• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

“woke” is the new caravan.

Following reporting rules is only for the little people, apparently.

In after Baud. Damn.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

We’ll be taking my thoughts and prayers to the ballot box.

The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

This has so much WTF written all over it that it is hard to comprehend.

Chutkan laughs. Lauro sits back down.

Ah, the different things are different argument.

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

Bark louder, little dog.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

It’s a doggy dog world.

How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?

He really is that stupid.

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

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

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Fire up the war machine

Fire up the war machine

by DougJ|  February 23, 20109:57 am| 150 Comments

This post is in: General Stupidity, Good News For Conservatives, We Are All Mayans Now

FacebookTweetEmail

The neocons are itching for battle. There are dueling Kaplan pieces recommending the United States go to war with Iran (Applebaum and Cohen). Cohen’s advice is particularly idiotic:

It may be time for Barack Obama, ever the soul of moderation, to borrow a tactic from Richard Nixon and fight crazy with crazy. The way things are going, it would be crazy not to.

It will be interesting to see how this goes. I guess the next stops on the war tour are The New Republic, Slate, and then the Sunday morning shows. I wonder if Sullivan will call anyone fifth columnists this time.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Early Morning Open Thread: Winner of This Week’s Intarwebz…
Next Post: Practically Begging You To Call Him »

Reader Interactions

150Comments

  1. 1.

    El Cid

    February 23, 2010 at 10:02 am

    Surely there could be no adverse consequences to attacking Iran. We will be greeted as liberators detonators.

  2. 2.

    Rathskeller

    February 23, 2010 at 10:03 am

    When they are going to stop publishing that goddamn moron?

  3. 3.

    MikeJ

    February 23, 2010 at 10:04 am

    Perhaps Cohen wants us to shoot down more Iranian airliners.

  4. 4.

    Brian J

    February 23, 2010 at 10:07 am

    I pay much more attention to domestic policy than foreign policy, so perhaps I missed something in the last couple of weeks, but exactly what has changed that would make this a desirable course of action? Leaving aside whether a bombing would be a wise move regardless of the underlying factors, I just can’t think of anything. (And wouldn’t it be a bombing? Are they really going to recommend an occupation?) I just don’t get it. The way some people recommend military action as if it’s some sort of radio call in prank is just astonishing. I have no idea what military service is like, but I like to think I have enough sense and respect not to think like these guys.

  5. 5.

    MNPundit

    February 23, 2010 at 10:08 am

    Seriously why bring up Sullivan? Are you even bothering these days? Maybe you should read some Niebhur.

  6. 6.

    Steeplejack

    February 23, 2010 at 10:08 am

    __

    Cohen:

    It may be time for Barack Obama, ever the soul of moderation, to borrow a tactic from Richard Nixon and fight crazy with crazy. The way things are going, it would be crazy not to.

    This is über idiotic. It’s the kind of rhetorical flourish that looks good on paper–at least to the author–but has no practical meaning at all. What would be the useful “crazy” thing to do with regard to Iran? Cohen leaves out that part.

    And the foreign policy of the United States is like an ocean liner, not your dad’s speedboat on Lake Kamanawannalaiea. You can’t just yell, “Hey, guys, watch this!,” spin the wheel and hit the gas. Or at least you shouldn’t. It hasn’t turned out too well for us the last few times.

  7. 7.

    Ugh

    February 23, 2010 at 10:08 am

    Jesus Fucking Christ.

  8. 8.

    Napoloen

    February 23, 2010 at 10:10 am

    The idea of attacking Iran is completely insane. It is 5 times more insane then the insane idea of attacking Iraq, which itself was an insane idea on its face.

    The WaPo can’t die a quick enough death.

  9. 9.

    jenniebee

    February 23, 2010 at 10:12 am

    Mutually Assured Destruction worked fine against the Soviet Union, sure, but the Iranians have First Strike capa… well, they have so much land mass… huh.

    WTH. Cohen looks at Iran and he doesn’t see a people who looks at itself as the last Shiite bastion with a duty to survive and propagate their religion (I don’t know if they are, but why not?) The point is, he looks at Iran and sees a Nuclear Martyr state with no other objective – none – than to eliminate Israel.

    Sure, they haven’t really done anything directly to Israel in how long? and their pursuit of nukes could, just could, be explained by our policy of invading sandy countries anytime we feel like it, but that must be a ruse.

    What a racist shit.

  10. 10.

    Chris Johnson

    February 23, 2010 at 10:13 am

    What?? o_O

  11. 11.

    rachel

    February 23, 2010 at 10:13 am

    @Brian J: Nothing has changed, and that’s what bugs them. it’s going to continue to bug them until Iran gets bombed back to the stone age. Personally, I hope they go to their graves with their war itch unscratched.

  12. 12.

    ed

    February 23, 2010 at 10:13 am

    We’ve heard this eight years before.

    Ladies and gentlemen, Tom Friedman, 16 February 2002:

    No, the axis-of-evil idea isn’t thought through – but that’s what I like about it. It says to these countries and their terrorist pals: “We know what you’re cooking in your bathtubs. We don’t know exactly what we’re going to do about it, but if you think we are going to just sit back and take another dose from you, you’re wrong. Meet Don Rumsfeld – he’s even crazier than you are.“

    Really. He wrote that and he’s still a columnist for the most respected newspaper in the U.S. and possibly the world. No kidding. How did that not thinking through the “axis-of-evil idea” or invading Iraq based on the notion that you’re demonstrating your craziness work out? Did Mr. Cohen think this through? I don’t think so and I don’t like it. And I don’t give a frog’s fat ass what Tom Friedman thinks about it.

  13. 13.

    Mike Kay

    February 23, 2010 at 10:15 am

    muther fucking chicken hawk cowards who never served a single day in uniform.

  14. 14.

    dmsilev

    February 23, 2010 at 10:17 am

    I’ve read Cohen’s column twice and I can’t for the life of me figure out what he’s trying to argue. Yes, yes, bomb bomb Iran, but why? Just because no one will expect us to? Nobody would expect Obama to give the next State of the Union address via interpretive dance, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.

    -dms

  15. 15.

    mr. whipple

    February 23, 2010 at 10:17 am

    I’m sick of the insane.

  16. 16.

    Mike Kay

    February 23, 2010 at 10:18 am

    I don’t even know what these idiots are talking about regarding “nixon fighting crazy with crazy.” History shows the North Vietnamese did not give up, rather, it was the United States who did.

  17. 17.

    null pointer exception

    February 23, 2010 at 10:19 am

    Somehow I get a feeling that Cohen dreamt up that line sometime during the last week and the whole article is an excuse to use it.

  18. 18.

    Sarcastro

    February 23, 2010 at 10:20 am

    Since when was invading a nation that did not attack us, had no capability of attacking us and didn’t support the people who did attack us NOT fucking batshit insane?

    And since that piece of whackaloon stupidity didn’t seem to deter the Iranians one god damned bit what kind of drooling troglodyte would suggest an entirely different failed childish tactic of acting crazy might be the way to go?

    Jesus fucking Christ on crutches, they think of war in the same way a 10 year old thinks of going to prison. “If you act crazy enough they leave you alone!”

  19. 19.

    chopper

    February 23, 2010 at 10:20 am

    The way things are going, it would be crazy not to.

    it would be irresponsible not to speculate that it would be crazy not to fight crazy with crazy. also.

  20. 20.

    Folderol and Ephemera

    February 23, 2010 at 10:20 am

    Wait, so is Cohen saying that the Soviet Union should have responded to Nixon’s “Madman Strategy” by initiating a bombing campaign to try and destroy the U.S.A.’s nuclear capacity?

    That’s . . . uh . . . interesting.

  21. 21.

    Cheryl from Maryland

    February 23, 2010 at 10:21 am

    Yes, when in doubt go with the Crazy Nixon Option. Idjit.

    Whoever writes the contracts at WaPo needs to think about a senility clause.

  22. 22.

    Mike Kay

    February 23, 2010 at 10:21 am

    Why won’t richard cohen die?

  23. 23.

    Daddy-O

    February 23, 2010 at 10:21 am

    And if anybody knows crazy…

  24. 24.

    rachel

    February 23, 2010 at 10:23 am

    @Sarcastro:

    “If you act crazy enough they leave you alone!”

    That how it works for North Korea.

  25. 25.

    Mike Kay

    February 23, 2010 at 10:24 am

    I’m sorry to say, Joe Klien was right:

    The notion that we could just waltz in and inject democracy into an extremely complicated, devout and ancient culture smacked–still smacks–of neocolonialist legerdemain. The fact that a great many Jewish neoconservatives–people like Joe Lieberman and the crowd over at Commentary–plumped for this war, and now for an even more foolish assault on Iran, raised the question of divided loyalties: using U.S. military power, U.S. lives and money, to make the world safe for Israel.

  26. 26.

    Daddy-O

    February 23, 2010 at 10:26 am

    Stupidity. It’s universal.

    Why would we attack Iran, especially now, after we went through six-plus long years of war and occupation, the subduing of Iraq, killing Saddam and handing the entire country over to the Shi’ite mullahs?

    Iran is confused. Did they say something to insult us? Because after the trillion-dollar gift George W. Bush gave Iran, after that extreme kindness and global strategery, how could we EVER attack Iran?

  27. 27.

    Brian J

    February 23, 2010 at 10:27 am

    @dmsilev:

    I’d have a lot of respect for him if he did do that.

  28. 28.

    Daddy-O

    February 23, 2010 at 10:29 am

    Anybody who thinks that war makes ANY country safe–including Israel–is insane. Clearly. Anybody who says such things out loud is either insane or is a propagandist with a terribly flawed agenda.

    Or maybe a war profiteer. Also.

  29. 29.

    BC

    February 23, 2010 at 10:29 am

    Nixon had his demons and was in reality a little crazy (as were all those other red-baiters during that period and as are the neocons in our time). Obama’s whole persona is one of a reasonable, pragmatic man. I can’t imagine anyone in the world buying the “Obama’s a crazy man that we can’t restrain and he has his finger on the nuclear button!” meme at all – in fact, I just about fell off my chair laughing at the image of Obama being a crazy man. But it shows the frustration of the neocons because they are not getting instant gratification on the issue of Iran’s nukes. Talk about a 3-year-old mentality! And these people are writing columns trying to inform the American people. Time for Washington Post to go out of business.

  30. 30.

    Chad N Freude

    February 23, 2010 at 10:29 am

    And what could possibly go wrong in a war with Iran?

  31. 31.

    Face

    February 23, 2010 at 10:29 am

    I wonder if Sullivan will call anyone fifth columnists this time.

    Your constant inside-baseball refs are exceedingly tiresome.

  32. 32.

    Mike Kay

    February 23, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Do the neo-cons says how they’re gonna pay for the new war, because after all, they keep telling us, in a deficit environment, all spending measures must be revenue neutral.

  33. 33.

    Alex S.

    February 23, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Oh yeah, fight crazy with crazy! Sometimes you gotta do crazy things, regardless of whether they are right or wrong.

  34. 34.

    burnspbesq

    February 23, 2010 at 10:31 am

    @Cheryl from Maryland:

    Whoever writes the contracts at WaPo needs to think about a senility clause.

    Careful what you wish for. Fred Hiatt would probably use that clause to get rid of Gene Robinson and Ezra Klein.

  35. 35.

    gwangung

    February 23, 2010 at 10:34 am

    Nuts and bolts: we can’t stop Iran’s nuclear program with a simple bombing. Or a series of bombings. We have to invade, occupy and (probably) commit genocide.

    That needs to be brought up time and time again, because these asses are willfully blind to the consequences of actions.

  36. 36.

    Rick Taylor

    February 23, 2010 at 10:34 am

    I do know, though, that Iran seems intent on getting nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. I also know that nothing the United States and its allies have done has dissuaded Ahmadinejad (or the mullahs or the Revolutionary Guard Corps) from his goal.

    __
    I also know that Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction and is concealing from the world community.
    __
    Are we really going to fall for this twice? Even otherwise rational parties like Obama is falling for this. He wants to use sanctions to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons which we’re all certain they are intending to do, despite having no evidence. That’s a hell of a lot better than going to war with Iran to stop them, but it’s still pretty screwed up.

  37. 37.

    Mojotron

    February 23, 2010 at 10:35 am

    I’m going to take Cohen’s advice and convince the mentally-unstable homeless guy in the park near my office that Cohen’s a member of the CIA who’s been transmitting secret messages directly into his skull. At this point running over someone with a shopping cart filled with old newspapers and smearing him with feces is less crazy than bombing Iran.

  38. 38.

    SGEW

    February 23, 2010 at 10:36 am

    @Mojotron: WHAT IS THE FREQUENCY, RICHARD?!?

  39. 39.

    bayville

    February 23, 2010 at 10:38 am

    Figures the modern-day “liberal” WaPo would openly advocate another unwinnable war, through columns penned by two of its growing army of ignorant bootlickers, on the 65th anniversary of the Battle of Iwa Jima.

    Iwa Jima: The deadliest battle in modern U.S. history. More than 7,000 dead. 250 men went to the top of the Mountain to mount Ol’ Glory. Only 27 returned.

    And this was a battle that we won.

  40. 40.

    DanF

    February 23, 2010 at 10:41 am

    Obama should throw feces at Ahmadinejad. Then he should thump his chest and stare him down. Then the world will know that we are a serious nation.

    Oh! Or he could go all Mel Gibson ala Lethal Weapon on him. Like grab him on the top of a tall building and make him jump. That would be awesome! And threaten to shoot himself in the head! Also, too.

  41. 41.

    Michael D.

    February 23, 2010 at 10:41 am

    @MNPundit:

    Seriously why bring up Sullivan? Are you even bothering these days?

    Wondering the same thing myself. Absolutely nothing to do with the post. But mentioning Sullivan is like red meat to this gang. To borrow an idea from Joe Biden:

    “A noun, a verb, and Sully”

    That constututes “a post” here sometimes.

  42. 42.

    Brian J

    February 23, 2010 at 10:45 am

    And to think last week the Washington editor of Newsmax said that while The Post’s page was getting better, it was still too liberal for his tastes.

  43. 43.

    Ash Can

    February 23, 2010 at 10:46 am

    @Mike Kay: It looks like this is pretty much what Cohen and Applebaum are thinking — fuck the US (and everyone else), just do whatever it takes to serve Israel’s interests. Even if it means nuking anyone insolent enough to even question the motives of the Israeli government.

    Of course, no one will call these two drooling idiots out as the filthy traitors they are, because they’re just a couple of very thoughtful and serious journalists exercising their right to free speech, don’tcha know.

  44. 44.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 10:48 am

    @Mike Kay:

    Nobody would expect Obama to give the next State of the Union address via interpretive dance, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.

    Awesome.
    @Mike Kay: This is the second time you’ve asked that about a WaPo columnist. I’m telling you, they don’t die because they feed on the blood of virgins.
    @dmsilev:
    Well, if anybody else points out the glaringly obvious, we’re antisemitic. If Klein or Spencer Ackerman points it out, well, that’s just self-hatred. That’s OK.
    @Face: That’s not inside baseball. I can’t tell if you’re being snarky or you really don’t know what that refers to?
    @Mojotron:

    At this point running over someone with a shopping cart filled with old newspapers and smearing him with feces is less crazy than bombing Iran.

    Only a little bit.

    moderation? wtf, over?

  45. 45.

    Linda Featheringill

    February 23, 2010 at 10:51 am

    And what exactly are we to attack Iran with? The whole military is stretched to the point of breaking. Money is scarce. The people of Iran don’t want to be invaded and would not support us. I don’t think we would have much support from allies [although Australia hates to see a good fight that it is not a part of].

    The sum of these factors is this: IF WE WERE TO ATTACK IRAN, we would lose.

    Is that part of America First? No thank you. I’ll pass.

  46. 46.

    cmorenc

    February 23, 2010 at 10:53 am

    I just read Cohen’s column, which, had he ended it a paragraph earlier, would have been a sensibly insightful essay on the role of madness vs rationality in decision-making and posturing by various countries’ leadership in international relations.

    It’s that last paragraph where Cohen himself spins off into insane, incoherent, lethally dangerous stupidity:

    I have no idea whether Ahmadinejad merely acts crazy or is crazy. I do know, though, that Iran seems intent on getting nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. I also know that nothing the United States and its allies have done has dissuaded Ahmadinejad (or the mullahs or the Revolutionary Guard Corps) from his goal. It may be time for Barack Obama, ever the soul of moderation, to borrow a tactic from Richard Nixon and fight crazy with crazy. The way things are going, it would be crazy not to.

    As others have noted above, just WTF did Cohen have in mind with suggesting that Obama “fight crazy with crazy”? Doing something insane with nuclear weapons? How the Hell does a columnist spewing this kind of inchaote drivel keep his position at a supposedly respectable, influential national paper like the WaPo? The answer is unfortunately that the WaPo has long ceased to be worthy of respect as any sort of responsible, accurate news outlet, despite still keeping a couple of solidly worthwhile voices like Ezra Klein in their employ. (Unfortunately, too may of the rest of the WaPo’s editors and columnists seem simply…to well, be hearing batshit insane neocon voices in their heads).

  47. 47.

    geg6

    February 23, 2010 at 10:56 am

    Just because Israel is determined to commit national suicide and the neocons want us to go down with them, we’re supposed to fall for the same bullshit gambit they pulled in 2003?

    Fuck this shit. These assholes like Cohen seem to think Israel is the 51st state. Well, it’s not and just because Bibi has brought the crazy does not mean anyone on earth, let alone Obama, wants to be just like Bibi. Hell, even the Jews I know think Bibi, his Israeli minions, and his American enablers are batshit insane.

  48. 48.

    Ken

    February 23, 2010 at 10:57 am

    Mojotron @37, wrong kind of crazy. That’s the kind where people avoid you out of disgust. Cohen wants the crazy where people fear you. Replace your homeless guy with something along the lines of John Kramer from the Saw movies – an unknown madman who runs around kidnapping fatuous columnists and murdering them in grisly fashion.

  49. 49.

    Chad N Freude

    February 23, 2010 at 10:59 am

    @Linda Featheringill: You’re overlooking a few Fundamental Truths:
    Our military is infinitely superior to any other and can achieve any objective.
    We can pay whatever it costs through tax cuts.
    The people of Iran hate the regime and would welcome us as liberators.
    Conquering Iran would stabilize the Middle East.
    We cannot possibly lose any war. After all, we’ve won every one we’ve ever fought.

  50. 50.

    geg6

    February 23, 2010 at 11:01 am

    @Ken:

    an unknown madman who runs around kidnapping fatuous columnists and murdering them in grisly fashion.

    I know I’d seriously consider investing in a screenplay with this plot. I bet it would make an awesome movie.

  51. 51.

    geg6

    February 23, 2010 at 11:02 am

    @Chad N Freude:

    You forgot that whole spreadin’ democracy throughout the Middle East thing.

  52. 52.

    Ash Can

    February 23, 2010 at 11:03 am

    @gwangung:

    these asses are willfully blind to the consequences of actions.

    Like I said, their priority is Israel, not the US. And as such, invasion, occupation, and genocide are features, not bugs, especially when they can get some other country to do the dirty work for them. Seriously, why should they care what another war would do to the US? When push comes to shove, it’s not their country.

  53. 53.

    Ed Drone

    February 23, 2010 at 11:05 am

    His denial of the Holocaust is either proof of a drooling sort of insanity or a kind of Nixonian craziness designed to keep enemies and adversaries off balance:

    Hmmm… I recall another mid-East strongman who made extravagant claims, ruled harshly, and thumped his chest, too. Just a few short years ago, it was. Now, what was his name? Siddartha? No. SadSack? No. Ah, yes — Saddam!

    Whatever came of him, and the shock-and-awe tactics we planned to use on him and his people?

    Hmmm???

    Ed

  54. 54.

    Kryptik

    February 23, 2010 at 11:06 am

    Can we just rename the paper to the Glass Iran Daily? That’s what it seems to be as of late.

  55. 55.

    Tyro

    February 23, 2010 at 11:11 am

    It may be time for Barack Obama, ever the soul of moderation, to borrow a tactic from Richard Nixon and fight crazy with crazy.

    When i read this quote, I thought it was advice to Obama about how to deal with republicans, and I thought, “hey, that’s pretty good advice!”

  56. 56.

    cat48

    February 23, 2010 at 11:14 am

    There is no way to prepare for a strike on Iran by Israel. That’s what they suspect will happen at which time Iran will strike our allies in the region and our troops.

    I have a feeling Obama will offer Israel a nuclear umbrella so maybe they won’t strike and make it clear that if it is breached they will pay quickly. This seems the most likely and desirable solution based on the foreign policy articles I have read.

    There is no way anyone knows for sure where all their nuclear sites are to even strike them. Israel just bought drones as large as 747’s that can handle over a 12 hr flight to be used for spying and they do have the ability to strike with them.

    I have read that Saudi Arabia and perhaps Egypt are already included in a nuclear umbrella, but that is always denied by the govt. No more wars please.

  57. 57.

    Mnemosyne

    February 23, 2010 at 11:18 am

    @Rick Taylor:

    Are we really going to fall for this twice? Even otherwise rational parties like Obama is falling for this. He wants to use sanctions to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons which we’re all certain they are intending to do, despite having no evidence.

    If the Iranians aren’t developing a bomb, then they’re idiots. It’s pretty clear that they are and that they’re doing it because they learned the lesson that the Bush administration was teaching to Iraq and North Korea: if you don’t have a nuke, we’ll overthrow your government, but if you do have a nuke, we’ll just stand at a distance and shake our fist at you.

    If I had the US insisting that I was part of the “axis of evil” right before they invaded my next-door neighbor, I’d be developing a nuke, too.

  58. 58.

    Emma

    February 23, 2010 at 11:21 am

    Speaking for myself and not the site owner or contributors: To all of you so terribly sick of the kind/style of posts around here, please feel free to decamp to more acceptable sites. The interwebs are a biiiiiiig place…

    And as to the WP, yall have to remember, they once upon a classic of true journalism, brought down a criminal Republican president. They have been apologizing ever since.

  59. 59.

    MNPundit

    February 23, 2010 at 11:22 am

    Can I also push back against this interpretive dance shit? Obama dances white, we’ve seen it. Do you REALLY want to see that on the floor of Congress?

  60. 60.

    AxelFoley

    February 23, 2010 at 11:23 am

    @Napoloen:

    The idea of attacking Iran is completely insane. It is 5 times more insane then the insane idea of attacking Iraq, which itself was an insane idea on its face.
    The WaPo can’t die a quick enough death.

    Let’s shrink it so we can drown it in a bathtub.

  61. 61.

    FlipYrWhig

    February 23, 2010 at 11:23 am

    For decades, I haven’t understood why Israel is in this special position where we have to make special efforts to help them do what they do. Maybe that made sense in 1967. It’s old. They’re not a weak and vulnerable nation anymore. If Israel has a problem with Iran and Iran with Israel, here’s a radical notion, let _them_ figure it out. I don’t see that region in terms of Big Bully Iran and Scared Victim Israel. I’m not sure how many people do. It’s definitely much more widespread in the corridors of power in DC than at large in the country.

  62. 62.

    jrg

    February 23, 2010 at 11:26 am

    We’ve needed journalists in Iran for quite some time, seeing as how just about everything we know about the Green Revolution is coming from twitter feeds and anonymous videos.

    So here’s a “crazy” idea for Cohen: get your ass over to Iran and report on what’s going on before we commit billions of dollars and thousands of lives to another war… Or is “crazy” only “good” when someone else has to put their ass on the line?

    Fucking chickenhawk.

  63. 63.

    AxelFoley

    February 23, 2010 at 11:26 am

    @ed:

    Wow, I know Friedman was a major cheerleader for the war with Iraq, but I didn’t know that fool wrote that.

    And the Times had the gall to publish it, too.

    What. The. Fuck?

    Seriously, what the fuck?

  64. 64.

    SteveinSC

    February 23, 2010 at 11:29 am

    @Mike Kay:

    I’m sorry to say, Joe Klien was right:

    Occam’s Razor I.e., easy to see if you are willing to see. In Cohen’s case, it’s just soooooo easy.

  65. 65.

    chopper

    February 23, 2010 at 11:30 am

    @Michael D.:

    it’s true, dougj et al’s threads are nothing compared to your oh, wait.

  66. 66.

    Linda Featheringill

    February 23, 2010 at 11:31 am

    To Schadenfreude:

    Well said!

  67. 67.

    Ash Can

    February 23, 2010 at 11:31 am

    @Mnemosyne: This. Between the Israeli right wingers and a US that has an alarming tendency to go off the deep end every few years or so, I’d be crapping my pants if I were an Iranian. I’d be all for my government developing nukes. All the jerk-offs who just assume other countries are going to ignore saber-rattling from a nuclear-power neighbor and its big nuclear-power friend, or who think said countries should just bend over and take it when those nuclear powers tell them to, are on crack. I wouldn’t care so much except that it means we end up with crackheads running our foreign policy.

  68. 68.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 11:34 am

    Israel just bought drones as large as 747’s that can handle over a 12 hr flight to be used for spying and they do have the ability to strike with them.

    Do tell us of the 747-sized drones of which you speak.
    195-ft or 224ft wingspan
    63.5-ft tail height
    232-ft to 251-ft length
    Weight between 352,000lbs to 473,000lbs
    That’s one big damn drone.
    That no one has ever seen. Or heard of.

  69. 69.

    SteveinSC

    February 23, 2010 at 11:35 am

    @jrg: Hey, during the height of our most glorious war in Eyeraq there were some hoo-ha chairborne warriors where I worked. Take names, kick ass, etc. Sick of these chickenhawks (non-veterans), I offered to buy anyone of them a ticket to Eyeraq, a rifle and pay $1000 to their survivors should they perish doing God’s Holy work. Surprisingly, no takers.

  70. 70.

    SenyorDave

    February 23, 2010 at 11:51 am

    If Cohen has kids of draft age, hopefully they will be the first ones called up when we re-institute the draft. Which would definitely be necessary if we attacked Iran.

    I’m guessing Cohen is a classic chicken hawk. After all, I would be crazy not to assume this. It would also be crazy not to assume that Cohen has no problem with a strike on Iran since it woul kill a bunch of those swarthy Iranians. I’d be crazy not to think that.

  71. 71.

    Svensker

    February 23, 2010 at 11:57 am

    Thers’ comment on Cohen last fall:

    

    The real tragedy of global warming is that there is a dwindling supply of ice floes upon which to
    abandon Richard Cohen

  72. 72.

    jrg

    February 23, 2010 at 11:58 am

    SteveinSC – I’ve made similar suggestions to chickenhawks in the past. In Cohen’s case, his stance is even more idiotic, because the media is not doing it’s job… It’s not reporting from Iran.

    As a “journalist”, Cohen’s job is to inform (I’ll forget the fact that he’s just a professional armchair commentator for now). Until he’s able to fulfill his journalistic obligation, he needs to STFU with his war-mongering bullshit and stop waxing idiotic about how clever it is to act crazy when dealing with matters of national security.

  73. 73.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 12:00 pm

    @Michael D.:

    Wondering the same thing myself. Absolutely nothing to do with the post. But mentioning Sullivan is like red meat to this gang. To borrow an idea from Joe Biden:

    “A noun, a verb, and Sully”

    That constututes “a post” here sometimes.

    I noticed that as well. The Sully derangement thing is rather amusing, in a disturbing way.

    As far as I can tell (and I read Sully every day), he has regretted the war with Iraq and is absolutely not in favor of a war with Iran. Just mention his name though, and Pavlovs dogs start drooling.

  74. 74.

    Redshirt

    February 23, 2010 at 12:00 pm

    What’s even “better” about the Neocons lobbying on behalf of all things Israel is no doubt at least half (maybe more) of the people doing so are doing so in hopes Israel gets destroyed — cuz it’s written in The Book, dontchya know. Got to bring Armageddon to Judea.

    Now that’s policy work!

  75. 75.

    Svensker

    February 23, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    @Mike Kay:

    I’m sorry to say, Joe Klien was right:

    The world is a much more complicated place than I had ever imagined. Joe Klein IS right. And fucking brave for sticking his neck out: divided loyalties? Hooboy, that’s a red flag for the bullies.

  76. 76.

    Remember November

    February 23, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    Is Kaplan a front for David Horowitz’s MIC (KEY) mouse operation? And pardon me but WTF is a test prep company doing being involved in global politics?

  77. 77.

    ksmiami

    February 23, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    We are broke, bad at colonialization, and the Persians would defeat us, or at least destroy Israel if we attacked. WTF???? I think the Washington Post needs to die a quick and painful death, that or can’t we send Hiatt to the hills of Afghanistan??

    KILL THE NEOCONS

  78. 78.

    cat48

    February 23, 2010 at 12:06 pm

    @dmsilev:

    You make me laugh. Uh, personally, I thought BO did put on quite a performance at the SOTU. Almost gleeful and taunting like he had a good drug beforehand. Also, the constant smiling. My husband and I were amused.

  79. 79.

    Tsulagi

    February 23, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    @soonergrunt:

    That’s one big damn drone.

    It’s the 747-MOAD derivative.

    That no one has ever seen. Or heard of.

    Which is proof it exists. Those Jews are sneaky suckers.

  80. 80.

    Kevin Phillips Bong

    February 23, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    @soonergrunt: Yeah, I’m in the drone business and the largest one out there is Global Hawk, which I’m pretty sure we’re not selling to Iran. So a link would be nice.

  81. 81.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    @Linda Featheringill:

    The sum of these factors is this: IF WE WERE TO ATTACK IRAN, we would lose.

    I think it more likely that neither side would win. We can destroy the entire country and lay waste to all before us. Does that “win” whatever objectives we ostensibly set out to achieve?

    The expenditure in blood and treasure would not likely justify whatever it is we set out to do in Iran. Now, I have no problem with covert actions in theory. Iran does nasty stuff under the table, and so do we. If they actually seemed to be getting ready to test a nuke or something very provocative and destabilizing, I would suggest a fatal “accident” for one of their rustbucket Victor III subs or some such. (Sorry about that sub mishap. All hands lost, you say? Wow. You know, preventative maintenance is a real bitch on old Soviet equipment. Maybe you should look into that…!)

    Actually committing to an open war to do what…?

    I can’t fathom that. Israel has 200 deliverable nuclear weapons, and Iran knows that. Nothing is gonna happen.

  82. 82.

    ksmiami

    February 23, 2010 at 12:17 pm

    The Buzzcocks are still the awesome… just had to interject some fun into the death and destruction thread

  83. 83.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 12:25 pm

    @celticdragonchick: It goes back to the whole “decadent left enclaves on the coasts [that] may well mount a fifth column” that he said in the Wall Street Journal in the days after 9/11. Very few things get somebody’s dander up than being called a traitor. By a Brit. One that, at the time he did it couldn’t even serve in the armed forces himself because of his issues, and wouldn’t have been caught dead anywhere near a recruiting station anyway.
    Did he ever apologise or do or say anything remotely like an apology?

  84. 84.

    cat48

    February 23, 2010 at 12:31 pm

    TEL NOF AIR FORCE BASE, Israel (AP) — Israel’s air force has introduced a fleet of large unmanned planes that can fly as far as Iran.
    Air force officials said the Heron TP drones have a wingspan of 86 feet, making them the size of passenger jets. They said the planes are primarily used for surveillance.

    The drones, built by state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries, were first used during Israel’s war with Gaza last year. The company has said the aircraft can reach the Persian Gulf.

    Don’t know much about plane sizes, but this article from USA Today says they are the size of passenger jets. Wrong on me though, not the size of 747.

  85. 85.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 12:31 pm

    @soonergrunt: To say nothing of the fact that Sullivan was what many people considered to be an ‘intellectual’ conservative.
    I know the very idea is funny, but some still believed in things like the tooth fairy, the easter bunny and intellectual conservatives back in those days.

  86. 86.

    Silver Owl

    February 23, 2010 at 12:38 pm

    My nephew deploys for Afghanistan in two weeks. He’s going to his job. Just like my other nephew did his job in Iraq.

    Cohen sits on his spoiled pampered leeching non-thinking ass demanding others make him feel like he is something other than a blood sponge of a man. It is never ever going to happen. Cohen’s rot is his own to fix, not the military’s.

  87. 87.

    Comrade Dread

    February 23, 2010 at 12:41 pm

    Why the fuck does anyone still listen to these people?

    Seriously, after Iraq, these bastards should be pelted with rotten fruit every time they leave their think tanks and newspapers.

  88. 88.

    Brachiator

    February 23, 2010 at 12:46 pm

    @Brian J:

    I pay much more attention to domestic policy than foreign policy, so perhaps I missed something in the last couple of weeks, but exactly what has changed that would make this a desirable course of action?

    The sabre-rattling is getting more intense. Iran, strangely, stupidly, insists on upping the ante with respect to its nuclear development. Meanwhile, Secretary of State Clinton noted (fanned) fears about Iran becoming a military dictatorship. And in Russia, the prime minister of Israel was calling for extra tough sanctions against Iran if it continues to defy the international community.

    This kind of thing inevitably leads neocons and their enablers to get hot and bothered for military action.

    I also strongly suspect that Dick Cheney and other high ranking Bush officials push their war lust via friendly journalists in an attempt to influence foreign policy.

    Leaving aside whether a bombing would be a wise move regardless of the underlying factors, I just can’t think of anything. (And wouldn’t it be a bombing? Are they really going to recommend an occupation?) I just don’t get it.

    The neocons left rationality behind a long time ago. They are convinced that our Iraq adventure would be successful sometime in the future if only the American people had been smart enough to vote the McCain/Palin ticket.

  89. 89.

    Socraticsilence

    February 23, 2010 at 12:52 pm

    Yeah, that’s a smart move- whatever you can say about Obama domestically his return to the Bush I/Clinton “responsible coalition builder” model for Foriegn Policy is a freaking breath of fresh air- I mean there’s a reason that International Public Opinion of the US has basically done a complete 180 since 2007. Oh, and where’s the money for our Glorious Crusade against Islam part III going to come from (that might seem over the top but c’mon theres almost no chance it isn’t percieved that way)- do deficit only matter when cutting them helps kill poor people?

  90. 90.

    arguingwithsignposts

    February 23, 2010 at 12:53 pm

    Here’s my sully derangement syndrome from several months ago. The guy is an idiot. A well-paid idiot, but an idiot nonetheless.

    ETA: WaPo can DIAF too, for hiring that idiot Hiatt.

  91. 91.

    licensed to kill time

    February 23, 2010 at 12:55 pm

    @Kevin Phillips Bong:

    Here’s a link to the Israeli Eitan drone.

    It’s as big as a 737, wingspan 86 feet.

  92. 92.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 12:55 pm

    The neocons push bombing because of two things–
    1) it’s relatively ‘clean’ which is to say that it looks cool on TV and doesn’t have the ‘long stream of US Soldiers coming back in body bags’ problem of an invasion. Besides, what are the odds that camera crews will be allowed to operate in Iran by the regime there, or that footage out of Iran would be believed or even cared about? Remember that the only audience they worry about is the US public, and as long as there’s none of the messyness of my friends dying or getting maimed, they don’t have to keep making shit up. They think (and have ample reason to think) that the US public will easily support a bombing campaign for relatively flimsy reasons.
    2) of less import to the neocons, but more import to guys like me who actually think about long term effects on US foreign policy and military capability, we don’t have a functional army with which to invade Iran anyway. The Army is too small for what we are currently doing, frankly. If they want to do Iran before we get out of Iraq, they’re going to have to grow the Army to about 1.1 million active duty from the 580k authorized today. New units won’t have proper equipment for years, even if we went on a spending spree.
    Hence, bombing.

  93. 93.

    cat48

    February 23, 2010 at 12:56 pm

    Iran is producing at the 25% rate now according to a new nuke report obtained so they are all freaking out more than usual.

    It’s a higher percentage than before so brings them closer to a nuke.

  94. 94.

    arguingwithsignposts

    February 23, 2010 at 12:58 pm

    @licensed to kill time:

    Its wingspan is a massive 86 feet, the same as a Boeing 737 passenger jet. It can fly without refueling for over 20 hours at an altitude of over 40,000 feet.

    From the photo, it’s not “as big as a 737,” but the *wingspan* is the same as a 737.

    Huge difference between those two things.

  95. 95.

    licensed to kill time

    February 23, 2010 at 1:03 pm

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    My terminology stands corrected, thank you sir! You are right, big difference.

  96. 96.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 1:04 pm

    @cat48: When they get several kilograms of 90% (weapons grade) then Israel should worry. The US–not so much.
    Until then, they are only doing what any country that has Uranium ore and a medical radiologic necessity has a right to do.
    A right that WE, the US declared in the 1950s as the right of EVERY nation.

  97. 97.

    liberal

    February 23, 2010 at 1:16 pm

    @cat48:

    Iran is producing at the 25% rate now according to a new nuke report obtained so they are all freaking out more than usual.

    My impression is that the IAEA has a new head, who’s made some provocative statements that are set full of qualifiers and which contain no new evidence in an effort to curry favor with the US et al.

    I doubt much has really changed in the Iranian nuclear program. I’d honestly find it difficult to believe Iran isn’t pursuing a nuke, or at a minimum some civilian capabilities that could be quickly used to make a bomb if necessary. OTOH, their tech isn’t all that good, so it’s going to take them awhile to get there even if we don’t bomb them.

  98. 98.

    Svensker

    February 23, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    @soonergrunt:

    When they get several kilograms of 90% (weapons grade) then Israel should worry. The US—not so much.

    Israel, apparently, has somewhere around 200 nukes. Israel is not going to be attacked by a nuclear Iran. The Iranian leadership may be weird and annoying, but they are unlikely to desire their own deaths along with the destruction of their country.

    The neocons and Likudniks are not afraid of being ATTACKED by a nuclear Iran. They are afraid that their own hegemony in the area will be challenged. MADD is a two-way street. Right now, the Israelis are the bullies on the block with the biggest rocks. If Iran can match them, rock for rock, Israel will have to stop acting the bully.

  99. 99.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    February 23, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    “an unknown madman who runs around kidnapping fatuous columnists and murdering them in grisly fashion.”

    I know I’d seriously consider investing in a screenplay with this plot. I bet it would make an awesome movie.

    V for Vendetta comes close.

  100. 100.

    DougJ

    February 23, 2010 at 1:19 pm

    @Michael D.:

    I am honestly curious how he would respond to a war with Iran. I think a lot of others are too. What is wrong with that?

  101. 101.

    liberal

    February 23, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    @celticdragonchick:

    As far as I can tell (and I read Sully every day), he has regretted the war with Iraq and is absolutely not in favor of a war with Iran. Just mention his name though, and Pavlovs dogs start drooling.

    No drooling here. Fact is, though, that you don’t get do-overs. Being wrong about the war far outweighs whatever he said since, because he was wrong when it counted—that is, when we had a chance to stop the invasion. Talk after the invasion began is a lot cheaper.

    Though IMHO his throwaway comment about treason is not nearly as odious at the whole Bell Curve thing. He’ll rot in hell, surely, for that one.

  102. 102.

    liberal

    February 23, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    @Svensker:

    The neocons and Likudniks are not afraid of being ATTACKED by a nuclear Iran. They are afraid that their own hegemony in the area will be challenged. MADD is a two-way street. Right now, the Israelis are the bullies on the block with the biggest rocks. If Iran can match them, rock for rock, Israel will have to stop acting the bully.

    This.

  103. 103.

    Kevin Phillips Bong

    February 23, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    @licensed to kill time: Thanks for the link, that’s actually smaller than Global Hawk but that’s not really important. The important thing is wingspan, or even size for that matter, does not equal combat capability. There is currently no remotely piloted aircraft capable of surviving in contested airspace, which Iran most certainly would be. Now, the Israelis are tactically talented and could possibly shut down the Iranian integrated air defenses like they did with Syria, but the likelihood of a fleet of 737-sized remotely piloted aircraft successfully prosecuting a strike on Iranian nuclear sites is, with current technology, highly unlikely.

  104. 104.

    Nellcote

    February 23, 2010 at 1:21 pm

    @MNPundit:

    Can I also push back against this interpretive dance shit? Obama dances white, we’ve seen it. Do you REALLY want to see that on the floor of Congress

    ?

    Well since you put it like that, maybe not. But the reviews from Tapper, Todd and the other theater critics would be hilarious.

  105. 105.

    adamchaz

    February 23, 2010 at 1:25 pm

    Iraq had a population of 30 million
    Israel has a population of 7 million
    Iran has a population of 75 million people.

    Despite what Israel might think you can’t bomb 75 million people into submission. You would need boots on the ground and Israel doesn’t have the military to do it. I think they are getting a little cocky beating up on Palestinians.

  106. 106.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 1:28 pm

    @Svensker: Oh, I didn’t think that Iran is a nuclear threat to Israel. Honestly, the Iranian regime’s days are numbered. If we want to watch totalitarianism die in Iran, we need only sit back and watch. If we interfere at all, it will only prop up the mullahs.
    I was responding to Cat48’s alarmist post.

  107. 107.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    To each their own. I agree with Sully far more than I disagree, and I enjoy his writing by and large. I have said and written things that I regret (in this very forum), and I think it unrealistic, not to mention uncharitable, to hold people to standards that we would likely fail at ourselves. If you would rather denigrate and insult erstwhile allies, you have no room to laugh at groups like The Club For Growth who seek ever more effective ways to shrink the GOP.

    Just a thought.

  108. 108.

    Tsulagi

    February 23, 2010 at 1:31 pm

    @soonergrunt:

    The neocons push bombing because of two things—1) it’s relatively ‘clean’ which is to say that it looks cool on TV

    Yeah, they miss them some Shock and Awe video feed set against a night sky. Pretty. Starbursts.

    It’s what comes after those ADD warriors have a problem with.

    @arguingwithsignposts: Yeah, its wingspan is a bit under that of the first 737 derivatives and it’s less than half the length. Weight is about a tenth that of a 737. Here are more photos. It’s not a new game changing UAV. They showed it at the Paris Air Show a few years ago. Kinda doubt they’d sell it to Iran, though.

  109. 109.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    @adamchaz: You can’t bomb 75 million people into submission. Even if you used your 200 nukes. But you can cause societal collapse. All the neighbors would move in and carve the place up, leaving the nuclear target sites untouched in a wasteland with no governmental power. Libertarian heaven, it would be.

  110. 110.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    @adamchaz:

    Despite what Israel might think you can’t bomb 75 million people into submission. You would need boots on the ground and Israel doesn’t have the military to do it. I think they are getting a little cocky beating up on Palestinians.

    Actually you can, but you would need to resort to scorched earth atrocities that would make Bomber Harris wince.

  111. 111.

    Napoloen

    February 23, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    @adamchaz:

    Why in Gods name would Isreal ever need to put boots on the ground in Iran? I do not have a globe in front of me but Iran must be at least 2 counties away from Isreal, so they have no reason to fear of a Iranian gound invasion, and in a conventional air campaign Isreal would clean Iran’s clock. All that leaves is a nuclear threat which Isreal could easily counter by pointing out to Iran that it could cut Iran’s population from 75m to the 50-60 range in a couple of hours with millions of more deaths to follow from radiation and starvation.

    Why would they need to put any boots on the ground?

  112. 112.

    Brachiator

    February 23, 2010 at 1:39 pm

    @soonergrunt:

    When they get several kilograms of 90% (weapons grade) then Israel should worry. The US—not so much.

    The Israelis are never going to passively wait until Iran obtains a critical mass of weapons grade nuclear material. And one worry of Washington is that a Middle East war would inevitably pull us in as a participant.

    Until then, they are only doing what any country that has Uranium ore and a medical radiologic necessity has a right to do.

    No one knows whether Iran is simply acting out of a medical radiologic necessity. I don’t know that any president, and certainly not a Democrat, could simply give Iran the benefit of the doubt. The GOP would milk this for all it’s worth, no matter how reasonable a less bellicose policy might be.

    A right that WE, the US declared in the 1950s as the right of EVERY nation.

    Ironically, as the Wiki notes, “the nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program.”

    Times change.

  113. 113.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 1:42 pm

    @soonergrunt:

    Forty deliverable nuclear weapons is considered the MAD threshold, since it is considered impossible for any modern nation state to function or even exist with 40 major population centers removed. (The TV series Jericho which portrayed the breakup of America into three nation states was premised on 18 nuclear detonations)

    200 nuclear weapons being detonated in Iran would be a catastrophe not seen in human history since the phreatic volcanic explosion of the Greek isle of Thera. Probably 70% plus (at a guess) of the population would be dead or dying from radiation and blast injuries. Movement within the country would be impossible for months because of radiation. Starvation and disease would decimate virtually everybody else within three months, and there is nothing the world could do about it. We would not be able to get to them because of radiation NO GO zones, and prevailing winds would carry contamination into Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and much of south central Asia.

    The people would not bombed into submission. They would be bombed into non-existence.

  114. 114.

    Michael D.

    February 23, 2010 at 1:49 pm

    @DougJ: Then ask him. I’ve emailed Sully several times and have usually received responses. Insinuating that he’d tear to shreds who opposed bombing Iran is not helpful.

  115. 115.

    arguingwithsignposts

    February 23, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    @celticdragonchick:

    If you would rather denigrate and insult erstwhile allies, you have no room to laugh at groups like The Club For Growth who seek ever more effective ways to shrink the GOP.

    I don’t consider Sully an erstwhile ally at all. I consider him horribly inconsistent.

    He deserves all the mocking in the world for his “conservative” principles. So he does well with torture. BFD. So does Shep Smith. Until he comes over to the dark side and stops linking approvingly to folks like Megan McArgglebargle, he can DIAF, too.

    I have all the room in the world to laugh at the Club for Growth, not the least of which being their name, which sounds like a commercial for a hair product, or enhancement product.

    ETA: we have all written things we regret. But to continue defending an ideology that betrays you every. step. of. the. way. is beyond my threshold. Believe me, I’ve been there.

  116. 116.

    Neutron Flux

    February 23, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    @soonergrunt: Perhaps Kevin Bong Phillips will enlighten us as to whether this huge drone is reality.

  117. 117.

    adamchaz

    February 23, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    @Napoloen:
    I don’t believe an conventional air campaign would “clean Iran’s clock.” I believe that Iran has been preparing for a moment for a while.

    I have no reason to believe that the Iranians desire for self-preservation is any stronger or weaker than the Israels or the U.S. So i imagine like any rational actor facing a threat such as Israel they have a defense against the majority of Israels capabilities with weapons they bought from Russia and China.

    Russia and China would also have an incentive to help Iran weakened Israel and the US. I would think that America needs to learn from North Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq that superior weapons dosen’t always win.

  118. 118.

    Neutron Flux

    February 23, 2010 at 2:01 pm

    Sheez. Kevin Phillips Bong is IN the house. Note to self: Read the whole thread.

  119. 119.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 2:01 pm

    @celticdragonchick: I don’t think it would take three to five nukes to cause complete societal collapse in Iran.
    Tehran, Qom, Esfahan, and Shiraz. Hit that axis, and all cross country trade and communication stops and the strong central government is destroyed. Kerman and Yazd just to be sure.
    This is well within the realm of Israeli capability.
    Hell, you hit Tehran with one nuke and the government will collapse and the economy along with it.

  120. 120.

    Napoleon

    February 23, 2010 at 2:03 pm

    @adamchaz:

    I don’t believe an conventional air campaign would “clean Iran’s clock.”

    Maybe I should have been more precise in my language, they would have cleaned Iran’s Air Forces clock. It would take Israel 2 or 3 days max to establish absolute air superiority, just like we did in Iraq, which of course isn’t the same as controling the the situation on the ground, or perhaps even in the Straights of Hormuz (sp?). (I personally think airpower is way overrated).

  121. 121.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    @Napoloen:

    Why in Gods name would Isreal ever need to put boots on the ground in Iran? I do not have a globe in front of me but Iran must be at least 2 counties away from Isreal, so they have no reason to fear of a Iranian gound invasion, and in a conventional air campaign Isreal would clean Iran’s clock. All that leaves is a nuclear threat which Isreal could easily counter by pointing out to Iran that it could cut Iran’s population from 75m to the 50-60 range in a couple of hours with millions of more deaths to follow from radiation and starvation.

    We make several similar points, although I would caution you on the supposed vulnerability of the Iranian Air Force. The Israeli AF is well equipped, superbly trained and well led, but they would be fighting far from friendly territory and with a very limited fuel budget since they would not have tanker support. Iran has an aging, although still capable AF and is building the new Saeque multi role fighter to supplant the older Chinese F-6/MiG 19s and the newer Mig-29 Fulcrums and Mirage F.1’s. Maintenance and training may well be issues here, since Iran does not have reliable parts suppliers for many of her aircraft (which explains the need for a home grown weapons industry!), but they would be fighting from home bases and have SAM, ground based radar intercept guidance and tanker support. Israel would have to use cruise missile attacks (the HAVE NAP POPEYE comes to mind) on airfields, radars and SAM sites, and that would certainly give away any element of surprise.

    It would be a tall order for a small AF like Israel’s, and I am not sure they could pull it off.

  122. 122.

    sparky

    February 23, 2010 at 2:05 pm

    now does anyone see why i said what Lieberman announced yesterday (DADT “repeal”) is about war with Iran?

    anyone?

    /bangs head on keyboard

  123. 123.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 2:05 pm

    @Neutron Flux: Anything is possible. Remote control planes can be done. The US government remote-controlled a 707 once just to crash it into something and see what would happen. We remote control old F-4 phantom jets for use as high fidelity targets for the Air Force and Navy to practice on all the time.
    So, yeah. You could remote control or drone control a large aircraft relatively easily. The question is, why would you want to do so? Anything that big as a military asset is almost certainly dropping bombs on something and you probably want a human in the loop somewhere.
    I suppose you could drone a tanker plane if you worked at it. Israel doesn’t have the tanker planes to ‘drone up’ as it were.
    I guess you could fill an old 747 with explosives to its max payload and kamikaze it into something, but that’s really expensive.

  124. 124.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 2:07 pm

    @soonergrunt:

    Quite true.

  125. 125.

    DougJ

    February 23, 2010 at 2:11 pm

    @Michael D.:

    You’ve come increasingly close to being an official troll here recently.

  126. 126.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    @DougJ:

    Disagreement does not equal trolldom.

  127. 127.

    Kevin Phillips Bong

    February 23, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    @soonergrunt: The USAF remotely piloted aircraft future systems roadmap calls for a medium sized tactical airframe capable of interdiction/CAS and other air-to-ground type missions, and a large airframe designed for tanker/cargo/logistics missions. Neither aircraft exists yet except on the drawing board but they most certainly will at some point.

    As of right now the control architecture is the limiting factor in situations where rapid maneuvering is required. If you control via line-of-sight you can have instant response, but if you control via satellite like we control Pred/Reaper then there is appreciable latency in your inputs. This limits missions to benign maneuvering and uncontested airspace.

  128. 128.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    Off to chem lab.

    meh
    BBL.

  129. 129.

    Neutron Flux

    February 23, 2010 at 2:16 pm

    @soonergrunt: I was wondering if the article was correct.

    It seems to me that human in the loop thing is an asked and answered question.

  130. 130.

    Brachiator

    February 23, 2010 at 2:16 pm

    @celticdragonchick:

    Forty deliverable nuclear weapons is considered the MAD threshold, since it is considered impossible for any modern nation state to function or even exist with 40 major population centers removed.

    MAD is Mutually Assured Destruction. Any conflict between the US and Iran would be one-sided.

    Aside from the issue of bombing in general, destabilizing another oil producer would be madness. And a major nuclear strike against Iran would be madness squared.

    The people would not bombed into submission. They would be bombed into non-existence.

    Possibly not. But a nuclear strike against Iran might guarantee that other Muslim nations would abandon any moderation in favor of attacks against the US and the West.

  131. 131.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 2:25 pm

    @Kevin Phillips Bong: That’s what I’m saying. Yeah, a Predator costs some cash, but by the time you’re done remote control/drone control modifying your 747, you’ve spent a bucket load of dough that would be more profitably spent on GPS-guided bombs to be dropped from your F-16s and F-15s.
    With your 747 kamikaze bomb, you’ve made a system that can’t respond to external threat in a timely manner, thus virtually ensuring it will be shot down. It’s also a one-shot deal.
    The tanker I can see as a large UAS because those things never go into enemy territory. F-15 sized UCAS? sure, why not. That will be doable soon enough. But I don’t think you’ll ever see a UCAS strategic bomber, mainly because the Air Force owns the strategic bombardment mission and they are all about the flight suit and how sexy it looks driving down the main drag in the convertable. I work for them in my civilian job. They’ll fight tooth and nail to keep that from happening in appreciable numbers. The Navy will lead on this one because if you can build an aircraft that doesn’t need a pilot, you can do it cheaper and easier, and smaller for the exact same (or better) capability. You can put more of them in the same space and carrier hanger decks aren’t getting bigger.

  132. 132.

    Barry

    February 23, 2010 at 2:30 pm

    Rathskeller:
    “When they are going to stop publishing that goddamn moron?”

    When the embalming technology can’t keep up with the decay. There is no retirement age for pundits, and even death wouldn’t stop them, since half of them probably have unpaid interns cranking out the sh*t.

  133. 133.

    Kevin Phillips Bong

    February 23, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    @soonergrunt: Actually the USAF command structure is more or less run by single seat fighter types, that’s why it was so odd when a trash hauler/special operations guy (Schwartz) was selected to be Chief of Staff. As far as missions go, strat strike is perfect for a remotely piloted vehicle. You have much more airframe design flexibility when you take the shaved monkey out of the jet, the weapons it delivers are already quite precise so you don’t need to maneuver the plane to an accurate firing solution, and you avoid the possibility of the enemy capturing your aircrew if they bag the jet. You’re going to get much more resistance when the AF tries to completely do away with F-15/F-16/F-22/F35 in favor of a UCAV than you will when they remote pilot a B-1/B-52 replacement.

    And yes, an unmanned/robotic 747 kamikaze bomb is about the most tactically useless thing I can imagine. Unable to penetrate hardened sites, easy to shoot down from the ground or via fighter aircraft, shows up like a giant turd on air defense radar. Pointless.

  134. 134.

    liberty60

    February 23, 2010 at 3:10 pm

    @Mike Kay:

    muther fucking chicken hawk cowards who never served a single day in uniform.

    The only good thing I ever heard about a new military draft, is the thought of the Bush twins and the pampered scions of the Villagers all pushed to the tip of the spear somewhere in Godforsakenstan.

  135. 135.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 3:10 pm

    @Kevin Phillips Bong: I see where you’re coming from, but I’m surrounded by field-grade officers who look at ANY remotely piloted/autonomous aircraft as a threat to the whole thing.
    The artificial line I see being drawn is on the whole “you want a living, thinking soul (said with reverence) with his finger on the pickle!” To them an unmanned bomber is just a short step away from the unmanned fighter plane.
    They’ll sacrifice the tanker drivers if they have to but the guys I know will look you dead in the eye and tell you how important it is that qualified jocks should be driving the aircraft and (if worse comes to worst) the UAVs.
    The Air Force’s Predators crash more often than the Army’s (called the Reaper, I think) because the AF pilots insist on flying the damn thing all the way to the ground and they prang it on the landing. The Army uses NCOs to watch the screen and push the little red button when they get permission and they have the plane fly itself. And they freak the fuck out when you call it a plane. It’s fun to watch.
    Not that I would ever needle my massively egotistical coworkers about their impending obsolescence. Cause that would be wrong.

  136. 136.

    Kevin Phillips Bong

    February 23, 2010 at 3:24 pm

    @soonergrunt: Well, there already is a qualified pilot driving all the AF UAVs, with the minor exception of the “beta program” guys who fly Predator ISR missions only. The Army uses enlisted troopers to fly their Sky Warriors (which is just a heavy fuel version of our Pred) and I’ll give you one guess which UAV is responsible for most of the near-mid-airs in Afghanistan. It’s only a matter of time until an off-altitude UAV not talking to anyone takes out a C-130 loaded with dudes and they rethink the required qualification of UAV pilots. As one of the reverent “living (yes) thinking (mostly) souls” that was taken out of a fighter cockpit to fly Reapers, I totally understand the culture change that’s going to have to take place over the next few decades. I’ll be long retired, but it’ll be fascinating to watch.

  137. 137.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 3:39 pm

    @Kevin Phillips Bong:
    Oh, to be sure, deconfliction is a huge headache, and taking guys from infantry units and military police billets and making them UAV operators isn’t helping. I’m not sure that the answer to that is to spend the money it takes to qualify an F-16 pilot, for example, and put them into a UAV workstation. The answer (in my opinion that is informed solely by working in this particular office and could be wrong) is better air traffic management and control.
    And for whatever it’s worth, I want pilots in aircraft. We wouldn’t be having this back and forth here but for a flight of A-10s showing up at the right time on one day, and F-16s on another. We even had CAS from a B-1 once. I’m a pretty big fan of the USAF. I just think they need some institutional adjusting from time to time, like all large organizations.

  138. 138.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 3:57 pm

    @soonergrunt: and a tip of the boonie cap to you for that, Kevin. Especially if you’re a driver for one of those platforms.

  139. 139.

    Kevin Phillips Bong

    February 23, 2010 at 4:06 pm

    @soonergrunt: As a former A-10 guy, glad we could be of service. The current paradigm isn’t to train an F-16 guy and toss him in the GCS, we’re taking qualified pilots from all airframes and training them to fly the UAVs. The training is quick and pretty cheap.
    Initially we wanted primarily fighter guys for the Reaper as we were doing lots of CAS, but now that it’s a mostly COIN conflict we’re taking bodies from everywhere. One of our sharpest guys is an F-15E WSO. The steady-state answer is going to be using guys trained in a major airframe either on loan to the UAV community or doing an intermediate tour between primary tours. It’s much less about knowing the inherent problems and considerations of weapons delivery than it is about knowing where to put your airplane and when, who to talk to, what to expect out of various platforms you may encounter out there.
    You’ll have to trust me when I tell you that the CAS you could have received from an MQ-9 would have been as good as the fighters, and we could have stayed on station for most of the day (or night) to watch your back after dropping some hate.
    And if there ever was an institution in need of adjusting, it’s the AF. Norty thinks he can do it by making us wear blues every Monday. As usual, the beatings will continue until morale improves.

  140. 140.

    Michael D.

    February 23, 2010 at 4:21 pm

    @DougJ:

    You’ve come increasingly close to being an official troll here recently.

    How so? Because I disagree with something you said? Or because I noted that you said something that had no relevance but that was most likely inserted into it to spice up an otherwise throw-away post?

  141. 141.

    soonergrunt

    February 23, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    I remember thinking “this is it. They’ve got us. I’m going to die in the next few minutes.” I remember knowing it as clearly as I’ve ever known anything. It was very calming.
    And then the A-10s showed up and the JTAC guy got them on their first run. The bad guys started breaking contact, but it was too late for most of them to get away.

    The sunset that evening was the most beautiful thing I’ve ever seen in my life. Thank you, and all the warthog drivers for that.

  142. 142.

    chopper

    February 23, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    @Michael D.:

    well, you would know about throw-away posts now, wouldn’t you?

  143. 143.

    de stijl

    February 23, 2010 at 5:00 pm

    Somehow I get a feeling that Cohen dreamt up that line sometime during the last week and the whole article is an excuse to use it.

    He didn’t dream it up. He stole it from The New Guy.

    Idiot and plagiarist.

    What makes it more pathetic is that he plagiarized from one of the worst movies of the aughts.

  144. 144.

    MNPundit

    February 23, 2010 at 5:20 pm

    @soonergrunt: Which brings up the question of why he is on the blogroll under “Blogs We Both Read” instead of the mockery roll?

    I guess it’s the blog’s rightwing roots showing up from time to time.

  145. 145.

    J. A. Baker

    February 23, 2010 at 5:32 pm

    I wonder if Sullivan will call anyone fifth columnists this time.

    I don’t know about that, but you can bet your bottom dollar that Glenn “Instahick” Reynolds will declare that anyone opposed to nuking Tehran is “objectively on Ahmadinejad’s side.”

    ‘Cause that’s how he rolls.

  146. 146.

    Sm*t Cl*de

    February 23, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    “an unknown madman who runs around kidnapping fatuous columnists and murdering them in grisly fashion.”

    Complicity comes close.

  147. 147.

    Remember November

    February 23, 2010 at 6:08 pm

    I think we need to organize for the Coffee Break Party…”We’re brewing up trouble, with an extra shot.extra bitter.”

    Who’s with me?
    cuz we’re all human beans….

  148. 148.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 6:30 pm

    @Brachiator:

    I was assuming a conflict between Israel and Iran. The Iranian Shahab missile series variants do not have the range to hit the CONUS.

    Also, I do not think that anybody seriously expects that Israel would expend the entirety of her nuclear arsenal against Iran in the event of a nuclear exchange. Twenty warheads would be more than enough, even allowing for redundancy against high value targets. I engaged in (unlikely) speculation since the subject had been brought up.

  149. 149.

    celticdragonchick

    February 23, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    @J. A. Baker:

    I don’t know about that, but you can bet your bottom dollar that Glenn “Instahick” Reynolds will declare that anyone opposed to nuking Tehran is “objectively on Ahmadinejad’s side.”

    True, dat…

    I love glibitarianism.

  150. 150.

    Brachiator

    February 23, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    @celticdragonchick:

    I was assuming a conflict between Israel and Iran. The Iranian Shahab missile series variants do not have the range to hit the CONUS.

    Israel currently has far more nuclear capability than Iran. MAD still does not apply. I was reading an article in History Today about the 1973 Yom Kippur War. On October 8, Israel was rocked by Arab success and according to the article, “[Prime Minister] Meir reportedly ordered 13 tactical nuclear weapons readied as a last resort if the tide could not be turned.”

    This was far from theoretical.

    I’m not sure if the mini nuclear powers (Israel, South Africa, India, Pakistan) think about MAD. And sometimes Americans forget that these nations have nukes and differing views of their national interests than the US, Russia, China and other big nuke countries.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Omnes Omnibus on Senator Menendez (D-NJ) indicted for corruption (again) (Sep 22, 2023 @ 2:03pm)
  • trollhattan on Bibi & Bone Saw (Sep 22, 2023 @ 2:03pm)
  • Paul in KY on Crash & Burn (Open Thread) (Sep 22, 2023 @ 2:02pm)
  • Amy on Senator Menendez (D-NJ) indicted for corruption (again) (Sep 22, 2023 @ 2:02pm)
  • NotMax on Bibi & Bone Saw (Sep 22, 2023 @ 2:01pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!