Rumblings of War with Iran

Friday, February 24, 2012

Transcript

The prospect of attacking Iran is making its way back into the media and political discourse, despite the fact that national security experts think a pre-emptive strike would be a bad idea. Brooke speaks to New York Times reporter Scott Shane about why talk of war is on the rise.

Errors - Tusk

Comments [10]

I am honored and impressed in the amount of honesty within this new cycle and the News Agencies' surely need to scrutinize themselves far more and aggressively than anyone or thing else. I Bet You All Thought The War In Iraq Was Not An Intellectual Insult Within Either of Your Inelligencies. Even Though this level of honesy is far too uncommon within the News Agencies'. I need a transcript of this = would you help!!! Rare But Good!!!

Apr. 25 2012 11:45 AM
anna from new york


"Where is our Presidential leadership?"
NOWHERE.
Listerer, I know we disagree. As I mentioned in #8, I am a Social Democrat and I am pretty sure you are not.
In FEBRUARY 2007 (!), I declared publicly and pompously (not typical) that I'd rather die than vote for "hope, unity, change and bipartisanship." I knew better than illiterate and rich Hollywood (with their focus on their BODIES, money, animals) and equally illiterate with similar interests New York.
I am pretty sure I am not going to vote at all this year.

Feb. 28 2012 09:34 AM
anna from new york

Yes, Steve from Oregon, life is simple. Only in America. Sorry to disappoint you, but I happen to be a Social Democrat (possibly the only one in this nation). Far left, far right. Today's far left is tomorrow far right, or reverse. Besides, the techniques are the same and collaboration is more than common. Someone recently quoted Hitler from 1927 (before he decided he needed the "capital"). The quote is as "socialist" as any by the OWS "socialist." These groups meet and the French have a great saying (I'll save it for the next time). Try harder, Steve.
dr anna

Feb. 28 2012 09:17 AM
Steve from Portland, Oregon

Hey OTM, having read the comments on a couple different segments, a couple weeks apart, I'm struck by the similarities between all these comments. Is OTM the target of an organized effort (however small it might be) by right-wing ideologues to post comments criticizing OTM segments, plus NPR and PBS general. Seriously, Brooke and, um, well, you know who you are, you guys should look into this. (Btw, I'm sorry I forgot your name ...or at least your first name, Mr. Garfield)

Feb. 27 2012 11:38 PM
listener

Israel destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981 a few years before Saddam gassed the Kurds with WMD Iraq famously never had and a nuclear Iraq would have put an interesting wrinkle into their invasion of Kuwait.
The Iraq War caused Libya to give up its WMD it was not supposed to have and Israel destroyed Syria's nuclear reactor in 2007 which would make their current uprisings rather more daunting for everybody.

A variable that goes unmentioned with these "rational actors" getting a nuke is that no doubt other "rational actors" like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other nations will strive to get them as well.

A century ahead with a broke United States trillions of dollars in debt to the new superpower China and an Islamic world with nuclear weapons.

Where is our Presidential leadership?

Feb. 27 2012 05:10 PM
anna from new york

I was so shocked by this nonsense that by inertia I continued to listen to ... NPR. Big mistake. The following program was "Smiley & West" which I've learned to avoid. As usual, two first class demagogues call me "sister" (an absolute insult - I am a decent person from a decent family) and as all demagogues do pressed all the cheap buttons. They also had a white guest (moreover "Jewish") which of course meant that black antisemitism needed white reinforcement. Yes, the "lady" was Margaret Ratner Kunstler (yes, the wife of you know whom) who predictably shared her big problem - she is unable to be antisemitic without being called antisemitic.
Yes, isn't this the biggest problem in the world now? Shouldn't we feel for poor, poor, poor rich and so privileged American who just want to be a bigot and hypocrite and BENEFIT from it.
Pure undeluted evil.
dr anna (antisemitism is one of my areas of expertise)

Feb. 27 2012 09:15 AM
concerned citizen from New York

"On The Media" is supposed to report of the reporting of issues, not editorialize on them itself. Today's program used a New York Times "news" report as representative of media reporting on Iran. But, this week, on the same day and on the same page as the US intelligence community unanimously denied that there was evidence that Iran was on the cust of a nuclear bomb, a New York Times report of UN officials and EU officials stated the opposite, that Iran was on the verge of nuclear capability.
Why didn't "On The Media" report that story as well?
Why is it that the UN and EU - not exactly the greatest friends of Israel - come to conclusions so different from our intelligence community, that jibe with Israel's assessment?
Isn't this a legitimate question for On The Media?
Perhaps it is our own intelligence community - and even the New York Times itself - who are overreacting to their own mistaken judgments over Iraq by belittling a completely different set of evidence for Iran. Isn't this another possible avenue for media analysis?
Exactily why did the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff lecture Israel that attacking Iran is not even an option? Doesn't it appear that there is a coordinated Administration assault on Israel against a possible strike, which itself is also a proper subject for a media analysis program to raise?
Another line of questioning - what are the similarities and differences today and vs Iraq? One of the differences is the Iranian proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, who are already carrying out terror acts even without a nuclear capability.
I respectfully request a response from On The Media to these points.

Feb. 27 2012 12:25 AM
Chris Gray from New Haven, CT

So, some readers here my recall that I once saw photos of my Mom's sister, her husband and their son, Cousin Billy, at the royal table with the Shah and his family when Billy worked for them. Simultaneously, my best high school friend, whom I had met in 10th grade German while he also had French and Latin and I Spanish, now served as the President of the University of New Haven's Foreign Students club and had a largely Iranian club complaining of heavy surveillance and brutality by Savak, the Shah's secret police. I assumed a revolt would lead to democracy not a theocracy.

According to Joe Klein on the Chris Matthew's Show today, Ahmadinejad is not going to win re-election since the Supreme Leader won't allow his slate of candidates to run. I advise our President to offer to build the 5 nuclear plants we once promised the Shah. This would immediately take the issue of weapons and their proliferation off the table and, while I personally despise the proliferation of any nuke technology, let them suffer a Chernobyl or Fukishima and the attendant physical and political fall-out rather than us. That's only a hope.

Meantime, when I facetiously suggested in a tweet to C-SPAN'S Washington Journal that one brave American with a backpack tactical nuclear weapon exploding at Mecca (I was looking for anyone named George Bush to volunteer.) could solve the world's problem.s with Wahabiism (right wing Sunni thought, supported by the Saudis), I got a very supportive follower known as IranRiggedElection. I'm guessing they have no problem with us eliminating threats to Shiites.

Feb. 26 2012 04:10 PM
anna from new york

This is unbelievable. This security guy talking about his belief in rationality of Iranian government brought to mind his predecessors who talked about rationality of German government (yes, I am referring to Hitler)
There are ugly traditions of bigotry and corruption in American government (foreign service, CIA etc.) - one of the recent examples is Tenet sitting in Saudi Arabia's sheiks' pool expressing himself ... antisemiticly of course). Similarly, the NYT talked about rationality of Hitler and ... just didn't notice the Holocaust.
The only military expert I know will go directly after his retirement, with his pension, to some neo-Nazi camp.
In other words, laughing and enjoying oneself is nice, but why not ask your guests real questions.

Feb. 26 2012 03:49 PM
listener

"You don't have an administration hell bent for war"
The Iraq War was approved by the US Congress and the Libyan "kinetic military action" was not not in violation of the War Powers Act. Apparently "hell bent for war" means lawful approval by the US Congress.

If only Mormons, Catholics and Evangelicals were granted the same generous benefit of the doubt as the Holocaust denying "rational actors" in Iran who threaten the existence of a fellow member of the United Nations.

Feb. 24 2012 11:44 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.