Reality and a Whopper on Iran

RLENT · Aug 13, 2011

From The National Interest:

Reality and a Whopper on Iran
by Paul R. Pillar | August 12, 2011

Perhaps the most noteworthy exchange on foreign policy in the Republican presidential candidates' debate in Iowa Thursday night started with a question to Ron Paul about Iran. Whatever else you may think about Paul and his candidacy, there is no refuting three truths he stated regarding the hysteria-inducing subject of Iran and its nuclear program.

One, as Iranians look at what is surrounding them in their own neighborhood, they have good and understandable reasons to be interested in nuclear weapons.

Two, even if they were to acquire a nuke, any capability they then had would pale in comparison with what the United States faced in the form of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, or China for that matter.

Third, as U.S. dealings with the Soviets demonstrated, an adversary's nuclear capability does not constitute a reason to stop talking and start making a war.

Paul's plain speaking, of course, clashed with the orthodoxy in this country according to which hysteria is considered the proper response to any mention of Iran and nukes.

Among the other candidates, Rick Santorum jumped to the task of exclaiming how incorrigibly awful Iran is in every respect. Probably the most curious item in his indictment was that the Iranian regime “tramples the rights of gays”—curious given that one of Santorum's own claims to notoriety is his conspicuously unfriendly posture toward homosexuality, which he has compared to bestiality. (Elsewhere in the debate, Santorum supported a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and a reversal of the Obama administration's abandonment of “don't ask, don't tell” in the military.) [Rlent Editorial Comment - seriously, this is the kinda thing ya just can't make up - what a hypocritical sack of dung ...]

But Santorum also used a glaring falsehood: that “ Iran is a country that has killed more American men and women in uniform in Iraq and Afghanistan than the Iraqis and the Afghans have.”

This was hardly the only factual error uttered during the debate (and Paul didn't get things quite right in characterizing what the U.S. intelligence community has said about the Iranian nuclear program), but it was the biggest whopper of the evening. It also was the most dangerous falsehood.

Inaccuracies such as Tim Pawlenty calling Michael Mullen a general rather than an admiral, or Jon Huntsman mistakenly characterizing the pace of U.S.-Chinese diplomacy, are unlikely to make any difference in public perceptions that could have policy consequences. But Santorum's assertion, against the backdrop of habitual demonization of Iran, is just the sort of falsehood that is likely to stick and to contribute to mistaken public beliefs that in turn could provide support for disastrous policies.

We've seen that sort of thing happen in the recent past. Ron Paul had something perceptive to say about that, too. After Michele Bachmann joined Santorum with an “I will do everything to make sure Iran does not become a nuclear power” comment, Paul observed, “You've heard the war propaganda that is liable to lead us into war...They're building up this case just like they did with Iraq. Build up the war propaganda.”

Link to original article: Reality and a Whopper on Iran

moose · Aug 13, 2011

Not a war propaganda at all.
unlike nuclear china or the soviet colt war.
with Iran the problem is not if they will armed an shiab5 missal.
but the dirty bombs that will be distribute to El'kahida ,His'bullah ,or any other of our enemy's.
once there, the 'or else' leverage frightening will become a way of life for most Americans.

the only reality with Iran, is that, unlike, let say, Egypt, where with the new power given to the peoples now, we will never find the weapons we gave them in the last 30 years ,at least we did not gave them nukes.

RLENT · Aug 13, 2011

Moose,

I'm just guessing here ..... but I suspect that you will find that, ultimately, that this isn't a road ya wanna go down with me ....

moose said:
Not a war propaganda at all.

No .... actually, advocating "reasons" and (so-called) "justifications" for unprovoked, armed hostilities against a country and a people who have not attacked this country is exactly that: war propaganda .....

moose said:
unlike nuclear china or the soviet colt war. with Iran the problem is not if they will armed an shiab5 missal. but the dirty bombs that will be distribute to El'kahida ,His'bullah ,or any other of our enemy's. once there, the 'or else' leverage frightening will become a way of life for most Americans.

Likelihood is that were there no unqualified US support for Israel, and other authoritarian/repressive regimes in the Middle East, we wouldn't even be on their radar screens.

moose said:
the only reality with Iran, is that, unlike, let say, Egypt, where with the new power given to the peoples now, we will never find the weapons we gave them in the last 30 years ,at least we did not gave them nukes.

Same could be said for Israel ...... but unlike Eqypt's case (who while they have a horrid case in terms of human rights for their own citizens, haven't used our weapons in wars of aggression on their neighbors) ..... simply because Israel has used the weapons we have supplied in indiscriminate military actions - to commit de facto ethic-cleansing and genocide .....

The reason they have done so is unqualified support from the US - and it's time for that to end. More and more folks here in the US are beginning to (finally) understand that and see it for it is.

Without that unqualified US support, I suspect Israel will have new found motivation to get along with her neighbors.

PS - the fact that Israel is nuclear is a very good and entirely reasonable reason for Iran to want to acquire nukes .....

Let's try this: you don't want Iran to have nukes ? ...... well then, let's have Israel get rid of theirs ..... how about that ?

moose · Aug 15, 2011

RLENT said:
Moose,

I'm just guessing here ..... but I suspect that you will find that, ultimately, that this isn't a road ya wanna go down with me ....
Why not ?
i think you are a good debtor.
only you have opinions that are simply difference then the ones i have.
this is not about right or wrong, nor trying to make anyone's change his mind, but about sounding ones own opinions.
it might be intimidating to a point, simply because I'm new to the shoutBox, but we are going to have fun..
I'm sure you can find it in your heart to treat me with WG, and NOT make it personally. just remember that i'm a very busy person, (sorry,not a Vanner LoL) and it might take me days, or weeks to respond.

No .... actually, advocating "reasons" and (so-called) "justifications" for unprovoked, armed hostilities against a country and a people who have not attacked this country is exactly that: war propaganda .....
Unprovoked - as in a 2 decades of Iranians saying they will use all power given to them to kill all Americans once they have the chance to do so ?

Likelihood is that were there no unqualified US support for Israel, and other authoritarian/repressive regimes in the Middle East, we wouldn't even be on their radar screens.
this is exactly where we (as you and me) do not see eye to eye. You (if i may place some words in your mouth, and if im wrong please fix this) : are saying they hate us (as in Americans) because of our unmatched support to Israel.
While I understand that they hate us (as in all things American) simply because we are not them (as in Muslim Regine), and there for we needs to be killed.
they are going to go after everything not reading the Qur'an 5 times a day. it's the ONLY rezone they live.

Same could be said for Israel ...... but unlike Eqypt's case (who while they have a horrid case in terms of human rights for their own citizens, haven't used our weapons in wars of aggression on their neighbors) ..... simply because Israel has used the weapons we have supplied in indiscriminate military actions - to commit de facto ethic-cleansing and genocide .....
Egypt did not use that weapon just yet, simply because they yet to have a rezone to do so, and it is our job to make sure they don't.
they also did not used that weapon to do their job and fight evil. as in stopping the weapon train from entering the Gaza strip, like they should have and needs to. they also do not stop the refuge's train from Aritaria(Sudan) to Israel's southern borders.
the fact is, that Egypt have becomes a sponsor of terror. with an undisclosed numbers of our military supply, now at the hands of terrorists groups.
since they have demonstrated hoe the partners is, it is only a matter of time, till they will have the chance to use it themselves, unless, obviously, we can stop them, and proposed a valid alternative.
it is up to us to shape the future of those weapons.
The reason they have done so is unqualified support from the US - and it's time for that to end. More and more folks here in the US are beginning to (finally) understand that and see it for it is.

i think you are confusing the agreements we have with Israel (as to what they are allowed to or not allowed to do with our military supply), with what we wish them to used those weapons for. after all, there is a very complicated and detailed agreements, as to what every piece of supply can be used for. that's why America do not supply, for example more then the Avionics and platforms on jets.
as i sated here before, our military aid, is aiding Americans first, not only the recipients.
we won't sell it, if we would have an options, but we simply do not have enough wars of our own to support long term the military industry we needs, to provide for our own military .
the rezone we can afford our own wars, is simply because we sell military aid to country's we can trusts.
by doing so, we lose our control capability over those weapons.
there for when Israel is using it's military force to protect it's own citizens, we change the TV channel.
how arrogant those Israeli can be - to fight our own war, using our own weapons, but kill the enemy while doing so... must be something better to watch on the morning show.

but i think you MIGHT still owe me an explanations, or at least a handful of examples, when our military aid weapons was used for Ethic cleaning or genocide .
im a bit at a loss with that remark. maybe i read it wrong ?
but a friendly advice : don't bother, just wait one short month till Sept. the 10th, you can watch it live.
and i will be here to explain.

Without that unqualified US support, I suspect Israel will have new found motivation to get along with her neighbors.
Unfortunately they won't. it's not a war of choice. an Prim minister once said : "when the arabs lay down their guns - there will be no more war. when Israel lay down their guns - there will be no more Israel. "
beside, there is a growing voices in the Israeli cabinet, to stop the military aid. many Israelis feel the same. saying Israel will be better off spending the R&D and manufacturing domestic .
history have showed us that Israel will do well, with or without the American military Aid, it is America that needs that Aid . as the vast majority of that money is being spent domestic in America.
funny, during the 1st gulf war i had a bumper sticker on my scooter saying : "America don't worry - Israel will save you"
PS - the fact that Israel is nuclear is a very good and entirely reasonable reason for Iran to want to acquire nukes .....
with only one small difference :
Israel have never threatened using nukes, heck they did not even openly admitted for having one, yet alone giving anyone rezone to be concerned.
while Iran did, and do so, with very pointed targets.not only over Israel, but worldwide, and declaring America as a valid target, if and when.

Let's try this: you don't want Iran to have nukes ? ...... well then, let's have Israel get rid of theirs ..... how about that ?

Not going to happens. for the same rezone America will never give off it's nuclear military capability. the power of nuke is not by using it. but by having the options of using it as a last resort.
this is not an Attack weapon, it is a difference one, as so well being demonstrated over Japan, as it's ended WWII.
unfortunately it is the Attack weapon of choice by Iran, and the rezone we should never allow them to achieve nuke capability's.

Wow, that was long

paullud · Aug 15, 2011

There are more in depth reasons that we don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon than what Ron Paul seems to portray. It is much more of a concern that the weapon would be used to potentially start WWIII.

Posted with my Droid EO Forum App

OntarioVanMan · Aug 15, 2011

moose said:
Not going to happens. for the same rezone America will never give off it's nuclear military capability. the power of nuke is not by using it. but by having the options of using it as a last resort.
this is not an Attack weapon, it is a difference one, as so well being demonstrated over Japan, as it's ended WWII.
unfortunately it is the Attack weapon of choice by Iran, and the rezone we should never allow them to achieve nuke capability's.

Wow, that was long

Wow moose..take a deep breath!!