Regarding DougJ’s amazing (and horrifying AEI quote), I’d just like to point out that Kubrick got there first.
The biggest problem for the United States is not Iran getting a nuclear weapon and testing it, it’s Iran getting a nuclear weapon and not using it. Because the second that they have one and they don’t do anything bad, all of the naysayers are going to come back and say, “See, we told you Iran is a responsible power. We told you Iran wasn’t getting nuclear weapons in order to use them immediately.” … And they will eventually define Iran with nuclear weapons as not a problem.
Anyone won runs is a VC. Anyone who stands still is a well disciplined VC. HAHAA. You guys ought to do a story about me some time.
Politicians hide themselves away, they only started the war. Why should they go out to fight? They leave that role to the poor.
Egg Berry
I think Joseph Heller might have gotten there even earlier.
David Koch
Get some!
General Stuck
Ever’body know, the poor are always being fucked over by the rich. Always have, always will.
some guy
the quicker Iran develops nuclear latency the safer we will all be. hell, they’ve already figured out how to take down a stealth drone, so there is that, though the solid-rocket explosion is certainly an unexpected setback I am sure they will quickly overcome.
Number of counties Iran has invaded or attacked=zero
Number of countries US/Israel has invaded or attacked= you do the math
Egg Berry
@some guy:
Do you count the decade-long war with Iraq in that total?
Morbo
@General Stuck: Incorrect. The answer we’re looking for is: Time will tell on their power minds, making war just for fun, treating people just like pawns in chess. Wait ’til their judgment day comes.
Scott
@Egg Berry: Didn’t Iraq invade Iran in that one?
sfinny
@Egg Berry: I believe that Iraq invaded Iran, so I don’t think that counts under someguy’s formulation.
some guy
@Scott:
eggs berry is incorrect and you are eggs ackley correct.
srv
@Scott: They were coming right at them.
Mike Goetz
I would have thought Dr. Strangelove:
“Mr. President, it is not only possible, it is essential. That is the whole idea of this machine, you know. Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy… the FEAR to attack. And so, because of the automated and irrevocable decision-making process which rules out human meddling, the Doomsday machine is terrifying and simple to understand… and completely credible and convincing.”
Egg Berry
@Scott: I think part of my point was the ambiguity of the term “attacked.” Sorry if that wasn’t apparent. IOW, Iran “won” a lot earlier than the war ended.
The Republic of Stupidity
Of course… there’s always Pakistan…
Ya know… another heavily-Muslimish kinda country that already HAS nukes…
And doesn’t like us very much… any more… too…
some guy
there were certainly attacks by the Iranians during the war, but the origin of the conflict was an invasion/attack by the Baathists.
Egg Berry
@some guy: I certainly did not mean to absolve Iraq of their guilt in the affair.
suzanne
Bad Religion have words of wisdom to offer on the subject:
From the force to the union shops
The war economy is making new jobs
But the people who benefit most
Are breaking bread with their benevolent hosts
Who never stole from the rich to give to the poor
All they ever gave to them was a war
And a foreign enemy to deplore
Let them eat war]
That’s how to ration the poor
The Other Chuck
Iraq not only invaded Iran, we sold them the chemical weapons they used to gas Iranians with.
But no they just hate us For Our Freedoms
some guy
has anyone ever taken down an RQ-170 drone before? what a hoot if the Iranians actually did bring it down successfully and with minimal damage, as they claim.
but seriously, has anyone else ever done that before?
magurakurin
@Egg Berry: the words, “attack,” and “invade,” have actual meanings.
Lockewasright
So the kids they dance and shake their bones…
Egg Berry
@magurakurin: You might want to finish that paragraph:
srv
@some guy: The RQ is a special drone, used covert observations – like OBL’s lair and likely Iranian nuke facilities. Known to operate out of Afghanistan, South Korea and maybe Turkey. There likely are only a few of them. If they got one, it probably had some failure as opposed to them getting lucky.
eric
Nice sabbath
Ira-NY
Kubrick – Strangelove:
some guy
@srv:
yup, you are right, the fact that the American military and intelligence community (and their lackeys in the industrial complex) are adamant that they “lost control” of one of their most advanced drones a day after Iran announced they had shot it down gives me confidence that Iran did, in fact, shoot it down.
this is of a kind where every time the Taliban shoot down a chopper the US/NATO are adamant that no, it was mechanical failure. RPG/AK-47 rounds into a rotor or an engine do tend to create “mechanical failure.”
at least the Americans are starting to backtrack now (see Fox News and the ever reliable whore Jim Miklasewki) and say, well maybe they do have possession but it’s really no big thing, etc
amk
“Russia without Putin!” and “Revolution!”
Villago Delenda Est
@Egg Berry:
Iraq started that war. You have to go back centuries to find a war that the Iranians (who were once the Persians, you know, the arch-villains of AEI wankfest 300) started, as a war of aggression.
The United States will never live down the shame of the utterly illegal war of aggression against Iraq, first outright war of aggression by a major power without the slightest legitimate casus belli since Hitler had his minions fabricate the Gleiwitz incident in 1939.
The Iranians have learned the lesson: if you have nukes, the US is highly unlikely to touch you. The North Koreans taught them that.
MikeJ
I’ll repeat my favorite stupid quote of the day:
Joseph Zarelli, lead Republican budget negotiator in the Washington State Senate, as quoted in the New York Times.
Villago Delenda Est
@Egg Berry:
Yes, and after June of 1942, the United States was on the offensive against Imperial Japan.
That doesn’t change who started the war. It was Iraq. With our blessing and, as pointed out above, our chemical weapons.
Egg Berry
@Villago Delenda Est:
I thought the NK million-man army and proximity to seoul prevented that long before the introduction of nukes.
Egg Berry
@Villago Delenda Est:
And we “attacked” Japan. See how that works?
amk
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-us-canada-16043626
cue lynne cheney and other neo cons start bashing obama on pox news.
Villago Delenda Est
@Egg Berry:
Not sure what you’re getting at here.
The US didn’t start WWII in the Pacific. Japan did. Sure, The US attacked Japan. In response to Japan’s aggression.
Iran didn’t start the Iran-Iraq war. Iraq did. Sure, Iran attacked Iraq. In response to Iraq’s aggression.
Do you know who the winner of the deserting coward’s excellent adventure in Iraq was? Iran.
some guy
like I said, Fox News and NBC News both used “unidentified military officials” to confirm tonight that the Iranians actually have the drone.
so sad, too bad.
Egg Berry
@Villago Delenda Est:
My point was the use of the term “attacked.”
Read upthread.
Also: the use of firebombing and nuclear weapons – there’s legitimate arguments against our “response.”
None of which excuses Iran-Contra or the numerous other stupid things we’ve done in the ME
some guy
from the original comment from the AEI citation:
And they will eventually define Iran with nuclear weapons as not a problem.
The problem for AEI is most of the world (and most rational people here, as well) doesn’t see this as an actual problem.
so sad, too bad.
Amanda in the South Bay
Don’t drones fly low and slow? Like, low enough so that any fighter built in the last 50 years could engage it?
Sloegin
Dude’s getting pedantic about the word ‘attacked’.
It’s a meaningless word after a war starts. The important bit is which side started the war, and that the other side has pretty much never started one.
Redshift
@Sloegin: Especially since that’s the definition of the war crime “aggressive war” in international law.
Chris
@some guy:
And that’s why when polled back in 2002/2003, the citizens of most foreign countries were more concerned about America and Israel as threats to world peace than the “Axis of Evil” nations (one of whom hadn’t started a war in living memory, one of whom hadn’t done it since the fifties, and one of whom had recently done it but then had its warmaking ability completely destroyed).
Don’t know if I can agree that a nuclear Iran would be better for the region, but I’m fairly confident it wouldn’t be the disaster the wingnuts claim. After all, Russia, China and North Korea all went nuclear, to say nothing of Pakistan, and the world’s still spinning.
Egg Berry
@Sloegin:
Tell that to the occupants of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, for starters.
srv
@some guy: It would be the greatest mil-tech loss in a decade or two probably, as only it and maybe the F-22 can operate autonomously/undetected in highly defended environments. So it would be the latest in stealth and countermeasures. Newer than the F-22.
Jamming it’s sat downlink with the help of foreign spe.c.i.a.lists, maybe. Shooting a super-stealthy UAV with the SAMs they have, probably not.
We wouldn’t admit a loss, because we’d be furiously looking for it to bomb it. Iranians could be bluffing, think Ice Station Zebra, except Rock Hudson is Persian.
dead existentialist
@Chris: To say nothing of the only country to ever use a nuclear weapon. Or two.
Villago Delenda Est
@Sloegin:
The entire point of “attacked” in this context is WHO STARTED THE FUCKING WAR.
In the course of any war, there will be offensives and counter offensives by both sides. To call, say, the Normandy Invasion an “act of aggression” is a turn of phrase worthy of Goebbels.
I remember playing Risk in high school, and the joke always was that you never, ever conquered a province. You always liberated it.
Sloegin
@Egg Berry: Or Chinese in Nanking, or the 6 million or so European Jews, or say the 20 million or so Soviet dead, yer point?
The point of fighting defensively after a war starts is to stop the war. Most would argue doing whatever possible to end it as quickly as possible.
Larry R
nice sabbath +1
some guy
@srv:
probably right, unless they were somehow able to construct a variant of the S-300PT Jane’s claimed they obtained from Belarus 3 years ago, or upgrade their capabilities to the S-300P the Russiansd sold them but never delivered? or maybe the Chinese made good on their promise to help upgrade their SAMs?
the near unanimity of the “we lost control of one of our most advanced drones over a section of Afghanistan that has seen no Taliban activity in years” means billable hours are right now accruing at some of our most cherished welfare agencies.
Egg Berry
@Sloegin:
Nobody wins in a war.
@Sloegin:
The argument being whether the means deployed to end the war justify the ends. Killing innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Dresden and Tokyo. Who is the villain.? I don’t enjoy “winner” calculus.
4jkb4ia
It looks as if in the GOP foreign policy debate there were two questions–one about if they would support Israel if Israel started the war and one about sanctions. No one had to come out and say that they would start the war. Everyone could say that Obama is not doing everything he can short of war.
At least in 2008 there was a very clear-cut difference on the issue of Iran and that’s how my husband made up his mind.
An example in another direction would be the Senate vote to leave the issue of indefinite detention ambiguous. This was an issue where Obama thought he could go to Congress and get a result that required thinking through the consequences of having given warmaking authority. Instead he got more warmongering as shown in the refusal to close Gitmo.
================================================
Housekeeping
Cain was a joke.
“Sacrificed…to The Cole” was bullshit and does not represent 99.9% of the comments I ever made on this blog. The comments in the late-night Thanksgiving thread were a sincere effort to help you out. There is no more to say.
srv
@some guy: We probably spent a couple billion developing this thing, and it would have requirements to loiter over the latest and greatest and we either have access to Russian HW via special relationships or just practicing against them.
Here’s an alleged S300-PS site:
http://bp3.blogger.com/_0HCJq6B1wZA/R39QwUEVzSI/AAAAAAAAAuI/dh3C1mKV3WU/s1600-h/TPSA10B.jpg
In Nevada.
Most likely, some special friends visited Iran and made some assumptions about the altitude it operates at and built a probability box around Natanz (or other sites) airspace. Or someone is testing a bistatic radar. Not sure where you go from there, but “seeing” it is the first part.
– fixed link
wilfred
Egg Berry’s comments are “Who, me?” hasbera. Anything to deflect humanization and empathy with Iran is fair game.
Again, the comments are only stupid if you don’t realize the strategic implications for Israel of Iran having a nuclear weapon, particularly in terms of demographics. Pletka, after all, made a very exlcusive list:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/09/stars-david
She’s not arguing from an American point of view, but from an Israeli one.
some guy
@srv:
weird, I was just scanning Sean O’Connor’s site right before you posted that link, thanks (the one you posted before you edited the photo) IMINIT&Analysis is a pretty cool site, been there before.
One way or another it went down, and the Iranians have it. If the US military wants to stick with “Operator Error” that’s their right, but as you say, until we see it…. pictures or it didn’t happen!
the Iranians will most likely post something soon, as soon as it is in a secure facility
jheartney
@Egg Berry: I think the main point is that countries that don’t initiate hostilities are in an entirely different category from those which do.
The reason we are talking about this, if you recall, is that we have a set of lying warmongers saying that we (a country with a very recent history of launching an unprovoked war of aggression) must attack a country with no recent history of unprovoked aggression, because that country is supposedly a threat to international peace. Irony of this lost on said warmongers.
The important question here is whether Iran in possession of nukes is an inherent danger to peace. Based on recent history, a list of plausible dangers to peace includes the good old US of A far in advance of Iran.
Comrade Luke
Dear John Cole:
The commercials for the TV show Unforgettable look ridiculously bad, but the woman looks ridiculously hot. I know you watch it for the aforementioned woman, so I ask you: is the show any good? Or is she hot enough that it doesn’t matter?
srv
@some guy: I wouldn’t be sure the Iranians “have” it.
It’s common knowledge it operates out of a specific base in Afghanistan. Like Gary Powers’ U2 flight, someone is probably tasked to monitor its comings and goings.
Last week, it didn’t come back. Probably much commotion and greater air traffic in western Afghanistan. A smart cookie would claim “look at what we found!” to mess with us.
wilfred
Here:
http://www.juancole.com/2010/11/wikileaks-on-israel-iraq-and-the-iranian-specter.html
Gex
Guys, just give it up. Iran didn’t just lay down their weapons and let Iraq own the place. They fought back in that war, and fighting is aggressive. Fighting is attacking. Ergo, Iran is an aggressive attacking force. We aren’t going to go with context or intent with what is being said. We are going to be technical with our definitions. If Iran fought in that war, they attacked.
Now, what the point being made by being so damn pedantic about the precise meaning of “attack,” I don’t know. I thought we were talking about the wisdom of expending so much foreign policy and military resources on Iran when they don’t have a tendency to initiate hostilities that is, if we can manage to tolerate imprecise language on occasion.
srv
@Gex: Maybe we could talk about the correct definition of “preventive” war. It used to mean acting first when another country was on the verge of attacking. Now, thanks to the last decade, it’s got a different meaning.
dance around in your bones
Just trying out a new nick – expect to be in moderation for a millennium or two. Previously known as L2Kt.
Might keep it, might not.
Death Panel Truck
Okay, Egg Berry, since you insist on being so goddamned literal, let’s try this from another angle:
Number of countries Iran has invaded = zero
Number of countries US/Israel has invaded = you do the math
What say you?
Linda Featheringill
@Comrade Luke:
Unforgettable:
I think it’s a cute show. Good acting, good production values, interesting plot. It might devolve into a formula piece but it’s good to me now.
And yes, Miss Thing is a cutie.
[No, I’m not John but I answered anyway. :-)]
TenguPhule
Anyone *who* runs is a VC.
/grammer commie!
TenguPhule
Only the losers say that.
Winners go home and fuck the cheerleaders.
TenguPhule
And if 1% of the 99% cuts the heads of the stupid 1% off, things become a lot simpler.
magurakurin
What exactly was egg berry’s point? That war is shitty? Knew that. Since it is without question that Iraq started the war why did this poster bring it up? To make Iran look more dangerous? And who benefits from such talk other than people who want…a war with Iran. I’m suspicious of the motives here. I don’t want any country to get a nuke, but being an American I don’t have much right to say no to the Iranians in my opinion. We have thousands of nukes.
Like I said, I’m suspicious of the motives. I don’t want Iran to have nukes, but I want a war between the USA and Iran even less. Talk which paints Iran as the big, bad evil dude of the moment seems only designed to encourage such a war.
Raven
Anyone won runs is a VC. Anyone who stands still is a well disciplined VC. HAHAA. You guys ought to do a story about me some time.‘
Actually Michael Herr (Dispatches) probably wrote that.
TheStone
Sometimes I think that the only reason I have any faith left at all is so that a part of me can believe that the last verse of War Pigs will play out. Probably not the best reason, but . . .
Southern Beale
Why I’m not laughing at that whole “Muppets are liberal propganda” smear.
Remember the message behind this madness, people.
Bullsmith
Egg Berry would make a great journalist. You get attacked, you fight back. You know, both sides, equal blame, yadda yadda.
phein39
Anyone won runs is a VC. Anyone who stands still is a well disciplined VC. HAHAA. You guys ought to do a story about me some time.
Most of the good lines out of Full Metal Jacket come from Herr’s Dispatches. Herr also wrote the narration for Apocalypse Now. Book is still in print. Highly recommended.
Special One
@Raven: To be pedantic, Herr quoted that. An anonymous Marine door gunner said it.
As for Persia invading others; last time they did it (AFAICR) was an invasion of Russia in 1826. It didn’t turn out well. Modern Iraq has also performed a couple of “interventions” that treaded the border of invasion; Seizure of Abu Musa and the Tunb islands in 1971 and direct military support for Oman against the Dhofar Revolution in 1973.
tomvox1
NeoCons = Intellectually masterbatory psychopaths.
Bnad
@Morbo:
I always pictured the punishment being adminstered by Iron Man.
Rafer Janders
Let’s also take a look at this from Iran’s perspective. To their (not immediate) north, they have nuclear-armed Russia. To their south, the Persian Gulf patrolled by the nuclear-armed US Navy. To their west, Iraq, occupied with and allied with the nuclear-armed US. To their northeast, Afghanistan, occupied with and allied with the nuclear-armed US. To their southeast, nuclear-armed Pakistan. Slightly farther afield, but well within missile range, nuclear-armed Israel, India and China.
They are literally surrounded by nuclear-armed powers, none of whom are friendly and many of whom are openly hostile. If I was an Iranian leader, sheer self-preservation alone would compel me to develop nuclear weapons.
fasteddie9318
@Villago Delenda Est:
Well, not that many centuries. Nadir Shah and all.
fasteddie9318
@Special One:
The Qajars would have argued that they were not attacking Russia unprovoked, they were trying to recover territory that the Russians had taken from them in 1813. At least that’s how the Brits sold it to them so they could use them to fight a proxy war against Russia. And no, it didn’t turn out well. The Qajars lost territory, paid an indemnity to the Russians, had to allow their Armenian subjects to emigrate to Russia, surrendered full naval control of the Caspian to Russia, and granted a full capitulation to Russian merchants in Persia.
Rafer Janders
@Gex:
Guys, just give it up. Iran didn’t just lay down their weapons and let Iraq own the place. They fought back in that war, and fighting is aggressive. Fighting is attacking. Ergo, Iran is an aggressive attacking force.
Sure, the same way that Poland, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Belgium and Greece were all aggressive attacking forces against Germany in World War II…So you can’t say that Holland has never “attacked” anybody! Why, they attacked Nazi Germany!
Bullsmith
@fasteddie9318:
Ah yes, the Persian Napoleon. Invader of India. Shah from 1736–47. NEVER FORGET!
Dr. Squid
Even Spies Like Us got there before AEI.
Someguy
@some guy:
Please note: I’m not this some guy. >That< asshole doesn't believe in conjunctions, or capitalization. I have nothing to do with such people.
Paul in KY
@Villago Delenda Est: The last time might have been when the Caliph made the mistake of executing Mongol envoys from Hulagu Khan.
Paul in KY
@Amanda in the South Bay: i would say you could shoot one down with a 50 cal.
Paul in KY
@Egg Berry: Tell it to the residents of London, Rotterdam, Singapore, Nanking, Birmingham, Warsaw, etc.
Paul in KY
@wilfred: What a bunch of weenies. I lived for 35 or so years with the threat of a Soviet strike. I didn’t emigrate to Switzerland.