The Choir Next Time
The coming Iran-War “product rollout.”
Doug M. I’m in for $100. If I “win,” the money goes to the Silver Spring YMCA’s Building Bridges campaign. You can pick your own recipient.
Cernig’s post is a treasure-trove of debunking on the EFP propaganda. I see that he also offers the same thesis I did the night before on OTB Radio - that the US government has started stressing alleged Iranian interference in Iraq because there’s been progress on the “issue” of Iran’s nuclear program. Remember, they don’t want a solution to supposed problems, they want a war. For these people in Iran in 2007-2008, as in Iraq from 2002-2003, a peaceful resolution of outstanding differences is a danger to be avoided.
Comment by KCinDC —
September 1, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Surely the emphasis on Iranian “meddling” in Iraq is at least as much about being able to portray the attack on Iran as a simple extension of the existing war — something that doesn’t require any new authorization (especially with the handy classification of part of the Iranian military as a terrorist group). But as with Iraq, it’s good to have multiple justifications, so you have various fallback positions as they’re exposed as bogus.
Comment by Happy Jack —
September 1, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
If, in the next two weeks, the networks start replaying scenes from ‘79 with some frequency, I would be inclined to double down.
Comment by Nell —
September 1, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
Reproducing comments I just made at American Footprints:
Barnett Rubin says his first source’s account has since been confirmed, so I see little reason to doubt the OVP and its AEI-WINEP-FDD-WSJ noise machine will rev up shortly.
There’ll be two carriers in striking range by early November.
Between now and then there’ll be an intense effort to get the UN sanctions tightened. My take on that effort is that it’s the “we tried diplomacy” cover felt to be necessary for another war of aggression.
But in the event that the war talk in September scares the Security Council into thinking it’s worthwhile to tighten sanctions regardless of the IAEA, just to keep the U.S. from launching an attack, then there’ll be a provocation arranged at some point in spring 2008 (e.g., support for attacks on US troops in Iraq, cross-border response to PKK/PEJAK attacks in northern Iraq/Kurdistan).
—end AF comments
There’s a current AEI-and-friends effort to dis and block Congressional sanctions bills of a kind that would normally be right up their alley (Danielle Pletka had a Washington Post op ed and was quoted on several other occasions last month saying the same thing; Richard Shelby has a hold on Obama’s Iran divestment bill).
The explanation given is that these bills would make it less likely for the UN Security Council to pass tightened sanctions. So it’s possible that the real goal is crippling sanctions. On the other hand, it’s possible that AEI and Republicans don’t want anything that would hurt their oil company friends and funders, even if it also hurts Iran.
Comment by Carlos —
September 1, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Why doesn’t Doug ever make these sorts of bets with me? (not this bet in particular, but I could have cleaned up on Jim Webb.)
Comment by Jon H —
September 1, 2007 @ 7:05 pm
All that remains to be seen is whether it is started by us outright, or if we install Allawi and he “starts the war” and “requests our assistance”.
Comment by lemuel pitkin —
September 1, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
Jon-
That is BRILLIANT. Install Allawi, he denounces Iran and requests our help. Could work too. I recall reading an interview with the Baath Party leadership in exile a while back where they as much as said that they had no real problem with the US, the enemy was Iran.
Comment by the talking dog —
September 1, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
The thing is, Jim once optimistically hoped that UK– not US, but UK– public opinion, which was overwhelmingly against the Iraq War, might manage to stop it here. Sadly, that was incorrect (and I for one will never, ever, forgive the NY Times for deliberately understating the size of stateside protests (particularly the 400,000Plus strong protest in NYC that it reported as under 100,000)… but even still… in Britain, the protest was still bigger.
With Iran, the international opposition to this will be absolutely rock solid: the US of A (and the psychopathic Dick Cheney/Bill Kristol wing of the Republican Party… ALONE) and Israel (the Likudnik wing… ALONE), and that’s it. The rest of the world, unanimously, will oppose… Gordon Brown will not go along with this. I don’t even think John Howard can go along with this. Indeed, we will doubtless have to veto UN resolutions condemning the US on this, for our naked aggression.
In the end, the one thing we can count on is NO opposition from the Democrats, who will, as usual, crap in their pants for fear of being on the wrong side of American genocide.
What do you do? We’re watching an oncoming vehicle the size of Iran coming at us in slow motion, and we’re screaming at the top of our lungs to turn the damned wheel to get out of the way, and instead… our national drivers aren’t veering, and are stepping on the gas…
Comment by Cernig —
September 1, 2007 @ 9:55 pm
The neocon’s noise machine has already started feeding their pals in the UK press the teasers for the campaign.
Regards, C
Trackback by 'Aqoul —
September 2, 2007 @ 7:53 pm
Tehran: A Sore US Wrecks? Iran War Looming?…
The informed blogosphere and newsosphere are abuzz with rumors that a US war, or a sustained attack (i.e.war), on Iran is being put out for aggressive marketing by Administration innards this week. Events will prove this true or false. Regardless……
Comment by Doug M. —
September 3, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
Carlos: because I don’t make bets unless I think I can win, /obviously/.
Jim: OK, you’re covered. For my own charity, I’m tipping toward Fisher House — but let’s see where we are in a year.
Doug M.