I just got an email from AIPAC spelling out its demands on Iran. These emails, sent out regularly to the AIPAC membership, represent their marching orders to its members and, though the donors, to Members of Congress and the administration. There is nothing secret about these emails. Sign up and you can get them too.
Here is what AIPAC is saying as the United States prepares for the six party talks with Iran that begin this weekend,
U.S., ISRAEL NEED TO STAY IN SYNC ON IRAN TALKS
In order for nuclear talks between Iran and six world powers – the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany – to succeed, the United States and Israel must agree on basic strategy, Gerald F. Seib writes Monday, April 9, in The Wall Street Journal. Both U.S. and Israeli officials think a constructive meeting last month between President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu produced more of a meeting of minds than emerged from some previous conversations between the two. If talks get rolling, however, it will be important for Israel and the U.S. to remain in concert on three important questions: identifying the goal of negotiations, defining the point of no return requiring action and determining whether there are any alternatives to military force.
In other words, the United States must not approach Iran with its own interests foremost in the minds of our negotiators. Remember when Calvin Coolidge said, “The business of America is business.” AIPAC says “the business of America is Israel.” This is, of course, absolutely unprecedented even in the case of formal allies like the United Kingdom and Canada. In fact, even during World War II and in NATO, the United States led. That is not the case with Israel.
Attached is the following:
A NUCLEAR IRAN THREATENS AMERICA
A nuclear-capable Islamic Republic of Iran is a grave threat to U. S. national security. It is essential that the United States lead the effort to prevent one of the most dangerous countries in the world from having the most lethal weapon known to man.
Below are examples of how a nuclear-capable Iran would impact the United States.
THE COST OF OIL COULD SKYROCKET: Iran would be able to coerce oil-exporting nations afraid of not accommodating a nuclear regime in Tehran.
What This Means: Fearing Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Arab OPEC nations would agree to Iranian demands to reduce their production of oil, which would raise its cost, forcing you to pay more at the pump. From food to cars, this would have a signiﬁcant impact on our entire economy. While gas prices have increased sharply recently, they could skyrocket if Iran were able to dominate Arab countries.
U.S. SOLDIERS WOULD FACE SEVERE THREATS: The United States has troops and bases all over the Middle East and in countries that neighbor Iran.
What This Means: Were Iran to have a nuclear weapons capability, it would change the balance of power in the Middle East and U.S. forces would have to account for an emboldened regional power. Iran would be able to dramatically increase its support to terrorists and insurgents that are already targeting U.S. troops.
TERRORISTS AND ROGUE STATES COULD BE ARMED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS: Iran—the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism—would be able to provide Islamist terrorists, such as Hamas and Hizballah, with nuclear materials.
What This Means: Possible nuclear blackmail. For example, what would we do if Hizballah announced three years from now that it had smuggled a nuclear device or a dirty bomb into Manhattan or Washington?
Give in to their demands? Call their bluff? The regime could also provide nuclear materials and knowledge to its allies in Venezuela, Nicaragua and Bolivia, bringing the threat of nuclear terror close to America’s shores. THERE WOULD BE A NUCLEAR ARMS RACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST: If Iran were to acquire a nuclear weapons capability, Arab countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt have already hinted they would develop such a capability.
What This Means: An increasingly unstable Middle East, with a rising Islamist inﬂuence, would be home to a nuclear arms race. More states would acquire nuclear weapons, and the threat of nuclear arms falling into terrorist hands would dramatically escalate. Nuclear weapons would likely spread elsewhere around the globe, increasing the danger from such weapons for generations to come. The more countries that possess nuclear weapons, the greater likelihood that they will actually be used.
AMERICAN INFLUENCE WOULD BE WEAKENED: A nuclear-capable Iran could more successfully pressure Middle Eastern countries to adhere to Tehran’s wishes and ignore ours.
What This Means: Our ability to work with many Arab countries would be diminished if they felt threatened by a nuclear capable Iran. America would be seen in the region as weaker and as having failed in its objective to prevent Iran from obtaining such a capability. Our inﬂuence would diminish as Iran’s would soar.
This is pretty remarkable, considering that almost every speculative dire prediction AIPAC makes about the dangers posed by a “nuclear-capable” Iran would almost certainly happen if AIPAC and its cutouts achieve the war with Iran it has been pushing for a decade. My favorite AIPAC predictions are that a “nuclear capable” Iran (i.e, an Iran that could potentially produce a bomb) would cause “the cost of oil” to “skyrocket” and would pose “severe threats” to U.S. soldiers.
Think about that: a “nuclear capable” Iran would do that but not the joint US-Israeli war on Iran that AIPAC lobbies for.
All this would be laughable but for the fact that AIPAC almost always gets exactly what it wants, especially in an election year.