Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of my oft ax grindings is generally reserved for a regular customer who also happens to be one of the most reliable. Ah yes, the good ole press and media that attempts to pass itself off as meaningful and thoughtful purveyor of information, that in truth isn’t befitting the bottom half of a babies alimentary canal.
It is no wonder that so many view media today as little more than the propaganda arm of the government War Party, also known as the Incumbent Party for those seeking a softer approach. From pro-war wh*re hacks like Judith Miller, who exchanged any sense of integrity for an hour in the spot light to paid pro-war spokes-generals saturating liberal media stations like MSNBC, to revelations of wiki-leaks that the NY Times and Washington Post were shilling for the White House in an attempt to better package the war in Afghanistan.
Ok, lets forget that the US government seemingly wants and pines for war and lets forget that contemporary media and press outlets bend over backwards in a great effort to help sell the perpetual war to the American public, what about the ability of the average American reader to understand what they are actually reading? Are American’s really this ignorant that we can’t read between the lines of what is said to see what is meant and what is actually being said?
Here is an example of what I’m talking about in Reuters, which I sadly must say is actually one of the more balanced news content providers today. Now upon first reading to most people, it would appear to be a standard issue news story about Iran’s nuclear program being set back, but let’s take a closer look at some notable quotes from various spokespersons used in this and several other articles.
"The latest assessments, based at least in part on Israeli intelligence ... "
So at least part of the recent estimate on Iran is based upon Israeli intelligence, and I think everyone is aware of just how soft the Israeli’s are towards Iran, right? I mean were not talking about some anti-war puff piece, were talking about the intelligence assessment from US and Israeli intelligence agencies.
"U.S. intelligence agencies believe Iranian leaders have not yet decided to build a nuclear bomb ... "
Now hold on just a minute here, lets take a moment to let this sink in. US intelligence agencies believe Iran has not yet decided to build a nuclear bomb, but isn’t this what Ahmadinejad has been saying for the past five years? Isn’t this what the western press and media has ridiculed Iran’s leaders over and have stated repeatedly that Iran is secretly, covertly and methodically doing in real time? Yet here our own intelligence agencies are now claiming that Iran hasn’t even decided to build a nuclear weapon in the first place. I think this is substantial considering we just destroyed their ability to legally refine uranium, an act of war for most countries, like as if it happened to us for instance.
"We've got more time than we thought," said Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency."
Well in light of the fact that US intelligence agencies have admitted that Iran hasn’t even decided whether to build a nuclear weapon in the first place, perhaps we have a great deal more time, like forever?
" ... intelligence officials believe Iran is actively trying to assemble the infrastructure and know-how for atomic bomb production ... "
Here we go again and all within the same article, as if this isn’t really a report on Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear weapon but in fact an Abbott and Costello routine. Let that one sit a moment for mere comedy sake from the files of “Six degrees of Kevin Bacon”. “Actively trying to assemble the infrastructure and know-how”. Are you kidding me, are you serious? What the hell does this exactly constitute when one says “infrastructure AND know-how”? Indoor plumbing? Electricity inside a building? The use of concrete in a structure that could maybe be used to build a death ray if they wanted to for nefarious purposes? How about the "know-how", I mean couldn't you say their use of paper and pencil or learning how to read constitutes "trying to assemble know-how"? Someone pick me off the floor, I can’t stop laughing at the sheer ridiculous nature of this statement. It’s so bad it nearly isn’t worth mocking. I honestly ashamed that a US intelligence agency would make such an ignorant and moronic statement as this.
"The intelligence folks think that the Iranians aren't necessarily moving full steam ahead with the development of a nuclear weapon, but that there's fairly robust debate inside the Iranian regime on whether to go forward."
Once again the six degrees of Kevin Bacon strikes! I have this neighbor who once knew this guy that lived next door to this woman with an internet connection who met a guy that was once related to a government official that overheard a conversation in Iran about a “Robust debate” taking place on whether or not Iran wants to pursue a nuclear weapon. Well if a "Robust debate" isn’t grounds for a full scale invasion or at least a trillion dollar war, then I don’t know what is. Are you flipping serious!
"The official added that, "Even if (the Iranians) choose to do the wrong thing and proceed toward nuclear weapons, ... "
Now this quote I had to point out midway through this simply because it is confirming the second statement that Iran hasn’t even decided whether to produce a nuclear weapon or not. Now for the past several years, we hear daily in our press that are in fact working towards a weapon. We have for several years spoken daily about attacking them to prevent them from producing a weapon we admit they haven’t even decided to build. So while our press calls the Iranian government liars secretly working towards a bomb, our own intelligence has confirmed they were telling the truth all along. Now I’m sure the NY Times and the Washington Post will produce an article at length pointing this out…. NOT.
"The most recent -- and controversial -- consensus of U.S. spy agencies issued in 2007 reported that Iran had "halted its nuclear weapons program" in the autumn of 2003, although Tehran was "keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons.""
Once again, the consensus of US intelligence is that Iran is “keeping the option to build a nuclear weapon open”. Did you get that? They are keeping the option open, and if that isn’t reason enough to attack another nation, I don’t know what is. Can you make a more inane statement than "they are keeping their options open"? How about, "US intelligence agencies claim that water is wet", but they are keeping their options open. Which intelligence agency is using 5th graders to make public statements to the press, because that is about the level of depth you find from such a statement in this context. Seriously people, what is more pathetic, that a US intelligence agency would make such a statement or that the American media will repeat it 4982745982 times?
"In the last few days, however, the assessment in the United States and Israel seems to be shifting back toward the 2007 intelligence evaluation of slower Iranian nuclear progress."
You mean the part about us not knowing if Iran has decided to make a bomb in the first place? Lets not forget to point out the recent admittance by Israeli officials that Israel and the US used the Struxnet virus to cripple Iran’s uranium refinement ability. While the Israeli’s have been gloating and bragging about their efforts, the US has been more muted, but also doesn’t deny our role in this cyber attack. On the bright side, we have now removed their ability to produce a nuclear weapon that we admit they hadn’t even decided to build. How awesome is that!
"Meir Dagan, outgoing director of Israel's principal intelligence agency, Mossad, said Tehran would not be able to build a bomb for at least four years "because of measures that have been deployed against them.""
Lets not forget that it has already been repeated by both Israeli and US intelligence that Iran had not even decided to build a nuclear weapon in the first place. Lets keep people focused on the fear and the booga booga and lets keep the option to attack or war against them on the table, no matter what the evidence actually shows.
"A few days after Dagan's assessment, Netanyahu insisted the Iranians were still intent on getting a nuclear weapon and that only a combination of sanctions and a credible threat of military action would be effective deterrents."
God bless Israel’s chief luster of war Benjamin Bibi Netanyahu, we can always count on him to keep the hype alive and right on cue. Almost reminds me of those heady days of Dick Cheney running roughshod over US intelligence agencies and the Office of Special Plans ran out of his office in order to cherry pick evidence and twist arms of US intelligence agencies in order to get his war of desire and choice. I can almost picture those ultra-Liberal media types on stations like MSNBC running the cute little flag waving graphics with "March to War" and "Target Iran". Sigh, how I miss those days when people called me unAmerican for asking if the evidence to war against Iraq was sound. I can't wait until the United States starts talking about sedition yet again. God bless America and our love of freedom... to bomb others with impunity.
"David Albright, a former United Nations weapons inspector who heads the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington think tank, told Reuters that his own analysis still indicated Iran's nuclear research could reach a breakout point for bomb building in a year or two. Albright said he did not understand why Israelis like Dagan were so confident Iran will remain incapable of putting together a bomb any earlier than 2015."
This is by far the best part of this entire story, the use of David Albright as a credible source of anything is so hysterically laughable as to border on the absurd. Just what in the hell does "break out point" actually mean anyway? Is this some defined period of time or level of technical proficiency that is reached or just some moronic statement that some half wit pinhead coined for sound byte of the week?
David Albright if you remember was one of the people who, for a CNN story, confirmed the existence and substance of plans to build a nuclear weapon that were found in an Al Qaeda safe house. Only one problem, the plans that were found were part of a comedic parody piece in a science humor publication in the 1960’s and could be found publicly on the net.
These secret nuclear weapons plans were from a story that explained how to use left over plutonium dust as an insect repellent and to be sure and keep your uranium away from pets and small children. Thats right, this alleged weapons expert couldn't tell a comedy skit from a real bomb, yet this alleged “expert” is contradicting Israeli intelligence estimates on Iran’s nuclear capability? If this is the standard that our press and media are using, I would like to offer my services as an “expert” researcher for spending all of 3 minutes proving that David Albright is actually a comedian for the Daily Show and not an actual “expert” who is qualified to refute Israeli intelligence or the intelligence of a hamster for that matter.
Now I’m only using this story as an example of the current state of media and press, as well as a point of discussion on American reading comprehension. Regardless of your personal position on this issue, anyone with an IQ equal to their body temperature or greater has to look at this and consider for just a moment, how absurd this really is. For those promoting confrontation or aggression towards Iran, be they the press or individuals, or think tanks or government officials, many of the people quoted here are often cited in most US media outlets for their expert and pro-confrontational statements. What is humorous about this is that these same people who will offer a pro-aggression stance, have also in the same breath, admitted that Iran hasn’t even decided to build a nuclear weapon to begin with. So the only possible conclusions a person can draw is that they are lying now or they were lying then, and in either case, they are liars who are not to be taken seriously. An alternative conclusion might be that they don’t have a clue what the hell they are talking about and are simply flailing away crude and clumsy statements in hopes of frightening children and fearful and paranoid adults.
After being one of the several hundred million people who witnessed the selling of a war in Iraq by certain members of government with full cooperation of the American media establishment, I view anything in any press with great skepticism. I’ve seen the presentations, I’ve witnessed the talking points and selling statements and hot button sound bytes that are used to sway public opinion on matters of war or national aggression and pro-intervention. I’ve smelled the cart of rotten fish being peddled to the people and I not only refuse to buy it, but I can hardly read these stories without erupting into sheer laughter at the absurdity of what is being said and what is meant.
After all this, the only thing that can be asserted by US and Israeli intelligence is the claim that Iran "wants" a nuclear weapons program, as it cannot even factually claim that Iran has decided to pursue such a program, let alone begin one. However, if you are one of the fearful pro-war types, don't worry, the truth has never stood a chance against constructs such as desire and want in our media and press and I've seen nothing to prevent a war with Iran if you want one badly enough.
One of my oft ax grindings is generally reserved for a regular customer who also happens to be one of the most reliable. Ah yes, the good ole press and media that attempts to pass itself off as meaningful and thoughtful purveyor of information, that in truth isn’t befitting the bottom half of a babies alimentary canal.
It is no wonder that so many view media today as little more than the propaganda arm of the government War Party, also known as the Incumbent Party for those seeking a softer approach. From pro-war wh*re hacks like Judith Miller, who exchanged any sense of integrity for an hour in the spot light to paid pro-war spokes-generals saturating liberal media stations like MSNBC, to revelations of wiki-leaks that the NY Times and Washington Post were shilling for the White House in an attempt to better package the war in Afghanistan.
Ok, lets forget that the US government seemingly wants and pines for war and lets forget that contemporary media and press outlets bend over backwards in a great effort to help sell the perpetual war to the American public, what about the ability of the average American reader to understand what they are actually reading? Are American’s really this ignorant that we can’t read between the lines of what is said to see what is meant and what is actually being said?
Here is an example of what I’m talking about in Reuters, which I sadly must say is actually one of the more balanced news content providers today. Now upon first reading to most people, it would appear to be a standard issue news story about Iran’s nuclear program being set back, but let’s take a closer look at some notable quotes from various spokespersons used in this and several other articles.
"The latest assessments, based at least in part on Israeli intelligence ... "
So at least part of the recent estimate on Iran is based upon Israeli intelligence, and I think everyone is aware of just how soft the Israeli’s are towards Iran, right? I mean were not talking about some anti-war puff piece, were talking about the intelligence assessment from US and Israeli intelligence agencies.
"U.S. intelligence agencies believe Iranian leaders have not yet decided to build a nuclear bomb ... "
Now hold on just a minute here, lets take a moment to let this sink in. US intelligence agencies believe Iran has not yet decided to build a nuclear bomb, but isn’t this what Ahmadinejad has been saying for the past five years? Isn’t this what the western press and media has ridiculed Iran’s leaders over and have stated repeatedly that Iran is secretly, covertly and methodically doing in real time? Yet here our own intelligence agencies are now claiming that Iran hasn’t even decided to build a nuclear weapon in the first place. I think this is substantial considering we just destroyed their ability to legally refine uranium, an act of war for most countries, like as if it happened to us for instance.
"We've got more time than we thought," said Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency."
Well in light of the fact that US intelligence agencies have admitted that Iran hasn’t even decided whether to build a nuclear weapon in the first place, perhaps we have a great deal more time, like forever?
" ... intelligence officials believe Iran is actively trying to assemble the infrastructure and know-how for atomic bomb production ... "
Here we go again and all within the same article, as if this isn’t really a report on Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear weapon but in fact an Abbott and Costello routine. Let that one sit a moment for mere comedy sake from the files of “Six degrees of Kevin Bacon”. “Actively trying to assemble the infrastructure and know-how”. Are you kidding me, are you serious? What the hell does this exactly constitute when one says “infrastructure AND know-how”? Indoor plumbing? Electricity inside a building? The use of concrete in a structure that could maybe be used to build a death ray if they wanted to for nefarious purposes? How about the "know-how", I mean couldn't you say their use of paper and pencil or learning how to read constitutes "trying to assemble know-how"? Someone pick me off the floor, I can’t stop laughing at the sheer ridiculous nature of this statement. It’s so bad it nearly isn’t worth mocking. I honestly ashamed that a US intelligence agency would make such an ignorant and moronic statement as this.
"The intelligence folks think that the Iranians aren't necessarily moving full steam ahead with the development of a nuclear weapon, but that there's fairly robust debate inside the Iranian regime on whether to go forward."
Once again the six degrees of Kevin Bacon strikes! I have this neighbor who once knew this guy that lived next door to this woman with an internet connection who met a guy that was once related to a government official that overheard a conversation in Iran about a “Robust debate” taking place on whether or not Iran wants to pursue a nuclear weapon. Well if a "Robust debate" isn’t grounds for a full scale invasion or at least a trillion dollar war, then I don’t know what is. Are you flipping serious!
"The official added that, "Even if (the Iranians) choose to do the wrong thing and proceed toward nuclear weapons, ... "
Now this quote I had to point out midway through this simply because it is confirming the second statement that Iran hasn’t even decided whether to produce a nuclear weapon or not. Now for the past several years, we hear daily in our press that are in fact working towards a weapon. We have for several years spoken daily about attacking them to prevent them from producing a weapon we admit they haven’t even decided to build. So while our press calls the Iranian government liars secretly working towards a bomb, our own intelligence has confirmed they were telling the truth all along. Now I’m sure the NY Times and the Washington Post will produce an article at length pointing this out…. NOT.
"The most recent -- and controversial -- consensus of U.S. spy agencies issued in 2007 reported that Iran had "halted its nuclear weapons program" in the autumn of 2003, although Tehran was "keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons.""
Once again, the consensus of US intelligence is that Iran is “keeping the option to build a nuclear weapon open”. Did you get that? They are keeping the option open, and if that isn’t reason enough to attack another nation, I don’t know what is. Can you make a more inane statement than "they are keeping their options open"? How about, "US intelligence agencies claim that water is wet", but they are keeping their options open. Which intelligence agency is using 5th graders to make public statements to the press, because that is about the level of depth you find from such a statement in this context. Seriously people, what is more pathetic, that a US intelligence agency would make such a statement or that the American media will repeat it 4982745982 times?
"In the last few days, however, the assessment in the United States and Israel seems to be shifting back toward the 2007 intelligence evaluation of slower Iranian nuclear progress."
You mean the part about us not knowing if Iran has decided to make a bomb in the first place? Lets not forget to point out the recent admittance by Israeli officials that Israel and the US used the Struxnet virus to cripple Iran’s uranium refinement ability. While the Israeli’s have been gloating and bragging about their efforts, the US has been more muted, but also doesn’t deny our role in this cyber attack. On the bright side, we have now removed their ability to produce a nuclear weapon that we admit they hadn’t even decided to build. How awesome is that!
"Meir Dagan, outgoing director of Israel's principal intelligence agency, Mossad, said Tehran would not be able to build a bomb for at least four years "because of measures that have been deployed against them.""
Lets not forget that it has already been repeated by both Israeli and US intelligence that Iran had not even decided to build a nuclear weapon in the first place. Lets keep people focused on the fear and the booga booga and lets keep the option to attack or war against them on the table, no matter what the evidence actually shows.
"A few days after Dagan's assessment, Netanyahu insisted the Iranians were still intent on getting a nuclear weapon and that only a combination of sanctions and a credible threat of military action would be effective deterrents."
God bless Israel’s chief luster of war Benjamin Bibi Netanyahu, we can always count on him to keep the hype alive and right on cue. Almost reminds me of those heady days of Dick Cheney running roughshod over US intelligence agencies and the Office of Special Plans ran out of his office in order to cherry pick evidence and twist arms of US intelligence agencies in order to get his war of desire and choice. I can almost picture those ultra-Liberal media types on stations like MSNBC running the cute little flag waving graphics with "March to War" and "Target Iran". Sigh, how I miss those days when people called me unAmerican for asking if the evidence to war against Iraq was sound. I can't wait until the United States starts talking about sedition yet again. God bless America and our love of freedom... to bomb others with impunity.
"David Albright, a former United Nations weapons inspector who heads the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington think tank, told Reuters that his own analysis still indicated Iran's nuclear research could reach a breakout point for bomb building in a year or two. Albright said he did not understand why Israelis like Dagan were so confident Iran will remain incapable of putting together a bomb any earlier than 2015."
This is by far the best part of this entire story, the use of David Albright as a credible source of anything is so hysterically laughable as to border on the absurd. Just what in the hell does "break out point" actually mean anyway? Is this some defined period of time or level of technical proficiency that is reached or just some moronic statement that some half wit pinhead coined for sound byte of the week?
David Albright if you remember was one of the people who, for a CNN story, confirmed the existence and substance of plans to build a nuclear weapon that were found in an Al Qaeda safe house. Only one problem, the plans that were found were part of a comedic parody piece in a science humor publication in the 1960’s and could be found publicly on the net.
These secret nuclear weapons plans were from a story that explained how to use left over plutonium dust as an insect repellent and to be sure and keep your uranium away from pets and small children. Thats right, this alleged weapons expert couldn't tell a comedy skit from a real bomb, yet this alleged “expert” is contradicting Israeli intelligence estimates on Iran’s nuclear capability? If this is the standard that our press and media are using, I would like to offer my services as an “expert” researcher for spending all of 3 minutes proving that David Albright is actually a comedian for the Daily Show and not an actual “expert” who is qualified to refute Israeli intelligence or the intelligence of a hamster for that matter.
Now I’m only using this story as an example of the current state of media and press, as well as a point of discussion on American reading comprehension. Regardless of your personal position on this issue, anyone with an IQ equal to their body temperature or greater has to look at this and consider for just a moment, how absurd this really is. For those promoting confrontation or aggression towards Iran, be they the press or individuals, or think tanks or government officials, many of the people quoted here are often cited in most US media outlets for their expert and pro-confrontational statements. What is humorous about this is that these same people who will offer a pro-aggression stance, have also in the same breath, admitted that Iran hasn’t even decided to build a nuclear weapon to begin with. So the only possible conclusions a person can draw is that they are lying now or they were lying then, and in either case, they are liars who are not to be taken seriously. An alternative conclusion might be that they don’t have a clue what the hell they are talking about and are simply flailing away crude and clumsy statements in hopes of frightening children and fearful and paranoid adults.
After being one of the several hundred million people who witnessed the selling of a war in Iraq by certain members of government with full cooperation of the American media establishment, I view anything in any press with great skepticism. I’ve seen the presentations, I’ve witnessed the talking points and selling statements and hot button sound bytes that are used to sway public opinion on matters of war or national aggression and pro-intervention. I’ve smelled the cart of rotten fish being peddled to the people and I not only refuse to buy it, but I can hardly read these stories without erupting into sheer laughter at the absurdity of what is being said and what is meant.
After all this, the only thing that can be asserted by US and Israeli intelligence is the claim that Iran "wants" a nuclear weapons program, as it cannot even factually claim that Iran has decided to pursue such a program, let alone begin one. However, if you are one of the fearful pro-war types, don't worry, the truth has never stood a chance against constructs such as desire and want in our media and press and I've seen nothing to prevent a war with Iran if you want one badly enough.
That is a lot to digest. I am going to read it all and get back to you.
1) I blame Clinton for reducing the CIA field office staff by 25%, effectively neutering decades-long established spy networks. Does anyone believe that networks associated with Iran were spared? Pssssshhhh.
2) It irks me that assessments include terms like "not capable for another 4 years." As if 4 years is a long time????? I don't really understand this particular line of reasoning at all.
3) I believe intentional misinformation is put out to market by the government as part of the propoganda campaign. Reueters, in my mind, is just one of the many vehicles used to transmit.
1) I blame Clinton for reducing the CIA field office staff by 25%, effectively neutering decades-long established spy networks. Does anyone believe that networks associated with Iran were spared? Pssssshhhh.
2) It irks me that assessments include terms like "not capable for another 4 years." As if 4 years is a long time????? I don't really understand this particular line of reasoning at all.
3) I believe intentional misinformation is put out to market by the government as part of the propoganda campaign. Reueters, in my mind, is just one of the many vehicles used to transmit.
Is Reuters a vehicle for misinformation, I wouldn't doubt it but then again, I suspect the bulk of contemporary media is little more than a giant steaming pile of misinformation. Whether it is intentional or just assembled by idiots I'll leave others to decide.
Now if Reuters is quoting government officials and intelligence agency spokespeople, then is Reuters to blame or is the officials they are quoting to blame for the misinformation?
Statement #2
"U.S. intelligence agencies believe Iranian leaders have not yet decided to build a nuclear bomb ... "
Statement #4
" ... intelligence officials believe Iran is actively trying to assemble the infrastructure and know-how for atomic bomb production ... "
Now when we look at these two statements from the same article, we see that US intelligence agencies are stating that A) we don't know if they decided to build a nuclear weapon. and B) that we believe they are actively seeking the infrastructure and know-how to build a nuclear weapon.
I don't know about you folks, but such contradictions in statements from the same article when quoting "intelligence agency spokespeople", I'm not only skeptical, I openly claim it is bull chips.
Now who does one look to for shoveling the BS here, the press quoting the government or the government for making the statement? Or do you focus on the part about "we believe", even in the absence of evidence?
When I look at Iran, I see an extremely dysfunctional and volatile political situation. An incredibly young population, a vocal opposition not just to the ruling theocracy, but to the status quo itself. The events in Tunisia, and in Sudan, are dramatic shifts in countries where the people have been dissatisfied by the status quo. I think Ahmadinejad is simply a mouthpiece, an ambitious loudmouthed mouthpiece, who is used as a tool by the ruling theocracy, but kept on a leash. My concern would be how frayed that leash is, given Ahmadinejad's ties to the Revolutionary Guard, and the fact that the Revolutionary Guard assumed greater power in the aftermath of the 2009 elections, and the fact that the Revolutionary Guard has quietly amassed a great deal of wealth and ownership of key Iranian industries. The aging theocracy will result in a power vacuum, and my concern is that the Revolutionary Guard will fill that vacuum, and that a nuclear weapon in their hands may be more dangerous than a nuclear weapon in the hands of the religiously extreme theocrats currently in power. I hope that the Iranian people will not allow a military authoritarian regime replace their theocracy, but I think that the window of opportunity to prevent that is shrinking.
Is Reuters a vehicle for misinformation, I wouldn't doubt it but then again, I suspect the bulk of contemporary media is little more than a giant steaming pile of misinformation. Whether it is intentional or just assembled by idiots I'll leave others to decide.
Now if Reuters is quoting government officials and intelligence agency spokespeople, then is Reuters to blame or is the officials they are quoting to blame for the misinformation?
Statement #2
"U.S. intelligence agencies believe Iranian leaders have not yet decided to build a nuclear bomb ... "
Statement #4
" ... intelligence officials believe Iran is actively trying to assemble the infrastructure and know-how for atomic bomb production ... "
Now when we look at these two statements from the same article, we see that US intelligence agencies are stating that A) we don't know if they decided to build a nuclear weapon. and B) that we believe they are actively seeking the infrastructure and know-how to build a nuclear weapon.
I don't know about you folks, but such contradictions in statements from the same article when quoting "intelligence agency spokespeople", I'm not only skeptical, I openly claim it is bull chips.
Now who does one look to for shoveling the BS here, the press quoting the government or the government for making the statement? Or do you focus on the part about "we believe", even in the absence of evidence?
I don't fault Reuters. To be honest, i've witnessed enough over the past 20 years to be confident that our government is not as good at intelligence gathering as we have been led to believe. To be clear, I don't expect that every terrorist/nuclear/nefarious act can be recognized and averted. And i'm sure there are hundreds or thousands of events that are successfully averted every year. But I have grown very skeptical of government watchdogs, spy agencies, intelligence groups, etc. because of the very types of statements that you have highlighted here. When I read between the lines, all I see/hear is "I don't know what the hell's going on so this is what i'm going to say instead." Too many contradictions in too short a timeframe, as you've illustrated. It just says to me that somewhere along the way we have lost our way as a true superpower. I blame Clinton, as well as Democrats during the 79-89 Russo-Afghan war for neutering our spy network. It's very complex, but to summarize, I don't trust our government when it comes to international affairs.
...........The aging theocracy will result in a power vacuum, and my concern is that the Revolutionary Guard will fill that vacuum, and that a nuclear weapon in their hands may be more dangerous than a nuclear weapon in the hands of the religiously extreme theocrats currently in power. I hope that the Iranian people will not allow a military authoritarian regime replace their theocracy, but I think that the window of opportunity to prevent that is shrinking.
Regardless of who is eventually in power, if they can develop nukes, they will. In the west, we somehow want others to be good nuclear-free citizens (the do-as-I-say approach), but the local people correctly see it as a technology that brings power and prestige (just ask Pakistan!). In other words, nuclear technology wise, we may still not get the results we hope for regardless of the changes in Iran. The cat is out of the bag and the best we can do is slow its spread to other countries.
Referring to OP, the key is to keep the Iranian pot simmering by using the lame media we have. Another crisis like 9-11 and there will certainly be calls to invade Iran. We have all the defense spending we need to justify in a time of budget cuts and no real big enemies. A good Iran war will mean about a trillion dollars into the defense industry's coffers.
LET'S GET THIS STRAIGHT. Anyone with some understanding of the open literature on Nuclear Physics, some engineering talent and a source of Uranium can develop a nuclear bomb. In actuality it would make more sense to buy one through the criminal underground in the countries that already have the devices.
The knowledge to build a bomb is out there so the question is: Why bother? Iran has nothing to gain by threatening the world with nuclear weapons. Yeah, the Mullah's are pissed at the Israelis and their insane Likkud Party but who isn’t? Iran does not need to attack anyone as they have the domestic resources to haul themselves out of the normal Islamic dark ages. Perhaps preventing the development of another industrial economy is a reason for our warmongering.
The people that most NEED a WAR are the profiteers operating the International Warfare corporations making trillions off our and others efforts to “End Terrorism” or some other phony excuse. Ending Terrorism and/or War would be an economic disaster to these monsters and, unfortunately, much of our own industrial economy. The people that work in this huge boondoggle are among the best paid workers in the most profitable companies. The loss of these contracts would effectively shut down what is left of our industrial economy.
These people have a tremendous effect on everything we do including how the profit driven press create and present the latest “threat to all that is Good and Holy”. As the only thing Good and Holy to these guys is their political control and, most importantly their profits. As they are willing to kill thousands of people for these profits lying to everyone is a relatively small sin.
We have no rational reason for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is also no rational or moral reason for a war with Iran. I do not consider corporate employment or profit a sufficient reason to kill masses of people. The dedicated greedsters might but I do not.
There is also the minor consideration that if we do attack we just might lose all our ships in the Persian Gulf to precision guided ballistic, actually no longer random ballistic, missiles carrying non explosive warheads. Guided munitions accurate to a couple of meters or so are much more useful in a war than any number of nuclear weapons. I am nearly certain the Iran has developed this technology while keeping us fusing about the nuclear weapons they don’t want or need.
I want to thank THT for another of his thoughtful and provocative essays.
I think you need to try to see this from the perspective of Iran .....
First you had the Shah .... not very popular, indeed pretty repressive, much hated and heavily supported by the USA.
Then you get invaded by Iraq, also heavily supported by the USA (at the time) and finally fight them to a standstill at huge cost in lives.
Then you watch the USA fight two conventional wars against Iraq where the US army (aided by others) rolls over that army which you fought for years in a few days. Now they are camped on your doorstep.
In the meantime, you have 30 years of anti-Iranian rhetoric and sanctions coming from the US and to a lesser extent her allies.
So, not unreasonably, you feel a little paranoid. But what do you do? You know you cannot beat the US in a conventional war ... right now, nobody can. But you also know that the US is hyper-sensitive to heavy casualties. So you build a few nukes and I don't think they have done as yet) because, used against an invading conventional force, they will cause devastating casualties. The knowledge that they exist might just stop you getting invaded. Actually .... even if they don't exist, the thought that they just might exists is equally powerful.
This is why I gather info from various news sources and formulate my own opinion. I listen to the left media and right media and do some searching around if I'm that interested and have my own conclusions. Right or wrong but enough to hold a conversation with someone.
At the end of the day Iran is trying to build something nuclear. They say it's for power and everyone else says it's for weapons. Who really knows?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
