liberty student: Now imagine if someone in Iran, should it be attacked, was able to broadcast pictures of the wounded and dead 24/7. That's huge. People accept war, as long as they don't have to look at the bodies. As soon as it effects them personally, that's when their resolve weakens.
Now imagine if someone in Iran, should it be attacked, was able to broadcast pictures of the wounded and dead 24/7. That's huge. People accept war, as long as they don't have to look at the bodies. As soon as it effects them personally, that's when their resolve weakens.
Am I having a phantom memory here? Weren't pictures of the wounded and dead broadcast during the Iraq invasion? You couldn't turn on a TV in the Muslim world without seeing them, could you? But here in the States, hardly anything. The establishment press were in the tank for the war, and did their part by helping to sanitize it. How could a couple of low-traffic (at least low-traffic in the States) Iranian websites make a difference in this regard?
Now suppose that, for the sake of discussion, and against all my pessimistic expectations, these sites make enough of a splash after an attack to worry Obama & Co. regarding popular support for, or resignation to, the invasion. If His Majesty the President asked American ISPs to block "propaganda" from the offending sites whilst our brave lads (pardon me, persons) in uniform were defending our freedom from worse than death in Eye-ran, isn't there a fair chance that they would just cave, do their patriotic duty, and acquiesce? If there were such a thing as the Internet in 1965, and Lyndon Johnson asked the ISPs to stop retailing VC propaganda, I'm thinking that in the political climate of that time, the proprietors of ISPs would have told the Administration to sod off. Now I'm not at all sure.
Understand, liberty student, I pray God that you are right and I am wrong about this.
Am I the only one here who would feel more comfortable if Iran didn't have nuclear weapons?
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
GilesStratton:Am I the only one here who would feel more comfortable if Iran didn't have nuclear weapons?
me, i cant see good reason why any state should have them
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
even a stopped stratton is right twice a day.
GilesStratton: Am I the only one here who would feel more comfortable if Iran didn't have nuclear weapons?
Would you feel more comfortable if our growing imperial grasp upon the middle east eventually threatened nuclear armed Russia and/or China enough to push back?
Human Action Comics Issues 1-6
Lilburne:Would you feel more comfortable if our growing imperial grasp upon the middle east eventually threatened nuclear armed Russia and/or China enough to push back?
I don't think either of them will push back in a serious way, not any time soon anyway. Nonetheless, perhaps I've been buying into propaganda (and I am actually being sincere here) but given the current leader of Iran I'd rather them not have nuclear weapons at all.
GilesStratton:given the current leader of Iran
I wasn't aware Ahmadinejad had actually attacked anyone. Or had military bases around the world. Or had ever deployed WMDs.
GilesStratton:perhaps I've been buying into propaganda
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/37177.html
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php?articleid=11025
I think Ron Paul put it best. They can't even refine their own gasoline, and people start to fear that they are going to build a nuclear weapons program from scratch. It's the same sort of irrationalism that gets people to believe the 9/11 propaganda and every other war propaganda. Fear, ignorance and noble lies.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
Good God, not at all, mate. If you count me, there are at least two of us. But I should also feel more comfortable if the US government didn't have any, either. Or any other governments in the Nuke Club (Pakistan, India, Israel, Russia, you name it), for that matter.
Now Iran doesn't have any nuclear weapons. So are you comfortable GS? And nothing in the Bush-Obama barrage of abuse against Iran has persuaded me that Iran's nuclear program is anything beyond a program for power generation, which Iranian sods are entitled to under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. There are still nuclear power plants here in Illinois, USA, where I live (real, working plants, not just odds and sods put together to research and prepare for power generation). I'm hoping Washington isn't contemplating Shock and Awe for Illinois -- it would almost certainly ruin my day.
Now let me see, there was a recent incident in which the whole American foreign policy and intel juggernaut had uncovered a nuclear weapons program being conducted surreptitiously by an evil rogue government. Right under the noses of UN inspectors swarming all over the territory of the rogue government. Curse my memory, what was that all about? Wait a minute -- it's coming back to me now -- that was bloody Iraq, wasn't it? And didn't the whole bleeding American foreign policy, military, and intel juggernaut conduct an invasion and occupation of Iraq on account of that accusation (among others)? And what the devil did they find after combing the occupied country? That the stupid, gullible fools of UN inspectors whom they had spent months vilifying on a daily basis were spot on all along.
Sorry, GS, don't mean to blow my top. But really, shouldn't that particular bit of recent history give us pause about buying into the Administration's campaign against their enemy of the day?
The US media is hilarious- check out this interview with the Iranian President
http://www.newsweek.com/id/216040
Why is it that when they question foreign leaders- our media acts like they're government agents? Always feels like more of an interrogation than an interview and open discussion.
U.S. Is Seeking a Range of Sanctions Against Iran
----
As Lew said recently on the LRC Blog....
"When the Neocons Say ‘Sanctions’… …They actually mean impoverishment, sickness, starvation, and death. As an act of war intentionally directed at civilians (including women, children, old people, and non-combatant men), sanctions are war crimes—and those who implement them are war criminals. Those who propagandize for them are accessories to murder."
…They actually mean impoverishment, sickness, starvation, and death. As an act of war intentionally directed at civilians (including women, children, old people, and non-combatant men), sanctions are war crimes—and those who implement them are war criminals. Those who propagandize for them are accessories to murder."
Excerpt
http://www.infowars.com/more-lies-more-deception/
In keeping with its obligations under the treaty, on September 21 Iran disclosed to the International Atomic Energy Agency that it is constructing another nuclear facility. The British prime minister Gordon Brown confused Iran’s disclosure with “serial deception,”and declared, “We will not let this matter rest.”
What matter? Why does Gordon Brown think that Iran’s disclosure to the IAEA is a deception. Does the moronic UK prime minister mean that Iran is claiming to be constructing a plant but is not, and thus by claiming one is deceiving the world?
Not to be outdone in idiocy, out of Obama’s mouth jumped Orwellian doublespeak: “The Iranian government must now demonstrate through deeds its peaceful intentions or be held accountable to international standards and international law.”
The incongruity blows the mind. Here is Obama, with troops engaged in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan demanding that a peaceful nation at war with no one demonstrate “its peaceful intentions or be held accountable to international standards and international law.”
wilderness: those comments are so disturbing. i can't stand how people salivate over war. the inflationary war machine looks to be reaving up again.
those comments are so disturbing. i can't stand how people salivate over war. the inflationary war machine looks to be reaving up again.
The denizens of neocon blogs like Hot Air take it two steps furthers, and slander dissenters. Apparently they think the NAP is "19th century thinking", and lobbing Mk-77 bombs on people belongs in the 21st century world. What makes it 21st is that we don't use trebuchets anymore.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap