Friday, February 13, 2009
Now they tell us: Iran is pursuing a bomb
Most political blog readers will remember the storm of controversy that erupted in early December 2007, when a new American "National Intelligence Assessment" claimed that Iran had stopped development of a nuclear weapon in 2003. The New York Times wrote that "[rarely], if ever, has a single intelligence report so completely, so suddenly, and so surprisingly altered a foreign policy debate here." Blogs exploded.
Lefty blogs rejoiced. At the Daily Kos diarists mocked Bush, Cheney, McCain, Romney, and Huckabee for having taken various hawkish positions on the subject. The Booman Tribune claimed vindication, having "spent a lot of electrons over the last year writing to you about a committed and sustained misinformation campaign to suggest that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program." Crooks and Liars wrote that "[i]f it's possible to make Bush look any stupider---the new NIE report on certainly Iran does." At the HuffPo, Jon Soltz declared "World War III plans stymied by National Intelligence Estimate." And so forth. There are literally hundreds of similar posts.
So imagine my interest to see the Los Angeles Times report that the intelligence agencies have reversed themselves again (bold emphasis added):
Little more than a year after U.S. spy agencies concluded that Iran had halted work on a nuclear weapon, the Obama administration has made it clear that it believes there is no question that Tehran is seeking the bomb.
In his news conference this week, President Obama went so far as to describe Iran's "development of a nuclear weapon" before correcting himself to refer to its "pursuit" of weapons capability.
Obama's nominee to serve as CIA director, Leon E. Panetta, left little doubt about his view last week when he testified on Capitol Hill. "From all the information I've seen," Panetta said, "I think there is no question that they are seeking that capability."
The language reflects the extent to which senior U.S. officials now discount a National Intelligence Estimate issued in November 2007 that was instrumental in derailing U.S. and European efforts to pressure Iran to shut down its nuclear program.
Commentary
Substantively, Iran hawks should rejoice. The Obama administration is clearly going to great lengths to educate Congressional liberals and the public at large on the danger posed by Iran. The point, presumably, is to dispose of the lefty canard that Iran is a fundamentally peaceful country caught in a security dilemma of American construct. It also commits Obama to an aggressive (even if non-military) posture toward Iran, which is comforting to those of us who believe that we need a hardball, if nuanced, strategy for containing, deterring, and, if necessary, interdicting the Islamic Republic.
Procedurally, this episode is going to reinforce the view of conservatives that after Iraq, at least, the intelligence agencies undermined the Bush administration at each opportunity. If there was "politicization" of intelligence during the Bush years, it cut against Bush policies more than it facilitated them.
Snarkily, we are waiting for all those lefty blogs to deliberate thoughtfully about whether the December 2007 report, which the Bushies nefariously "suppressed" for a year after its development, might have itself been the "intelligence failure." Perhaps it is important for a president to question the judgments of the bureaucracy.
Finally, we note that the LAT story appeared more than 36 hours ago with virtually no follow-up in the mainstream media or the blogosphere. It seems like a pretty big story, and a heckuva lot more important than, for example, the ins-and-outs of Judd Gregg's withdrawal.
62 Comments:
By 
Psota, at
Fri Feb 13, 11:05:00 AM:
We have zombie intelligence agencies to go along with out zombie banks. They're open for business. There are plenty of gadgets and computers on everyone's desks. There are lots of people scurrying about. But, it's all an illusion to keep from admitting the truth: that Iran is an enemy (and that our largest banks are insolvent).
Americans have felt an instinctive revulsion toward Iran since the Hostage Crisis. The NIE may have managed to temporarily distract us, but that can only last so long. We'll be back.
By 
, at
Fri Feb 13, 12:05:00 PM:
This close to a political coup. The unelected bureaucrats, composed of self-annointed intelligentsia, decided to make new policy. The policy of our elected government was changed, at the cost of allowing Iran a nuclear bomb. Who knows how this will change the world.
By Viking Kaj, at
Fri Feb 13, 12:26:00 PM:
How this will change the world is that the Saudis will acquire nuclear technology. Their foreign minister said as much in 2006-2007.
Possible sources? The Chinese seem able and willing and are major Saudi customers.
Is the Middle East heading for nuclear warfare? When you consider the differences between the Wahabi's and the Iranian Shias my response would be yes.
How does this alter the strategic calculus? We need to plan for the post oil, post middle East economy if we are going to be secure as a nation.
By Viking Kaj, at
Fri Feb 13, 12:31:00 PM:
Oh, and back to the basic question. Are the Democrats duplicitous and disingenuous? Certainly not less so than the Republicans. Our public "servants" really aren't doing us much service.
We need an effective third party if we are going to stand any chance of changing things.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 12:56:00 PM:
There are a couple of basic questions here: 1) how can we discipline those who so consciously decided their political goal of stopping the president from ending the Iranian bomb threat was more important than performing their honest duty? 2) If Obama wants to allow the Iranians to go nuclear, can he tell us why that is good for our country? 3) how can we transform our political institutions to do the will of the people in the future, rather than the will of unelected bureaucrats?
By Viking Kaj, at
Fri Feb 13, 01:00:00 PM:
Upon further reflection, do you think the O Man is preparing us for his invasion of Iran after the "stimulus" package fails?
Yes, I am that cynical.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 01:08:00 PM:
I think it far likelier that 0bama is preparing us to accept an Iranian bomb as a fait accompli, and if possible make it seem that it happened on Bush's watch.
By Viking Kaj, at
Fri Feb 13, 01:16:00 PM:
Hmm, how is that logically consistent since they also claimed that Bush wanted to invade Iran at the time?
By bob, at
Fri Feb 13, 01:54:00 PM:
One issue after another, we're uncovering just how many of the judgments made by Bush-Cheney were right -- now that we strip away the partisan vitriol.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 02:02:00 PM:
Ummmmmm. Excuse me. What is the surprise here again........? That Iran wants nukes? NO. That they almost have them? No. That once they get them, they will destroy as many enemies (and Israel) as fast as they can? No. That the U.N. watchdogs aren't watching? No. That the M.E. is a seething caldron of death dealers eager to start armageddon? No.
The real surprise here is that someone on the left actually admitted it, therefore committing heresy before the entire Obamanation. That is as antilibweral as you can get. The shame of it all.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 02:49:00 PM:
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 02:58:00 PM:
Funny, instead of reading HawkCrock spin on the LA Times story, I read the stroy itself...
It clearly states, while the NIE called out SECRET uranium efforts had stopped, other efforts linked to possible nuke building, like bombs, did not stop.
As the son of a US military officer, I had the pleasure of going to Iran 3 years ago. Even I as an open minded, non judgmental citizen was BLOWN away by the metropolitan, educated and PRO AMERICAN position of EVERY person I met!!! NOTHING at all like I had been led to believe by the media and the fear mongers found on blogs such as this!!
Young, old, men, women actually approached us as Americans to speak to us, we met nothing but friendly and gracious people.
Even though the US provided Saddam the weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians and the US government has sponsored pretty much everything from Coups to assassinations there!!
But for the sake of US/Judo Military proliferation, it is imperative we turn these people into something evil.
The two lessons I learned after leaving Iran was PLEASE do not let America become it's own Theocracy,let's not emulate the Iranian model, and regardless of what you NEED to believe, people in Iran are basically the same as us, but that thought doesn't allow us to maintain our $700B yearly Military budget...
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 03:25:00 PM:
Possible sources? The Chinese seem able and willing and are major Saudi customers.
Why wait for those infidels? AQ Khan is free.
By Elijah, at
Fri Feb 13, 03:41:00 PM:
I have never thought it to be fear mongering or turning people into something evil by listening to the words and thoughts they express, and take them at their word. Perhaps some men actually mean what they say, and have the strength of their convictions.
“The message of the (Islamic) Revolution is global, and is not restricted to a specific place or time. It is a human message, and it will move forward. Have no doubt … Allah willing, Islam will conquer what? It will conquer all the mountain tops of the world.”
- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, July 25, 2005.
“The world of Islam has been mobilized against America for the past 25 years. The peoples call, “death to America.” Who used to say “death to America?” Who, besides the Islamic Republic and the Iranian people, used to say this? Today, everyone says this.”
- Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, June 24, 2004
“If one day, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel’s possession -on that day this method of global arrogance would come to an end. This is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.”
- Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Former Iranian President, December 14, 2001
“Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world… those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world.”
- Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Feb 13, 04:23:00 PM:
"As the son of a US military officer, I had the pleasure of going to Iran 3 years ago."
Why were you even let into the country? Academics who met with royalist officials thirty years ago are still blacklisted there, as are current grad students who have met with Iranian dissidents.
"Even I as an open minded, non judgmental citizen was BLOWN away by the metropolitan, educated and PRO AMERICAN position of EVERY person I met!!! NOTHING at all like I had been led to believe by the media and the fear mongers found on blogs such as this!!"
Lemme guess. You visited Tehran or Esfahan. Yeah, that's totally representative of the entire population of the country, which matter because Iran is fundamentally a representative democracy.
Right?
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 04:26:00 PM:
This report reveals a number of interesting facts. Prominent among these is the left's willingness to alter factual information for their own political ends. Even left-leaning people within the intelligence community were willing to subvert their own president at the time. Remember that we had a number of disclosures of classified information during Bush's term, and to his shame, Bush never did anything about it. The liberal media, of course, was complicit in this treasonous behavior. I am reminded of a basic tenet of communist philosophy which states that ANY behavior, no matter how henious, is morally acceptable as long as it furthers the end of world communism. Although I am not saying that the right is as pure as the driven snow, I am sickened by the left's ability to see black and call it white, and to do anything to subvert the legitimate government of this country and increase their own power.
By TRex, at
Fri Feb 13, 04:27:00 PM:
I would like a Congressional investigation into who was responsible for the National Intelligence Estimate which defused potential action on Iranian nuclear subterfuge. Due to the obvious dangers of a nuclear Iran and the bizaare sudden reversal of intelligence estimates in this regard, I believe that this is warranted. I believe very strongly that certain ideologically motivated individuals were trying to alter foreign policy at the expense of national security.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 04:41:00 PM:
"Even though the US provided Saddam the weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians and the US government has sponsored pretty much everything from Coups to assassinations there!!"
Witness another lefty hypothesis slain by a cold hard fact (or lack thereof) - can you name 1 major american weapons platform that was used in the IRAN/IRAQ war? Further can you name any American institution that was forced to right off loans after the fall of Sadam? You can name plenty of French, Russian, Chinese arms companies as well as gov't loan programs but not American.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 04:43:00 PM:
why is there no talk of others in mideast not being alllowed to have nukes - namely israel. why would anybody in mideast listen to those who have one-sided view of the situation. I think if we pursue the goal of ALL in mideat to give up nukes and to have nuke-free mideast, then we can aspire to achieve it without bloodshed or war. what do we gain by supporting israel all the time - what has israel done for usa that we have to sacrifice for their interest. Why are we involved in this at all?
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 04:51:00 PM:
Now let me guess. How on earth, if we had actually found that Iran was this _______ close to having a bomb, where would we borrow the money to finance a third war? And supposing we did find funding, who is going to sign up to go to Iran and fight these people? Everyone who enjoys fighting or is desperate for money, is already in Iraq or Afghanistan
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 04:57:00 PM:
Anonymous, when have you heard that Israel would use their weapons to fight a non-agression war?
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 05:13:00 PM:
We increased Iran's sphere of influence when we handed the Shiites Iraq. The righties always like to leave out that it was their leader that immensely strengthened Iran's position in the world and weakened our own. This ill conceived knocking out the counter-balance (Saddam and his Sunnis) proved that 2001-2009 was the critical time to squeeze the noose on the Iranians. Instead we made them a force to reckon with. And with the bomb? Well we had better start making friends with them. Thanks Cowboys!!
By Viking Kaj, at
Fri Feb 13, 05:18:00 PM:
Son of Military and Dawnfire,
What is interesting about Iran is that the population is very young and are greatly influenced by things western, but perhaps more in a commercial sense than in a political way. Jeans, computer games, makeup, private parties, etc. are all the rage. The mullahs and politicians are thus engaged in a very delicate balancing act, keeping the economy going enough to keep the people happy, while still tyring to keep a tight grip on the reigns of power.
If, however, the economy falters then there is the real chance that Iran could become less than monolithic with regards to the Islamic state. It is this prospect that the mullahs fear and continue to work against.
How would a reform candidate respond to demands that they dismantle the nuclear program? Probably the same way that we would respond if someone asked us to dismantle ours. But reform candidates might have other priorities both domestically and abroad.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 05:25:00 PM:
I think everyone in this country, and most of the rest of the world, has always had a wary eye on Iran. When you really think about it these people have been fighting over the same issues for hundereds of years, with the exception of Isreal. This will never stop. As far as Bush/Cheney goes, they are both evil men. They lined their pockets with the hides of the masses. They didn't discover anything new. We all knew that Iran wants to dominate the muslim religion and destroy Isreal. Duh. The only judgement that Bush/Cheney were right about is that they could pull the wool over the eyes of the American public. The media worked hand in hand with them to accomplish that goal, i.e. Fox News. The North American Union is coming. These economic times were orchestrated to make people believe that the N.A.U. is a good thing. Don't be an ostrich and hide your head in the sand. The events of the past twenty years are finally coming to fruition. Bush Sr., Bill & Hillary Clinton, and W are all members of the same organization, not sure about Obama but wouldn't doubt it. Republicans, Democrats, we could have five different parties and it would not make a difference. The people really in power are not public figure heads. They have their own agenda that they will accomplish. They are almost as crazy as the Islamist extremists! Check out the Georgia Stones if you don't believe me, otherwise known as the American Stone Henge. All of our so called leaders rely on fear and ignorance to convince people they are doing what is right and neccessary. Why do you think that America is one of the least educated modern nations in the world? Welcome to 1984 ladies and gentlemen. Unfortunately, the time of individual rights is coming to an end...
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Feb 13, 05:27:00 PM:
I was being sarcastic. I know about Iran.
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Feb 13, 05:29:00 PM:
@Anon 5:25, who apparently was posting the same time as me: HAHAHAHA!
Tell Alex Jones I said hello.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 05:30:00 PM:
Anonymous,
The reason we defend Isreal is because of WWII. The allied nations new that the Nazi's were killing the Jews. We did nothing about it. Therefore, to try to make their concious' feel better they stole land, most of the current land of Isreal, to give the Jewish people a place to call their own. It basically comes down to the sins of our fathers...
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 05:46:00 PM:
when the old system does'nt work its time 2 overthrow the existing and replace it with something better rewrite the goverment.stand up before its 2 late.2012 is to close not 2 think about.but the future can be changed unlike the past.
By Elijah, at
Fri Feb 13, 06:01:00 PM:
Thanks Cowboys!!
as to U.S. interests, any middle eastern conflict will accelerate the global economic downturn, also directly affecting the U.S. Likewise, Asian growth is even more dependent on the steady flow of hydrocarbon resources
Money for any future conflict - the U.S. will get it from the same source that is funding the current bill that just passed the house and the Obama administration's TARP 2.
Iran should be cautious in attacking U.S. interests in response to any possible Israeli actions.
Israel, like Iran, will act with its own interests.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 06:12:00 PM:
@bill - I believe American weapons were used by Iran after our arms for hostages transactions in '85. In July 1985, Israel sent American-made BGM-71 TOW antitank missiles to Iran through an arms dealer named Manucher Ghorbanifar, a friend of Iran's Prime Minister. I'd say the TOW qualifies as a "major american weapons platform."
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 06:51:00 PM:
"It also commits Obama to an aggressive (even if non-military) posture toward Iran, which is comforting to those of us who believe that we need a hardball, if nuanced, strategy for containing, deterring, and, if necessary, interdicting the Islamic Republic."
Hows about a policy where we bitch slap the Persians and humiliate them militarily at every oppurtunity?
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 07:03:00 PM:
What is ultimately sad about this is iran aquiring nukes will make them infinately less secure and more likely to get obliterated in a nuclear exchange in which they will lose. Now whether they are nuked by a consortium of israeli or pan-arabic rival powers is the only question.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 07:15:00 PM:
Wars happen because one nation has better weapons that the other. Israel will always attack Iran so long as it is the sole owner of nukes in the region. Once Iran gets a bomb, and I hope they will, then there will be peace in the region because Israel cannot go around attacking countries at will. A bully, like Israel, can only be stopped when the neighborhood they bully also gets weapons. End of thy lesson. For you idiots that think Iran is going to send a bomb to Israel once they get one, is pure fantasy. Jewish propaganda.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 07:20:00 PM:
No more wars for Israel - I cringe when I read the paranoia here. Did you learn nothing about the Iraqi debacle? Can you even recognise the amount of propaganda being fed to you by the warmongers.
An attack on Iran will most likley cause a world war, will this be Rapture? Will the chosen inherit the Earth? Or will all our lives just get very messy.
Please show shome discrimination.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 07:27:00 PM:
For the person who visited Iran and was loved by its people: You ahave the air of a liberal pacifist with socialist tendecies. I also suspect that most of the people leaving pro-iran comments here or that reflect a general dislike of America are probably liberal democrats or of Arab/muslim descent. This is my conclusion due to the lack of proper grammar and english in the comments. This aside, Iran is no friend of America, and anyone with a decent amount of common sense knows they want nuclear weapons. We seek peace with them because we think this is the "civilized" thing to do. They are at the opposite end. Their religion is the basis of their world and in that their religion basically requires them to force others to convert or die. Iran may consist of multiple Pro/Anti american organizations, but the Anti-american forces are in control by a majority. Also, when it comes down to it, the general population of Iran does not have at least a positive view of Us. Most of them either hate or at best distrust us. This is plain by reading through Iranian sites and blogs, if anyone takes the time to read. In their eyes we are the "great satan" anyway. This is not all muslims, but those who follow the extremist views of Wahabism, and Iran is one of the central regions for this sect. Fundamentally I thnk the world is facing a powder keg situation in the middle east which may unfortunately lead to a global confrontation. Hopefully this is a few years off and America will be more financially stable and able to handle the situation by then. As i see it we are currently the only ones who will be a significant factor in any mideast conflict. The EU is an impotent organization, they cannot even handle Darfur, let alone the mideast. India, Russia, and China have no care what happens there other than oil. I believe we will eventually come to the time when Extremism will be seen as global threat and a global intitiative will have to be set to stamp it out.
By Steven, at
Fri Feb 13, 07:28:00 PM:
Even though the US provided Saddam the weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians
Except, of course, the U.S. didn't, according to the independent, anti-war Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the world's foremost monitor of international arms transfers. The only "weapons" the U.S. sold Iraq, according to SIPRI, were police-spec helicopters.
Now, Iraq did take those helicopters, mount French and Russian weapons on them, and use them in the war. But to say the U.S. armed Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War is as silly as saying Japan armed an African warlord who mounted a Russian machine gun on a Toyota pickup.
How about funding? Well, the only aid the U.S. provided Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War was agricultural export credits, good only for food raised in the U.S. Granted, the free food from the U.S. allowed Iraq to spend money on weapons instead of food imports . . . but it was food, not money, that the U.S. gave Iraq.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 07:36:00 PM:
Extemism? thats a good one after Dubya's reign, Iraq happenend because Isarel and her sympathisers wanted it, and they are gearing up for a rerun of the same lame excuses.
If Israel could learn to live with its neighbours there wouldn't be a problem. Oh, but hold on the Talmud says they are animals.
Forget the anti-Islam spin, go do some research about Zionism. Their propagandists are the most effective in the world, witness the power of the Israeli lobby in the US. They determine US Foreign Policy.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 07:40:00 PM:
@Elijah, I think you addressed your comment to the wrong poster. The person writing about U.S. arms sales was "anonymous", not bill. Furthermore, he/she was writing about arms sales to Iraq, not Iran.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 08:32:00 PM:
Very interesting comments here.
But in response to Stephen, as a Jewish American i find your comments amusing. Ive met many indiciduals such as yourself, and a majority of them generally hate America and that is understood why they harbor views such as yours.
The ultimate conclusion of the matter is that the world is coming together as one global entity. This has led to cultural conflict and an understanding that we all have very different fundamental beliefs. Unfortunately, some people believe that anything different from what they believe is wrong. Sometimes to the point if justifies them murdering you and all who believe like you. I myself have been the victim of hatecrimes because of my race and know firsthand what hatred, based upon stupidity, can result in.
I agree wholeheartedly with the individual who said that we must eventually stamp out extremists. This includes all violent organizations no matter what religion/culture/nation they identify with.
As for steven:
Iraq happened because we were on a hawkish footing and we sincerely believed he had WMD that could be funneled to terrorists. Escaped Dissidents from Iraq and operatives told us this and in the end i believe most of the evidence was destroyed or dismantled before the invasion. Please note that in the years up to the invasion, Saddam kicked out the EU monitors that were sent to monitor if he had WMD. It is like denying a police officer searching your car. It usually indicates you have something to hide, and saddam was given a 6 month notice before we invaded. Enough time to get rid of most or all of any evidence, at least im my solitary opinion
Also, its hard to live with your neighbors when a majority of them, as a religious foundation, believe that your entire race is comparable to insects, and do not want peace, but want you "wiped off the map". I suspect youve never been to Israel, Jordan, or Syria so i would think the view you have was taught by
Lastly, although there are zionists, To say there is a conspiracy by them and that they are in control of US policy is a common topic among extremists and those who generally want a reason to hate the west. Ahmedinejad himself had a big conference about it not too long ago, i suspect you were probably present.
Also personally, I am not anti-islam. I just, like the anonymous poster before, make a note that there is one particular branch of Islam is incompatible with modern society and is a threat to national and global security due to the fact that it is adhered to by tens of millions of people. There may be christian/buddhist/hindu or any other number or reiligions that have similair branches, but none of these are as prolific or active as the Isalmic group we see today.
As for anyone who may know steven, i ask you to pray that men like him become less common as history progresses. One hitler was enough.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 08:36:00 PM:
The only "weapons" the U.S. sold Iraq, according to SIPRI, were police-spec helicopters.
I remember pointing this out years ago.
It's amazing how old leftist talking points just never seem to die.
By Purple Avenger, at
Fri Feb 13, 09:11:00 PM:
NOTHING at all like I had been led to believe by the media and the fear mongers found on blogs such as this!!
Iranians != Iranian government
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 09:22:00 PM:
If it's possible to make the idiots at Daily Kos, Crooks and Liars and other liberal blogs look any stupider---the recent statements by the Obama administration about Iran certainly do.
By Unknown, at
Fri Feb 13, 10:17:00 PM:
---Substantively, Iran hawks should rejoice. The Obama administration is clearly going to great lengths to educate Congressional liberals and the public at large on the danger posed by Iran. ---
Substantively, it was evil and false to pillory Bush when that phony CIA assessment released. It was one more example of the left ignoring our national security to score unsubstantial (CHEAP) points against the President. Now we should be glad that lefty lies are being abandoned in the harsh light our jeopardy from this Iranian menace.
Two legs baaaad, Four legs goood
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 11:27:00 PM:
Isn't it funny,not ha ha funy ,that these wars are more about religion than anything else or so it seems to me. and hte same thing is happenong in the US People are being judged by their religion or lack there of.No right in any way shape or form.
By , at
Fri Feb 13, 11:27:00 PM:
Jews is not a race it is only a religion
By jdkchem, at
Sat Feb 14, 12:04:00 AM:
Has the economy gotten so bad that they've had to shut down the nut-houses?
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:12:00 AM:
Its obvious animals are as dumb as humans. Show a less threatening front by destroying your nuclear production facilities, build them in the first place to displace attention towards them and avoid more attention from another. North korea.. iran... and whoever else you want to put up there... work together to believe they are fooling someone else. Intuition doesn't have to follow the path that is laid because it is diversive to another by being instinct. Something that can create an extinction on another. As much as keep itself going forever. Including the other that wishes to lead you. North korean,Iran are pawns to a greater threat.
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:22:00 AM:
All you americans, Face it and accept it, that your government always needs an enemy to survive, now it's Irans turn to be the one, and the ones after are already sorted out and planed. That's how they sell weapons and manupulate others to keep your way of life going. Face another fact also, your country is run by the jews and they control your inside and out policy and contrary to the fact, all they feed you in media, movies and etc which they own (a simple search in web shows you how)is how innocent they been throughout history, bulls... of course, they are nothing but blood suckers. So get to know who you support. No one is anybodys enemy if people with money and power let them.
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:33:00 AM:
The hate filled, anti-semetic left and their anti-everything muslim allies are rejoicing.
Anon- We don't need enemies. We don't create them. They are the ones who need us to feel "victimized" by our success and obvious superiority.
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:33:00 AM:
Israel is not there because te US felt guilty after the holacaust, although that may be the Islam!1st spin
Isreal has been there for 4000 yrs ago, 2000yrs BC and since islam was born in 7th century, ancient Israel predated the invention of Islam by about 2700 yrs!
King David of ancient Israel built Jerusalem about 1700 BC! So much for islams claim that this land was holy Muslim land.toal fanatsy, revisionist history and Arab nonsense for their masses.
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:42:00 AM:
I think all Muslim bloggers should not bother posting here...post in Muslim nations where people are truly uneducated about world history.
Your world histoy has been written by dictators who have repressed the truth and kept your newspapers/books as organs of state propaganda. unfortunately your ignorance of the facts is not your fault, but that of your criminal, sick and destructive "leaders"
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:43:00 AM:
Anon is as ignorant as he sounds - "Wars happen because one nation has better weapons that the other."
This is completely wrong and just about every historical level.
Wars happen for dozens of reasons and in every one I can the think of each side had a weapon that was better than the enemy. In World War II the Royal Navy and French Navy completely outclassed the German Navy on every level. Conversely, the German Air Force outclassed the Royal Air Force and the French Air Force combined, at least until the Battle of Britain. One example and I have shown that you do not know what you are talking about. Weapons don't make war, governments do.
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 12:55:00 AM:
Blacque Jacques Shellacque said...
"The only "weapons" the U.S. sold Iraq, according to SIPRI, were police-spec helicopters. I remember pointing this out years ago. It's amazing how old leftist talking points just never seem to die."
It's only amazing if you think of the left as a disorganized, truth seeking group of individuals of good character and pure motives. A dangerous part of the left is very organized and dedicated to spreading lies. Just look at how long the President Bush "plastic turkey in Iraq" story was repeated and repeated. The aim was to deliberately deny the President good press for a wonderful humanitarian gesture. The hate filled left is still repeating the lie when the truth has been there since the story first broke. Propaganda is their weapon.
PS- I know a lot of left-wing people. None of them are part of the "hate filled left" when I say, "hate filled left" I mean the hate filled part of the left, not all of the left.
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 02:27:00 AM:
After digesting too many partisan blogs I have to tip my hat to Tyree.
I was really impressed with Obama's campain, his dignity and apparent honesty, and sadly watched the partisan, anti Bush, hateful smearing and distortion of truth by nearly every media source available. How could such a good man be associated with such stinky tactics?!?.
Would critical government agencies distort intelligence to achieve partisan ends. If it were up to the media, then definately. If the media and critical intelligence agencies are strategically disinforming, how is this any different from government controlled media in a facist state?
Face it. If you turn on the TV your asking for propaganda. On the bright side we are better fed than was the case in cambodia during the 70's. I just hope they don't send me to a reeducation camp for living a soft life.
Oh, I forgot. There was a war in all of this. So sad for Russia to lose the war for communist world domination, to have it's enemy (us) pick up where it left off to pursue world leftism starting in the middle east.
: )
Lock and load
By , at
Sat Feb 14, 07:11:00 AM:
Anon-
How could President Obama be associated with such stinky tactics?
Because he didn't don anything to confront the smears and lies. Even Clinton had the guts to tell a 9/11 Truther with a gutsy "How dare you?". Obama could have done the country a great service by standing up for intelligent, rational discourse. Instead he wrote for the hate filled Huffington Post and now has them on his list of credentialed White House reporters. Obama used the hate industry to his own ends, and it worked. The subject above says it all "Now they tell us: Iran is pursuing a bomb". President Bush's administration got a lot of things wrong, but they were right about a great many things that the hate filled left wing used to attack them. You may not have seen the signs at Zombietime, but the hate filled left believed that President Bush was Hitler, and a greater evil than the terrorist Osama bin Laden.
By , at
Sun Feb 15, 03:52:00 AM:
"Witness another lefty hypothesis slain by a cold hard fact."
- - - -
Slain? Hypothesis?
How about "calculated lie" that "lived long enough to do exactly what it was designed to do."
Yeah, the people who drafted and circulated this report knew that eventually, someone would notice they were wrong.
Someone, somewhere . . . .
See all the MSM reports about this? No? Nowhere?
And all it accomplished was, it caused one giant chink in Bush's credibility, shortly before his party ran against The Lying Dems.
If this lie has now been slain, then it has entered liberal martyr's heaven.
By , at
Sun Feb 15, 11:53:00 AM:
Check out the December 6, 2007 orgasmic fantasies in Time magazine from one of the grand poobas of the leftist nutroots and useful idiot freakshow parade, one Joe Klein:
"The truth about Iran appeared to shatter the last shreds of credibility of the White House's bomb-Iran brigade - especially that of Vice President Dick Cheney, who had been stumping haughtily for war. It was a political earthquake, reverberating through the presidential campaign. Within hours, Hillary Clinton was under renewed attack by her Democratic opponents for voting for a bellicose anti-Iran resolution in the Senate this year. But the unintended damage was to the credibility of the Republican presidential candidates, all of whom had noisily rattled sabers about Iran. Once again the black-and-white neoconservative view of the Middle East region had been proved wrong. At first the antique neocon Norman Podhoretz actually insisted, 'The intelligence community, which has for some years now been leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush, is doing it again. This time the purpose is to head off the possibility that the President may order air strikes on the Iranian nucleur installations.' Soon, even Podhoretz was in retreat.
As is customary with loon Klein's fantasies about the United States military, he substitutes his dreams in bed cuddling with his teddy bear collection for reality and asserts: "But it wasn't just the intelligence community that had been trying to prevent the war hawks in the Administration from bombing Iran. The Secretaries of State and Defense and the leaders of the uniformed military had decided that diplomacy was the best way to deal with an admittedly hostile and dangerous foe in Tehran. Almost exactly a year ago, after the firing of Donald Rumsfeld, the President met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the 'Tank,' the Pentagon's secure facility. Bush asked the Chiefs about attacking Iran. He was told that a bombing campaign could do severe damage to Iran's military and nucleur facilities, but the Chiefs said they were opposed to such a strike because of the probably 'blowback.' The Iranians, Bush was told, could make life very difficult for the U.S. troops on the ground in Iraq. They could shut off the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz, thereby creating a global economic crisis. And they could use the threat of Iran-sponsored terrorist attacks on the American homeland."
Hahahahahahahaha!!! Klein found a book of cliches ("blowback"!!!), opened an atlas to discover the "Straight of Hormuz", used the internet to discover "the Chiefs" and the "Tank" ("the Pentagon's secure facility"!!!), and received an audio recording of the conversation had by Bush and "the Chiefs" (in a "secure facility", no less!!!), which included "the Chiefs" telling Bush that "they were opposed to such a strike"! Not a shred of evidence to be found anywhere to support Klein's delusions but dutifully swallowed by every like-minded fool from sea to shining sea.
By , at
Sun Feb 15, 12:16:00 PM:
They could shut off the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz, thereby creating a global economic crisis.
Does this bozo really believe that the US Navy, the most powerful in the world, couldn't take care of the Iranian navy?
By , at
Sun Feb 15, 03:55:00 PM:
randian asked: "Does this bozo really believe that the US Navy, the most powerful in the world, couldn't take care of the Iranian navy?"
Yes, randian. Joe Klein not only thinks that the vaunted, feared, lethal Iranian navy would destroy the United States Navy and control the Strait of Hormuz if it pleased, but Klein also thinks that the Joint Chiefs of Staff agree with him. If you aren't familiar with Joe Klein, then check out Time magazine's Swampland blog. He's one loony, loony, loony leftist loon. He's a jewel of utter idiocy.
By , at
Wed Feb 25, 02:06:00 AM:
How would you feel if I keep slapping you in the face and forcefully say you cannot own something no matter what, while I myself hold and own the same things? Wouldn’t you rise and stand up against my stupidity?
This is exactly what countries like North Korea, Iran and others feel and act when other countries lead by bigot USA (lead by Jews and Zionists) tells them they are not allowed to have nuclear power, nuclear arms, this technology or that technology. That small kid will eventually grow up and one day slaps you back, maybe even harder.
By TigerHawk, at
Wed Feb 25, 02:14:00 AM:
That last comment came from Tehran -- in case it wasn't obvious -- and warrants a response.
The issue is not whether Iran gets a bomb or not. The issue is whether the Islamic Republic gets a bomb. Your government has projected power via transnational terrorism and threatened war against other countries in the region. That means that its possession of an atomic weapon would run the risk of catastrophically destabilizing the whole region. One not need be a Zionist or a Jew to think those things.
By , at
Tue May 26, 06:54:00 PM:
"We increased Iran's sphere of influence when we handed the Shiites Iraq."Maybe. But, we also removed the only real threat the Iranian leaders had to justify their harsh rule. In the long run, we are better off setting up the conditions for a free society to evolve than to keep millions of people oppressed under dictatorial rule by amorally playing antagonists off against one another for our benefit.
"That small kid will eventually grow up and one day slaps you back, maybe even harder."If Iran ever really tries that, the entire nation will be obliterated by those whose technology is far ahead of their own. I'm talking nothing but radioactive glass from the Gulf of Oman to the Caspian Sea. That is the kind of fire the leaders of Iran are playing with.
