This post on the DailyKos blog is a collection of inferences from a variety of Washington sources about the game plan being readied for the next couple of weeks to prepare the public for and to get it to accept the war with Iran which is about to start. Might be crap, but given what you read elsewhere and given Bush & Co, it does seem plausible.

Like a big screen blockbuster, the tagline isn’t hard to guess: This time it will be different — we both have nukes! Or will!

They [the source’s institution] have “instructions” (yes, that was the word used) from the Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don’t think they’ll ever get majority support for this–they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is “plenty.”

Tactical:

1. Do not use “we” or “us.” The USA, us/we, are not going to attack Iran, Bush is. This approach aggravates the right’s increasing isolation AND protects you from “blame America first” distractions. They’re all alone and everyone hates them. Make them feel it.
[…]
4. The pro-war fringe. America has left them behind. They’re doing this partially out of spite, somewhere between scorched earth and sour grapes. […] Bombing Iraq helped them feel better about 9/11. Bombing Iran is supposed to help them feel better about Bush’s failure in Iraq.



  1. Smith says:

    It really isn’t very pratical for the US to start wars with every third world country that wants nukes. We should just make a policy announcement:

    “If a nuclear device is ever exploded in our country, we will immediately launch ten nuclear missiles into North Korea and Iran. THEN we will conduct an investigation to determine the responsible party. Now, does anyone else want to join the nuclear club?”

  2. MikeN says:

    I thought all the Democrats in the reality based community had the talking points that Iraq was a mistake, and that Iran was the real danger?

  3. ECA says:

    said before,
    SAY again..

    WHAT percentage of Muslims LIVE in the middle east?
    How many mothers, brothers, sisters, aunts and uncles..?
    If you attack a nation like this, what are the Odds, that 1/2 the country Splits, and shows up in other nations? Standard Guerrilla tactic.

  4. nightstar says:

    #11 mmigu “What a coincidence that the two countries that the US are currently invading just happen to be on both sides of Iran…..”

    This would seem rather obvious, however most Americans are ignorant of local geography let alone that of the middle East.

  5. nightstar says:

    #12 Pedro

    “#11 and they also told ahmedinacrazy to walk around with a chip on his shoulder and asking everyone on the western world who’s willing to take it.

    I bet the “holocaust didn’t exist” script has been given to him from the pentagon ”

    Your rationalization for invasion of a sovereign nation is lunacy. Should I shoot my neighbor because he claims there never was a Jesus?

  6. nightstar says:

    #39 “#18 Oh yeah! what about the threat he made to Israel, telling the four winds he (your cousin ahmedinacrazy) will make Israel dissapear? I must have dreamed that when I was doing you what you said you’d do to me. BTW, I just did it again.”

    You didn’t dream it Pedro, someone else dreamed it up for you. That was a faulty translation published by the corporate media to sway public opinion.

    But hey, you bought it so it was all worth while.

  7. joshua says:

    Bush isn’t going to war against anyone else. He hasn’t the troop strength or the material. Bush is through. Surge or no surge, no matter how well or bad things are at the end of his term. He will go down as the worst President in history.

    Iran has threatened Israel, and others. They are developing the means to make nukes, with the Russians backing. These things may not go down well with the left, but they are reality. We will have to deal with Iran someday, unless the moderates finally win out there.

    If it ever comes to war….I fully expect that it will be Hillary who does it…..to show she has the balls of a man.

  8. You says:

    Surely they must realize that going to war with Iran would be handing the Democrats the next three elections? Then again, maybe they don’t plan on there being any more elections.

  9. Gary Marks says:

    #43 nightstar, right on! My first clue to this was when it occurred to me how strange it was that an idiomatic phrase such as “wiped off the map” was used in the translation. It simply didn’t make sense to me that a good translator would use a phrase like that, loaded with so much extra meaning beyond the words themselves. Idioms like that cannot be helped in the source language, but they are dangerous and suspicious when used in the target language. What Ahmadinejad said in Farsi (he was actually quoting Ayatollah Khomeini) was nowhere near the reasonable equivalent of genocidal annihilation, which is what has been understood in the west from the mistranslated phrase “wiped off the map.” But anyone who wants to attack Iran benefits from this misunderstanding.

    With propaganda, as with religious indoctrination…
    Repetition makes it true.
    Repetition makes it true.
    Repetition makes it true.

  10. TIHZ_HO says:

    #47 With propaganda, as with religious indoctrination…
    Repetition makes it true.

    As practised by the US government.

    Pedro – do you speak Arabic?

    Cheers

  11. Greg Allen says:

    I’m a Democrat but I’m totally PO’d at our leadership. They’ve had six months (more, really) to get out ahead of this potential Bush fiasco and they haven’t done a thing.

    The other disaster we can see coming a mile away is for Bush’s bungled Iraq war to disastrously spin out into a regional war. The Bush bunch is too incompetent to ever see this coming so the adults need to step in… but they are not.

  12. Greg Allen says:

    … to be fair. It should be mentioned that the Dems have tried to fix some of this mess … for example, they did try to deauthorize the war ( http://tinyurl.com/2rh4n5 ) which would have limited Bush’s ability to insanely expand it into Iran.

    But, of course, the Republican obstructionists blocked it.

  13. TIHZ_HO says:

    I commented this for another post but I feel it is appropriate here as well

    Consider Russia, they fought in Afghanistan for 20 years? However here is Russia working with Iran with their nuclear power reactors.

    This ought to have been a joint US / Russian project. How does that saying go..”Keep your friends close and your enemies closer?” Instead of considering Iran as an enemy why not try to make them a friend? I am far from being naive but really the US has meddled so much in the middle east that there should be no surprise with the outcome.

    Regardless if you believe it or not the fact remains the US is seen as a Big Bad Bully with the only big stick in town and not at all like a big brother ready to extend a hand. The sooner the US moves towards being the big brother the situation will change

    I was moved by what JFK said in reference to the nuclear test ban treaty in 1963…The US was locked into a seemingly un-winnable cold war with Russia.

    “What kind of peace do we seek? Not a ‘Pax Americana’ enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables man and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children, not merely peace for Americans by peace for all men and women, not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.”

    This is what should make Americans proud for being Americans!

    Regardless of political party persuasion this ought to be and must be The United States Mission Statement to inspire the world to follow. This is what should be on both parties platforms next year.

    Shame that is not. How did we lose our way?

    Cheers

  14. ECA says:

    OK,
    what would be the best ways to fight the USA…

    GEt all the military OUT.
    Get shipped to Canada and mexico…and jump the borders, or if you have a passport, just WALK in.
    DONT bring anything with you, you will find enough HERE.
    Think about Harvest season…How many dry crops and forests are around..
    How many gas bombs can you make, to spread over a WHOLe city. cities that are LARGe and under manned.
    I would need only a couple of thousand people to rein terror.

    think about it.

  15. TIHZ_HO says:

    #53 And…? what’s the point other than why hasn’t anyone done this already?

    The only thing to think about is how much of the threat is real and how much is bullshit.

    The US right now is a frightened population doing what ever the government says…but under the banner of liberty.

    Cheers

  16. OvenMaster says:

    “About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.” So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!” (emphasis added)

    General Wesley Clark, March 2nd 2007, describing a conversation in the Pentagon in September 2001on http://www.democracynow.org

    N.B. Since 2001 of the seven countries mentioned; The regime has been changed in Iraq, Lebanon and Somalia. The Libyan government has changed orientation an aligned with the West. The positions of the Sudan and Syrian governments have weakened. Iran remains defiant.”

    This is quoted from

    Considering a war with Iran:
    A discussion paper on WMD in the Middle East
    Embargoed to 01.00 Hours GMT
    28 August 2007

    and is located here: http://tinyurl.com/363ty4

    The US is going to war with Iran before Bush leaves office. This is not bullshit.

  17. Mister Mustard says:

    >>It simply didn’t make sense to me that a good translator would
    >>use a phrase like that, loaded with so much extra meaning

    Unlikely that the original-language version used the exact words “wiped off the map”.

    However, I would fully expect a good translator to be able to translate the meaning of the original into English, rather than a word-for-word literal conversion. If you translate “wiped off the map” literally into Arabic or Farsi, it would sound like something you do with a dustcloth or a Swiffer, rather than what it actually MEANS. That’s why there’s a market for good translators, and people don’t just rely on Babelfish or FreeTranslation.

  18. TIHZ_HO says:

    #56 If this is so, then its a sad day…

    Bye Bye Miss American Pie drove my Chevy to the levee but the my tank was dry…

    And the good ol boys were drinking whisky and cried on the day when what America stood for died…

    Pax Americana… The new world order…?

    Cheers

  19. nightstar says:

    #48 Pedro, reread my comment #42. Contemplate your rationalization of preemptive war.

    When you offer a logical argument I’ll consider it. Until then I’ll assume your still sore from the earlier spankings I’ve administered.

  20. Gary Marks says:

    #57 Mister Mustard, I know this is way too long, but maybe it’ll be worth reading anyway.

    My point was that idiomatic phrases like “wiped off the map” are a clear mark of poor translation. If Ahmadinejad’s original Farsi words had actually meant annihilated, then it should have been translated thusly, but he didn’t say anything like that. He was making an historical reference in his speech, and actually quoting the now-deceased Ayatollah Khomeini. The English translator’s use of an idiom which is widely equated in the West with annihilation is inexcusable, even just from a procedural point of view, although it seems to have served its purpose.

    The original Farsi text:
    “Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.”

    Another scholar translates this to mean:
    “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.”

    It looks more like he’s calling for regime change in that region, and this is more in keeping with other remarks he has made. Interestingly, he has not threatened that Iran will bring about this regime change, yet the parties (both within and outside the U.S.) who want to see America attack Iran “pre-emptively” are using this incorrect perception of Iran’s threat to “wipe Israel off the map.” They need to build their case that Iran is the greatest threat to world peace. It seems more like a case of fearmongering by the same people who wanted to attack Iran long before this speech was ever made.

    Make no mistake, Ahmadinejad is no teddy bear by any means, but neither has he threatened to annihilate Israel. He continues to believe that if the Holocaust occurred in Germany, then the state of Israel should have been carved out in German territory as part of war reparations, rather than resulting in the displacement of so many Palestinians from their homeland, far away from where the Holocaust supposedly took place. That was one of the points he made in his letter to Bush, which was widely dismissed as the unintelligible ramblings of a crazy madman.

    The handwriting is certainly on the wall — we want to attack Iran. It just comes down to the question of how thinly stretched our resources are. Also, we have a limited window of opportunity. If their next election brings a more moderate-sounding President, we may not have the excuse we need to attack them. Wouldn’t that be a shame?

  21. nightstar says:

    #61 Pedro you are trying to vindicate the concept of “thought crime”.

    If what you say is valid we can turn it around and apply it to ourselves.

    It would seem then that all the nations of the earth should unite against the USA.

  22. nightstar says:

    #65 which extremists contend that motto Pedro?

    Your condemnation of Castro and so called Communism(Castro is a dictator BTW not a Communist) has no bearing on this debate.

    Argentia and any alleged bribes have no bearing on this debate.

    Your repetition of lies and disinformation doesn’t make anything true.

    Must I spank you again and again?

  23. Mister Mustard says:

    >>Ahmadinejad is no teddy bear by any means, but
    >>neither has he threatened to annihilate Israel.

    OK, he’ll keep Israel, he just wants to kill all the Jews (make them “vanish from the page of time”).

    Seems like “wipe them off the map” is certainly close enough for government work. Even if he bombed Israel into oblivion, it would still be “on the map”. I would just be a nuclear wasteland, with all the inhabitants having “vanished from the page of time”.

    I’ll bet this guy would get along great with Mel Gibson.

  24. Gary Marks says:

    #67… “OK, he’ll keep Israel, he just wants to kill all the Jews (make them ‘vanish from the page of time’)”

    Huh??? Your use of “them” is incorrect. When the U.S. called for regime change in Iraq, were we threatening to annihilate the Iraqis? I understood that there was a difference between killing all the citizens and changing the regime, but time and time again, we see Ahmadinejad’s denouncement of the Zionist regime in Israel being equated with a call to kill all the Jews. I don’t deny that what he actually said is still a very serious matter. Calling for regime change is extremely serious, and our own President only does it once in awhile. However, I fail to see a legitimate equation of regime change with genocide, which is what we’re being asked to believe he called for.

  25. Mister Mustard says:

    >>Huh???

    If you don’t understand the difference between making a whole civilization “vanish from the page of time” and “regime change”, I guess I have nothing more to say. You’re hopeless.

  26. Gary Marks says:

    MM….. Let me remind you again that you’re mismatching words and phrases — perhaps I wasn’t clear enough the first time. The word “regime” is supposed to be matched with “vanish from the page of time,” as those two were specifically paired in Ahmadinejad’s speech. You (inadvertently, I’m sure) substituted “whole civilization” as your apparent equivalent for “regime.” So to answer your question — yes, I do understand the difference between regime change and making a whole civilization vanish from the page of time. A better question would be, do you? You seem a bit confused.

    And thus, the pattern continues.

  27. TIHZ_HO says:

    #59 No Gas…the levee is incidental.

    Cheers

  28. TIHZ_HO says:

    What is interesting is the Muslims I know see Jews as brothers…WTF?

    Cheers

  29. Jared says:

    Your correct. He said regime change not genocide. If any one does not believe it than you will need to watch the video. You will hear it with all the references needed to make your mind up. And by the way stay off the drugs (fox news) it only warps your mind into believing what the neocons say. That’s called mind control. Question everything you hear on any station for that matter cause rupert owns several stations. And lots of radio too!

  30. XxJohnyxX says:

    It’s about time we did something about stupid Iran we should f*ckin nuke the b*sterds they deserve it


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 8528 access attempts in the last 7 days.