Web Letters: Hands Off Iran

Well, I appreciate this attempt to delineate what would happen should "we" attack Iran with bombs and soldiers. This is something that the neo-cons have not informed us about, so as responsible citizens we should be doing the thinking for them and for ourselves. One letter-writer stated that the threat from Iran will be ongoing and that the need for a possible invasion by American soldiers should remain a possibility sometime in the future. He hasn't tried to look into the content of the author's analysis.

You have to take the scenario on three levels. Strategically, there will be international repercussions, politically and economically. Tactically, it will be easy to bomb Iran with stealth weapons, but a larger-scale bombing campaign would be more vulnerable to the Iranian air defense. Tactically, it would be absurd to ask Americans to foot-soldier into Iran, a death march. Anyone with a pea brain can see this. Morally, it is tragic to kill others when there is no good reason.

The density of the American public is more profound than anywhere in the so-called civilized world. Unless we set limits on our compulsive militarism, we will all have to suffer the consequences.

Personally, I will continue to pay my taxes and work toward a change in policies. It sucks.

Jim Willingham
Vets for Peace/Vietnam Vets Against the War

St. Petersburg, FL

There is no substantial evidence that the Bush Administration is preparing air strikes on Iran in the short term, although it is common sense that this will be the first step in using force to make Iran to comply with its international obligations as signatory of nuclear proliferation treaties. These strikes will target identifiable nuclear facilities only at this stage. A second stage if some events evolve as the result retaliation from Iran might involve “beheading” the Iranian government.

Land invasion may follow up as a second step if the speed of events do not allow the creation of a new government willing to work peacefully with the rest of the work on common matters and on the contrary a more radical group takes power, but this scenario can be present only long after George Bush has left the White House.

My main question is: why is this obsession with GWB all about if he will leave the office in only one year? At the end the United States is a free democratic country where there is succession of power, division of power in branches, and with or without Bush we will be facing the same international dilemmas and acting the same way, or in a different way but not pleasing everyone. We have a legislature controlled by Democrats right now, what have they done? Some are concerned about GWB's approval rating being in the 20s right now, what about the Congress approval rating in the 10s?

Finally if you do not pay taxes you will be jailed and it will be a useless action not correctly appreciated or fully understood by a single Iranian or American.

Good luck!

Jorge Mallea-Blanco

Jacksonville, FL

Most of your argument on why we should not attack Iran revolves around the fact that we can not carry out a clean strike and that the goals of our military actions won't be fulfilled. This argument essentially acknowledges, and vindicates, the neocons' goals that you are willing to go to jail for.

You are wrong, sir; we should not attack Iran because Iranians deserve the same human rights that we do.

Mike Hands

Berkeley, CA

Chris Hedges has the right idea. There's a reason why the Bush Administration has been able to perpetrate its wars and assaults on liberty: too many Americans who should know better are content to merely disapprove, tsk-tsk, wave signs or protest at rallies. When we move from disapproval to actual opposition, we'll start to have some real-world effect. It's way past time to put our money where our mouths are.

I'm only surprised Hedges has drawn his line in the sand as far back as he has. For me, the government crossed that line with the Iraq invasion in 2003. I stopped paying the federal income tax then, and have since reduced or eliminated my contributions to other federal taxes as well. Now I'm putting all of my time and money on the side of my values, instead of letting Congress spend it on Pentagon priorities and political pork.

Why wait for the next atrocity? Join the War Tax Boycott today. There are many ways to resist taxes: legal ways and ways that require civil disobedience, safe ways and ways that take courage. There's a method that's right for you.

David Gross

San Francisco, CA

If we permit the Democrats' flaccid leadership to stand in the way of an impeachment that would remove this madman from power, we are complicit no matter whether we pay our taxes or not.

Duane Galensky

Beallsville, PA

Instead of going to jail for not paying taxes, why not ask Iran and the Islamic states to promote freedom and consensual government and equal human rights for all people including the freedom from being blown up or occupied by Hezbollah and the other terrorists?

Arthur Taylor

Baltimore, MD

Get a grip, man. Take deep breaths. You're advocating a course that is unrealistic, ineffectual and expensive to anyone who tries it.

Peter Desmond

Cambridge, MA

Regarding Mr. Hedges's commentary, I am encouraged to come across others who have similar sentiments toward our current governmental predicament.

Having studied German language and history, I have been noticing parallels with Nazism since January 2004 or even a little earlier. Granted, some things could be coincidences, but too many are manifesting themselves. What's the maxim: once is an event, twice is a pattern and three is a trend. What word would we use for, say, 134?

I believe many need to refresh their memories by picking up Henry David Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" and giving it a good, long read.

Lip service is the same as apathy.

Richard Nantelle III

Asheville, NC

I say any war protest is good protest, each in their own way. The intensity level of the responses here makes for great reading, it is sad it's not fiction.

Withholding taxes in a pleasing intellectual concept, and no surprise coming from a writer who probably doesn't make any money. But it may be impossible for most Americans on philosophical grounds as it is fundamental to our culture that Americans would rather help dump a dead body than instigate the IRS into looking at them. Suggesting folks not buy oil is sado-masochistic at best; none of us can fathom not buying oil--ironically, because we have to get to work on time to be abused by our bosses.

We need to both save oil and defund the war. How about we all agree to not drive to Wal-Mart for a month? We basically finance our military with borrowed money originally spent by Americans on unnecessary goods sold there, most made in China. It's a possible broad consensus builder, older Americans upset we've never stuck it to China like we did the Soviets might go for it, and soccer moms pinned to the latest lead-painted toy stories on Fox News will, too!

Back in the '60s when we had a like situation, real American radicals motivated by the draft would do radical things to carry the mood of the nation to the mass media, and so to The People. It was Us against Them. Now, with no edgy students under duress of induction marching in the streets, it seems we are all them, the media are ineffectual, and we really don't have the time. We get a suggestion of a partial tax protest, put our two cents in on the topic and it's off to work.

History suggests therefore that to end this unending war cycle, we just need more of it, and the inevitable draft that follows.

Chris Kent

Portsmouth, NH

For some reason, the American people seem not to be in a protesting mood. However, attacking Iran is about as sensible as throwing gold down a sewer. Iran may develop a nuclear weapon. However, it is surrounded by nuclear states: Israel, Russia, Pakistan, India, France and England. I am trying to remember when Iran attacked anyone. I believe it was Saddam who attacked Iran. Certainly, Iran has fomented trouble by supporting those we oppose. The case for attacking Iran is so weak, I doubt the American people will swallow anything this Administration trumps up. The question is whether enough pressure can be placed on Congress to have backbone to say No to Bush.

Robert Berger

Minneapolis, MN

I live in a town in which there are many war tax resisters. Many of them are friends and friendly acquaintances. I like them and their willingness to sacrifice for the greater good. I think the method of war tax resistance, however, is misguided.

The likelihood that your war tax resistance would bear fruit is nil. The likelihood that a widespread war tax resistance movement would be spawned is similarly nil.

The likelihood that if you adopted war tax resistance, you would engage in similar legal shenanigans and rationalizations for criminality and privilege as large corporate greed-driven criminals is great, though obviously on a much smaller scale. And the likelihood that you would never subsequently have the ability to influence most people on a moral or even organizational basis is great, except perhaps intimately.

If you are choosing that monk-hood, do it. But, please don't conflate that to the level of effective social change.

Richard Witty

Greenfield, MA

Anyone who thinks that invading Iran woudn't be opening the gates for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse is obviously a drooling, witless troglodyte. Our slobbering, crystal meth-cooking, foolhardy, rednecked American public has already devolved our failing little republic back 100 years or more. When will you zombies get a clue. Our "democracy" has warped, molested and mangled our original goals of freedom to the point where we are all fearful, prescription drug-addicted, obsessive/compulsive consumer robots biting our nails and gritting our teeth in hopes that our bosses meet their dauphin master's target numbers. This system is hardly ready to be forcefully exported. God, you people make me sick!

Oh, and by the way, Iran getting nukes would be an infant's sigh compared to the holocaust that would ensue after a US invasion. So keep paying your taxes so that your kids will continue getting their mind-numbing, third-rate daily brainwashings. However, they might have a hard time getting there, with gas hovering around ten dollars a gallon. Morons!!!!

Josh Hiken

San Francisco, CA

Mr. Hedges: I would encourage you and as many as possible who are like-minded to follow your example. Then we can see what a "fascist" state we live in as you are all rounded up and thrown in jail... yeah, right.

You live in such a fantasty dream world, where suposedly the Bush Administration committed crimes, and we have lost our civil liberties. Let me clue you in on something, Buster; more civil liberties of real Americans were violated by Hillary Clinton by the illegal gathering of FBI files that she managed during her years in the White House. Now, that is something to worry about, as that was a real crime.

As well, we should be worried about Iran, as it is well documented that it is the primary state sponsor of terrorism, in the Middle East as well as in of other areas of the world. They should be not be allowed to gain access to nuclear technology, as they have not demonstrated that they will use the technology for energy-related purposes only. The statements they have made regarding Israel are outrageous, and on that basis alone, qualify Israel or any other nation to attack them pre-emptively.

If you were not such an idiot, you could see these things. Perhaps what the government really needs to do is to pass a war surtax and apply it only to idiotic liberals like yourself.

You don't have the balls to perform civil disobedience; how do I know this? You used to work for the NYT, which means you have no self-respect.

Robert S. Meybohm

Newport Beach, CA

Many replies to Chris Hedges's statement that he won't pay taxes seem to miss the obvious historical and literary precedent in Thoreau's On Civil Disobedience, which he wrote after being briefly jailed for refusing to pay taxes during the Mexican-American war. One would hope that we had all read this in school, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Those who suggest that Hedges take up arms or that not paying taxes is just silly might want to review Thoreau's essay (and its relevance in shaping the non-violent approaches of Gandhi and MLK).

I sympathize with Hedges's point, and it's every bit as valid in 2007 as Thoreau's in 1849--even moreso, considering that we can clearly see the fruit of one misguided war of aggression and its terrible toll on civilian lives as well as on American soldiers. I think it's a morally justified approach, one that combines a realpolitik about material sources for war with a brave willingness to undergo jail time for one's convictions.

Nonetheless, I do not think it's an approach I would take, nor would I recommend it for anyone who wants to prevent war with Iran or end the war in Iraq.

My issue with this approach at present is, in general, an issue with the way the left continues to marginalize itself through righteous but ultimately divisive protest action. A majority of Americans currently agree that the war in Iraq is wrong and that starting another one just like it in Iran would also be wrong; we don't need publicity stunts, we need to build on the consensus. But a sure way to undermine this consensus will be to take action that drives away those folks who might agree with your position but do not subscribe to your brand of political saintliness; hawks and their pundits would have a field day with the narrative that the "liberal tax hikers" are now refusing to pay their own taxes.

Our political graph has many axes of hyperbole, and the only solid ground of action I can see is to go through the center and try to build the consensus for real, lasting policy shifts. Call that "triangulation," if you will (though geometrically one can just as easily triangulate to one side or the other of two points as in their middle); I think there's more potential for peace in the long term by building on existing consensus than by wedge-driving bravado.

Chris Corbell

Portland, OR

I think this article has good intentions, but if you really want to do something that matters, stop using oil, since we all know that's why we're really over there. That means stop using gas, plastic products made from oil,pesticides etc. And while you're at it, try convincing everyone in America to do the same.I doubt you'll have much luck. The truth is, you and everyone else doesn't want to change their way of life. I'm not for war, but as long as we use oil, get used to the idea of military force being used to protect the remaining 60 percent of the world's remaining oil in the Middle East.

Paul Thompson

Tampa, FL

What a brilliant idea. If the government does something you don't like in one area, refuse to pay any taxes for anything. I'm sure the schools don't mind. They're obviously culpable too. And the highway repair bills, nope, don't pay those. And every other thing the government does. Nope, just don't pay any taxes.

Heck, if you were at least intellectually honest, you'd figure the portion of the federal budget going to a war you don't support, and not pay that portion of your taxes.

And since there are a number of things the Government does that I think are in violation of the Tenth Amendment, I can tweak my taxes as well (if your silly protest idea were actually workable).

Of course it isn't, and going to jail for tax evasion to "make a point" seems dumb. But hey, if you want to look that stupid, go ahead. And if you want to be intellectually dishonest enough to withhold your entire tax payment, why not.

But you do not ever get to make a claim, request or plan to spend any taxpayer funding on anything without unanimous support of all taxpayers.

Unless hypocritical posturing is the goal, in which case, carry on.

Robert Johnson

Colorado Springs, CO

"I have friends in Tehran, Gaza, Beirut, Baghdad, Jerusalem and Cairo."

But none, apparently, in Tel Aviv. That would explain why it wouldn't bother you if Iran is allowed to develop nuclear capability, I guess. The victims won't be anyone who matters to you.

Michael Gebert

Chicago, IL

While I am not sure what the effect would be if you didn't pay your taxes considering the economic collapse that would follow a war with Iran, but, go for it! However, if the Bush Administration did start a war, Republicans and some Democrats would go down to defeat in 2008. You are not in a minority in opposing a war with Iran. A majority of Americans oppose it.

There are very good reasons for a country such as Iran not wanting nuclear weapons, and I am not convinced they want them. I believe the idea of war with Iran has been manufactured in the mind of some hysterical nut cases in the Bush Administration. It has long been my view that the Bush Administration is the biggest danger to world peace, and I worry about them more than Al Qaeda. These people are incompetent!

Pervis J. Casey

Riverside, CA

This is a message for Bill Nigh, above.

You're a Nazi asshole. I hope you choke to death on your Thanksgiving turkey. The world doesn't need scum like you.

Neil McGowan

London, England

While my considered opinion is that the Iran situation will not and should not become open war at all, there are some points to ponder:

War need not be a purely air war or even have any ground combat. There is the option of a naval blockade or quarantine of the coast of Iran and the Persian Gulf to cut off commercial and military traffic. Coupled with strict financial controls, like those recently against North Korea, this would have a large impact with few, if any, casualties.

Anyone with a decent background in foreign policy or military history would know that this article presents a very false range of choices.

John D. Froelich

Upper Darby, PA

Mr. Hedges, Many of us share your frustration but your article is not helpful.

I could follow the argument for the strategic folly of attacking Iran.

I could not follow the argument (or assumption) of the "illegalities" committed by this Administration.

But presuming that our government is illegitimate, is a tax gesture the extent of your patriotism? Why not armed rebellion?

David Fischer

Sacramento, CA

Well, go ahead and refuse to pay your taxes. How many of us do you think will care if you go to jail and become Bubba's bitch? Hahaha. And explain to me why we would bring all our troops home and then in a couple of years ship them back to go to war with Iran? Since they are already overseas, why not fight now? I think you are a coward, and will hide your sons, while the rest of us send ours to fight!

Yuo should be ashamed and your children should be ashamed fo you! Fight now, or die later.

Bill Nigh

Riverside, CA