The aggression starts with Trump
How many people are aware that Trump’s threat to destroy 52 sites important to Iran was a response to a specific threat by Iran? Here’s what a prominent Iranian general had said just previously:
[Gen. Gholamali] Abuhamzeh, commander of the Revolutionary Guards in the southern province of Kerman, foreshadowed a possible attack on “vital American targets” located in the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation of Soleimani’s death.
“The Strait of Hormuz is a vital point for the West and a large number of American destroyers and warships cross there,” Abuhamzeh said according to a Reuters report, citing Tasnim news agency.
“Vital American targets in the region have been identified by Iran since long time ago … some 35 U.S. targets in the region, as well as Tel Aviv, are within our reach.”
Note the specific number, 35, plus the added threat to Israel.
Trump’s counter was therefore quite apropos and an “escalation” only in the numbers involved:
Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader who had just killed an American, & badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including recently….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 4, 2020
….hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking our Embassy, and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have…..
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 4, 2020
….targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 4, 2020
But it was very easy to miss the back-and-forth nature of the trash-talking. NBC’s coverage here seems typical. The headline was “Trump threatens attacks on 52 sites if Iran retaliates for Soleimani killing Trump tweeted the targets ‘WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD’ if Iran retaliates for the killing of Qassem Soleimani.” If one reads just the headline – as so many people do – it appears that Trump’s threat just came out of the blue. It’s only way way down much later in the article that there’s a mention of the quote threat from Iran that set it off. But I doubt most people get that far.
When I first took notes for this post, I looked at this Times article which began this way:
Iran condemned Donald Trump on Sunday as a “terrorist in a suit” after the U.S. president threatened to hit 52 Iranian sites hard if Tehran attacks Americans or U.S. assets in retaliation for the killing of military commander Qassem Soleimani.
“Like ISIS, Like Hitler, Like Genghis! They all hate cultures. Trump is a terrorist in a suit. He will learn history very soon that NOBODY can defeat ‘the Great Iranian Nation & Culture’,” Information and Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Javad Azari-Jahromi tweeted.
Soleimani, Iran’s pre-eminent military commander, was killed on Friday in a U.S. drone strike…
Iranian propaganda led the way.
But now, looking at the same article again, I see that it starts somewhat differently and then goes this way (they keep updating it, apparently). My remarks and comments on the text are in brackets:
Iraq’s parliament called on Sunday for U.S. and other foreign troops to leave as a backlash grows against the U.S. killing of a top Iranian general, and President Donald Trump doubled down on threats to target Iranian cultural sites if Tehran retaliates. [No mention of the attack on the embassy. No mention of the Iraqi threats to which Trump was responding. Characterization of the Iraqi vote as a response to Trump rather than something the Iranian faction controlling the present Iraqi government has wanted and planned.]
Deepening a crisis that has heightened fears of a major Middle East conflagration, Iran said it was taking another step back from commitments under a 2015 nuclear deal with six major powers. [The Times and the MSM have been instrumental in heightening those fears of “a major Middle East conflagration.” It is a pretense that Iraq ever intended compliance with the Obama “deal.” The “six major powers” are invoked to give more gravitas to the idea that the deal was a great one, which is a fiction the Times helped initially convey and now tries to maintain.]
Iran’s most prominent general, Qassem Soleimani, [yeah, he was just a regular old “prominent general”] was killed on Friday in a U.S. drone strike on his convoy at Baghdad airport, an attack that carried U.S.-Iranian hostilities into uncharted waters. [U.S.-Iranian hostilities have been in these basic waters for a long time. Also, note that there is an equivalence here in the phrase “U.S.-Iranian hostilities,” with the US listed first as though Iran has not been the aggressor since 1979. All those “Death to America” chants are just a backlash, you see. Or maybe the Times hopes we don’t even recall those chants, or how long and how frequently they have been shrieked.]
An Iranian government minister denounced Trump as a “terrorist in a suit” after the U.S. president sent a series of Twitter posts on Saturday threatening to hit 52 Iranian sites…[I’d bet the Times agrees with the Iranian characterization]
Democratic critics of the Republican president have said Trump was reckless in authorizing the strike, and some said his comments about targeting cultural sites amounted to threats to commit war crimes. [Let’s add that to the other bogus impeachment charges.]…
It was Trump’s withdrawal of the United States from the deal in 2018 and reimposition of sanctions on Iran that touched off a new spiral of tensions after a brief thaw following the accord. [Yes, when the US is paying a country to pretend to agree to something, and allows that country to use the money to fund terrorism and buy influence around the world, then there’s every reason for that country to ease up on the attacks for a bit. Don’t bite too hard the hand that feeds you.]
On Sunday, Iran further distanced itself from the agreement, saying it would continue to cooperate with the U.N. nuclear watchdog but would respect no limits to its uranium enrichment work. [Like it was ever going to abide by the agreement in the first place.]
That meant “there will be no limitations in enrichment capacity, level of enrichment and research and development and … it will be based on Iran’s technical needs,” state TV said, quoting a government statement. It said the rollback of its nuclear commitments could be reversed if Washington lifted sanctions on Tehran. [The sanctions are really hurting them.]
As head of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, Soleimani masterminded Iran’s clandestine and military operations abroad, creating an arc of Shi’ite power with the help of proxy militias confronting the regional might of the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia. [Soleimani was just trying to take over the governments of other Middle Eastern countries to counter that big bad troika, that axis of evil, the US, Israel, and the Saudis. Forget that this ambition by Iran has been going on long, long, before Trump.]
Hundreds of thousands of mourners, many chanting, beating their chests and wailing in grief, turned out across Iran to show their respects after his body was returned to a hero’s welcome. [No doubt they did this. Orchestrated mourning mixed with some sincere mourning from those who back the Iranian government’s terror and imperialist reach. So what?]
I could go on, but why bother?
And in fact, sometimes I wonder why I fisk the Times at all anymore. I think it’s because I know plenty of people who think it’s the paper of record, and I believe it still has tremendous influence. As propaganda, it’s rather brilliant and rather subtle in the sense that, if the reader doesn’t know the history and the counter-arguments, it is quite persuasive.
It’s always Year Zero …. when leftists need it to be.
Things today, this afternoon, from various places (J. E. Dyer, Mike Pregent, others)
DoD has notified Iraq Gov’t by letter the US is moving (mostly out) US troops from Iraq areas where IRGC-QF operates. Some US will remain in Kirkuk says one source, but Hashd has to go from there.
6 B-52s are headed to Diego Garcia. For support of future operations.
From JEDyer’s twitter, a repost of someone else: “Somethings up. 52 F35’s the entire fighter wing from Hill AFB, Departed this morning, What a sight to behold Living near the base I have never seen activity like this”
“Top general says letter suggesting US would withdraw troops from Iraq was a ‘mistake'”:
From the get-go, the NYT et al. have been writing about Trump like they write about Israel.
That should have been the giveaway from day one.
The only conclusion is that there are vast numbers of people who are flying by their emotions, who are so intoxicated by hate that they cannot even contemplate what has happened to them; who have no inkling that they are being taken for a ride.
(On the other hand, maybe they truly wish to be lied to, deceived and manipulated…which, of course, sounds non-sensical; but none of this makes any sense except in an emotional, Orwellian need to seethe, to hate and to promote and foster hate—hate as a pleasurable narcotic—kind of way. All of which matches up perfectly with the drug-like ubiquity of social media, alas; which has replaced religion, as it were, as the opiate of the masses…)
As head of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, Soleimani masterminded Iran’s clandestine and military operations abroad, creating an arc of Shi’ite power with the help of proxy militias confronting the regional might of the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
He also held the nuclear portfolio. Why they don’t mention? Such a mystery.
Isn’t the Times published motto:
“All the News that fits We print”?
maybe they truly wish to be lied to, deceived and manipulated [Barry]
Bingo!
Had dinner with a neighbor couple of liberal views this weekend. Shocked by how little this educated pair knew about any of the major issues, from Iran, to impeachment, to climate change. I know they will retreat back into the NYTimes for comfort after we brought up (mildly!) a few conflicting facts. It’s their noinng-noinng.
Neo:
I have long wondered, and sometimes objected, to your continued “fisking” of the NYTimes. It is and has for a long time been a hateful instrument of social corrosion and misinformation. My psychiatrist brother worships it and its contents, the result being that we cannot discuss virtually anything. His opinions on issues are facts, and my facts are facts on which I have tried to seek his opinion. Sad.
His Times worship is rooted in what he deems anti-authoritarianism. He loved the publication of the Pentagon Papers. He admires leakers like Comey.
Excellent fisking job, Neo.
So much that is not widely known and so little of the substance being reported by the MSM. The NYTs is right on the lefty message. How dare we defend ourselves? We should take our medicine like good little children. After all, we deserve it because …….privilege or something.
VDH hits the right notes in this essay:
“Certainly, it may be in the larger economic interests of America to keep moderately priced oil flowing from the Middle East. But disruptions, cartels, and embargoes do not matter to the United States in the degree they did during the last half-century.
This reality is especially germane when the European Union, larger and nearly as rich as the United States, simply will not provide for its own security, despite its proximity to the region and its dependence upon it. China likewise freeloads on the U.S. Navy’s deterrent presence in waters off the Middle East.
These new realities do not necessarily mean we should vacate the region entirely, only that we should be far less likely to intervene when others have far more at stake.”
*****************
“The administration seems intent on avoiding the appeasement of Obama and also the interventionism of the Bush years. So far, it has managed to help destroy ISIS without getting into a shooting war with Turkey over the Kurds or knee-deep in the quagmires of Syria. The administration wants to find a way out of both Iraq and Afghanistan that does not destroy U.S. deterrence, a quest that ultimately depends on how we define deterrence, both regionally and globally.
In other words, the United States is trying to square a circle, remaining strong and deterring our dangerous elements, but to do so for U.S. interests—interests that increasingly seem to be fewer and fewer in the Middle East.”
Well worth reading it all: https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/05/what-is-the-middle-east-in-the-middle-of-anymore/
Actually, I wonder whether it’s the hate itself (and related feelings of scorn, disdain, contempt) that is the real narcotic.
Together with the mob dynamic acting as a force multiplier….
Whether it provides a tremendous thrill and as in running, releases palpable endorphins.
“Hater’s high”?….
Hassan Rouhani tweets: “Those who refer to the number 52 should also remember the number 290. #IR655 Never threaten the Iranian nation.”
290. That’s the Lockerbie 747. IR655 is the passenger plane Vincennes shot down.
sdferr gives us insight into the long Shia numerological memories.
The NYT and WAPO long ago turned into Pravda for the democrats. I stopped taking the WAPO years ago because there was no difference between the front page and the editorial page.
sdferr:
“Never threaten the Iranian nation” says Rouhani. Should be “Never threaten the Iranian nation. We’re the only ones allowed to issue threats.”
Heh yes neo, even “never harm Iranian nation: We’re the only ones who do that”.
Just listened to Andrew Klavan talk with M. Doran: here, https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=yoJuhbkseHs
About 9mins30secs in. Doran lays out Khamenei’s problem: he must show strength but exactly that will trigger Trump’s promised destruction x52. Which I seriously take will mean the end of that regime. Odds aren’t even as good as Scylla/Charybdis.
J. Hinderaker, Powerline: “WAR CRIMES” HYSTERIA ON THE LEFT
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/01/war-crimes-hysteria-on-the-left.php
See whole post for embedded tweets from DJT, AOC, Ihan Omar, Maggie Haberman
The wife of Captain Rogers, the Vincennes CO, was car bombed in 1989. She was not injured but the car was destroyed. Since then Bush and successive presidents have avoided retaliation againt the Quds force. Trump owes less than zero to the Intel Community so had no hesitation in going after Suleimani.
I am amazed at the MSM reaction to the hit. Juan Williams was droning on about it a few minutes ago on Fox. Are they all comfortable in siding with an enemy?
VD Hanson has a post on the “get even election” coming up in November. He thinks people are angry about what has been done, even if they are not fond of Trump.
Neo,
you bring here As propaganda?
Ok, I think the western has not read or knew what Mullah did and can do with their “propaganda”
Mullah’s first foremost tool to be Mullah is his “mouth/ Tunge”, its very simple tool and asset.
They start talking to people he needs to convince them about something (religious matter), he should be very skilled or learn to be effective to brainwash the mind of the public.
As much as he succeeded in this matter he climes the rank of Mullah.
They used different ways and style for their propaganda, they start in the street in small communities than “Hussainiah”
Let give some examples of Iranian Mullah propaganda to benefits inside and may outside Iran and see how their tactic works while we all think that Iranian regime has many trebles inside Iran before the killing of their gange master
Qassem Suleimani’s daughter warns US of ‘dark days’ ahead
There are more and more ways for Mullah propaganda
In the kindergarten of several cities, the symbolic casket of Qasim Soleimani was displayed to children under the age of 6. This is mental damage, who still has no understanding of death and life after that most children worry about losing their parents
https://twitter.com/AkhondeG/status/1214288417070231553
This behaviour of the Mullah regime in Iraq reminds us of Khomeini time when his regime facing growing opposition to his regime which led the regime to starts attacking borders checkpoints on Iraqi borders which all documented with UN at a time. So Saddam nerve was pushed by that and he went to war with Iran which Mullah regime was hungry and happy to get which make all faction and opposition inside Iran devolved and have all support for his regime by the nation
Huge crowds flood Tehran streets for Soleimani’s funeral reminded Iranians with Khomeini’s funeral
Huge crowds flooded the streets for Stalin’s funeral too.
A few years later, they wondered why they had paid respects to an obvious tyrant.
Some things take time to settle in.
FB; Chester Draws:
Khomeini’s funeral[s].
As I get older, I get more and more persuaded that perhaps the worst flaw of all is denial because it enables so many of the awful parts of our nature.
Rod Dreher made a big deal recently about how he was quitting the New York Times after it published some piece he found horribly offense and harmful to traditional Christianity. Shortly after that, he was back referencing stories in the Times with the excuse that he “had” to keep reading it in order to keep blogging.
That was ridiculous and I told him so. He isn’t a general interest blogger and the fairly narrow area of subjects he usually writes about aren’t exactly what the NYT really focuses on. Besides, it’s 2019 and anything really significant that shows up in the NYT will usually be repeated ad nauseam all over the web and social media. This isn’t 1950, for pity’s sake.
Rod Dreher went back to reading the Times because he WANTS to read the Times. Because even though he’s retreated to the wilds of Louisiana and the online paleo-con environs of The American Conservative, Dreher still really wants to think of himself as the sort of cosmopolitan type who reads the NYT. Even though he rants and raves incessantly about how those same people are out to get him and other believers, he needs to think of himself as being just like his would-be oppressors.
And if Dreher could just admit that about himself, he’d probably become both a better thinker and writer and more able to combat the looming Christian persecution he fears. But of course, he’s far too intelligent, educated, and sophisticated to be ruled by such petty neurosis and social yearning. That’s only for other people.
And why it matters is that ultimately the only thing any of us can do about the NYT is deny it our time, attention, and money. If enough of us did that, the New York Times would stop being THE NEW YORK TIMES and it would become just another voice in the crowd. But that can never happen if you convince yourself that you have to read it no matter what.
Mike
MBunge:
This is why I continue to read the Times (not all that often, but certainly rather often) and continue to write about it:
(1) It influences a huge number of people, including so many people I know.
(2) I find it fascinating in terms of the way it designs its propaganda. It has a very subtle, smooth touch that I believe is very effective.
(3) And yet it is so easy to fisk.
As for your last paragraph, where you say that if enough people stopped reading the paper it would lose its influence – of course that’s true. The key word is “enough.” But in all these years of the paper’s lies, there are tons of people still reading the Times and using it for guidance, relying on what it says and believing it. If every person on the right topped reading it I doubt it would make it more than a tiny bit less influential or less important, because I strongly suspect that the vast majority of people reading it are not on the right.
Plus, the people on the left who read it magnify its effect by quoting it to their reader, listeners, friends and family. I try to point out its flaws, and to do that I must read the article I’m writing about.
I have never paid for a subscription, though.
Is it possible that some of Obama’s cash-in-hand to the mullahs was used to buy a controlling interest in the papers, or are they really just that anti-American?
“As propaganda, it’s rather brilliant and rather subtle in the sense that, if the reader doesn’t know the history and the counter-arguments, it is quite persuasive.” – Neo
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Reagan
Neo has pointed out before, and I have noticed elsewhere, that the bulk of NYT / WaPo propaganda is of the class “every individual thing they said is true and the article as a whole is a lie.”
Of course, sometimes they out-right lie, but they usually try to disguise that as a “some people say” perspective, or as something from anonymous sources.
sdferr on January 6, 2020 at 8:19 pm said:
J. Hinderaker, Powerline: “WAR CRIMES” HYSTERIA ON THE LEFT
* * *
One of the commenters there posted a breakdown of the “52 card pick up” math for the Left.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7a813972ffd5d6e8749e32bbf55ca03c5ab3db38be680eea0e88ae927560fae7.jpg
sdferr again: “From JEDyer’s twitter, a repost of someone else: “Somethings up. 52 F35’s the entire fighter wing from Hill AFB, Departed this morning”
I know President Trump’s “52” is for the 1979 hostages, but that’s an unusual coincidence.
AesopFan:
That’s a big part of its brilliance and subtlety as propaganda. Usually everything is true in the sense of facts. It’s the omissions as well as the word choices that guide the reader to a certain conclusion that is a lie. And it’s also what and who they choose to quote and what to emphasize.
PS While I was checking the Reagan quote, I got a laugh that I’m sure Wikipedia did not intend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_only_reports_what_the_sources_say
About that mistaken letter — it’s CNN, Jake.
So, as with the Democrats in Congress, don’t tell anybody anything you aren’t prepared to see in print.
And note that CNN (as does NYT) omits that the Parliament vote was by only the Shi’ites (presumably friendly to or working for Iran), and that the Kurds and Sunnis boycotted.
And the rebuke part is opinion.
PS I wondered when I read about that resolution yesterday: does “other foreign troops” include Iranians?
If so, we helped them out with that part already.
And they are sending another 52 message.
This numerology thing is impressive.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/us-deploys-b52-bombers-indian-ocean
Pretty sharp eyes, to know where they are headed just from spotting them departing.
Neo’s first link to American Thinker has a very useful chart of US & Iranian firepower. Just in case you were worried.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/the_showdown_with_tehran_enters_its_rhetorical_stage.html
The chart came from UK Express in June, so I’ll just link it here by itself.
https://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2020-01/218250_5_.jpg
Think of this as a companion piece to the chart.
It starts better than most of the Leftist MSM, too.
https://www.meforum.org/60201/iran-lacks-good-options
Be interesting to see who comes.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/01/06/iraqi-consulate-in-detroit-to-hold-memorial-event-for-soleimani-condolences-accepted-from-public/
Probably some of the ubiquitous anonymous sources.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/01/06/here-we-go-again-deep-state-leaks-intel-about-soleimani-strike-in-hopes-of-damaging-trump/
Led by Nancy & her Super-Gavel.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/01/06/pelosi-house-to-vote-on-resolution-limiting-trumps-actions-against-iran/
BTW Neo, one thing that seem’s to be debatable is the context, meaning, legality, and consequences of the killing of Soleimani.
The NRO writers alone have staked a position on just about every possible permutation.
I’m putting my chips with John Yoo on this one.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/qasem-soleimani-strike-president-trump-has-constitution-precedent-on-his-side/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=second
Very extensive and clear analysis of the legal factor.
Melanie Phillips turns a good phrase.
https://www.melaniephillips.com/killing-qasem-soleimani/?fbclid=IwAR1vD3_P93FNYrYJ-aCCpbInzQmI2haYNV9gdpYyb1Pj1k5AIxiPhvokz0U
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/01/obamas-benghazi-baghdad-daniel-greenfield/
RTWT.
And then add some more of Daniel’s posts from his side-bar.
Sometimes just the headline is enough to get the picture, but you’ll miss some good barbs if you don’t read the post.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/01/iran-will-punish-us-no-longer-lying-about-nuclear-daniel-greenfield/
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/01/disproportionate-retaliation-great-trump-doctrine-daniel-greenfield/
I liked Yoo’s post, but Greenfield is more succinct.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/01/no-killing-soleimani-didnt-require-congressional-daniel-greenfield/
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/01/no-iraqs-parliament-didnt-vote-expel-us-troops-its-daniel-greenfield/
OT but another example of President “VSG” Trump’s humor, totally lacking in Obama and the Left.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/01/06/rush-limbaugh-interviews-president-donald-trump-transcript-and-audio-video/
But this is why he won the election, and hopefully the next one as well.
You can’t fake authenticity.
Your missing the point. The lede is the nature of Trump’s threat, not its order of occurrence.
Similarly, when Trump threatened to take out the families of terrorists, the various headlines saying “Trump threatens to kill the families of terrorists” didn’t hinge on “threaten”, but rather “families.”
Yeah, we know terrorists target families. The news is that the US President wants to.
In this case, its cultural targets.
families of terrorists
Oh. Like the teenager, son of al-Awlaki Obama actually drone-killed? Like that?
Oh, look at that: I buried the lede! They were both US citizens summarily executed on Obama’s order, without trial. Amazing efficiency in an otherwise utterly feckless foreign policy conduct, too.
Thanks for the fisking of the NY Times, neo. And thanks for reading the NY Times so that guys like me don’t have too.
And, thanks commenters for your great posts.
Iran threatening our Persian Gulf targets is getting out-of-date. Being self-sufficient in oil and gas, we no longer have to be able to keep the Gulf open, we only have to be able to close it.
What Ira said.
The Times is the paper of record. An that record is an old single by Question Mark and the Mysterians.
Surellin, closing the Strait is possible, but it’s not clear to me how that fits our strategic aim with Iran. Particularly as sanctions, especially secondary sanctions on those who choose to trade with Iran in oil has already all but crippled their economy. Why then would the US want to trouble the economies of our allied nations around the Gulf who also depend on an open Strait to send their wares around the world and receive imports in return?
But perhaps I misunderstand or mispercieve the advantage you see? Say more then, if you wish. I’d like to know.
A prediction comes true.
In an earlier comment about the drone strike that killed a group of terrorists including the ‘austere revered chief terrorist planner’ I noted a threat traditionally made by the other side.
That “this action by [ Israel | United States ] will open the gates of Hell!”.
By golly this morning I just read ( I’m retired so no sass about how I should be working and not surfing the web ) …
Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, vowed that even if Tehran opted for the weakest option, it will create an ‘historic nightmare for the Americans … [and those] hoping to escape our revenge are unaware that the Islamic Republic will open the door to hell.’
URL: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7860045/Iran-considering-13-revenge-scenarios-death-General-Soleimani.html
Neo:
Great fisking of the NYTimes article. If the Times were to respond to your post, (and of course they will not), I am sure they would fall back on that old bromide: “The Times stands by its reporting of the situation.” Which is the fourth estate’s way of saying “we don’t have to explain ourselves to you peasants.”
More cheap talk? Probably, but who knows, lol.
Just because Trump says he will bomb their cultural sites doesn’t mean he will. Maybe he means it. Maybe he doesn’t. Maybe he meant it when he said it but will change his mind later. Maybe he was bluffing at first but will ultimately find the resolve. It’s really hard to assign a probability to the expected outcome, nearly impossible to calculate the anticipated payoffs.
It’s fun… even, dare I say it? liberating… to convey a message to an opponent that is calculated to sound crazy but is really intended to throw a spanner in his number-cruncher. Use words to paint scary pictures in your opponent’s head. Make them anticipate things that aren’t really going to happen. Draw them off-sides before the snap, watch them get penalized. At very little cost.
Well-executed cheap talk serves as a screening device to aid in the assessment of Iran’s degree of risk aversion. AK’s next move will likely inadvertently reveal valuable information about the mullah’s perception of Iran’s resilience to damage from exogenous events.
It will be interesting to see what AK does, to induct how he thinks the probabilities will shake out from what move he makes. If AK escalates, then I think the end is near for the regime. He will embrace the unknown only when the known promises certain collapse.
AK needs a reprieve. Immiserating sanctions, a succession of demonstrations and protests, the orange wolf at the door… can Iran withstand more sanctions, more protests, more Trump? No, not alone. AK needs an ally. He should reach out to the democrats with some environmentalism or some anti-racism rhetoric, like Bin Laden did. No feminism from islamofascists, not credible. Just make some noise and try to get a sympathetic response.
Those Iraqi Shiites understand. They know the world is watching. Their non-binding resolution is pure cheap talk. Buncha phonies trying to sound tough. Full of sound and fury. Trump doesn’t make a significant move in response. He has someone leak a scary-sounding, unsigned, draft document that says “Sayonara Iraq and best of luck with ISIS.” Via Twitter, he threatens Iran-level sanctions and a hefty bill for U.S. military infrastructure in Iraq. Does he mean it? Is he really willing to leave Iraq to the tender mercies of Iran or ISIS? Would he actually sanction Iraq? What’s the cost of being wrong?
There is a high risk of catastrophic failure when playing with someone as powerful and unpredictable as Trump. I’m really not that worried about an Iranian nuclear program but I hope to God we never face an Iranian Trump.
Iranians seem to have totally forgotten about the last encounter with the US in the form of Operation Praying Mantis in 1988. More than 30-years later, with much more advanced weaponry, one can only assume things will be much worse for Iran. In 1988, the scorecard after US decided to de-escalate looked like this.
US:
1 helicopter crashed (2 killed)
Iran:
1 frigate sunk (45 crew killed)
1 gunboat sunk (11 crew killed)
3 speedboats sunk
1 frigate crippled
2 platforms destroyed
1 fighter damaged
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis
“Why then would the US want to trouble the economies of our allied nations around the Gulf who also depend on an open Strait to send their wares around the world and receive imports in return?”
I think closing the Strait talk is usually just hyperbole to illustrate how things have changed in the whole Middle East dynamic. Practically, the idea is to cause such economic disruption so that other countries would side with us against Iran just to get it over with.
Mike
MBunge: closing the Strait talk is usually just hyperbole
There is a stat somewhere on the internet, which I am too lazy to pull up, that shows that the three largest consumers of oil that flows through the Strait are China, India and Japan. Former two have good diplomatic relations with Iran. They both also have a navies that could use some stretching and exercise. I say, let them sort it out one way or another.
Let us also not forget that the “elite” Republican Guards held the Iranians to a standstill during their war. We all know what happened to those “elite” Republican Guards when they faced off against the US. Same thing will happen to the “elite” Quds Force.
Are they all comfortable in siding with an enemy?
For the most part, our intelligentsia and their dependents and hangers-on do that reflexively. It’s an aspect of the decline in character among the professional-managerial subset from one cohort to the next.
“[I]mportant to Iran and Iranian culture” does not necessarily mean cultural sites. I would think that its nuclear and missile facilities are important to Iranian culture (as it is now, anyway). Same goes for TV and radio stations.
Hard to believe, isn’t it, that during my lifetime there was a Democratic president who said, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty.”
http://theothermccain.com/
Here’s another example. The market cannot force these people into Chapter 11 soon enough.
Just because Trump says he will bomb their cultural sites doesn’t mean he will.
Sure ‘nough. But what did he actually “say” (to start the loons on their freakout)?
To my eyes, being merely “important to Iran & the Iranian culture” is a far cry from bombing a “cultural site” as such.
At the very least, as you carefully point out Mentus, it’s ambiguous as all get out. But not for Trump’s political enemies. They permit themselves whatever interpretation of his words that will suit their needs. Has nothing to do with his aims and everything to do with theirs.
Their non-binding resolution is pure cheap talk.
Turns out the vote was taken without a quorum present:
https://mobile.twitter.com/BilalWahab/status/1214517353888862209
Taliban condemns killing of Qasem Soleimani
McChrystal recounted his decision not to attack Soleimani’s convoy in Iraq in 2007
Why neither Bush nor Obama killed Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani
If you don’t know the story of Iranian Air Flight 655
https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1214282946896629764
FB on January 7, 2020 at 3:36 pm said:
Taliban condemns killing of Qasem Soleimani
* * *
Isn’t that the group that really did have an issue with destroying cultural sites?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dd6aec31f4bd0c6fd2ac40189558928a1ffbba5ef71168f9a920c0c432cf460f.jpg
BTW, the first thing that happened after Saddam’s fall was the destruction and looting of Iraq’s cultural site, the Baghdad Museum, by … Iraqis.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/looting-iraq-16813540/
Great fisking, Neo; and I echo: glad you’re doing it, so I don’t have to.
I’ll also plug the Rush Limbaugh transcript with Trump, tho Neo’s work is worth more of my time, it’s good to see Trump’s full paragraphs, sometimes, as well as his tweets:
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/01/06/americas-anchorman-interviews-president-trump/
I’ve already mentioned I support Trump tweeting, so was glad to see Rush also disagree with those who say Trump should tweet less. Good to read his tweets directly, not what Dem media say he means.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump
Had a very good meeting with @kbsalsaud of Saudi Arabia. We discussed Trade, Military, Oil Prices, Security, and Stability in the Middle East!
I was trying to think of what Trump says that I disagree with. I’m not happy with him destroying Iranian cultural monuments, like the Buddhas destroyed by Muslim terrorists. But he hasn’t yet done that, and hasn’t even quite promised/ threatened to do that, altho it’s an image that does come to mind when reading his tweet.
I believe his tweet reduces the Iranian response – and just thinking about “what are the 52 sites Trump means?” will remind Iran about 2 things:
1) They DO have a lot to lose, and
2) With Trump, everything remains on the table.
This is Trump “Art of The Deal” instinct – probably equivalent to 3D chess BUT in a game with less secure rules, boundaries, and criteria for winning.
It’s really hard to assign a probability to the expected outcome, nearly impossible to calculate the anticipated payoffs.
It’s easy – 50%!
or 20%. or 80%.
What’s hard is knowing which probability you’d bet on, and how much you’d be willing to bet.
I’d bet less than 1000 Americans die in the Mid East before the election. (est 80% probability)
Secretary Pompeo
?
Suddenly @JZarif cares about Persian culture. No one has damaged Persian culture more than the Islamic Republic — disrespecting Cyrus and holidays like Nowruz, prohibiting dancing, and putting an end to religious tolerance. Iran’s regime has defiled everything Iranians hold dear.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1214626468891938816
Tom Grey on January
BTW, the first thing that happened after Saddam’s fall
I hope you are not mixing in words between Iraq – Iran
Now The President put his list for Iran, not Iraq.
The MSM delights in deliberately misconstruing Trumps words. He said “important to Iran & the Iranian culture”. The press reported “Iranian cultural targets. There is a world of difference between the two.
Neo
Did you think The President list with a cultural site like Khomeini Shrine?
As its a symbol of Lunatic Khoieni the father of the Iranian regime?
My apologies to Tim for my mistake.
My replay to the comment by AesopFan on January
FB:
I’m going to assume that English may not be your first language. Your question at 4:54 PM is hard to understand. You might want to try rewording it.
Neo
What I meant, off course there are many Cultural sites inside Iran.
In your opinion at this stage does Khomeini Shrine site represent any importance to be targeted (if happen) as a cultural site inside Iran?
“Trump backs off threat to hit Iranian cultural sites”:
FB: the story of Iranian Air Flight 655
The important thing about that event is the dates of the relevant events.
18 April 1988 Operation Praying Mantis
3 July 1988 Iranian Air Flight 655
After the flight was shot down there was no Iranian retaliation because they had already been spanked into good behaviour in April.
Ayatollahs are forced people, students & workers to attend the regime’s staged propaganda shows.
Do you know, during Iran-Iraq war Qasem Soleimani, became a commander. He recruited children & young men from Kerman province (his birthplace).
Children were sent to the frontline to clear minefields. Many killed, injured and were captured by Iraqis. The survivors still suffer from physical and mental complications.
As Ayatollahs propaganda, In 2019, a film, 23 Individuals, based on the book was produced by Mehdi Jafari and sponsored by Owj Arts and Media Organization in Tehran. In October 2018, General Qassem Soleimani attended the movie’s release and met with members of the cast and crew on location in Iran’s capital. Yusefzadeh and some of the other teen captives attended the movie along with the cast and crew.
CHILDREN KHOMEINI’S CANNON FODDER
The Lost Youth of Iran’s Child Soldiers
Andy:
There has been speculation that Iran and Libya worked together to bomb Pan Am Flight 103 (Lockerbie Scotland).
FB, you see the film “The Dish”?
LOOK AT WHO @CNN IS USING AS A COMMENTATOR! THE VP OF IRAN!
Just heard that Iran fire rockets on Al-Assad air base western Iraq where US troops stationed inside Iraq…..
FB – as you noted, you were asking about one of my comments, not Tom’s, regarding the looting of the Iraq museum.
I was pointing out, sarcastically, that the destruction of cultural monuments has been done by a lot of different people in the Middle East (I only referenced two well-known incidents), so the Democrat spokes-persons getting upset now about President Trump’s threat is called “pearl-clutching” — pretended outrage.
You mentioned that the Islamic Regime disrespects and sometimes destroys things of importance to the ancient Persian culture of Iran. I have seen some other stories along that line of thought.
https://www.meforum.org/60028/persian-cultural-nostalgia-as-political-dissent