{"id":68242,"date":"2006-11-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-11-27T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/11\/27\/lidee-de-lattaque-de-liran-comme-idee-recue-et-banalisee\/"},"modified":"2006-11-27T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-11-27T00:00:00","slug":"lidee-de-lattaque-de-liran-comme-idee-recue-et-banalisee","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/11\/27\/lidee-de-lattaque-de-liran-comme-idee-recue-et-banalisee\/","title":{"rendered":"L&rsquo;id\u00e9e de l&rsquo;attaque de l&rsquo;Iran comme \u201cid\u00e9e re\u00e7ue\u201c et banalis\u00e9e"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>Oui, nous avions oubli\u00e9 ou \u00e9gar\u00e9 cette d\u00e9p\u00eache AFP sur une attaque probable de l&rsquo;Iran en 2007, d\u00e9p\u00eache datant du <a href=\"http:\/\/www.truthout.org\/docs_2006\/printer_112206K.shtml\" class=\"gen\">21 novembre<\/a>&#8230;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00ab<em>President George W. Bush could choose military action over diplomacy and bomb Iran&rsquo;s nuclear facilities next year, political analysts in Washington agree.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>I think he is going to do it,\u00a0\u00bb John Pike, director of Globalsecurity.org, a military issues think tank, told AFP.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em> They are going to bomb WMD facilities next summer,\u00a0\u00bb he added, referring to nuclear facilities Iran says are for peaceful uses and Washington insists are really intended to make nuclear bombs, or weapons of mass destruction (WMD).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>It would be a limited military action to destroy their WMD capabilities\u00a0\u00bb added the analyst, believing a US military invasion of Iran is not on the table.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb<em>US journalist Seymour Hersh also said at the weekend that White House hawks led by Vice President Dick Cheney were intent on attacking Iran with or without the approval of the US Congress, both houses of which switch from Republican to Democratic control in January after the November 7 legislative elections.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tEtc, etc<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tIl est vrai que nous rencontrons r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement, de cette fa\u00e7on, un article ou l&rsquo;autre reprenant l&rsquo;id\u00e9e d&rsquo;une attaque de l&rsquo;Iran par les USA, d&rsquo;une fa\u00e7on plus ou moins pressante, plus ou moins routini\u00e8re, qui revient r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement. C&rsquo;est l&rsquo;un des mots qui va ici : routine, ou bien : banalisation<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tL&rsquo;id\u00e9e d&rsquo;une attaque contre l&rsquo;Iran est devenue une des id\u00e9es re\u00e7ues centrales du monde virtualiste de Washington, une pr\u00e9vision dont plus personne ne s&rsquo;\u00e9tonne, \u00e0 laquelle plus personne ne s&rsquo;arr\u00eate. M\u00eame les articles de Hersh sur le sujet (voir celui du <a href=\"http:\/\/www.newyorker.com\/printables\/fact\/061127fa_fact\" class=\"gen\">21 novembre<\/a>) ne font plus qu&rsquo;\u00e0 demi sensation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tCette \u00e9tonnante banalisation, d&rsquo;une part, refl\u00e8te un processus naturel : l&rsquo;affaiblissement de l&rsquo;administration, qui l&#8217;emp\u00eache de faire avancer ses projets comme elle le voudrait, le maintien en \u00e9tat de veille pourtant de ses projets, et, <strong>surtout<\/strong>, l&rsquo;acceptation de cette perspective d&rsquo;une attaque par la psychologie washingtonienne. Ce dernier point am\u00e8ne \u00e0 cette situation o\u00f9 plus personne ne s&rsquo;\u00e9tonne vraiment de cette perspective, ni ne la rel\u00e8ve comme excessivement dangereuse, ill\u00e9gale, schizophr\u00e8ne, etc.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t Justement, schizophr\u00e8ne ; tout se passe comme si vous aviez parmi vous quelqu&rsquo;un d&rsquo;instable psychiquement, mais qu&rsquo;il est impossible de traiter pour des raisons imp\u00e9ratives (qui ose officiellement d\u00e9noncer Washington? Car c&rsquo;est Washington qui est schizophr\u00e8ne) et dont on supporte les lubies parce qu&rsquo;il le faut, et qu&rsquo;elles semblent alors \u00eatre trait\u00e9es comme s&rsquo;il s&rsquo;agissait de la normalit\u00e9 des choses. Ce quelqu&rsquo;un d&rsquo;instable, effectivement, ce n&rsquo;est pas seulement GW, ni Cheney et ses planificateurs, c&rsquo;est l&rsquo;ensemble du monde washingtonien qui a accept\u00e9 l&rsquo;id\u00e9e de l&rsquo;attaque comme allant de soi. En quelque sorte, le d\u00e9bat l&rsquo;acceptabilit\u00e9 de l&rsquo;attaque est tranch\u00e9, m\u00eame s&rsquo;il y a bien s\u00fbr des pour et des contre. Si demain, certains manoeuvrent bien et que l&rsquo;opportunit\u00e9 se fait jour, on ira. C&rsquo;est ce qu&rsquo;on appelle une <strong>id\u00e9e re\u00e7ue<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 27 novembre 2006 \u00e0 05H09<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Oui, nous avions oubli\u00e9 ou \u00e9gar\u00e9 cette d\u00e9p\u00eache AFP sur une attaque probable de l&rsquo;Iran en 2007, d\u00e9p\u00eache datant du 21 novembre&#8230; \u00abPresident George W. Bush could choose military action over diplomacy and bomb Iran&rsquo;s nuclear facilities next year, political analysts in Washington agree. \u00bbI think he is going to do it,\u00a0\u00bb John Pike, director&hellip;&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[2870,6173,868,6171,2773,6172,3248],"class_list":["post-68242","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-attaque","tag-banalisee","tag-bush","tag-idee","tag-iran","tag-recue","tag-washington"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68242","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68242"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68242\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68242"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68242"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68242"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}