Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.

This blog will pay for itself.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

They fucked up the fucking up of the fuckup!

The willow is too close to the house.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

You come for women, you’re gonna get your ass kicked.

Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

“And when the Committee says to “report your income,” that could mean anything!

I’m pretty sure there’s only one Jack Smith.

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

Second rate reporter says what?

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

“Can i answer the question? No you can not!”

Take your GOP plan out of the witness protection program.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

The republican caucus is already covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

I really should read my own blog.

He seems like a smart guy, but JFC, what a dick!

Today’s GOP: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

You are here: Home / Politics / Republican Stupidity / The Greatest Jackalope In History

Reader Interactions

123Comments

  1. 1.

    Wilfred

    Juan Cole published Rubin’s comments at his site last week; this Iran ‘surge’ should be relatively easy to follow. I saw Cowan being interviewed on Fox with the teaser War with Iran running – not with a question mark, either. Pretty hard to see how Bush backs away from his current rhetoric – he just needs some good news from Petraeus and its a go. Who the fuck is going to stop him?

  2. 2.

    Tom Hilton

    “I am a Republican. I am a conservative. But I’m not a raging lunatic.”

    Not a lunatic? Sorry, buddy–your party has no use for you anymore.

  5. 5.

    Zifnab

    it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects.

    I guess Murdoch is going to get his money’s worth.

  7. 7.

    Gus

    I don’t understand. The only beneficiary I can think of is Israel. Is the Israel lobby that powerful?

  8. 8.

    Pb

    I don’t understand. The only beneficiary I can think of is Israel. Is the Israel lobby that powerful?

    So I hear, yes…

    The American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC) which heads a network of pro-Israeli lobbies, persuaded Congress to drop a provision which would have required President Bush to ask for Congressional approval prior to attacking Iran.

    As reported in the May 16, 2007 issue of The Hill:

    “The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an influential group that advocates strong U.S. ties with Israel, lobbied heavily to remove the Iran provision in the supplemental, arguing that the measure would weaken President Bush’s attempts to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons.”

  9. 9.

    Dave

    I don’t understand. The only beneficiary I can think of is Israel. Is the Israel lobby that powerful?

    PNAC…it’s the goal of PNAC to completely remake the face of the middle east.

  11. 11.

    Davis X. Machina

    The only beneficiary I can think of is Israel.

    Don’t rule out the GOP.

    Yeah, there’s only about a 10% chance that the rally-round-the-flag effect will survive massive disruptions in the oil markets during heating season, and most sentient carbon-based life forms think that ‘doing’ Iran would be a very bad idea, but is it a guaranteed bad idea?

    As the immortal Dr. Egon Spengler said in Ghostbusters“Not necessarily. There’s definitely a very slim chance we’ll survive”.

  12. 12.

    Dreggas

    Davis X. Machina Says:

    The only beneficiary I can think of is Israel.

    Don’t rule out the GOP.

    Yeah, there’s only about a 10% chance that the rally-round-the-flag effect will survive massive disruptions in the oil markets during heating season, and most sentient carbon-based life forms think that ‘doing’ Iran would be a very bad idea, but is it a guaranteed bad idea?

    Given the general tenor of most people on the street lately the mob will finish what the british attempted during the war of 1812.

  13. 13.

    Zifnab

    I don’t understand. The only beneficiary I can think of is Israel. Is the Israel lobby that powerful?

    Yeah, Isreal doesn’t really benefit per se. For instance, the nation has spent the last 50 years easing itself into the Middle East amidst multiple wars, untold numbers of terror attacks, and more than one threat of genocide. Going to war with Iran would be the geopolitical equivalent of kicking an ant-hill. You just send all the crazies flying off to the four winds, to make newer and nastier nests. Many people in Isreal recognize this.

    They also recognize that their continued existence is predicated on the fact that American Arms Dealers can continue to use Isreal as their cash cow, pressuring Congresspeoples to give Isreal money so it can buy big, expensive, death machines from US contractors.

    The nation of Isreal and the people of Isreal don’t benefit for two shits if we run off and bomb Iran. But a few savy investors and military salesmen do get a hefty bonus. That’s what this is about.

  14. 14.

    jnfr

    I also think it’s part of the PNAC grand plan. Didn’t you hear Kristol on Jon Stewart a couple weeks ago also saying he thinks attacking Iran would be a good idea?

    If only we can beat on the people and governments of the region long enough and total determination, you just know someday they’ll do what we want them to!!

    Because, you know, all the imperial powers have had such good luck with their military adventures in the Middle East.

  15. 15.

    Tom Hilton

    Yeah, there’s only about a 10% chance that the rally-round-the-flag effect will survive massive disruptions in the oil markets during heating season…

    But remember: when we’re paying $9/gallon for mogas after we bomb Iran, it’ll be because we pulled out of Iraq.

  17. 17.

    Xenos

    Don’t forget that the longer the middle east is at maximum insecurity the longer the right-wing government in Jerusalem will stay in power. Although Israel has very serious regional threats to deal with, it has been run by a dishonest, authoritarian party that has apparantly been the model for Cheney and the Neocons for seeking power through conflict.

  18. 18.

    Gus

    I suppose with oil prices rising to record levels the oil companies will also benefit. I’m just thinking that the political negatives of $8/gallon gasoline are a little too much for even the most insane Republican to sign up for an Iranian venture.

  19. 19.

    ThymeZone

    Given the general tenor of most people on the street lately the mob will finish what the british attempted during the war of 1812.

    Yes, I’m down for it. I will travel that long damn distance, and I will take to the streets of DC, if these assholes try to start a war with Iran. And I expect to have 250k of my closest friends right there with me, and I expect to bring Washington to a standstill until they pay attention.

    Enough of this shit is enough.

  20. 20.

    Zifnab

    And I expect to have 250k of my closest friends right there with me, and I expect to bring Washington to a standstill until they pay attention.

    You bring the beer, I’ll bring the chips. We’ll make a vacation of it.

  21. 21.

    Jake

    Yes, I’m down for it. I will travel that long damn distance, and I will take to the streets of DC, if these assholes try to start a war with Iran.

    Why not drop by before then? The weather should be lovely and the tourists have gone the hell home.

    I saw another flyer for a protest on the 29th but I didn’t catch the group or details.

  22. 22.

    Dreggas

    Zifnab Says:

    And I expect to have 250k of my closest friends right there with me, and I expect to bring Washington to a standstill until they pay attention.

    You bring the beer, I’ll bring the chips. We’ll make a vacation of it.

    I’ll bring hot dogs and marshmallows and we can roast ’em on the embers.

  23. 23.

    grumpy realist

    Expect in 3 months, or 5 months, or whenever they try to pull this clown circus off:

    “…but no one would have DREAMED the Iranians would close the Straits of Hormuz….”

    Can we make acute stupidity punishable by the death penalty? Pretty please?

  24. 24.

    grumpy realist

    Also, totally OT, but a delightful line from The Economist re Gonzales:

    “[Gonzales’s] various appearances before congressional committees resembled nothing so much as the clubbing of a baby seal.”

  25. 25.

    Z

    Huh.. as a warm up, could you and your 250K closest friend storm the Weekly Standard, and tar & feather Bill Kristol? I think he’d look fabulous in feathers.

  26. 26.

    ThymeZone

    You bring the beer, I’ll bring the chips. We’ll make a vacation of it.

    You got it. I am bringing a motor home, with a shower, and a grill, and enough meat and food to feed an army, and my guitar.

    You are all welcome to join me. There will be food and beverages for all. I’ll be parking the thing at night in Takoma Park and at night we can go swimming in Sligo Creek.

  27. 27.

    Dreggas

    Z Says:

    Huh.. as a warm up, could you and your 250K closest friend storm the Weekly Standard, and tar & feather Bill Kristol? I think he’d look fabulous in feathers.

    tar and feathering is too good, I say we draw and quarter that insolent little shit.

  28. 28.

    J. Michael Neal

    You got it. I am bringing a motor home, with a shower, and a grill, and enough meat and food to feed an army, and my guitar.

    You lost me there. Beer, grilling, and protesting is fine. I draw the line, however, at folk music.

  29. 29.

    semper fubar

    TZ — Puh-lease. We tried that in early 2003 (500,000 in NYC on 2/15/03 – I was there — how naive I was to think it would matter!) ), and nobody even noticed.

    You’re dreaming if you think: A) hundreds of thousands will mobilize on the streets for this, and B) our government (and that includes democrats) will care.

  30. 30.

    ThymeZone

    You’re dreaming if you think: A) hundreds of thousands will mobilize on the streets for this, and B) our government (and that includes democrats) will care.

    Maybe. But that was then, and this is now. I think things have changed.

  32. 32.

    Anne Laurie

    Given the general tenor of most people on the street lately the mob will finish what the british attempted during the war of 1812.

    It could be argued that attacking Iran is part of the Repub solution to this. If “we” go into Iran, “we” will need a military draft. Such a draft will take the most dangerous potential troublemakers — young, strong, angry, ex-contractors & former factory workers with guns & pickup trucks — off the streets of America. Bill Kristol and Dinesh D’Sousa will continue to sleep soundly in the security of their gated communities, and Karl Rove’s son and Dubya’s daughters aren’t going to be “caught in the Draft” any more than their daddies were. The most amenable draftees can be used as “security” within our borders to keep the rest of us in line, with urban minority types patrolling the redstate heartlands and trailer-park Bubbas riding shotgun in the urban areas; Murdoch’s Chinese allies have had great success with such divide-and-conquer strategies since at least the Tiananmen Square days. And if a string of miracles should actually enable Exxon and Halliburton to make a nice profit on “our” Big Iraqi Adventure, well, Capitalizm Rulez Okay!

  33. 33.

    Patrick S Lasswell

    Uhm, guys…Iran has been there for a long time, and it has been pretty screwed up since the Safavid dynasty made Shia Islam the state religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_dynasty (Although John Ringo claims it was Tamerlane that laid the groundwork…)

    Iran is not going anyplace, and the Islamic Republic which currently reigns there is not going to be our friend, ever. It is beyond the existential capacity of the Islamic Republic to allow secular democracies to prosper while their political process is disintegrating. They must fight us to explain away their own failures, just like Saddam did. That’s what happens with fascist states, they must stay at war.

    Can anybody here come up with a realistic way that the Islamic Republic will declare peace with secular democracies?

  35. 35.

    Perry Como

    Can anybody here come up with a realistic way that the Islamic Republic will declare peace with secular democracies?

    There isn’t one. Iran would never offer to help the US in finding al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9/11, nor offer to open talks about its nuclear program in order to stop sanctions. That’s just crazy moonbat talk.

  36. 36.

    Patrick S Lasswell

    Anne Laurie,

    If “we” go into Iran, “we” will need a military draft. Such a draft will take the most dangerous potential troublemakers—young, strong, angry, ex-contractors & former factory workers with guns & pickup trucks—off the streets of America.

    It seems like you’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this. Have you ever considered doing so while not under the influence of hallucinogens?

    Iran is a different case than Iraq and has substantially greater vulnerabilities to internal dissent. The geography makes it exceptionally difficult for the central government to administer the very unhappy populace. They also have a thriving smuggling trade going on that I have seen from the Iraq side of the border. Booze goes to Iraq, carpets come back. My conversations with Iranian revolutionaries indicates to me that “we” don’t have to march on Iran to dispense with the Islamic Republic.

    Have you ever been to the American South?

  37. 37.

    Patrick S Lasswell

    Perry Como,

    There isn’t one. Iran would never offer to help the US in finding al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9/11, nor offer to open talks about its nuclear program in order to stop sanctions. That’s just crazy moonbat talk.

    Helping us kill Sunni extremists does not make Shia extremists pacific. How did you say those nuclear negotiations were going?

  38. 38.

    Pb

    They must fight us to explain away their own failures, just like Saddam did. That’s what happens with fascist states, they must stay at war.

    Well, that would explain the “perpetual war” angle…

    Can anybody here come up with a realistic way that the Islamic Republic will declare peace with secular democracies?

    It’s not about them spontaneously declaring peace, it’s about us not unnecessarily declaring war.

  39. 39.

    Patrick S Lasswell

    Pb,

    It’s not about them spontaneously declaring peace, it’s about us not unnecessarily declaring war.

    So you would prefer to respond to their continued direct and proxy acts of war by supporting Iranian rebels instead of sending our own troops into Iran?

  40. 40.

    Andrew

    Why haven’t we threatened Iran with our elite corps of gay married homos, who are the only force in the world capable of defeating our military on the battlefield?

  41. 41.

    Patrick S Lasswell

    Andrew,

    Why haven’t we threatened Iran with our elite corps of gay married homos, who are the only force in the world capable of defeating our military on the battlefield?

    I am a reservist with a gay married brother I am proud of. Can you explain why your comment is not despicable?

    If you want Congress to lift their “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, talk to them. Please stop maligning the troops for a law imposed on them by Congress. You demean yourself by doing so.

  42. 42.

    Perry Como

    How did you say those nuclear negotiations were going?

    An evil nation like Iran would have never tried to broker a meeting with the US to discuss its nuclear program and talk about ending support for Hezbollah. After all, Iran is part of the Axis of Evil. Even if they did try something like that (which they wouldn’t — you know, evil and all), the proper thing to do would be to ignore any such request. After all, Iran is unserious. And evil.

    It’s better that we bomb the living crap out of the country. There’s nothing like a few MOABs or tactical nukes dropped on peoples’ friends and families to get them to see how benevolent we are. I predict it will be a cake walk. We’ll be greeted with candy and flowers. A kind of existential friendship.

    Hell, let’s get Ahmed Chalabi in there to lead the glorious revolution. I hear he’s good buddies with Tehran.

  44. 44.

    Tom S

    If there is one thing that would unite every element in Iranian society, it would be a US attack on Iran.

    Lasswell: What US forces are we going to use to attack Iran? The same troops that are currently being worn out by the “surge?” If anyone can learn anything from fairly recent history concerning Iran, anything short of an overwhelming and immediate victory will make Iraq look like a picnic. WE DO NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ATTACK IRAN IN THAT MANNER. I can understand people like you treating the world like a giant game of Risk; I am mystified and horrified that there are elements in the Bush administration that think the same way.

  45. 45.

    Chris Johnson

    This dream is scaring me. Somebody wake me up please?

    WHY are people even talking about this? WHY isn’t the bottom line, “Okay, we’re doing many things to deal with the extreme chaos and hostility we’ve enhanced through preemptively attacking Iraq, primarily NOT PREEMPTIVELY ATTACKING IRAN”?

    I’m somehow just not getting this. Why aren’t the people who are NOT batshit crazy stopping the ones who are? Why are we even talking about ‘protests’ in Washington as if Cheney and his gang will see a crowd of hippies and say oh, this makes them sad, we better stop?!

    It’s too big to focus on and way too unreal to understand, but I end up simply hoping for essentially a military coup… I end up hoping that traditional military brass will essentially say ‘not with my army you don’t’.

    Because these guys will be ruining that army, and this country, not to mention the constitution that the military guys swore to protect, and there needs to be military brass capable of saying ‘this is strategically retarded’. I just wonder what the hell they need to be convinced to not take orders from the insane? Hurting people isn’t a reason for them, it’s their job, but surely the German ‘retreat forward’ doctrine as a strategic policy is fatally flawed enough to rebel against?

    It’s not like I don’t have enough on my plate without passively watching the total flameout of the country I was born in and live in… when did we turn into the fifth Reich again? I missed that fucking memo.

  46. 46.

    Perry Como

    If there is one thing that would unite every element in Iranian society, it would be a US attack on Iran.

    Agreed. Nothing says lovin’ like your family in a 3000 degree oven.

    Lasswell: What US forces are we going to use to attack Iran? The same troops that are currently being worn out by the “surge?” If anyone can learn anything from fairly recent history concerning Iran, anything short of an overwhelming and immediate victory will make Iraq look like a picnic. WE DO NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ATTACK IRAN IN THAT MANNER. I can understand people like you treating the world like a giant game of Risk; I am mystified and horrified that there are elements in the Bush administration that think the same way.

    Now you have to go all moonbatty. Everyone knows that as soon as we unleash our Freedom Bombs that the basij will embrace a new Jeffersonian Democracy and lead a wave of democratic transformation throughout the Middle East. Think of Operation Iranian Freedom as Operation Iraqi Freedom 2.0. Everyone knows the first release is always buggy.

  47. 47.

    Chris Johnson

    So you would prefer to respond to their continued direct and proxy acts of war by supporting Iranian rebels instead of sending our own troops into Iran?

    Fuck their acts of war. Other countries have lived with acts of terrorism even within their own borders (the UK anyone) without deciding to turn the offending parties into glass. I mean it, fuck their acts of war. Live with it. The ocean shrank and maybe you and I joined the rest of the world at last and have to care what (for instance) OUR GOVERNMENT does overseas.

    I think it’s hilarious and dreadful that we’re talking about their acts of war with one fork of the tongue and INVADING THEIR COUNTRY with the other- or wasn’t it just bomb them flat with no sort of followup?

    If any country in the world, ANY country, was in any position to do that to US, omg! axis of eeeevil! How can you get more evil than coming into OUR country and killing our doodz?

    Gee, good question.

    We’d better get our lunatics out of the way right now before they set a high-water mark for evil that makes WWII look polite. By any necessary means.

  48. 48.

    demimondian

    Can you explain why your comment is not despicable?

    Because it’s funny, it’s sarcasm, and you are on a blog famous for its spoof.

    And, whether it’s funny or not, its purpose is to evoke exactly the kind of self-righteous pearl-clutching that you’re exhibiting.

    Do you think that anyone outside your circle of fellow “moderates” thinks you really mean what you’re saying? Just two posts earlier, you offered an intellectually dishonest false choice. You asserted that another poster was under the influence of hallucinogens. We know you and your ilk, and you’re good for just one thing — being made fun of.

    Congratulations! You’ve earned tonight’s _BJuice Pimple to be Popped_ Prize. Enjoy it.

  50. 50.

    The Other Steve

    Hey, they’re saying on CNN that Larry Craig might have read John Cole’s post. Or at least, now he’s saying he’s not going to resign and instead is giving a big FUCK YOU to the Republican Party.

    Kind of funny. We’ll see I guess.

  51. 51.

    Perry Como

    Hey, they’re saying on CNN that Larry Craig might have read John Cole’s post. Or at least, now he’s saying he’s not going to resign and instead is giving a big FUCK YOU to the Republican Party.

    I don’t see how this relates to us bombing the crap out of Iranians to spread freedom and democracy.

  52. 52.

    Pb

    Patrick S Lasswell,

    So you would prefer to respond to their continued direct and proxy acts of war by supporting Iranian rebels instead of sending our own troops into Iran?

    Mu. When did you stop liking pie?

  53. 53.

    Tim F.

    My conversations with Iranian revolutionaries indicates to me that “we” don’t have to march on Iran to dispense with the Islamic Republic.

    Congratulations Patrick, you just demonstrated exactly the same rosy scenario tunnel vision that led your neocon friends into glorious victory in Iraq. Dissidents whispering in your ear? Christ, I never expected to meet someone dumb enough to fall for the same con twice. Only the most ludicrously happy comic-book outcome could possibly follow from bombing Iran unprovoked so why prepare for them, right?

    If this Iran warmongering doesn’t work out make sure to email me about this choice bridge in Alaska. It’s a buyer’s market my friend.

  54. 54.

    Perry Como

    We need to strike now while the iron is hot:

    Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president and longtime Machiavellian figure in Iranian politics, was picked Tuesday to head a powerful clerical body – another defeat for the current president’s hard-line faction.

    Bombing the crap out of Iran would be the final nail in the coffin for the hard liners.

  56. 56.

    Chris Johnson

    Hey, if you don’t want a wildcat for a girlfriend, you’re not really very manly are you? ;)

  57. 57.

    myiq2xu

    If we’re gonna invade another country, can we pick one where the people speak English and don’t hate us so much? Maybe one with nice weather?

  59. 59.

    TenguPhule

    I just wonder what the hell they need to be convinced to not take orders from the insane?

    They tend to figure this out five minutes after they’re dead.

  60. 60.

    TenguPhule

    Iran is a different case than Iraq and has substantially greater vulnerabilities to internal dissent.

    Only if you’re a fucking moron. Unfortunately, that’s who’s in charge of the government today. Iran’s ‘internal dissent’ will last all of five seconds once the bombs start dropping. Unlike turn-coat Republicans who’d sell out their own country to the enemy at the drop of a dime, the Iranians are not stupid and have seen what ‘freedom bombing’ did to their neighbors.

    The geography makes it exceptionally difficult for the central government to administer the very unhappy populace.

    Coincidently, this is also great country for guerilla warfare.

    They also have a thriving smuggling trade going on that I have seen from the Iraq side of the border.

    All the better to retaliate against a US attack with.

    My conversations with Iranian revolutionaries indicates to me that “we” don’t have to march on Iran to dispense with the Islamic Republic.

    As Tim says, we have many bridges to sell you, buddy. Cheap.

    How did you say those nuclear negotiations were going?

    I’d say pretty damn good, since Iran isn’t going for nuclear weapons yet despite Bush trying to push them into going for them.

  61. 61.

    Davebo

    If we’re gonna invade another country, can we pick one where the people speak English and don’t hate us so much? Maybe one with nice weather?

    Well lets see. Cayman Islands? Nah, to expensive, they drive on the wrong side of the road, and invading them would end Halliburton’s bidness in Iran.

    Jamaica? Too dark. Period. (but the smoke is nice)

    Madagascar? Nah, a recent movie makes them seem too personable.

    Kuwaitt? Been there, done that.

    Taiwan? PURE GENIUS!!! I mean seriously, how long can we milk this islamomuslim threat? But with Taiwan we have an honest threat from folks we’re trying to piss off already!

    Fuck you China, we’re annexing Taiwan. Don’t like it? Dump our T Bills and take your losses.

    I like it! But then, I’m not holding any T Bills.

  62. 62.

    Perry Como

    Fuck you China, we’re annexing Taiwan. Don’t like it? Dump our T Bills and take your losses.

    That would be an act of war, moonbat.

  63. 63.

    Pb

    Bush’s senior advisers on Iraq have recommended he stand by his current war strategy

    Sure beats being fired?

  64. 64.

    Andrew

    That would be an act of war, moonbat.

    What if we did it and brought our own flowers? And chocolates. And a rubber. Then it would be an act of sexy time.

  65. 65.

    myiq2xu

    Bush’s senior advisers on Iraq have recommended he stand by his current war strategy

    General, you don’t have a war plan! All you have is a kind of horrible spasm! – Robert S. McNamara

  66. 66.

    Perry Como

    What if we did it and brought our own flowers? And chocolates. And a rubber. Then it would be an act of sexy time.

    Leave it to a leftard to miss such a simple concept. If we annex Taiwan that’s okay. We’re the USA. We can do whatever we want since we are a nation of God.

    China dumping our TBills would be an act of war.

  68. 68.

    myiq2xu

    Wouldn’t the best attack on Iran be to fix the mess we made of Iraq?

    But not nearly as much fun. The Little Emperor watched 300 and got all excited watching all those oily, half-nekkid mens wrasslin’ and doin’ all that manly stuff with their big muscles and he decidered that he wanted to reenact Thermopylae so he figgered he’d start a fight with Persia.

    He’s hoping it will be as much fun as playing “naked gladiator” was when he was in college and all the boys in his fraternity used to gang-bang a cheerleader every Saturday night.

  69. 69.

    Punchy

    Coincidently, this is also great country for guerilla warfare

    There are forests in Africa that are likewise hotbeds for gorilla warfare.

  70. 70.

    Dennis-SGMM

    So, by attacking Iraq, a country country that didn’t attack us we’ve made it necessary to attack Iran, another country that didn’t attack us. This will, in turn, make it necessary to attack a third nation (Syria) that didn’t attack us for supporting Iran.

    Of course none of those on the receiving end of our Diplomacy Through Ordnance will turn into die-hard jihadis nor will any of them take note that we seem to be in the habit of attacking majority-muslim countries. They will accept the attacks because they’ll know that we’re killing them and their families and destroying their countries for their own good. In short: they’ll greet us as liberators.

  71. 71.

    yet another jeff

    all the boys in his fraternity used to gang-bang a cheerleader every Saturday night.

    Er…wasn’t he a cheerleader?

  72. 72.

    Education Guy

    I think war with Iran is a bad idea. That said, can you honestly tell me that they aren’t already at war with us?

  74. 74.

    Pb

    can you honestly tell me that they aren’t already at war with us?

    Yes. (This Has Been Another Edition Of Simple Answers To Simple Questions)

    War – a prolonged state of violent, large-scale conflict involving two or more groups of people.

    Interestingly, I don’t think it’d be possible to honestly argue that a) the US is (somehow) already at war with Iran and b) Iraq isn’t currently mired in [one or more] civil war[s]…

  75. 75.

    Dennis-SGMM

    That said, can you honestly tell me that they aren’t already at war with us?

    I can say it. Have Iranian forces attacked American forces? Have they shot down any of our aircraft or sunk any of our ships? Have they invaded an allied nation?

    That we “know” that Iranian proxies are at work in Iraq and we “know” that the Iranians are supplying arms to Iraqi insurgents strikes me as way too much like we “knew” tht Saddam had WMD’s.

    Here’s something to consider: US Supplied Arms are Being Used by Kurdish PKK Terrorists.

    The money graf:
    “By checking serial numbers, US officials have confirmed that some of the weapons recovered by Turkish police after violent crimes had originally been bought by the Pentagon for distribution in Iraq, the New York Times reported.”

    Considering the obvious fluidity of arms supply in the Middle East right now I don’t think that finding Iranian arms in Iraqi hands is exactly a cassus belli.

  76. 76.

    Punchy

    I don’t see how this relates to us bombing the crap out of Iranians to spread freedom and democracy.

    We’re not bombing the Iranians. Only their military, their infrastructure, their powerplants, and their missle silos. And their airports. Bus depots, prolly.

    But NOWHERE in that list does one see “Iranians”. No one dies, we get a shiny new democracy in Iran, and only 3 soliders die, from suffication on rose petals and tossed hard candy.

  77. 77.

    jenniebee

    That said, can you honestly tell me that they aren’t already at war with us?

    ZOMG, Operation Canned Goods rides again!

    Srsly, the WH has tried something awful to goad them into making a casus belli, and its done its best to control the flow of information to give Americans exactly the impression you seem to have. But our military commanders on the ground in Iraq have said on the record that there’s no proof that the Iranian government is supplying arms to Iraqi insurgents (and that’s even with a situation so fluid that yesterday’s Sunni Insurgency is today’s Anbar Province). And the Iranians are actually an important ally of the Iraqi government, which we’re spending American lives to prop up.

    I’ve heard of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” but “the friend of my friend is my enemy?” That’s just… wow.

  78. 78.

    Wilfred

    As if on cue:

    BAGHDAD (AP) — Three separate attacks in Baghdad killed four U.S. soldiers and at least 11 civilians, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Wednesday.

    Three of the soldiers died after their Humvee was hit with an explosively formed penetrator, a type of bomb that the U.S. alleges Iran has been supplying to Shiite militias. Iran denies the accusation.

    Sloooooowly I turned, step by step…

  79. 79.

    Wilfred

    And btw, what the fuck is an ‘explosively formed penetrator’? Is it a penetrator that was formed explosively, or a penetrator in the form of an explosive? The AP editors should see the LOLLY video, really.

  82. 82.

    jenniebee

    If only the WH put as much effort into tracking the movements of the 200K assault rifles that have been “misplaced” in Iraq as they do in tracking the origins of EFPs (an IED by any other name…)

    Wiki shows a citation from Salon in January of this year citing the inclusion of EFPs in IEDs, and reporting then that they had been appearing for some time. But it’s just now that the lingo seems to have shifted away from the IED, which, being Improvised, is a difficult sell for having been supplied by a govmint, and to EFP which doesn’t sound as “handmade”. What fortunate timing for the folks who want to bomb Iran!

  83. 83.

    Punchy

    ‘explosively formed penetrator’

    /Looking down….

    I think we’ve just invented a new euphanism for my…uh…nevermind.

  84. 84.

    The Other Steve

    And btw, what the fuck is an ‘explosively formed penetrator’? Is it a penetrator that was formed explosively, or a penetrator in the form of an explosive? The AP editors should see the LOLLY video, really.

    It’s a shaped charge… an explosion that is directed in a particular direction… i.e. usually at whatever is on the road at the time it is to go off.

    Also sometimes referred to as artillery rounds with an improvised detonator. :-)

  85. 85.

    Rick Taylor

    I don’t think we’re really invading Iran. It’s not quite the same as Iraq, at least not yet; before the Iraq war there was absolutely no doubt we were going to invade after all. Even with all the saber rattling, they’re still talking mostly about sanctions. I think this really is just a ploy to pressure both Iran and Europe. I sure hope that’s so, as war with Iran would be a much larger catastrophe than the war with Iraq has been.

    –Rick Taylor

  86. 86.

    mrmobi

    Take it easy folks. At least if we do attack Iran we’ll use our most powerful weapons, nukes. If not on purpose, maybe by accident.

    There’s an article in USA Today about some cruise missles which were about to be decommissioned. You’ll never guess where the Air Force chose to store them… on the wings of B52s! I’m not making this shit up. From USA Today:

    The paper, a fellow Gannett publication, cites anonymous sources who say that five Advanced Cruise Missiles were mistakenly loaded on a B-52 bomber that flew from a base in North Dakota to one in Louisiana. The missiles, set to be decommissioned, should have been removed from the plane. Instead, they were mounted on the bomber’s wings.

    “Air Force standards are very exacting when it comes to munitions handling,” Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Ed Thomas says. “The weapons were always in our custody and there was never a danger to the American public.”

    The crews that handled the warheads at Minot Air Force Base have been “decertified,” according to the Times.

    Don’t worry, the Air Force has very exacting standards! So take it easy, you surrender-monkeys, we might use nukes on the Iranians. No point in doing things halfway. Think of all the epidemiological data we’ll gather on radiation sickness from wind-borne fallout! Think how much better things will be in the Middle East, assuming there’s one left.
    We are beginning to feel the full effects of Mad Cowboy disease. It should be fully developed by the time Hillary Clinton takes office.

  87. 87.

    Xenos

    An EFP is a military-spec roadside bomb, not some kludge put together out of an old artillery shell. It can turn an armored vehicle into a very hot hot oven, and is nasty business.

    Still, a lot of countries make them, and not just the Iranians. The fact of EFPs going off, even if they were manufactured in Iran, is not probative of anything in regard to whether Iran is attacking America through Iraqi proxies.

    If the Iranian government were shipping EFPs into Iraq, don’t you think they could be bothered to supply Chinese or Turkish-made EFPs purchased on the black market?

  88. 88.

    Zifnab

    So take it easy, you surrender-monkeys, we might use nukes on the Iranians. No point in doing things halfway. Think of all the epidemiological data we’ll gather on radiation sickness from wind-borne fallout! Think how much better things will be in the Middle East, assuming there’s one left.
    We are beginning to feel the full effects of Mad Cowboy disease. It should be fully developed by the time Hillary Clinton takes office.

    Oh, you’re forgetting the possibility that we could just us nukes and then lie about it. They weren’t “nukular weapons” after all, just high yield munitions that produced radioactive fall-out. Nukular weapons are defined as weapons that we define as nukular, after all. And who are the American people to suggest how the Generals run their war anyway? If General Petreaus came to me and said “I need the biggest bombs you’ve got, that don’t technically constitute nuclear… ahem, nukular weapons”, then as President, I would be obligated to supply him with the tools he needed to get the job done. Why do you hate America?

  89. 89.

    Fe E

    And btw, what the fuck is an ‘explosively formed penetrator’? Is it a penetrator that was formed explosively, or a penetrator in the form of an explosive? The AP editors should see the LOLLY video, really.

    It is in fact a penetrator formed by an explosion. While similar to a shaped charge the metal liner of the explosive is basically a flat plate that is blown into a slug traveling at mach 3 or 4. This is actually MUCH slower than the jet of a typical shaped charge, but the mass of the slug is better at defeating modern composite armor–which is the kind the US uses.

  90. 90.

    Punchy

    At least if we do attack Iran we’ll use our most powerful weapons, nukes. If not on purpose, maybe by accident.

    I remember an article about 6 mo.s back that mentioned how the neo-clowns envisioned secretly using tactical nukes agains EyeRan, then blaming the radiation on the nuclear plants they would claim to have blown up. Apparently they did not realize that the radiation patterns would be completely different, and the claim would be laughed out of the Hague. Perhaps this is why we will not bomb Iran.

  91. 91.

    demimondian

    Fe E wins the prize. The slug from an EFP is capable of penetrating into the interior of a modern infantry vehicle, and is hence more lethal than a basic IED.

    Whether an EFP is an IED or not is a somewhat difficult question. I’ve never made either one, so I don’t know how hard it is to form and place the metal precursor in order to make it likely that it’s actually driven forward as desired. It appears that the ones being used against American forces are originally of NATO manufacture — Turkey, perhaps? — which would tend to indicate that they were bought on the black market, not improvised from locally available materials.

  92. 92.

    Wilfred

    I know what an EFP is – my problem was with the sloppy adverbial phrasing, actually. Pedantry deserves pedantry, I suppose, so here goes. Formed penetrator is adjective + substantive. Modifying it with the adverb ‘explosively’ means the penetrator was formed in an explosive way, which is as ridiculous as it sounds. It’s bad English, used in a sensational manner to pitch another war.

  93. 93.

    caustics

    An EFP is a military-spec roadside bomb, not some kludge put together out of an old artillery shell.

    They really aren’t that high-tech, though the Milspeak terminology makes them sound sexy. A length of sturdy pipe, some hammered copper and some(widely available) high explosive are pretty much all one would need.

    But of course, anything more complicated than a roman candle simply had to have come from Iran.

    And maybe it did. But short of forensic details like finding such a device intact and stamped “Proudly Made In Iran – Death to the infidels!” I don’t see the point in speculating. It’s a free market of things that go boom, and the demand will be supplied.

  94. 94.

    Hyperion

    because dear leader is in australia….

    Political Science
    by Randy Newman

    No one likes us-I don’t know why
    We may not be perfect, but heaven knows we try
    But all around, even our old friends put us down
    Let’s drop the big one and see what happens

    We give them money-but are they grateful?
    No, they’re spiteful and they’re hateful
    They don’t respect us-so let’s surprise them
    We’ll drop the big one and pulverize them

    Asia’s crowded and Europe’s too old
    Africa is far too hot
    And Canada’s too cold
    And South America stole our name
    Let’s drop the big one
    There’ll be no one left to blame us

    We’ll save Australia
    Don’t wanna hurt no kangaroo
    We’ll build an All American amusement park there
    They got surfin’, too

    Boom goes London and boom Paree
    More room for you and more room for me
    And every city the whole world round
    Will just be another American town
    Oh, how peaceful it will be
    We’ll set everybody free
    You’ll wear a Japanese kimono
    And there’ll be Italian shoes for me

    They all hate us anyhow
    So let’s drop the big one now
    Let’s drop the big one now

  95. 95.

    Pb

    US Supplied Arms are Being Used by Kurdish PKK Terrorists

    Time for Turkey to declare war on the US!

    It appears that the ones being used against American forces are originally of NATO manufacture—Turkey, perhaps?

    Time for the US to declare war on Turkey!

    If the Iranian government were shipping EFPs into Iraq, don’t you think they could be bothered to supply Chinese or Turkish-made EFPs purchased on the black market?

    For that matter, if the US government wanted to declare war on Iran, don’t you think they could get some Iranian weaponry into the right hands in Iraq / fund some Iranian resistance group to do it / etc., etc.

    Considering the obvious fluidity of arms supply in the Middle East right now I don’t think that finding Iranian arms in Iraqi hands is exactly a cassus belli.

    Yeah, but that only applies to sane people–clearly not applicable here.

  96. 96.

    r4d20

    They really aren’t that high-tech, though the Milspeak terminology makes them sound sexy. A length of sturdy pipe, some hammered copper and some(widely available) high explosive are pretty much all one would need.

    If you wanted a crude one. The effectiveness of EFPs is all about the shape of the copper disk – the more inexact the shaping, the less effective the resulting “slug” that it becomes after detonation.

    I dont remember anyone saying that ALL EFPs must come from Iran – just that SOME appear so well machined that they “probably” do.

    I think an attack on Iran will be stupid but I dont think its wise to let the debate be “Is Iran supplying weapons to Iraqi clients” because they probably are and we are going to lose that debate. Nations NORMALLY interfere in the civil wars of their neighbors because they tend to be affected by the results of those wars. If Iran is “interfering” in Iraq it would be engaging in perfectly normal behavior from a historical perspective. They may not be behind any given thing – like the touted EFPs – but they are almost certainly involved in acts that could be claimed as legitimate “casus belli” by those who would find it useful to do so.

    Sooner or later some harder evidence is very likely going to surface and if you’ve staked our opposition to an attack on Iranian innocence we are going to have problems.

    If, on the other hand, you focus on the “attacking Iran would cost us more than we gain” then even if evidence does surface it wont necessarily undermine the idea that attacking them wouldn’t be prudent.

  97. 97.

    myiq2xu

    Formed penetrator is adjective + substantive. Modifying it with the adverb ‘explosively’ means the penetrator was formed in an explosive way, which is as ridiculous as it sounds.

    Ridiculous, but true.

    The explosion forms the metal plate into a projectile and also sends it on its merry way to penetrate armor and kill our troops.

    We’re talking WWII technology, all you need is a basic machine shop and some HE, plenty of which was lost because we were too busy getting photo ops of Saddam’s statutes being trashed to guard ammo dumps.

    BTW – until recently our primary enemies were Sunnis, who were unlikely to be getting support from Shia Iran. Al Queda is exclusively Sunni, the state religion of our pals the Saudis.

    Where did 15 of the 9/11 hijackers come from?

  98. 98.

    demimondian

    Modifying it with the adverb ‘explosively’ means the penetrator was formed in an explosive way, which is as ridiculous as it sounds.

    Except that’s exactly what happens — the penetrating slug is formed *by the explosion itself*

  99. 99.

    demimondian

    I dont remember anyone saying that ALL EFPs must come from Iran – just that SOME appear so well machined that they “probably” do.

    That’s a beautiful example of a myth persisting — it turned out that those “well machined” EFPs…were Turkish.

    Oops.

  100. 100.

    myiq2xu

    They may not be behind any given thing – like the touted EFPs – but they are almost certainly involved in acts that could be claimed as legitimate “casus belli” by those who would find it useful to do so.

    Would a “casus belli” be supplying arms and satellite data to Iraq when it invaded Iran? How about replacing their democratically elected leader with our pal the Shah?

    Just because some Iranians are involved in supplying arms or training or anything else to one group of our various enemies in Iraq, doesn’t mean that the nation of Iran is involved, otherwise we should have attacked Saudi Arabia long ago.

  101. 101.

    Andrew

    We’re talking WWII technology, all you need is a basic machine shop and some HE, plenty of which was lost because we were too busy getting photo ops of Saddam’s statutes being trashed to guard ammo dumps.

    Remember folks, we invaded Iraq because they had the advanced technology for building nuclear and chemical weapons and flying drones, but suddenly they’re incapable of some basic machining so it MUST COME FROM IRAN. Anyone who says otherwise is a commie-nazi.

  102. 102.

    Rusty Shackleford

    r4d20 Says:

    …Sooner or later some harder evidence is very likely going to surface be fabricated and if you’ve staked our opposition to an attack on Iranian innocence we are going to have problems…

    September 5th, 2007 at 10:51 am

    Fixed r4d20’s post.

  103. 103.

    Education Guy

    If yes, Iran-contra would be a hangable offense.

    Sure, if we have always been at war with Eurasia. To be fair, I seem to recall that at one point it was Eastasia. I could be wrong though.

  104. 104.

    caustics

    I dont remember anyone saying that ALL EFPs must come from Iran – just that SOME appear so well machined that they “probably” do.

    Can you link sources for the “well machined” and “probably” things? I’ve just heard rumors, and I admit I’m not well informed in this matter.

    If you wanted a crude one. The effectiveness of EFPs is all about the shape of the copper disk – the more inexact the shaping, the less effective the resulting “slug” that it becomes after detonation.

    Well sure. The concept dates back to WWII, before real-time computer modeling and such. And crude or not, I wouldn’t want one of these things blasting molten copper at me from under the floorboards.

  105. 105.

    Wilfred

    Andrew nailed it:

    Remember folks, we invaded Iraq because they had the advanced technology for building nuclear and chemical weapons and flying drones, but suddenly they’re incapable of some basic machining so it MUST COME FROM IRAN.

    That’s the central contradiction of the current Bushco crap.

  106. 106.

    myiq2xu

    An EFP is a military-spec roadside bomb, not some kludge put together out of an old artillery shell.

    Early in the insurgency, those Iraqis who didn’t appreciate all we were doing for them were using remote-detonated artillery shells hidden in parked cars or buried alongside the road. Fairly crude but effective against unmounted infantry and unarmored vehicles. As time went on and we started upgrading the armor in our vehicles the Iraqi Ingrates upgraded their weapons and tactics as well.

    I’ve read how often EFP attacks take place within sight of police and Iraqi Army checkpoints, sometimes between them.

  107. 107.

    Zifnab

    Remember folks, we invaded Iraq because they had the advanced technology for building nuclear and chemical weapons and flying drones, but suddenly they’re incapable of some basic machining so it MUST COME FROM JORDAN SYRIA SAUDI ARABIA LEBANON TURKEY GREECE EGYPT IRAN.

    That’s why we need to bomb and invade SYRIA SAUDI ARABIA LEBANON TURKEY GREECE EGYPT IRAN.

  108. 108.

    TenguPhule

    If, on the other hand, you focus on the “attacking Iran would cost us more than we gain” then even if evidence does surface it wont necessarily undermine the idea that attacking them wouldn’t be prudent.

    If you intend to cede the concept that attacking Iran would be legitimate if the costs were outweighed by the hypothetical ‘benefits’ involved, you might as well give up there.

  109. 109.

    r4d20

    Can you link sources for the “well machined” and “probably” things? I’ve just heard rumors, and I admit I’m not well informed in this matter.

    This is what the military has CLAIMED.

    I was not seconding it, and I think that the “probably” part comes mostly from their gut instinct and not hard facts. I was just pointing out that the argument is not “EFP = Iran” but “sufficiently sophisticated EFPs = Iran”. Perhaps I was being pedantic.

    Like I said – I don’t support the notion of attacking Iran but the simple fact is that Nations have historically interfered in similar circumstances. Whether its a civil war in a neighboring country or an invasion of a neighbor by a rival, nations interfere because it is usually in their apparent self-interest to do so. Nations have been doing this since the first kings ruled over cities in Mesopotamia and the ‘safe bet’ is that Iran is doing it too even if there is no hard evidence (which, naturally, they would try and conceal as best they can).

    There is a difference between a ‘safe bet’ and ‘evidence sufficient to goto war’ but, as someone pointed out, they might be able to fabricate evidence.

    The fight should be “Attacking Iran would be stupid” NOT “Iran is innocent”. The first is solidly grounded in empirical reality that cannot be undermined by real or fabricated evidence – the second might be false and, even if true, might not matter if someone does a good enough frame-up job.

  110. 110.

    r4d20

    Would a “casus belli” be supplying arms and satellite data to Iraq when it invaded Iran? How about replacing their democratically elected leader with our pal the Shah?

    YES IT WOULD. WE PLAY THIS GAME TOO. EVERYONE PLAYS IT!

    I dont see how the fact that we once fucked with Iran makes it LESS likely that Iran is fucking with us now. Seems to me that they would like a chance to kick us in the shins – at least I would if I were them.

    If you intend to cede the concept that attacking Iran would be legitimate if the costs were outweighed by the hypothetical ‘benefits’ involved, you might as well give up there.

    So what, its “a moral objection or nothing at all”?

    Even basic “self-defense” can ultimately based on a COST-BENEFIT analysis – I’ll fight back against someone trying to injure/kill me because the cost of not doing so is extreme but I’ll give my wallet to a gunman because,even though I’m morally justified in fighting, its cheaper and less likely to end in my death.

    Honest cost-benefit analysis rarely favor war – and its a real shame if progressives have decided that even considering such things counts as ‘warmongering’. The truth is that, if everyone actually considered the costs and benefits of invading countries, there would be a lot less invasions.

  111. 111.

    Andrew

    Also, if supplying weapons to Iraqis which are then used to attack Americans is cause for war, we may have to invade General Petraeus.

  112. 112.

    caustics

    I was just pointing out that the argument is not “EFP = Iran” but “sufficiently sophisticated EFPs = Iran”. Perhaps I was being pedantic.

    Perhaps. Being a consistent concern troll is a tough hack. My only advice to you is that italics should be used sparingly.

  113. 113.

    r4d20

    Being a consistent concern troll is a tough hack

    A single thread hardly makes one a “concern troll”. This isnt a habit.

    My only advice to you is that italics should be used sparingly

    I WILL TAKE YOUR ADVICE IN THE FUTURE!!!!!!!!!

  115. 115.

    caustics

    A single thread hardly makes one a “concern troll”. This isnt a habit.

    [blinks]

    Sorry I didn’t recognize you right away r4d20, you crazy spoof you. Hey, take this advice:

    Go fuck yourself.

  117. 117.

    DavidTC

    I don’t quite see why Iran shouldn’t be allowed to interfere in Iraq’s civil war, pretending they were. After all, we appear to be interfering in it. And, logically, if Shia militias killing US troops with Iranian support means we should invade Iran, than Shia militias with Iraqi government support means we should re-invade Iraq.

    But, seriously, perhaps a better argument isn’t what right we have to invade Iran, but are we, in any manner whatsoever, able to invade them? The answer is quite obviously ‘no’. Nothing else really fucking matters.

    It’s like having a debate about whether or not you can leave food in a car to protect it from bears, or if you should drive your car up a tree to keep the food safe. It is not, in any way, any sort of possible thing, it doesn’t matter if it’s a ‘good idea’ or a ‘bad idea’. You simply cannot park your car in a tree. No matter how fast you drive it at the tree, the result will not be ‘car parked in tree’.

    It is physically impossible for us to even vaguely succeed in a war with Iran. And I don’t mean ‘succeed’ as in ‘come out smelling like roses’, I mean ‘succeed’ like the Iraq war! We couldn’t come be that ‘successful’, and we’d pretty much instantly lose Iraq, too.

    Oh, and incidentally…international law, right now, keeps Iran from invading Iraq. If we invade Iran and use Iraq as a staging ground, they now have a legally justified reason to invade and conquer Iraq. And, hell, Afganistan too.

    Does anyone sometimes wonder if Iran is setting US policy?

  118. 118.

    Pb

    DavidTC,

    But, seriously, perhaps a better argument isn’t what right we have to invade Iran, but are we, in any manner whatsoever, able to invade them?

    My understanding is that it’d be more of a bombing campaign than an invasion. Then again, there’s always The Onion’s prediction to think about…

  119. 119.

    DavidTC

    My understanding is that it’d be more of a bombing campaign than an invasion.

    A bombing campaign? To do…what, exactly?

    Your response is rather akin to me saying we don’t have the manpower to catch a bear, and you say ‘No, no, we’re not going to catch him, we’re going to run up and kick him in the balls a few times.’

    I realize it’s not your plan, but, honestly, this is insane.

  120. 120.

    TenguPhule

    So what, its “a moral objection or nothing at all”?

    The instant you forfeit the concept that attacking Iran is stupid and wrong, you lose. The American public is stupid about things like this. Once you let the idea that attacking Iran preemptively is okay…well, we all saw what happened to Iraq, yes?

  121. 121.

    TenguPhule

    it doesn’t matter if it’s a ‘good idea’ or a ‘bad idea’. You simply cannot park your car in a tree. No matter how fast you drive it at the tree, the result will not be ‘car parked in tree’.

    And Bush will simply retort “You’re not driving fast enough into that tree, commieliberal!”

    This administration is composed of nothing but stupid ideas that don’t work, what makes you think this would stop them now?

  122. 122.

    r4d20

    My understanding is that it’d be more of a bombing campaign than an invasion

    Well, of course, but do you think the Iranians are going to sit back and just take it?

    Its gonna be tit-for-tat and the fact is that we have 150,000+ soldiers right next door to Iran, at the end of long supply lines, and surrounded by hostile natives, many of whom are more loyal to Iran than to us.

    There is very little chance that a “bombing campaign” is going to be the totality of the thing.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. […] As an aside. I was wondering over my speculation I think an attack on Iran will be stupid but I dont think its wise to let the debate be “Is Iran supplying weapons to Iraqi clients” because they probably are and we are going to lose that debate. Nations NORMALLY interfere in the civil wars of their neighbors because they tend to be affected by the results of those wars. If Iran is “interfering” in Iraq it would be engaging in perfectly normal behavior from a historical perspective. They may not be behind any given thing – like the touted EFPs – but they are almost certainly involved in acts that could be claimed as legitimate “casus belli” by those who would find it useful to do so. […]