Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 1, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

BUSH AND IRAN....David Sanger provides a look at what's behind President Bush's supposed change of heart on holding talks with Iran:

Few of his aides expect that Iran's leaders will meet Mr. Bush's main condition: that Iran first re-suspend all of its nuclear activities, including shutting down every centrifuge that could add to its small stockpile of enriched uranium....And while the Europeans and the Japanese said they were elated by Mr. Bush's turnaround, some participants in the drawn-out nuclear drama questioned whether this was an offer intended to fail, devised to show the extent of Iran's intransigence.

...."Cheney was dead set against it," said one former official....But three officials who were involved in the most recent iteration of that debate said Mr. Cheney and others stepped aside perhaps because they read Mr. Bush's body language, or perhaps because they believed Iran would scuttle the effort....In the end, said one former official who has kept close tabs on the debate, "it came down to convincing Cheney and others that if we are going to confront Iran, we first have to check off the box" of trying talks.

They sure sound serious about trying to avoid war, don't they? They're going to "check off the box" and everything.

Kevin Drum 2:45 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (84)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

"Second verse,
same as the first."

Posted by: Ron Byers on June 1, 2006 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINK

i guess it's a good thing (for Cheney) that Iran said No Thanks

Posted by: cleek on June 1, 2006 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

control of the old fields is what the bushies want, that is why they didn't want to focus on Afganistan, they have no oil. Iran is the central point in the Persian Gulf, look at the map. The US has managed to keep forces there since the aftermath of WW II. The bushies are oil people. Russian has the most oil, right across the black sea from Iran. Iran has access to all waterways in the Middle East, that is handy when transporting oil and gunes.Then, the OPEC countries have major resources, the bushies are in bed with them already. Wars are always fought for money. Lives of people are irrelevant to these creeps.
Also, a war with Iran might divert attention from the growing outrage against the bushies. It won't work, but I don't put it past them.

Posted by: Marilyn Gjerdrum on June 1, 2006 at 2:55 PM | PERMALINK

Here we go again. No, wait, this time it's completely different! Only, no, it's not. We've still got the same morons in charge.

Better we should wait than run off with this gang into another pointless land war in Asia.

Posted by: theorajones on June 1, 2006 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

Oy, fuck..... This is nerve-wracking.

I wouldn't trust Bush or Cheney with finger paints, but I keep thinking that a conflict with Iran would be such an obvious disaster that even they wouldn't seriously follow such a course. Am I being too Panglossian?

Posted by: sglover on June 1, 2006 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

And if you'd like an idea of what Iran really is (or really isn't) capable of when it comes to enriching uranium, check out Arms Control Wonk.

Long story short, between the Bush administration's lack of commitment to a peaceful solution and Iran's desire to appear like they can enrich uranium, things could go very badly.

Posted by: cyntax on June 1, 2006 at 2:57 PM | PERMALINK

"It came down to convincing Cheney..." "[agree with it] perhaps because they read Mr. Bush's body language".

I always thought the "Cheney's in charge" meme was cliche, but -- shouldn't the President simply be able to say "this is how we're doing it" and have his VP (at the VERY least) enable him to do so?

At least Truman fired those subordinates who resisted him, even when they were popular!

Posted by: the good reverend on June 1, 2006 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINK

He's the War Preznit, so duh. Whaddya think he's going to do?

His pattern has been to try war one place and then, if that doesn't work too good, to try again somewhere else.

Like a spoiled kid biting into each chocolate in the box and throwing them away when they're vanilla creams and not the caramel he's looking for.

Ooh, box of chocolates. Why does that image seem so apt for our Boy Preznit?

Posted by: Cal Gal on June 1, 2006 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

War will make you Dems turn on each other, keeping The Good Guys in Power!

Muuu-hooo-HAHAHAHA!

Posted by: Freedom Phukher on June 1, 2006 at 3:06 PM | PERMALINK

David Sanger provides a look at what's behind President Bush's supposed change of heart on holding talks with Iran:

I think the most likely explanation is that Iran has been convinced by our allies in Iraq to give up its nuclear program and stop supporting terrorism. Moderates Muslims like the newly democratically elected Iraqi government and Ayatollah Sistani have been trying to get Iran to stop being a nuclear threat to the world and they've suceeded. As conservatives have pointed out the road to Tehran is through Baghdad and that is what's happening.

Posted by: Al on June 1, 2006 at 3:07 PM | PERMALINK

James Fallows on why strikes wouldn't be a good idea:

* The United States was too late. Irans leaders had learned from what happened to Saddam Hussein in 1981, when Israeli F-16s destroyed a facility at Osirak where most of his nuclear projects were concentrated. Iran spread its research to at least a dozen sitesexactly how many, and where, the U.S. government could not be sure.

* The United States was too vulnerable. Iran, until now relatively restrained in using its influence among the Iraqi Shiites, could make Iraq hell, in the words of one of our experts, Kenneth Pollack, of the Brookings Institution. It could use its influence on the worlds oil markets to shock Western economiesmost of all, that of the worlds largest oil importer, the United States.

* The plan was likely to backfire, in a grand-strategy sense. At best, it would slow Iranian nuclear projects by a few years. But the cost of buying that time would likely be a redoubling of Irans determination to get a bomband an increase in its bitterness toward the United States.

Posted by: Uli Kunkel on June 1, 2006 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin....why do you hate God and his chosen President so?

Posted by: Nathan64 on June 1, 2006 at 3:12 PM | PERMALINK

Via Cleek's CNN link...

"Rice remarks had no new words," Mottaki told the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). "The remarks were a litany of phrases."

Mottaki nailed it!

Posted by: ajl on June 1, 2006 at 3:16 PM | PERMALINK

"Rice remarks had no new words," Mottaki told the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). "The remarks were a litany of phrases."

I heard her on the radio yesterday; she sounded slightly exasperated. It was hard to tell if it was an act (because she wanted to sell the Admin. BS more convincingly), or genuine (because she's now feeling like Powell, having to loyally spout stupidity in public).

Posted by: Uli Kunkel on June 1, 2006 at 3:25 PM | PERMALINK

This is part of what Bush means when he claimed to have tried to avoid the war diplomatically to the "max". "Max" meaning every measure politically necessary to provide cover for whatever he wanted to do.

Posted by: Catch22 on June 1, 2006 at 3:28 PM | PERMALINK

Uli, how could Rice have been surprised that she would have to loyally spout stupidity? She'd been in the administration for a term before she took this job, and she'd seen what Powell had to do. She knew exactly what she was getting into, so clearly she signed up for stupidity.

Posted by: KCinDC on June 1, 2006 at 3:30 PM | PERMALINK

They've clearly drawn up a list of everything that could possibly avoid war, and are trying everything on it. WHat more do you want from them?

Posted by: American Hawk on June 1, 2006 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK

I heard her on the radio yesterday; she sounded slightly exasperated. It was hard to tell if it was an act (because she wanted to sell the Admin. BS more convincingly), or genuine (because she's now feeling like Powell, having to loyally spout stupidity in public).

I vote for (a). Rice's credentials as a tool are well-established. I believe her current approach to solving the knotty problem of Iraq involves focusing her mighty powers of exasperation, and saying, "Alright you guys -- start governing!" Kinda like a G-rated version of McCain's brilliant "Cut the bullshit" gambit.

Posted by: sglover on June 1, 2006 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK
perhaps because they read Mr. Bush's body language

Wouldn't it be nice to have a President who was not preverbal, so that his aides could simply ask him his opinion? I hope the above is a metaphor, but I have my doubts.

Posted by: RSA on June 1, 2006 at 3:37 PM | PERMALINK

Al: "I think the most likely explanation is that Iran has been convinced by our allies in Iraq to give up its nuclear program and stop supporting terrorism."

Which was accomplished, of course, by letting Ceti eels crawl in the Iranians' ears and wrap themselves around their cerbral corteces, rendering them extremely susceptible to suggestion.

Posted by: Khan on June 1, 2006 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

They've clearly drawn up a list of everything that could possibly avoid war, and are trying everything on it. WHat more do you want from them?

Well, a sincere effort of avoiding war, the type NOT implied by the phrase "checking off the boxes", would help.

Posted by: mmy on June 1, 2006 at 3:50 PM | PERMALINK

They've clearly drawn up a list of everything that could possibly avoid war, and are trying everything on it. WHat more do you want from them? - AChickenHawk

Beautiful sarcasm, AH ... kudos. Good to have you on board.

Posted by: (a different) kevin on June 1, 2006 at 3:57 PM | PERMALINK

Diplomacy designed to fail. It's becoming so familiar it must look like routine from the inside as well as from out here. If Rice & Co. ever needed to design a successful diplomatic initiative, would they have any idea how to do it?

Anyway, everything this administration designs -- from its phony tax reform to its phony diplomacy, to its phony wars -- fails. Everything. It's amazing when you look at it. And I'm sure George and Dick and Condi and Rummy are amazed every day by the unpredictability of their consequences.

Posted by: tapdance on June 1, 2006 at 4:06 PM | PERMALINK

You really should read Guests of the Ayatollah." This is who these people are. At first there was less concern as Ahmadinejad was thought to be a figurehead, like previous presidents. Lately, there is more talk that he is consolidating his power and may be more dangerous than first thought.

This guy believes that armageddon will bring forth the hidden imam. He is a real religious extremist. Our principle hope is that the students will overthrow the mullahs. Daniel Pipes thinks they might be so alienated by this 25 year reign of terror they could even abandon Islam.

In the meantime, we need to be supporting the students and the others who are trying to toss out the nuts. A secret survey by the Interior Ministry of Baghdad residents a couple of years ago showed 94% of the population opposed to the regime. The problem is the 6 %. We should not be seriously negotiating if this gives support to the regime. Kevin's idea of a "Marshall Plan" is lunacy but liberal orthodoxy so I guess you have to include it.

Iran is as dangerous as Hitler was in 1936. The Iraq invasion may actually help destabilize the Iran regime by giving hope to the regime opponents that we could really be serious, unlike the Europeans. The area is a crucial one until the end of the petroleum age and that isn't here yet. We have to get this right. Sanctions could hurt them more than us but the Russians and Chinese would probably not go along unless we blocked the straits of Hormuz.

Posted by: Mike K on June 1, 2006 at 4:08 PM | PERMALINK

Mike K

Iran is as dangerous as Hitler was in 1936? What have you been smoking?

Hitler had the support of the german population. Unless we invade or do something equally stupid the Mullah's don't have that much support.

Posted by: Ron Byers on June 1, 2006 at 4:12 PM | PERMALINK

This guy believes that armageddon will bring forth the hidden imam. He is a real religious extremist.

Replace the "hidden Imam" with "the rapture" and he sounds like our president.

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on June 1, 2006 at 4:15 PM | PERMALINK

Liklier explanation: the US couldn't attack.

This time absolutely no-one would go along. There would be no coalition of the "willing".

And the commanders in Iraq probably reminded Washington that our boys are sitting ducks in the Shiite areas.

All the talk about "body-language" just obscures teh basic fact - they can't go to war - and that's all that's stopping them.

Posted by: Samuel Knight on June 1, 2006 at 4:15 PM | PERMALINK

Bombing Iran will only increase the likelihood of them using the bomb on a US city once they get it.

Posted by: Ugh on June 1, 2006 at 4:18 PM | PERMALINK

"WHat more do you want from them?"

Yeah, jeez, you guys talk like you think the President of the United States has power and choices and all that stuff. I mean, give the poor guy a break. It's not like he'd ever go to war for no reason or completely let down his country in a huge emergency or lie to us on a daily basis or condone domestic spying or abuse of classified information to damage political opponents or foster hatred of gays and immigrants for purely expedient purposes or give giant no-bid contracts to his vice-president's old company.

Or any of those things. What a great, great man.

Posted by: Kenji on June 1, 2006 at 4:22 PM | PERMALINK

Here's why I can't get my head around the notion that Bush, Cheney, et al are really trying to provoke conflict with Iran: It's been said before, but the surest fallout to such an event would be horrendous spikes in oil prices. They'll the 2006 equivalent of the bread riots that every 19th Century monarch feared. Since Americans are already extremely disillusioned with Iraq, fresh lies about the "threat" from Iran are simply going to be discounted -- there's no possibility of a "Rally Round the Flag" bounce.

I know that the administration is nothing but a gang of criminals, but wouldn't simple self-preservation deflect them from such a losing course? Maybe it all depends on whether Rove can restrain Cheney's, ahem, "judgement"?

Posted by: sglover on June 1, 2006 at 4:25 PM | PERMALINK

And even if we COULD "go to war" -- and actually, we almost certainly could do a number of very warlike things, e.g., bombing, missile strikes, special ops, very limited invasion -- it's not clear what we would do after we did that.

We're certainly not going to "force regime change." Nothing rallies people more to their leadership, however detested, than invasion, especially by a power widely demonized as imperialist and religiously motivated.

We probably also couldn't seize and hold very much, if any, oil-producing territory. It's dispersed geographically in Iran, and very little of it is immediately adjacent to Iraq. Plus, holding it would be very difficult, given that Iran has a large army and a healthy economy, unlike Iraq's.

About the most we could do, imho, is screw up their economy and set back -- but not derail -- their weapons program. It's not clear what the benefits of the former would be -- oil prices would go through the roof, for one thing -- and there really isn't much long-term benefit to the latter, given the fact that Iran is still years away from any serious weapon-making ability.

And of course, the consequences for our geopolitical leadership, our economy, and our military would be ruinous.

Unfortunately, I no longer believe the people in charge at the WH are sufficiently capable of this kind of rational thought that they wouldn't go ahead and do something warlike without having thought through the consequences. They've unfortunately -- almost unbelievably -- shown themselves to be seriously delusional about these sorts of things, and willing to take action based on those delusions.

We can start a war, although we shouldn't, but I don't think anyone's on safe ground making any bets as to whether we will or we won't.

Posted by: bleh on June 1, 2006 at 4:27 PM | PERMALINK

America voted for these cretins. Can it be populated with geniuses that deserve any better?

Posted by: Name on June 1, 2006 at 4:36 PM | PERMALINK

Robert Kennedy Jr.'s article on the theft of the '04 election is up:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=8929

Go read it. I recall that Mr. Drum has been rather...skeptical on this issue. Prepare to be convinced, Kevin.

Just a stunning piece of work by Kennedy.

Posted by: owenz on June 1, 2006 at 4:37 PM | PERMALINK

Doh!

Link here:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stole

Posted by: owenz on June 1, 2006 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, upon reflection, I think there's more than meets the eye here.

Bush is first and foremost a political animal.

I believe that this whole Iran shenanigan is so that the GOP can go to the voters this Fall and say, "Look, if you vote the Democrats in, they will stop us from dealing with this deadly Iranian threat. You *have* to re-elect us (GOP) to survive."

I realize this doesn't sound very different from what others have said. The difference is that I think this is the be all and end all for Bush right now - winning Congress in November - everything else is all to be done in service to this end.

Posted by: Name on June 1, 2006 at 4:41 PM | PERMALINK

Whether Kennedy's assertions are correct or not, the sad and shameful reality is that roughly half of our fellow countrymen looked at a criminal and incompetent regime and said, "More of the same, please". 2000 I can write off as a tragic fluke. But in 2004 Bush had already compiled a pretty sorry record, and it's not like he had some Soviet-style handle on information. In 2004, information was never easier to come by. The only real mystery is, who are these fuckwits who thought Bush deserved a reward, but only now seem to have noticed that he's a lying incompetent?

Posted by: sglover on June 1, 2006 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK

So a very high up person in an international adv agency had dinner with a number two or three in the new German gov. He said the US is going to attack Iran within 30 days.

Maybe he was just speculating like the rest of us, based on a sense of deja vu occurring from the news. OR maybe he knows something.

sigh
I almost wish they would bomb Iran because this might be the only way to get rid of them all, our gov I mean.

Posted by: lilybart on June 1, 2006 at 4:54 PM | PERMALINK

I believe that this whole Iran shenanigan is so that the GOP can go to the voters this Fall and say, "Look, if you vote the Democrats in, they will stop us from dealing with this deadly Iranian threat. You *have* to re-elect us (GOP) to survive."

I don't think anybody believes in the "deadly Iranian threat", outside of the Krauthammers and Sullivans. And if they did, I don't think they trust Bush and Cheney to deal with it -- even given the (deservedly) scant faith that they have in the Democratic alternatives. The rumors that strike me as most credible say that Rove, the most purely "political" creature of the bunch, is dead set against a wider conflict, because it's such an obvious path to destroying the "permanent majority".

I think this "go through the checklist motions" mentality is straight outa Cheney's fucked-up, heavily medicated Nixon-era thinking.

Posted by: sglover on June 1, 2006 at 4:57 PM | PERMALINK

Mr. Bush's main condition: that Iran first re-suspend all of its nuclear activities, including shutting down every centrifuge that could add to its small stockpile of enriched uranium...

I think this has merits - the Iranians could agree to this if the US would meet an Iranian precondition that the US reduce its arsenal by half of the present warheads.

What Iran is doing is legitimate under the NPT. The US needs to start meeting its obligations under the NPT, which include reducing the size of its stockpiles.

Oh - I forgot - there's one set of rules for the US and another set for everyone else.


This precondition is another Bush scam, nothing else. Anyone who believes otherwise hasn't been following the news for the past 5 years. Remember the precondition that Saddam open his sites for inspection? After he finally did, and the IAEA and Hans Blix inspected and found nothing sinister, the US still invaded.

Posted by: Wapiti on June 1, 2006 at 4:58 PM | PERMALINK

I understand that today noone believes in the deadly Iranian threat - what I'm hypothesizing is that this a step that must be taken to whip up hysteria on the way to the election.

Posted by: Name on June 1, 2006 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

"Mike K

Iran is as dangerous as Hitler was in 1936? What have you been smoking?"

Pretty good cigars, actually. H Uppman's. You ?

"Hitler had the support of the german population. Unless we invade or do something equally stupid the Mullah's don't have that much support.

Posted by: Ron Byers"

They will have nuclear weapons and the willingness to use them. Ahmadinejad is recruiting more members of the "bajlis", the fanatics who were willing to walk through mine fields in the Iran-Iraq war. He has around 50,000 now, by some estimates.

Our best plan, I think, is to maintain the pressure and try to give aid to the students who are trying to overthrow the regime. That might include clandestine aid.

I really wish more of you folks would read and try to understand that this is serious and not another BushHitler scheme. Sigh.

Posted by: Mike K on June 1, 2006 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

Name is saying what I've been thinking for a while: this is another brewing campaign issue. expect a GOP-sponsored Congressional Resolution On Iran sometime in mid-September.

Posted by: cleek on June 1, 2006 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

Our best plan, I think, is to maintain the pressure and try to give aid to the students who are trying to overthrow the regime. That might include clandestine aid.

If you're trying to delegitimize said students, that's a rock-solid plan, by jiminy.....

Posted by: sglover on June 1, 2006 at 5:14 PM | PERMALINK

They will have nuclear weapons and the willingness to use them

mind reading

He has around 50,000 now, by some estimates

cite?

Our best plan, I think, is to maintain the pressure and try to give aid to the students who are trying to overthrow the regime. That might include clandestine aid.

yes, i'm sure tons of Iranian students would love to become US-sponsored agitators. that would probably go over really well - a guaranteed success.

I really wish more of you folks would read and try to understand that this is serious

and i wish more of you folks would realize that half of what you hear about Iran is total bullshit, and it makes the other half of what you hear seem more dire than it really is.

Posted by: cleek on June 1, 2006 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINK

America voted for these cretins. Can it be populated with geniuses that deserve any better?

Touche.
And while we are at it...

Check out the etymology of cretin.

Truly it is a wildy appropriate word...

Posted by: koreyel on June 1, 2006 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINK

Mike K

Do you really believe that the Iranians (or anyone) would really use an atomic bomb. We have thousands upon thousands of the damn things. We could turn Iran into a glowing glass parking lot within hours.

No, the mad mullahs spout their fundamentalist crap because they want power. They are not nearly as mad as they want their population or you want the US population to belive. An atomic bomb provides a shield. It is not an offensive weapon because it is too damned offensive to use.

Posted by: Ron Byers on June 1, 2006 at 5:18 PM | PERMALINK

Mike K: They will have nuclear weapons and the willingness to use them...I really wish more of you folks would read and try to understand that this is serious and not another BushHitler scheme. Sigh.

Will they? How do we know that? When will they have them?

This issue is very serious, but so is the fact that you seem to be starting off with some rather
unfounded assumptions, as I indicated upthread, but pehaps you didn't read:

"The Iranian centrifuge operation appears quite inept: They still cant produce their own uranium hexafluoride nor do their centrifuges do much better than 1.5 kg SWU/a. (And I forgot to mention Dafna Linzers story about some of the cascades crashing. )"

The administration seems to be rushing us into another war prematurely. Isn't that serious? And if it is so serious, isn't incumbent on the administration to treat it seriously rather than make desultory attempts at diplomacy just so they can "check off that box?" What could be more cynical on their part?

But hey there's a midterm election comin' so we needs to bomb us some ragheads, or Karl sez we're gonna be impeached.

Posted by: cyntax on June 1, 2006 at 5:26 PM | PERMALINK

As I said before. Do what you are supposed to do, what we have elected you for, President Bush. Materialize the second coming of Christ. Attack Iran now. After the election should be good enough for me, as long as Iran is attacked.

Posted by: Mini Al on June 1, 2006 at 5:36 PM | PERMALINK

"but in 2004 Bush had already compiled a pretty sorry record, and it's not like he had some Soviet-style handle on information"

Nope, the control of information from 1999 on was as American-style as apple pie. WMD, anyone?

Posted by: brewmn on June 1, 2006 at 5:53 PM | PERMALINK

They will have nuclear weapons and the willingness to use them. Ahmadinejad is recruiting more members of the "bajlis", the fanatics who were willing to walk through mine fields in the Iran-Iraq war. He has around 50,000 now, by some estimates.

And Saddam Hussein had WMDs and ties to Al Qaeda, by some estimates....and the Iraqis would greet us as liberators, by some estimates...and the Iraq War would take no more than a few months, by some estimates....

Posted by: Stefan on June 1, 2006 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

Ahmadinejad is recruiting more members of the "bajlis", the fanatics who were willing to walk through mine fields in the Iran-Iraq war.

You do realize that was twenty years ago, and that the religious / revolutionary fervor of the time has long since faded? And that the bajlis were willing to walk through minefields to save their homes from a foreign invader, and not for aggressive reasons? They were defending their homeland and their people from Saddam -- isn't that supposed to be a good thing?

Posted by: Stefan on June 1, 2006 at 6:12 PM | PERMALINK

It's amazing that some of you are still falling for the Bush trick. They want you to believe they're willing to use force in Iran, so they don't appear hypocritical. They want you to believe that there really is a grand scheme to introduce democracy in the ME and preserve liberty, when really it was all about Iraq. Bush has already made many concessions to Iran.. clearly, the Bush admin don't have the balls to attack, and Iran knows it, which is why Iran shows no sign of caving. I was against the war in Iraq from the outset, but given the choice of war with Iraq or Iran, I would've picked Iran because of their nuclear threat. Iraq was at least 10 years away from where Iran is now, if that.

Posted by: Andy on June 1, 2006 at 6:38 PM | PERMALINK

"I really wish more of you folks would read and try to understand that this is serious

and i wish more of you folks would realize that half of what you hear about Iran is total bullshit, and it makes the other half of what you hear seem more dire than it really is.

Posted by: cleek "

More juvenile comments are helpful. You are a big help.

One cite that seems to predate the latest developments is here. He mentions the basij toward the end. (I misspelled the word in my post)

The basij in the Iraq war were kids who were sacrificed as part of the Shi'a obsession with death and martyrdom. That is why massive retaliation is far less effectiove with a regime like this than with a regime like the Soviets who did not believe a word of their ideology. Ahmadinejad is perfectly capable of nuking Israel and accepting the consequences as part of his belief that the 12th imam will come if he raises enough hell.

Did you read about his "vision" during his UN speech ?

Here is a link on recent recruitment of basij.

Posted by: Mike K on June 1, 2006 at 6:40 PM | PERMALINK

The basij in the Iraq war were kids who were sacrificed as part of the Shi'a obsession with death and martyrdom. That is why massive retaliation is far less effectiove with a regime like this than with a regime like the Soviets who did not believe a word of their ideology. Ahmadinejad is perfectly capable of nuking Israel and accepting the consequences as part of his belief that the 12th imam will come if he raises enough hell.

You know, that makes just about as much sense as this....

Christianists believe in routinely sacrificing themselves as part of the Christian obsession with death and martyrdom. That is why massive retaliation is far less effective with a regime like this than with a regime like the Soviets who did not believe a word of their ideology. Bush is perfectly capable of nuking Iran and accepting the consequences as part of his belief that Jesus and the Rapture will come if he raises enough hell.....

Posted by: Stefan on June 1, 2006 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

That is why massive retaliation is far less effective with a regime like this than with a regime like the Soviets who did not believe a word of their ideology.

Ah, the old flip-flop -- a devastating weapon in the right-wing nutcase arsenal. Remember back in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s when John Birchers like Mike K were insisting that the Communists were an existential threat who were coming to kill us all in our beds, that they were fanatical fiends absolutely committed to their godless ideology? Now, it seems, it turns out that the Soviets were actually rational all along and didn't believe a word they were saying, they were really all capitalists at heart....

Posted by: Stefan on June 1, 2006 at 7:02 PM | PERMALINK

They sure sound serious about trying to avoid war, don't they? They're going to "check off the box" and everything.

Thank you, Kevin! This makes up for almost every time I've been infuriated by your clinging to CW, or ceding too much ground to the right with "sensible" centrism.

Posted by: Nell on June 1, 2006 at 7:26 PM | PERMALINK

Mike K

Fundamentalist ideology is for chumps. Ahmadinejad, the Mad Mullahs, and Osama are politicians. For them fundamentalist ideology is just a tool to gain and keep power. If they really believed the crap they tell the masses they would never have reached the top of their respective heaps. You haven't seen Osama carrying a car bomb, have you?

Posted by: Ron Byers on June 1, 2006 at 7:54 PM | PERMALINK

Bush is just a loud mouth, the Iraniens have to obey, that is his form of diplomacy and is surely insulting to the Iraniens.

Sounds like going to the UN before invading Iraq.

Posted by: Renate on June 1, 2006 at 8:40 PM | PERMALINK

What if Iran does get a bomb? They still don't pose a threat to the U.S. Hell, Pakistan has more terrorists than Iran. It's all about the oil. We better wean ourselves or we'll go broke fighting wars in the Middle East.

Posted by: darby1936 on June 1, 2006 at 10:17 PM | PERMALINK

Stefan, Is there any way we could get you to make commercials for Democrats this fall ? I would be happy to provide references. If you like, I will write letters about how stupid you are, if that would help.

Ron Byers, I sure hope you are right. Are you willing to bet your life on it ? Of course you are.

Renate, Spelling Iranians wrong once is a bug; twice is a feature. STFU.

Another waste of my time. Sigh.

Posted by: Mike K on June 1, 2006 at 10:17 PM | PERMALINK

免费电影下载 免费在线电影 看免费电影 免费电影网站 韩国电影 两性生活 性教育片 电影神话 电影雏菊 免费激情电影 最新电影 成人性爱电影 免费小电影 性电影下载 成人电影下载 免费电影在线看 宽带电影 经典电影 恐怖电影 免费影片 免费影院 最新大片 十八电影网 美女写真 人体艺术 美女图片 美女走光 美腿图片 三级片 性感美女图片 漂亮妹妹图片 美少女图片 日本av电影 情色电影 同志电影下载 激情视频下载 明星露点图片 写真电影 乳房图片 性爱视频 偷拍图片 美眉图片 泳装美女 美女内衣内裤 性爱贴图 情趣内衣图片 性生活图片 艳情小说 性息港 性福联盟 人体摄影 成人小说 汤加丽写真集 舒淇写真 美女脱衣图片 人体写真 波霸美女 美女鲍鱼 美女臀部 美女图库 手机铃声下载 铃声下载 免费铃声下载 mp3铃声 特效铃声 和弦铃声 图铃下载 铃音下载 搞笑短信 手机铃声免费下载 免费铃声 免费手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 三星手机铃声 三星铃声 诺基亚铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 midi铃声 搞笑铃声 移动铃声 nokia铃声 波导手机铃声 mid铃声 nec手机铃声下载 原唱铃声 联想手机铃声 摩托罗拉铃声 amr铃声 单音铃声 夏新手机铃声 松下手机铃声 cect手机铃声 和炫和旋铃声 海尔手机铃声 索爱手机铃声 飞利浦手机铃声康佳手机铃声下载彩信铃声 真人真唱铃声 mmf铃声 lg手机铃声 南方高科铃声 西门子铃声 东信手机铃声 tcl手机铃声 手机图片 手机彩铃 手机彩铃下载 彩铃下载 移动彩铃 免费彩铃 炫铃 手机炫铃下载 移动炫铃 酷铃 搞笑手机铃声 个性铃声 dj铃声 唱得响亮铃声 手机铃声图片 手机铃声格式 搞怪铃声 比特铃声 自编铃声 adp铃声 七彩铃声 经典手机铃声 最新手机铃声 手机铃声制作 诺基亚手机铃声 小灵通铃声 移动手机铃声 手机动画 手机彩图 手机铃音 手机铃声论坛 短信铃声 来电铃声 音乐铃声 歌曲铃声 铃声试听 手机壁纸 彩色铃声 v3铃声下载 手机待机图片 免费手机图片 三星手机图片 手机mp3下载 手机主题 如何制作手机铃声 真人原唱和弦铃声 qd铃声下载 经典铃声 联通手机彩铃 幽默短信 手机短信 手机游戏 手机电影 联通手机铃声 中国联通铃声 联通免费铃声 联通用户铃声 联通cdma铃声 联通和弦铃声 联通mp3铃声 联通特效铃声 联通彩铃 联通彩铃下载 中国联通彩铃 联通手机彩铃下载 联通彩铃业务 联通彩铃网站 联通免费彩铃 联通cdma彩铃 联通炫铃 中国联通炫铃 联通炫铃下载 联通炫铃网站 联通炫铃业务 联通cdma炫铃 联通手机图片 联通手机炫铃

Posted by: lami on June 1, 2006 at 11:01 PM | PERMALINK
American Hawk 3:35 PM They've clearly drawn up a list of everything that could possibly avoid war, and are trying everything on it. WHat more do you want from them?
Only in your fantasy world. In the real world, the fabricator of the phony Iranian badge story goes to Washington

Two weeks ago, Amir Taheri had an Op-Ed article in the Canadian National Post claiming that the Iranians have a law requiring Jews to wear yellow badges. It turned out to be a complete fabrication and has been the subject of much contempt among bloggers. So Tuesday, Taheri was invited to the White House along with other experts to give the president their honest opinions. With advice like that, our war in Iran will be a slam-dunk.

This guy believes that armageddon will bring forth the hidden imam. .. Iran is as dangerous as Hitler was in 1936. Mike K 4:08 PM

Bush is backed by religious fanatics who believe Armageddon will bring the second coming. Where's the difference? Your Hitler claim ignores the fact that Bush was the first to threaten Iran, the fact that the US backed Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war, that the US overthrew the Iranian government in the 50's and gave refuge to the hated Shah for cancer treatments
Mike K 5:07 PM I really wish more of you folks would read and try to understand that this is serious and not another BushHitler scheme. Sigh.

Since Bush gratuitously proclaimed Iran to be a member of the "Axis of Evil" and attacked another state that he gave that same designation, it is understandable that Iran would want all the self-defense it can get. If you don't want to make enemies of countries, don't do everything you can to exacerbate relations.

Posted by: Mike on June 1, 2006 at 11:20 PM | PERMALINK

At my blog some time back, I "predicted" the invasion would take place June 6th. You know, rapture etc., and the date 666.

Now it doesn't seem quite so funny. A little less rapturous if it's say, 866. But very nice timing for the midterm elections. Well, maybe. Then again maybe this time the American people will rise up with one voice, etc. etc. Oh wait. August. Half the population will be at the beach and the other half at WalMart.

Posted by: PW on June 1, 2006 at 11:22 PM | PERMALINK

Mike, nice of you to support the mad mullahs. You must know (although you probably forgot it in your frenzy over who would win American Idol) how Scharansky wrote that the gulag prisoners were thrilled when Reagan called the USSR the "Evil Empire." Somebody finally understood ! The Iranian students probably felt the same way about Bush's "Axis of Evil" speech. But you, like Neville Chamberlain, wouldn't want to "upset" them by calling them "names."

You'll look funny in a burka.

Posted by: Mike K on June 2, 2006 at 12:52 AM | PERMALINK

You must know (although you probably forgot it in your frenzy over who would win American Idol) how Scharansky wrote that the gulag prisoners were thrilled when Reagan called the USSR the "Evil Empire." Somebody finally understood ! The Iranian students probably felt the same way about Bush's "Axis of Evil" speech.

That's not quite what the Iranian students claim. Here, for example, an op-ed titled "Completing what we started: The fight for democratic ideals" by Iranian pro-democracy reformer Saeed Razavi-Faqih from December 11, 2002:

Unfortunately, the Bush Administration's posture toward Iran has not been helpful. President Bush's harsh comment that Iran is part of the "axis of evil" has allowed Iran's conservatives to claim they are defenders of the republic while they tighten the reins on the reformist majority. Now with the threat of war against Iraq coming to our borders, the conservatives have been conveniently handed another excuse to crack down on dissent and democratization.

Posted by: Stefan on June 2, 2006 at 10:51 AM | PERMALINK

The Iranian students probably felt the same way about Bush's "Axis of Evil" speech.

"Probably" is good enough for you, Mike K.

You know fuck all about Iranian society, and you're happy to wield lethal force on that basis...

Ignorance is a way of life for some.

Posted by: obscure on June 2, 2006 at 11:24 AM | PERMALINK

So, the Bush administration says that if the Iranians give in to all of Bush's demands, then and only then will they sit down to talk?

Sure seems like we need to applaud Bush's efforts at diplomancy. I looked up in the dictionary and was surprised to see that the definition of diplomacy is make the other guy give in to all your demands or bomb them. Guess it musta been a newer version dictionary.

Posted by: mperloe on June 2, 2006 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

手机铃声 和弦铃声下载 手机铃声免费下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 mp3铃声下载 下载手机铃声 三星手机铃声 手机铃声 免费铃声下载 铃声下载免费 搞笑铃声下载 搞笑免费铃声 铃声下载免费 搞笑下载铃声 下载铃声 三星铃声 免费铃声下载 MP3铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声 MP3铃声下载 手机铃声下载手机铃声 免费铃声下载 免费铃声下载 搞笑免费铃声 免费铃声下载 手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 免费铃声下载搞笑下载铃声 下载铃声 mp3手机铃声 三星铃声下载 免费手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 搞笑手机铃声 手机铃声免费下载免费铃声下载 铃声下载免费 手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 免费铃声下载 手机铃声下载 免费手机铃声下载 和弦特效铃声下载 文秘写作 竞聘演讲稿 个人工作总结 八荣八耻演讲稿 中国文秘网 治疗牛皮癣,阴虱特效药 免费歌曲铃声下载 免费手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 mp3铃声下载 免费手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 mp3手机铃声 免费手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 免费铃声 手机铃声下载 手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 搞笑铃声 免费手机铃声 免费铃声免费铃声下载 mp3手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 免费铃声 手机铃声免费下载 mp3铃声 免费手机铃声下载 免费手机铃声下载 手机铃声 手机铃声 免费铃声下载 手机mmf铃声下载mp3手机铃声 手机铃声 手机铃声免费下载 铃声下载 免费铃声 手机铃声下载 免费手机铃声免费铃声 免费手机铃声 mp3铃声 mp3铃声下载 免费铃声

Posted by: biu on June 3, 2006 at 5:10 AM | PERMALINK

<a>wnload mp3 music</a>
<a>debt free today</a>
<a>shopping cart seat cover</a>
<a>simple plan buddy icons</a>
<a>buy used book online</a>

Posted by: as89748 on June 3, 2006 at 11:41 PM | PERMALINK

Iran has a legitimate economic case for nuclear power - which is why the US encouraged and supported Irans' nuclear program. A few articles on US/European participation in Iran's nuclear program are found at "Blast From the Past" entry at IranAffairs.com -- see http://iranaffairs.typepad.com

Posted by: hass on June 4, 2006 at 3:11 AM | PERMALINK

<a>refinancing with bad credit</a>
<a>victorinox swiss army knife</a>
<a>rgo candle</a>
<a>online quote car classic insurance</a>
<a>return address stamp</a>

Posted by: as81359 on June 4, 2006 at 5:33 AM | PERMALINK

<a>commercial bridge loan</a>
<a>amaged wrecked porsche for sale</a>
<a>mployee assessments</a>
<a>buy carisoprodol online</a>
<a>buy text book</a>

Posted by: as75544 on June 4, 2006 at 6:05 AM | PERMALINK

<a>onate time share</a>
<a>print broker</a>
<a>army flag</a>
<a>resh look contact lens</a>
<a>ide raid</a>

Posted by: as3812 on June 4, 2006 at 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

<a>nightwish mp3</a>
<a>new balance running</a>
<a>teleflora florist</a>
<a>wood glue</a>
<a>colorado web design</a>

Posted by: as79753 on June 4, 2006 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK

<a>display panel</a>
<a>ark howard</a>
<a>pheromone oil</a>
<a>troubled youth</a>
<a>memory management</a>

Posted by: as72461 on June 4, 2006 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

<a>diazepam online</a>
<a>acility maintenance software</a>
<a>Tara Reid Gallery</a>
<a>time share broker</a>
<a>web site marketing services</a>

Posted by: as91846 on June 4, 2006 at 2:50 PM | PERMALINK


Good morning! I hope all is well with everyone. I'm so glad it's Friday. Can't wait to sleep in tomorrow. I shall go I shall come on the site (All about cellular telephones
http://cellphone.ccity1.com/

Posted by: Cnstantin on June 4, 2006 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

<a>moto art</a>
<a>albino deer</a>
<a>currency trading system</a>
<a>martha stewart omnimedia</a>
<a> insurance illinois</a>

Posted by: as28334 on June 4, 2006 at 5:04 PM | PERMALINK

<a>cheap domain web hosting</a>
<a>uy french wine online</a>
<a>car insurance online policy</a>
<a>gourmet coffee gift basket</a>
<a>OTORACER</a>

Posted by: as59841 on June 4, 2006 at 6:43 PM | PERMALINK

<a>portable air purifier</a>
<a>park city resort</a>
<a>buy gift</a>
<a>bextra lawsuit</a>
<a>anon sure shot</a>

Posted by: as83583 on June 4, 2006 at 8:05 PM | PERMALINK

<a>online college application</a>
<a>i cyclen</a>
<a>car auto insurance</a>
<a>ichigan debt consolidation</a>
<a>sinclair broadcasting</a>

Posted by: as82010 on June 5, 2006 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK

<a>car insurance agent</a>
<a>gourmet fruit basket</a>
<a>Inspection Equipment</a>
<a>be Awards</a>
<a>american furniture liquidation</a>

Posted by: as54237 on June 5, 2006 at 2:21 AM | PERMALINK

<a>led zeppelin mp3</a>
<a>der credit report</a>
<a>psychic love reading</a>
<a>ome site</a>
<a>nternet time sheet</a>

Posted by: as32721 on June 5, 2006 at 4:10 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly