« Israeli Spy Arrested | Main | People who can't shoot - anything. »

26 April 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Charles I

"it is clear to me that many, many people in the USA are not in a position to resist propaganda spread in the MSM and by people like Mullen and Gates."

So it would seem; it would seem the Republic is thus lost. Enjoy the rebate before you give it back at the gas station - its the driving season!

Zanzibar - the implication is get your wheelbarrow ready for hyperinflation, and the best preparation is to own a non-urban, non-grid-heatable home with garden and water access amongst people you know and somewhat trust.

m. savoca

after watching the US government video and related narration, which can be found at the bbc web site:


i am inclined to believe that our case against syria was convincing.

i am a strong critic of the Bush Cheney administration and the lies they propagated in the run up to the war in Iraq.

so i would appreciate if someone would review the reporting at the BBC web site. and critique.

given the info available to me so far, i support of the administrations position.


M. Savoca:

so i would appreciate if someone would review the reporting at the BBC web site. and critique.

There are plenty of good candid overviews available on the web. For example, Andrew Foland has been doing some excellent work, which is summarized here:


I particularly recommend reading Professor Foland's investigations, because (as the Colonel does here at SST), Dr. Foland gives due attention to the all-important epistemological aspects of this story.


Why is Cheney so much in line with the Likud/neo-con clique? A good question. Well, he's reputed to be something of a libertine in private life so I don't buy the religious thing.

What I would point to are these: his devotion to executive power, which he has declared had been usurped by Congress (!) in the Nixon days; his apparent self-image as a man ruled by necessity and fact and unswayed by emotion or public opinion; the Israelis' self-portrayal as the ultimate "hard men" ruled by state necessity and unswayed by human weakness. (The IRA reference is deliberate.)

In other words, they are birds of a feather. And they share this, an opinion that the people living in the area have no reality or humanity. Cheney comes at this view largely because he's a natural-resources extractor of the late 19th century ilk, for whom the job of local rulers was to keep the local vermin out of the way so the really important enterprises could continue.

His role in this administration is Grima Wormtongue, functioning like a chief of staff who defines problems for the decision of a chief executive. But the poor sap of a CEO can't see how he's being manipulated by an astute combination of obsequious flattery and barely-concealed contemptuous bullying; a nice little s&m kind of relationship.

On Iran, could it be that the goal of any campaign would be simply to sever communications between the gulf region and Teheran? In other words, to Iraqify Iran and attempt to destroy its unity as a state? IIRC, the reputed sites are mostly in the middle of the country, and it would deny oil revenue to Teheran, something Cheney and the Likudniks have wanted to do.

No occupation needed, just chaos created and a power center in the region destabilized.

Outrageous oil prices would follow and justify the most severe repressions in the Gulf to clear the way for exports from Iraq. If troops could be found it would justify occupation of the south, but who would do it? And would it really be necessary? Expensive oil does wonders for some peoples' blind trusts, after all.

I wonder who might see themselves as benefiting from that?

Babak Makkinejad


Please take a look at Juan Cole's site:


and look for the comments on this topic half-way through the page.

If this were indeed a nuclear site, Syria, as an NPT signatory, was entitled to it - she only needed to declare it when and if she were about to introduce nuclear fuel into that facility.

For US, a signatory of NPT, to try to justify the actions of a non-signatory of NPT against the purported nuclear facilities of another NPT signatory is just plain foolish; in my opinion.

Is it now the policy of the people and government of the United States that there are Nulcear Good Guys and Nuclear Bad Guys? Is NPT dead? And IAEA is about to be dismantled?

I would be much obliged to you if you could kindly take the trouble of explaining what it is that you support.


I'm not sure if this has come up in the discussion yet, but do you think the promotion of Patreus to centcom is in anyway pertinent in the push to attack Iran?

different clue

I don't understand why Gates is doing this. I thought Gates was supposed to be Baker's man (and therefor Poppy's and the whole Grey Establishment's man) in the White House. He
was supposedly sent over there to be Dubya's thinking-brain dog and preventer of bad bets like a
recreational attack on Iran.
And now he is catapulting the propaganda for a recreational attack on Iran?
What does it mean?


"Guns of August?" Or maybe some other month?

January 2009. Nice way for Bush to hand off the presidency to Obama or Hillary, no?


In my opinion, this conversation about Syria reactor is completely useless. (so what if it is real or not. makes no difference strategically.)

It doesn't take nuke for Syria to win against Israel.

All they need to do is transform their military from traditional tank+infantry, to light infantry + semi robotic drone. (that is to say, hezbollah + light industrial base + small group of drones)

This will enables hezbollah/Syria to attack Israel fuel depots and electric plants. Whereby changing the dynamic considerably.

So what if Israel can fly F-16 and bomb the entire Lebanon. There is nothing to bomb except large civilian buildings.

so, once fuel depot/amunition dump are damaged. Tanks/motorized vehicles logistic become very problematic.

And Israel army practically collapse into bunch of guys with guns 100 miles from home with no support.

On top of that. Once hezbollah can build fiberglass submarines. All Israel coastal cities are toast. (chemical plants, refineries, ports, cargo ships, etc)

again, so what if Israel has the fastest destroyers. Hezbollah just going to paddle their fibreglass submarines and saunter into Israel water. There isn't a single thing they can do.

So... Who cares about the nuclear reactor. It's irrelevant to military balance. If I were Israelis general, I would be more afraid of Syria start developing effective UAV bomber and giving it to hezbollah.

John Howley

Iran-Europe gas deals alarm US
By Daniel Dombey in Washington, Anna Fifield in Tehran,and Haig Simonian in Zurich
Published: May 1 2008 03:00 | Last updated: May 1 2008 03:00

The US and its allies are worried that the sanctions regime against Tehran is under threat from a possible new wave of European investment in Iran's strategically important gas sector.

Tehran has already concluded gas deals with Chinese and Malaysian companies - ending a protracted lull in investment in its energy sector - and has alarmed Washington by reaching an agreement with a Swiss group.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad