Bien sur, there must be one chosen to give the dissenting opinion, otherwise the citizens might suspect a fait accompli, non?

Et tu, medicinecatte?

DW

Bonjour, Mon. Bartoo.

Fareed must have been very disappointed that not everyone in the Administration was openly gung-ho for his lovely new war. He and CNN have been jonesing for one ever since Iraq went sour. How else can Zakaria and the rest of the network get the big ratings?

Although Dempsey say “no war”, as soon as we can manufacture sufficient “evidence” of weaponization of uranium, or intent to weaponize the uranium, or the desire to have the intent to weaponize the uranium, or that the Iranian do or MAY possess some other WMD, the it’s “Laissez le bon temps roullez!!!!! C’est la guerre!

War to the national news media is like a hurricane to the Weather Channel. They just get all giddy!!

“…but he shook his head at the notion of an Israeli strike, saying that it’s “not prudent” and “wouldn’t achieve [Israel's] long-term objectives.”
———-
Anybody who doesn’t think Israel would lauch a pre-emptive strike the second they have evidence of nucleur weapon “potential” doesn’t know any Israelis personally.

Heh. You stole my thoughts.

And who thinks the U.S. is not already arming the Syrians. Wasn’t that the purpose of Libya? To get AQI and Gaddafi’s weapons to destabilize Syria.

Lieberman’s bill is a “green light” for war. It permits an attack if the U.S. thinks Iran is even capable of operating a Mr. Coffee. I really want a foreign policy divorce between the U.S. and Israel. Our selling them weapons and Obama’s statement that we are in lockstep with Israel, has emboldened Israel’s leaders to ‘bully’ Iran. Kind of an Israeli, “I’m going to bomb you and if you hit us back, my big brother (the U.S.) will flatten you.” strategy. I am sick and tired of arrogant Israeli leaders’ threats against Iran.

I guess you missed the class where the need for evidence, for evidence of evidence, or even manufactured evidence was proven unnecessary. I think the class was called “making up shit; unprovoked attacks 101″. Or are you just seeding some undeserved credibility for the Israeli propaganda machine?

Hmmm….

Taking this at face value (yeah, yeah, I know), it would seem that ObamaLLP is actually against an Israeli strike. At least prior to the election.

How much leverage ObamaLLP has to stop Israel, I don’t know. Certainly, Israel’s foreign aid is not at risk. Nor is intelligence cooperation. And it’s seems to me that ObamaLLP and Obama personally are not held in great esteem by Israel or Bibi.

Israel has already gone to war with Iran, but in a more intelligent way. they’re killing the Iranian scientists who are involved with iran’s program. They’re sabotaging anything remotely associated with nukes or rockets.

You’ll see an increase in accidents before you see bombers. IMO.

Boxturtle (If i were Iran, I’d be taking Israel seriously)

Methinks that newcarguy, simply omitted, unintentionally, the quotation marks around “evidence”, DonS.

Who dares say that America does not manufacture “things”, anymore?

I say … a little “sexing-up” over here, please.

DW

Oh, they’ll hit. But will it be a military hit? I think they’ve done more damage to irans program with virii, accidents, and killings than they possibly could with bombs.

If I’m israel, my next escalation is going after political leaders via accidents.

Boxturtle (If I was Iran, I’d be looking at that last offer more closly)

My fave class was the one when they explained economies of scale in warfare. The bigger the war is and the more countries involved the more efficient the war enterprise becomes.

Vertical integration too. Make your own insurgents then send them all over the world to do their work.

The get-the-Soviets-out-of-Afghanistan model is just too good not to replicate on larger & larger scale.

I can only hope we can beat back the war mongrels. This interview is hopeful.
I know, but I can dream of sanity.

I’m thinking October surprise. Soon enough to gin up patriotic fever, but too late to see many of the negative consequences.

crossposted @ emptywheel:

I know you didn’t ask me but your hypothetical –”What happens if the US is in contact with the Iranians and lets them know that if there is no attack on the US then the US doesn’t get involved in any dispute between Israel and Iran? — reveals a quest that is understandable. My thought is 1) that train left the station a long time ago. US fingerprints are de facto all over Israeli belligerence, from arming them, to explicit and tacit diplomatic support. 2) reverse the scenario and ask yourself if it’s credible: i.e., the US, or Israel, sustains an unprovoked military attack and we expect an a priori behind the scenes deal not to retaliate to control the fall out. Not likely from either internal Iranian political pressures pov, nor in terms of external perceptions of Iran’s resolve by the rest of the world.

Your hyothetical of course precedes that we live in a world where the US and Israel pretty much control their own destiny and can shape geostrategic events any way they choose. That used to be the case moreso than it is today, but where things really get patheic is realizing the extent to which Israeli strategy seems to have almost a direct hand on the trigger of leveraging US power. Look at the number of Israelis, dual citizens and sympathizers of Israel who have participated in Israel’s military and diplomatic apparatus, and have intimate connections on the Hill and in the WH: both repub and dem. Not to even mention AIPAC.

It’s no coincidence. The NYT story citing (that belligerent fool) Robb’s recommending the US expedite super bunker busters in the same breath as he tries to pretend it’s not a direct path to attack gives a real flavor to what US intentions and actions are. We get our way in the world largely because we have the biggest stick, not because we are respected as fair and peaceful, IMO.

Finally, though not directly related to your question, I laugh at how Bumiller, or the headline writer, uses the word “Task” to describe a putative, unrpvoked Israeli air campaign. How very sterile and technical. Not at all like war, with blood, innocents, ‘collateral damage’, etc. Only the bad guys cause wars that are actually messy and wreak unimaginable damage.

I can just imagine my counterpart in Tehran, a sixty something guy with two adult children lucky enough to have jobs in a nearby metropolis, scared to death that the largest superpower in the world is contemplating bombing my country and that my own leaders are stupidly defiantly responding to threats from two nuclear armed nations, and then I read on the Internet, my version of the NYTimes in which some intellectual giant lays out the plans for the demise of my country, my cities, and my children. He must feel angry and terrified to read this kind of crap:

“Should the United States get involved — or decide to strike on its own — military analysts said that the Pentagon had the ability to launch big strikes with bombers, stealth aircraft and cruise missiles, followed up by drones that could carry out damage assessments to help direct further strikes. Unlike Israel, the United States has plenty of refueling capability. Bombers could fly from Al Udeid air base in Qatar, Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean or bases in Britain and the United States.”

Yeaup. I am quoting from that article too. Thanks.

Steve Clemons pwrites one of his all to rare posts these days:

“While everyone knows that the defense budget is large — even in the numbers that the public sees as the formally admitted figures by the Department of Defense — the truth is that when one scratches beneath the bureaucratic veneer, national security spending is much larger, nearly double the amount US citizens are told.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/02/the-real-defense-budget/253327/

Israel wants to sanction Iran, and destroy it’s nuclear reactors. We know that.

But for some reason, nobody seems to know or even want to know, that Saudi Arabia agrees with Israel.

If you want to be informed on this subject you can read this Guardian webpage, where this is made completely clear:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-saudis-iran

Otherwise, just keep attributing this solely to Israel and Aipac. which is completely wrong.

I predict this bit of information will be unwelcome and ignored at this post, at this site, and in the blog world in general.

Not sure why that is.

I’m not sure. Obama is probably getting a daily phone call from Holy Joe demanding a strike. Obama’s advisors are probably reporting that he could get away with a strike if he had a fig leaf to hide behind. Obama’s political advisors are probably telling that a strike would be a wash with the voters as long as they don’t blame it for increases in gas prices.

So it boils down to what does Wall St want? In return for his $1B, Obama would likely bomb Greece.

Boxturtle (He’s probably repaint our planes with German markings, though)

Wow. If even Clemons can figure it out, it must be a red-letter day.

Oh, we’re aware of that and it’s been discussed. But all that does is mean that Israel can do it as far as the Saudi’s are concerned. Which means they can use Saudi airspace.

But the decision will be made in Jerusalam, not Washington or Riyadh.

Boxturtle (There’s lots of support for hitting Shia Iran amongst the Sunni’s)

That’s what it smells like. He should have drilled the lunkhead

Careful. War mongerers including Saudi ones are all, ALL, criticized here. Thanks for the link.

Marcy @ emptywheel:

” . . .to what degree is our post-Arab Spring policy in the Middle East serving Saudi Arabia’s purposes of aiming to obliterate the Shia–Iranian–pole of influence and not just our typical responsiveness to Israeli demands? ” etc:

http://www.emptywheel.net/2012/02/19/do-we-really-want-a-unipolar-middle-east/

It’s that old Tom Lehrer song about everybody hating everybody. Saudis hate the shia.

I do not agree with the White House’s “unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security”. I think our commitment to any nation’s security is limited to the situation at hand and limited to how that nation respects the sovereign rights of neighboring nations.

http://www.kuna.net.kw/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=2222590&language=en

Otherwise you set up kindling to large conflagration commitments like WW I.

World wide inflation guaranteed. The straits of Hormuz would close. Russia and China are aligned with Iran. Hugely diplomatically complex. The “Great recession” would extend. As the Admiral says the level of uncertainty is high. Us MIC does not want Isreal to dictate our defense policy, Iran is no threat to our security and it’s own security is pretty porous as we have funded destabilization factors. The political pendulum is moving towards political policy that is less confrontational, Hezbollah notwithstanding.
The shite community is a force in the ME.Maybe see what Juan Cole thinks.

Your comments, both here and at EW’s place, are among some of the very best which it has my pleasure to encounter.

I hope we may see you commenting in both places as often as time and opportunity permit, DonS.

DW

Top Ten Ways Iran is Defying US, EU Oil Sanctions and How You are Paying for It All

Posted on 02/20/2012 by Juan

It wasn’t supposed to be like this, the Neocons assured us. Iran would soon be on its knees because of ever more stringent US sanctions on Iran. But Iran just cheekily sent two warships through the Suez Canal to dock at the Syrian port of Tartous. The old Mubarak government in Egypt might not have allowed such a thing, but the Arab Spring has brought to power an Egyptian government eager to demonstrate its independence from Washington.

Brent crude just hit $121 dollars a barrel, the highest in 8 months and a remarkable figure in the absence of a crisis like the Libyan War (responsible for the last big spike).

The one that ends when Alabama gets the bomb?

Anybody who thinks Israel will launch a PREVENTIVE (pre-emptive meaning the attacker has reason to believe it is under threat of immediate attack) attack against Iran without a high degree of confidence that the U.S. will join in doesn’t understand the nature of the mission.

The U.S. slod Israel 5,000 lb bunker busters. They are talking about a one time strike. The U.S, version of the same mission, which makes U.S. military uncomfortable and is by no means certain of success, involves attacks over several weeks using 30,000 lb bunker busters.

Moreover, the U.S. military doesn’t receive contributions from AIPAC. They haven’t forgotten the Liberty or the secret U.S. technology the Israelis passed on to the Soviets several times for various reasons.

When it sounded like W was serious about war with Iran, there were leaks of planned mass resignations by flag level officers.

Loved your ‘Fareed was sooo shocked’ by Demsey’s declarations, DD.

They say Fareed is really hot and in demand at DC parties and Diplomatic cocktail do’s…small wonder, eh wot? Weapons, war porn, excitement galore.

‘New favorite Chairman of the Joint Chiefs’ was pretty fun, too. ;o)

That sure seems to be its direction at the moment. If you assume away the possibility of policy confusion because of the unexpectedness of the Arab Spring. And its consequences.

I have seen the Iran “crisis” as a lot of chest-beating on all three sides for the sake of building public support for the regime – US, Iran, Israel. It sure seems that the real negotiations and the background is that the US military is not on board, the Israeli military and (interestingly) Mossad are not on board, and the Iranians aren’t terribly anxious to take the step to weaponization. Having the ability to weaponize their nuclear capability is enough of a deterrent. In this the experience of North Korea is instructive. Having nuclear weapons has not appreciably changed their strategic position. In my estimation Iran’s diplomats have been playing this situation well.

I would be surprised to see a war launched during the run-up to an election. Obama is running in 2012, and Ahmedinejad is running in 2013. Israeli domestic politics seems to be going against precipitous action with regard to Iran.

In this case, it seems that JCS Chair Dempsey is speaking US foreign policy of the moment. The presence of more war hawks in Congress after the fall election could change that. For now, the chest-beating has stopped for a little negotiation.

Well said.

Fareed’s a comprador import.

Thank you, DW. We just keep throwing this stuff out there in hopes of influencing the environment I guess. I certainly have no special expertise, but simply applying logic and honesty to known conditions seems to be in short supply amongst the powerful.

FWIW, I do get worked up about the Israeli connection since my mother’s family, Jewish, was decimated re WWII. It hurts to see the legacy of that suffering, repeated in so many families, being perverted in the ways the right wing zionist/christianist bunch do. And most of our Jewish acquaintances feel exactly the same, albeit none are staunchly religious.

Vengeance will be mine, thus sayeth the Lord.

Another exploit of the faithful. Predictable, really.

Trauma is useful.

Yeppers; a Yalie import from India.

Updated: Ah; just saw RC say what you mean by ‘comprador’ on DD’s Pelosi thread.

The way I see this:

The military brass are neocons and all into war for the sake of war. He has no intention of supporting his Commander in Chief. As a matter of fact, this is all about giving the Righties with Mighty an issue to use against Obama.

WOW! When you get kudos from DW @ #31 you’ve cleared the bar by several inches.

Interesting obsewrvation on everything. Although my take is, this is one really big, complicated mess. Way too many hidden variables. I got a bad feeling that this wil not end well.

OTOH, the several recent fatal vehicular “accidents” in Iran could prove to be stifling to the Iranian nucleur quest. Perhaps negating the need for an Israeli pre-emptive strike of some sort.

“Anybody who thinks Israel will launch a PREVENTIVE (pre-emptive meaning the attacker has reason to believe it is under threat of immediate attack) attack against Iran without a high degree of confidence that the U.S. will join in doesn’t understand the nature of the mission.”
———–
I believe that, while Israel would like our support, the lack of it would NOT necessarily deter them if they felt genuinely threatened.

If war with Iran was doable it would have been done. War is costly and destructive. At some point we have to renew our aging infrastructure to remain relevant as an economy. many forces are against the almighty dollar. we have been holding that off. WWIII will change the whole games as emerging nation/economies take a bigger bite out of GWP.

Iraq history proved that it doesn’t matter if you have inspections (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence), if warfare is your most important product.

Imagine if Iran succeeds and goes on line with its so-called peaceful nuclear power for domestic energy. Pretend you’re GE and Westinghouse. Not only did Iran build its own nuclear industry, but it didn’t buy yours, and from now on Iran could sell nuclear plants to the rest of the world instead of GE and Westinghouse. You have to ask yourself if you feel lucky. Well, do you?

If GE and Westinghouse want to destroy Iran’s nuclear capability, it will be done, probably without fingerprints, and you won’t know who to blame or applaud.

It must be terribly confusing and frustrating to the Iranians what with all the contradictory messages they’ve rec’d. the past several years: the IAEA, several US NIEs, SecDef Panneta, Chairman JCS Dempsey, the Mossad, have said that Iran has no nuclear weapons program. Yet the President has signed into law oil sanctions. Meanwhile, the US & Israel have both been engaged in a shadow war with Iran for several years and lately the US, Britain, and France have moved warships into the Gulf. So, Mr. Obama, what is it you want from the Iranians: war, regime change, Iran to return to its former status as a client state of the US? What is it you want? Why all the war talk from our traditional corporate media?

Amen. I’m also sick to think as an American, somebody might identify me with Israeli policy. Disgusting.