RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Taibbi writes: "As a journalist, there's a buzz you can detect once the normal restraints in your business have been loosened, a smell of fresh chum in the waters, urging us down the road to war. Many years removed from the Iraq disaster, that smell is back, this time with Iran."

Matt Taibbi at Skylight Studio in New York, 10/27/10. (photo: Neilson Barnard/Getty Images)
Matt Taibbi at Skylight Studio in New York, 10/27/10. (photo: Neilson Barnard/Getty Images)



Another March to War?

By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone

18 February 12

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUS6su29SqI

s a journalist, there's a buzz you can detect once the normal restraints in your business have been loosened, a smell of fresh chum in the waters, urging us down the road to war. Many years removed from the Iraq disaster, that smell is back, this time with Iran.

You can just feel it: many of the same newspapers and TV stations we saw leading the charge in the Bush years have gone back to the attic and are dusting off their war pom-poms. CNN's house blockhead, the Goldman-trained ex-finance professional Erin Burnett, came out with a doozie of a broadcast yesterday, a Rumsfeldian jeremiad against the Iranian threat would have fit beautifully in the Saddam's-sending-drones-at-New-York halcyon days of late 2002. Here's how the excellent Glenn Greenwald described Burnett's rant:

It's the sort of thing you would produce if you set out to create a mean-spirited parody of mindless, war-hungry, fear-mongering media stars, but you wouldn't dare go this far because you'd want the parody to have a feel of realism to it, and this would be way too extreme to be believable. She really hauled it all out: WMDs! Terrorist sleeper cells in the U.S. controlled by Tehran! Iran's long-range nuclear missiles reaching our homeland!!!! She almost made the anti-Muslim war-mongering fanatic she brought on to interview, Rep. Peter King, appear sober and reasonable by comparison.

Like Greenwald, I was particularly struck by Burnett's freak-out about Iran's nuclear program, about which she said, "No one buys Iran's claim that [it is] for peaceful purposes." She then cited remarks by Director of Intelligence James Clapper, which, she said, "drove that message home." But then she ran a clip with Clapper's quote, which read as follows:

Iran's technical advances . . . strengthen our assessment that Iran is more than capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon if its political leaders, specifically the Supreme Leader himself, choose to do so.

In other words, "If Iran were to decide to be capable of making nuclear weapons, it would be capable of making nuclear weapons." Unless I'm missing something, that's a statement that would be true of almost any industrialized country, wouldn't it?

Virtually all of the Iran stories of late have contained some version of this sort of rhetorical sophistry. The news "hook" in most all of these stories is that intelligence reports reveal Iran is "willing" to attack us or go to war - but then there's usually an asterisk next to the headline, and when you follow the asterisk, it reads something like, "In the event that we attack Iran first."

An NBC report Greenwald also wrote about put it this way: "Within just the past few days, Iranian leaders have threatened that if attacked, they would launch those missiles at U.S. targets."

There's a weird set of internalized assumptions that media members bring to stories like this Iran business. In fact there's an elaborate belief system we press people adhere to, about how a foreign country may behave toward the U.S., and how it may not behave. It reminds me a little of a passage in Anna Karenina about the belief system of noblemen in Tolstoy's day:

Vronsky's life was particularly happy in that he had a code of principles, which defined with unfailing certitude what he ought and what he ought not to do… These principles laid down as invisible rules: that one must pay a cardsharper, but need not pay a tailor; that one must never lie to a man, but one may lie to a woman; that one must never cheat anyone, but one may a husband; that one must never pardon an insult, but one may give one, and so on.

We have a similar gentleman's code, a "Westernized industrial power" code if you will, that operates the same way. In other words, our newspapers and TV stations may blather on a thousand times a day about attacking Iran and bombing its people, but if even one Iranian talks about fighting back, he is being "aggressive" and "threatening"; we can impose sanctions on anyone, but if the sanctioned country embargoes oil shipments to Europe in response, it's being "belligerent," and so on.

I'm not defending Achmedinejad, I think he's nuts and a monstrous dick and I definitely don't think he should be allowed to have nuclear weapons, but to me this issue has little to do with Iran at all. What's more troubling to me is that we've internalized this "gentleman's code" to the point where its basic premises are no longer even debated.

Once upon a time, way back in the stone ages, when Noam Chomsky was first writing about these propaganda techniques in Manufacturing Consent, our leaders felt the need to conceal - or at least sugar-coat - these Orwellian principles. It was assumed that the American people genuinely needed to feel like they were on the right side of things, and so the foreign powers we clashed with were always depicted as being the instigators and aggressors, while our role in provoking those responses was always disguised or at least played down.

But now the public openly embraces circular thinking like, "Any country that squawks when we threaten to bomb it is a threat that needs to be wiped out." Maybe I'm mistaken, but I have to believe that there was a time when ideas like that sounded weird to the American ear. Now they seem to make sense to almost everyone here at home, and that to me is just as a scary as Achmedinejad.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+95 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-18 13:47
Both US and Israeli intellignce "buys Iran's claim that [it is] for peaceful purposes" so far, as well as many others. CNN is just another corporate state lie and propaganda outlet.

The people had better wake up and do something before it is too late, before we get another Vietnam, Afgthanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc. only much worse.

See
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29343

War Propaganda's Triumph: U.S. Public Opinion on Iran
by Ben Schreiner
Global Research, February 16, 2012
 
 
-22 # tahoevalleylines 2012-02-18 18:33
The game was in motion beginning with the 1972 Olympics; the plane was hijacked in 1976 and flown to Africa so the Jews could be separated for "special treatment"; the Embassy in Tehran was taken and hostages kept 400 days... Payback is fair dinkum-

The US can step back from the Middle East (oil)and Muslim feuds by simply re-orienting transport to the pre-WW1 model: railway based distribution and mobility, cars mainly for the upper class, and on-site warehousing of stock in retail establishments (exit "Just-In-Time") . Others wishing to have cars would use them sparingly, in a gas-rationing scenario.

Of course a railway based economy is not going to happen by choice. We are going to dish out lumps, and take our lumps too, some big and painful ones. THEN after everyone pulls back to their home borders, America will salvage what can be salvaged, try to fend off attackers, and attempt to maintain the Union Of States. Railways will be rebuilt as possible, and most cars will be scrapped for the metal, except for the millions used as shelters...

See "ELECTRIC WATER" By Christopher C. Swan, 2007. Maintain local US Post offices...
 
 
+30 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-02-18 20:15
So right you are, bluepilgrim. CNN ain't nothin' but spin (and manipulation and distraction). Less flagrant than FAUX NEWS, but, nonetheless, a lie and propoganda outlet for the 1% greed and power addicted villainaire rulers.

When I heard the story of how Turner, CNN's founder and old style ethics in journalism matters promoter, was crushed out of his tv news creation, in order to turn CNN into 'just another corporate state lie and propoganda outlet", it made me want to announce a new mantra:

UNDO THE COUP!!!
 
 
+10 # abdullahiedward 2012-02-19 14:27
Ted Turner suffered for 11 years trying to convince investors that 24 hour news was a marketable commodity. Then came the first Iraq War and viewers saw Cruise Missles passing by hotel windows and overnight CNN became a hot property. Eventually AIPAC @ MIC made him an offer he couldn't refuse $750,000,000 cash and Vice-Chairman of the Board. And lo and behold the powers that be had a new way to control America's thinking.
 
 
+5 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-18 21:59
As of 2/19 3:30 GMT I can't get to globalresearch. ca -- says DNS error: page not found. I don't know what that means. Hacked, blocked, or scuttled?
 
 
+2 # CandH 2012-02-19 10:04
As of 2/19 4:00pm GMT me neither. Probably a DoD attack...
 
 
+4 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-19 12:26
Certainly possible -- or some other group who doesn't like what is at the site.

In looking around for the status I came across a good video by Michel Chossudovsky. He talks a bit about the media in it, as well as the long term plans for war, as laid out by PNAC, etc.
Not that the information he gives is not available elsewhere, but hwe just blurts out the truth and brings it together, and the CIA & war mongers hate that sort of thing.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3117338213439292490&ei=GmRQSY7DMprUqAPEhLCtBw&q=chossudovsky&hl=en#

War and Globalization - The Truth Behind September 11 1:56:31 - 5 years ago
 
 
+3 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-19 13:26
It's up again. I don't know what happened.
But I'm glad it was down long enough that I looked at found that video. It's excellent!! You gotta watch it.
 
 
+1 # psadave 2012-02-19 23:53
I just read it @ 9:50 PM PST
 
 
0 # RLF 2012-02-20 08:05
Let's look on the bright side. The former Soviet Union was put out of business by stupid wars...so maybe it takes 3 stupid wars but it will bring this Plutocratic government tumbling if they do this.
 
 
+8 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-18 14:35
Arthur Silber has some excellent observations about this article at

http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2012/02/hardhitting-dissenting-journalism.html
 
 
+35 # MidwestTom 2012-02-18 14:44
What are we worried about, our President won the Nobel Peace Prize. Surely he won't lead us to war. especially without going to Congress for approval. Remember that oldest carrier, the Enterprise, has been sent to the Persian gulf. Look for a torpedeo to come from a submarine, PRESUMED TO BE IRANIAN.
 
 
+28 # Interested Observer 2012-02-18 15:27
Remember the Maine!
 
 
+29 # motamanx 2012-02-18 15:40
For God's sake MidwestTom, don't give Cheney any more ideas.
 
 
+1 # Texas Aggie 2012-02-19 17:23
Like he'll be given a choice.
 
 
+65 # Archie1954 2012-02-18 14:49
Beside giving Iran a very good reason to attack America and its overseas interests, every time the US attacks another country it creats numerous new enemies that it didn't have before, I call it bad Karma and it intnsifies the rotting of its social fabric back home. I know most Americans do not overtly consider the horror that its military is visiting upon untold countries and untold numbers of people worldwide but deep down the seed of shame is there and it eats at the soul of America relentlessly.
 
 
+21 # Doubter 2012-02-18 21:07
Couldn't it be that our "leaders" are in the business of manufacturing enemies so as to never run out of places to bomb?
 
 
+8 # X Dane 2012-02-19 18:21
Yes Archie, there are reasons, why so many of our young veterans commit suicide, when they come home, maybe even more than are killed by the Taliban?

I am sure they feel guilty about some of the actions they took part in. No doubt they also realize, that we are creating many more enemies, and then they see how few people are actually paying attention to the war, in this country.

The BS that they are protecting OUR freedom, is bunk, perpetuated by the contractors making money off war. The poor military getting killed or maimed, are simply trying to earn a "living" or get an education. How incredibly sad.

Did you read the article last week by a captain or colonel, in which he stated that there is NO progress in Afghanistan and our forces are dying for a totally futile cause.

As in Vietnam, so here, the top brass is lying to us: Oh, we are almost there, we just need to stay a few more years and all will be great. LIES, LIES, LIES.
We can stay for 10- 15- 20- years and the result will still be the same.

We are making more Afghans hate us, because we kill too many innocent people along with the ones fighting us. It is a LOSE LOOSE situation.
We are there because the contractors make money on war. PERIOD
 
 
+4 # futhark 2012-02-19 20:22
American troops in Afghanistan are playing the role the infamous Hessians played in the War of American Independence. Mercenaries are never appreciated by the populace of the countries they invade.
 
 
+2 # RMDC 2012-02-20 19:09
X Dane -- good comments. Too bad our politicians don't see what you see.
 
 
+3 # X Dane 2012-02-20 21:17
Thank you RMDC. It is good to be appreciated. In the article about "Our military chief cautioning about war with Iran," I made a suggestion I would like to see carried out. I wrote it about 10 minutes ago so I may be a a little while before it comes up. I would love to hear what y'all think about it. Like so many commenting here I am VERY concerned.

When you see a warmonger like Lieberman pushing for war it is really scary and unfortunately he has 30 senators agreeing with him, making it even more worrysome
 
 
+72 # rom120 2012-02-18 14:50
You wrote:I'm not defending Achmedinejad, I think he's nuts and a monstrous dick and I definitely don't think he should be allowed to have nuclear weapons..... What about Israel which has over 200 nuclear weapons, is a criminal, rouge state with atrocities unparalleled in modern history?
What about the IMT trials in Nuremberg Germany where people were hanged for "starting a preemptive war"? Where are the legal minds to apply the same laws to Israelis and Americans?
 
 
+36 # Glen 2012-02-18 15:33
Very good, rom120. Let us not ignore Israel in any conversation concerning Iran or the Middle East. Ya want nuts - check out the Zionists and Mossad, and any who continue to wage overt and covert war.

Guess you also saw that Israel is thinking about tearing down solar power panels in the Palestinian community, stating it is under Israel's control?

Israel is the wild card, and the U.S. is stacking the deck.
 
 
+16 # sokolowmus 2012-02-18 16:44
Excuse me, "atrocities unparalleled in modern history?" What about 3 to 5 million killed by the US in Vietnam, or hundreds of thousands killed by Bush's war in Iraq? What did Israel do to come anywhere near those acts of aggression (against two countries that had no capacity to harm the US)?
 
 
-38 # Patriot 2012-02-18 20:04
[quote name="sokolowmu s"]" What about 3 to 5 million killed by the US in Vietnam, or hundreds of thousands killed by Bush's war in Iraq?"

Please provide sources for your figures. According to what I found, and what I remember, the North Vietnamese did the lion's share of the killing, by all estimates, and the total of those who died, North and South, was only slightly over 1 milion. In Iraq, although we must accept the blame for having started the war, the Iraquis themselves and the Al Quaeda-trained forces who tried to take over the fight caused far more casualties than we did.

Sources, please.
 
 
+16 # Peace Anonymous 2012-02-19 00:14
Quoting Patriot:
[quote name="sokolowmus"]" What about 3 to 5 million killed by the US in Vietnam, or hundreds of thousands killed by Bush's war in Iraq?"

Please provide sources for your figures. According to what I found, and what I remember, the North Vietnamese did the lion's share of the killing, by all estimates, and the total of those who died, North and South, was only slightly over 1 milion. In Iraq, although we must accept the blame for having started the war, the Iraquis themselves and the Al Quaeda-trained forces who tried to take over the fight caused far more casualties than we did.

Sources, please.

Patriot the Vietnamese defended their country. We invaded them remember? Did our involvement actually stop people from dying? What they did to us they did in self-defense just like Iran will be forced to do if we are stupid enough to follow through on this senseless path of destruction. Sorry while you argue about numbers I believe if 1 human being dies in this promotion it was one too many.
 
 
+11 # Glen 2012-02-19 07:49
Exact numbers are not the point in the conversation, but in truth, the U.S., either directly or indirectly, through dictators they supported, are responsible for the deaths of millions world wide. Israel has done a damn good job of killing off neighbors or ruining their lives. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. and allies definitely killed more than any group resisting the occupation or squabbling among themselves. I guess you do know there were no terrorists in Iraq prior to the U.S. attacking. Hussein would not put up with that shit.
 
 
-4 # Granny Weatherwax 2012-02-20 09:13
To be precise, Saddam was harboring the Mujaheddin E Kalk (MEK), an Iranian group which was operating under cover in Iran.

Have they been eradicated after the invasion? No. They are just too valuable a tool.
 
 
+1 # Texas Aggie 2012-02-19 17:25
Speaking of sources?
 
 
+69 # Dumbledorf 2012-02-18 14:57
A nation that exists only to wage war against others to prop up the military-indust rial-complex, and a failed economy, will get the rewards it deserves. We have become a nation of frauds and hypocrites led by liars and cheats!
Unfortunately, the only people paying for these rich bastards in control of this " war theater" now are the poor and soon to be destroyed middle class in America. ""Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other." -J. Madison
 
 
+34 # artful 2012-02-18 15:09
Yes, the braindead GOP is at it once again. They do love a war, especially if they personally don't have to attend. Maybe the old man McCain will finally figure out how to win the Vietnam War . . .
 
 
+20 # disgusted American 2012-02-18 20:31
Artful:

You seem to have completely forgotten that Obama wants to go to war with Iran. And that Democrats are behind him on this.

It's scary to see how many Americans are so ready to blame Republicans but omit Democrats who are equally guilty.

Tunnel vision gets us nowhere.
 
 
+4 # X Dane 2012-02-20 01:22
Disgusted American, I am surprised that so many agree with you. I sure don't. For we no longer have a cowboy in the Oval Office.

W would no doubt jump at the chance of another war. He LIKED being a WAR president. He aimed for that, before he ever entered the White House. He said that to be an important president, you have to be a war president.

We know how well THAT worked for out for the country. W will go down in history.
He can do nothing about that.

Obama, has made many, many mistakes, but his ambition is NOT to be a war president. He want's to do social reforms, more like Lyndon Johnson or F.D.R.
And Obama is too intelligent not to know that, it will be impossible if we get into yet another war, and one that will cause MUCH MORE damage and be wider than the war in Iraq.

I fully expect red marks raining down, for too many are ready to believe the worst about Obama. but somebody has to be fair.

I know he has said that: "Nothing is off the table". of course he did. If he did not. The republicans and Neocons would scream that he was a coward and placing the country in danger.

He has amply proved that he has way more courage than W ever did, and he has applied much tougher sanction on Iran than ever before.
 
 
+17 # winson 2012-02-18 15:31
Only Ron Paul would end the senseless wars and roll back the coming police state.

Midwest Tom, I like your sarcasm. Of course they will arrange a false flag event so that we can rah rah ourselves into a disastrous war.

Will we ever learn? Or will we just follow the butt in front of us into the FEMA camps.
 
 
+8 # futhark 2012-02-19 05:17
One might not like Ron Paul's positions on government run medical insurance, the environment, or some other issues, but I'm all for giving him credit for consistently and persistently opposing senseless wars and the erosion of our inherent liberties in the face of the rising tide of the surveillance state.

Mr. Obama needs to be held accountable for his pursuit of drone assassinations, keeping Guantanamo open, supporting FISA, NDAA, and the PATRIOT Act. Dr. Paul is the only "major party" candidate with the insight and courage to speak the truth on this issues.
 
 
+37 # Billsy 2012-02-18 15:50
High time for us mindful, informed, peace-loving folks to send a clear articulated message to our elected public servants: authorize another war and you'll be looking for another job come next election.

Bloated defense spending, forced hegemony and immoral wars on the part of the U.S. need to be the next poison pill in American politics.
 
 
+11 # disgusted American 2012-02-18 20:34
Billsy,

If the Obama apologists vote for that war monger and taker of our rights (NDAA is one example), and those who vote for him b/c they think he's the lesser of two evils, then we will have the same thing we had with Bush which has continued under the Obama administration and shows no signs of stopping.

Either stay home or vote for a third party candidate such as Jill Stein.

Otherwise, you are showing Democrats that what they have done to us is OK with you.

Stand up for yourself and the rest of the 99 percent.
 
 
+15 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-18 21:11
How about Libya? How abuot Pakistan? When is one more war finally going to be one too many?
 
 
+45 # seeuingoa 2012-02-18 16:00
and don´t forget,

that the soldiers dying on the battlefield and the civilians
dying in their beds are never
the sons, daughters and families
of the people in power who start
the war.
 
 
+47 # Gordon K 2012-02-18 16:07
"The primary aim of modern warfare...is to use up the products of the [industrial] machine without raising the general standard of living...

[A]n all round increase in wealth threatened the destruction—ind eed in some sense was the destruction—of a hierarchical society. In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motorcar...the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction...f leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance..."

--George Orwell, from his novel, "1984."
 
 
+26 # Cambridgemac 2012-02-18 17:10
Wow. It no longer sounds like satire - or fiction. It sounds like pure journalism....
 
 
+10 # Patriot 2012-02-18 21:03
Amen!
 
 
+18 # noitall 2012-02-18 16:18
"War is the Health of the state" Randolph Boren. Its as simple as that. Rich guys 'lead' us, rich guys lead them. Rich guys get rich in war, we, the 99.9% get dead. All we have is numbers of people in the street and they've pretty much covered their bases on that one too. Do yourself a favor and watch this and pass it around: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4NdmXenFPk
 
 
+1 # barbaratodish 2012-02-19 23:17
Quoting noitall:
"War is the Health of the state" Randolph Boren. Its as simple as that. Rich guys 'lead' us, rich guys lead them. Rich guys get rich in war, we, the 99.9% get dead. All we have is numbers of people in the street and they've pretty much covered their bases on that one too. Do yourself a favor and watch this and pass it around: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4NdmXenFPk

In case you want to read more about him, the correct spelling is Randolph S. Bourne, from Bloomfield, NJ
 
 
+29 # walt 2012-02-18 17:15
One needs ask only some simple questions:

1. Who is "us" when we hear that Iran threatens "us" all?
2. Is there a lobby that works overtime to get the US to go to war for it?
3. Is there any evidence of WMD's?
4. Is there a country near Iran that has WMD's but will not allow weapons inspectors in?

I have no love for Achmedinejad either, but we need to stick to the facts and remember that the Iranians are, like so many others, good people.
 
 
+22 # Peace Anonymous 2012-02-18 17:22
Propaganda. The never ending machine that repeatedly puts the world's money into the same pockets. All of it is funded by the taxpayer. Your tax dollar at work. Nothing for schools or hospitals but "they" will keep you safe. Have you had enough yet? Iran is doing everything they can to stop the threat they feel coming their way. We are the terrorists.
 
 
+3 # X Dane 2012-02-20 01:40
Too bad Peace Anonymous, that more people do not understand that. You hit the nail on the head..... WE are unfortunately terrorized by the military and the contractors producing all the weapons.

They want to continue making money. To hell with the country and all the ones who have to go and use the weapons to kill more people and increase the hatred against our country. How do we stop them???
 
 
+19 # John Gill 2012-02-18 18:18
Awesome propaganda spewing, Erin!!! My goodness, I wouldn't have thought it possible to compress that much horseshit into a single seven minute interview! Bravo CNN! You have finally shaken off, once and for all, even the faintest trace of "liberal media bias"!
 
 
+3 # X Dane 2012-02-20 17:55
Yes John Gill. CNN are now just Foux light.
They know that Foux has the most viewers, so they aim to emulate them.

They are not intelligent enough to understand that they will lose viewers who would like some Unbiased information.

The indoctrinated ones are so stuck on Foux, that nothing can pry them off. Maybe Erin should go to Foux, she could take another warmonger along: that old idiot Wolf Blitzer.

In the run up to the Iraq war Blitzer was practically salivating at the thought of bombs raining down on the poor Iraqis.....that we were LIBERATING??

He was so exited about "Shock and Awe". He was one of the very few that were. Unfortunately, the hawks in our country love to scare the pants off of people, with our bombs and other tools of death.
 
 
+16 # colvictoria 2012-02-18 18:23
The media is using its scare tactics again just to get the ball rolling. What will they plan next? another WMD lie? Will there be some staged attack somewhere like Chicago only to blame Iran?
Are the American people that stupid and that gullible that they will believe the lies and rally behind Obama when he declares war with Iran?
 
 
+19 # grouchy 2012-02-18 18:29
I Have long wondered what gives us the right to say which nation has the right to own any weapon they choose to? I don't at all like the weapons involved in the dispute here (hey, there are a lot of other wmd's not being fussed about here too), and we don't fuss that much about other nations that have or are developing them and some of the nations that already have a stockpile are more to fear than Iran I think, and Iran actually has very good reasons to want them (take a look at who is on their borders and/or who dwells within striking range), so why don't they have the right to defend themselves with these admittedly awful things? You got'em I want them too! So just why do we have the right to go around the world and dictate who gets what? Why are we so special in this case?
 
 
+16 # davehaze 2012-02-18 18:48
ALL YOU NEED IS WAR
apologies to John Lennon

Bomb, bomb, bomb
Bomb, bomb, bomb

There's nothing you can do to stop the lies
No country we can't get you to despise
A drone overhead and you soon believe the news It's easy

Attack Iran's the latest thrill
No one that moves we cannot kill
Nothing you can do but meekly go along
and send your brother, son or mom
It's easy

All you need is war, bomb ta da the bomb
All you need is war, bomb ta da the bomb

All together now...
 
 
+15 # disgusted American 2012-02-18 20:36
Be nice to America or it will spread democracy to your country.

Not what the Iran war cry is but says what America does best since the days of the Indians.

Embarrassing to be an American these days.
 
 
+13 # acohen8919 2012-02-18 19:16
We - and especially Iisrael - are making things so much worse and really pushing Iran to posture more and more. Iran is like the little kid on the playground who always feels humiliated, even when he'a not, and believes that carrying a gun to school will make him bigger and earn him respect. Israel comes along (or so it seems likely) and sends skilled assassins through the streets, knocking off Iranian nuclear scientists and getting aay with it. What does Iran do? Comes up with its own assassins whose methods are modeled exactly after the Israeli's. What happens? The Iranians fail miserably and even manage to blow up their own little weapons factory, with o e of the workers then managing to blow off his own legs. Keystone cops. More importantly, humiliating for Iran. It's a humiliated Iran that/'s most dangerous and all of our posturing with this sort of rhetoric is likely (?intentionalll y?) to push them further toward weapon building and their own forms of posturing. Whether or not it's for real, the fact that Iran has now signaled an interst in talks is something that should be nurtured. It's been talking a big boy's game but they may now. E wanting to call "uncle". The last thing we should be doing is ignoring them. War would be horrific. For everyone. Someone should muzzle the mongers.
 
 
+11 # davehaze 2012-02-18 19:43
apologies to John Lennon continue

Nothing you can do to feed the poor
Put them in prison and slam the door
Sorry Iran but we need another war
It's easy

All you need is war... ad infinitum, etc.
 
 
+16 # Patriot 2012-02-18 20:30
Incredibly, just this morning I had the same thought that Matt Taibbi did: There's entirely too much sabre-rattling going on. What can we do about it?

For starters, each of us can tell our Representatives , Senators, and President that if they decide to launch yet another war, they'll have to fight it themselves, because we won't fight it for them. Bet on it, nothing will happen until *after* the fall elections, so we need to make certain that all candidates and both parties get the message: No more wars unless we've been attacked first!

We have more on our plate than we can manage as it is. Our military is spread far too thinly, and they're tired, tired, tired, having been involved in the worst kind of combat, guerilla warfare, for ELEVEN years, without a pause and with no end in sight.

Grouchy, I agree with you: Who appointed us arbiters of who can and who can't develop nuclear capability? We need to worry more about what's going on *here* for a while, and let the rest of the nations of the world mind their business, themselves, for a change.

Iran hasn't DONE anything, yet, but they will make formidable adversaries. They're vigliant and tough, they've never knuckled under to anyone, and they won't melt away before an invading force.

Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan should have taught us about our own arrogance; but Iran is capable of teaching us whole lot more if we don't stop trying to force them into a war!
 
 
+11 # Lennie 2012-02-18 20:37
Are we trying to push Iran into doing something, so that we can say, "They started it?" Is there going to be another Gulf of Tonkin type of incident, with, as Midwest Tom suggested, if I am not mistaken, the USS Enterprise being used, as some sort of bait, vaguely, or maybe not so vaguely,similar to the USS Maddox in the Tonkin Gulf, in 1964. We all know what happened then. Will we ever learn?
 
 
+6 # CandH 2012-02-18 22:24
"The Gulf of Tonkin Incident, or the USS Maddox Incident, are the names given to two separate confrontations, one actual and one now recognized as non-existent, involving North Vietnam and the United States in the waters of the Gulf of Tonkin." wiki

The first incident wasn't enough to pull us into a conflict. the second totally made-up false "incident" was what was needed to justify the all out war in Vietnam.

We have the internet to give us more than the canned propaganda being spewed on the teevee/radios/p apers. Encourage people to look on the net for real information.

"You gotta Work for Peace. They got people working for War." Gil Scott Heron's "Work for Peace." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPqpV9olIlw
 
 
+14 # Doubter 2012-02-18 21:02
If we are ever going to DO something; we MUST stop the mad men running this country and prevent this war even if we have to lie on the tracks in front of the war machine!
I mean, this is IT!
 
 
+3 # madams12 2012-02-18 22:18
More and more of us are WAKING up.....it's a hard thing to not observe how many more people are comprehending that the US propaganda machine is in overdrive...and though I agree with much of what Taibbi has written...somet hing stuck in my craw as I read it...where MT writes: "ACHMEDINEJAD", I think he's nuts and a monstrous dick and I definitely don't think he should be allowed to have nuclear weapons..." well REALLY? ...a few minutes ago I received this article..which HITS the nail on the head...what do you think?Achmedine jad, I think he's nuts and a monstrous dick and I definitely don't think he should be allowed to have nuclear weapons." URL HERE:
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2012/02/hardhitting-dissenting-journalism.html
 
 
+6 # CandH 2012-02-18 22:18
"CNN's house blockhead, the Goldman-trained ex-finance professional Erin Burnett, came out with a doozie of a broadcast yesterday, a Rumsfeldian jeremiad against the Iranian threat would have fit beautifully in the Saddam's-sendin g-drones-at-New -York halcyon days of late 2002."

Gob-smacked excellent writing dude! You're baaack!

"Goldman-trained ex-finance professional," "Rumsfeldian jeremiad:" I think this calls for Gil Scott Heron's "Work for Peace" (ie the military and the monetary) video. "You gotta work for peace. They got people working for war." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPqpV9olIlw
 
 
-7 # C.H.Winslow 2012-02-18 22:21
It is likely that Israel and its public relations forces here in the U.S. are intentionally ginning up the war scare as a means of making the sanctions leveled against Iran more effective in a shorter period of time. Israel is too small a country to make a 2nd strike capability credible as a deterrent. If Iran can get a genuine hardened strike capability, then, no matter how many weapons Israel has, Iran plays the last piece on the chessboard. Thus, Israel must not even settle for a preemptive attack, it must muster a "preventive" attack; that is, it must strike Iran's nuclear capability before it can make a bomb. Someone needs to take that message to Tehran. This is not a matter for schoolboys. The burden for Israel is to be everybody's enemy. Somebody needs to take that message to Jerusalem. To bomb Iran is irrational for Israel, but by ginning up irrationality (T.C. Schelling's hockey puck), it may add to the credibility of Israel's unusable nuclear holdings. But all this is a very dangerous game. What if Russia decides to give Iran deterrent extension? Au contraire,Herma n Kahn, two can gin up nuclear irrationality. If several ME countries possessed nuclear capability, peace would break out (except that these are all fragmented political systems). N-person reciprocal nuclear games guided by a bedouin ethos--I may take up residence in my fruit cellar.
 
 
+10 # Kootenay Coyote 2012-02-18 22:45
‘"Any country that squawks when we threaten to bomb it is a threat that needs to be wiped out." Maybe I'm mistaken, but I have to believe that there was a time when ideas like that sounded weird to the American ear. Now they seem to make sense to almost everyone here at home, and that to me is just as a scary as Achmedinejad.’

No: scarier, because more heavily equipped & with a far more warlike record.
 
 
+8 # cordleycoit 2012-02-18 23:02
Yes they are ginning up another round of slaughter. There are networks rehearsing the war coverage with the left over generals to guide the peoples' thinking. Israel will have to use nukes to do the job and of course they the Israelis will use their bio-chemicals Israel will play stooge for the United States. The Rethugs are looking forward to the spike in oil prices and the repression that comes with war.The Dems will dither and the peace community will stay under the rock that the DNC put them under. The market will soar as will the cost of everything and the new bubble will be in place. There is a darker variant to the above, some really stinking thinking.
 
 
+7 # wwway 2012-02-19 01:23
The religious right in this country has been wanting a Holy War with Muslims since the oil embargo in the 1970's. Oil profits were funding big masque building projects in the US and the Christian right went into a panic over it. Republicans went to bed with the religious right so of course they're looking to "bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran."
If we're smart we'll let Israel defend itself. Americans have paid big tax dollars to fund Israel's nuke program and military industrial complex. That's enough. Israel doesn't need us beyond what we've provided for their defense.
 
 
+11 # RJB 2012-02-19 08:52
I don't take credit for the observation, but I forget its origin. It goes as follows: The troubles of the U.S. are no longer capable of being remediated by politicians and economists. It's time to call out the psychiatrists and sociologists. Our solutions are not reality based. Our behavior is pathological. I have no ideal even how to start healing mental illness on a global scale. It may do well to begin with Freud's thanatos complex.
 
 
0 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-20 00:07
Here's another war in the process of starting:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/feb2012/syri-f20.shtml
US sends drones over Syria as fighting spreads
By Alex Lantier
20 February 2012
US military officials confirmed Saturday that US drones are flying over Syria, as fighting spreads inside the country and US officials discuss military or “humanitarian” intervention to topple Syrian President Bashar al Assad.

[...]
 
 
+2 # C.H.Winslow 2012-02-20 11:20
In conflict, whether dyadic or n-adic, there is always a third (or additional) party. This ghost is called "reality" or, sometimes in game theory, "the shadow of the future". Those who want to help our planet should eschew mystical exotica and focus on what (possibly gullible, corrupt, ignorant) decision makers must face. They must operate in a terrifyingly primitive global political system. It is the primitivity of the system rather than the depravity of the decision makers that is the real culprit--as well as the one element of the situation that is fixable. Please give support to Barak, Hillary, and Leon to contain these terrible escalators. They cannot make decisions that please any of us entirely but can make some that displease all of us at a controllable level.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN