Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 18, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Go West, Young Han
Weather Extremes Rise as Planet Gets Hotter and Colder






Truthdig Bazaar
Beyond Bogotá

Beyond Bogotá

By Garry Leech
$17.13

Pure Goldwater

Pure Goldwater

By John W. Dean; Barry M. Goldwater, Jr.

more items

 
A/V Booth

Will Iran Come Out of the Nuclear Closet?

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Mar 14, 2009
Iran nuclear program
linktv.org

A U.S. official believes that Iran has obtained enough nuclear material to make a bomb. Israel is believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal, though it has never acknowledged this. Why does Iran pursue a nuclear bomb? And will Iran come out of the nuclear closet?

Link TV’s Mosaic Intelligence Report:

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, March 21, 2009 at 4:33 pm Link to this comment

Shouldn’t the title be “When will Israel come out of the nuclear closet?” and not this propaganda crap that fits in with the, let’s start a war with Iran routine?

This is what I would expect on Fox News or CNBC not TruthDig! Not data just suspicion. They have enough low grade refined nuclear material for a nuclear reactor not a bomb which needs a more highly refined fissile state. 90% to be of any use as weapons grade. More bullshit no different from Bush/Cheney. This gets a black mark swastica grade as What A Nazi Would Do or Stalin or Mao or Kim Jong Il etc…as in WWADD?The first ‘D’ is for Dictator so there won’t be any problem with the NSDAP reference.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 19, 2009 at 7:12 am Link to this comment

daga and shingo - OK, I will try not to pass premature judgment against Truthdig. Maybe it’s just a slip-up.

Report this

By Dag Andersson, March 18, 2009 at 9:26 pm Link to this comment

Still- my friends

TD has for a long time been one of the best.  That’s why this MEMRI-like garbage is such great disappointment. We can only hope it’s an editorial slip and not an indication of a new guideline.

Report this

By Shingo, March 18, 2009 at 7:16 pm Link to this comment

Ed Harges,

There’s no point in getting too worked up about the issue.  For those interested in the facts, the information is readily available.

I am willing to give TD the benefit of the doubt, but we should also bear in mind that there are degrees of progressiveness, just as there are centrists, moderates and extremists on the let and right.

Nothing has stopped you, myself and others from being informed about the Freeman story.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 18, 2009 at 6:55 pm Link to this comment

re: By Folktruther, March 18 at 12:04 pm:

Folktruther is right: it is indeed the “ostensibly progressive” websites and the “pseudo-progressives” who are the most dangerous, because they are practiced in the art of deluding us real liberals into thinking that they’re on our side. They make sure that even when we elect a black Democratic president who worked as a community organizer for workers and poor people in Chicago, the pro-Israel right-wing ethnic supremacist militarists retain control of US foreign policy.

Truthdig has remained silent about what happened to Charles Freeman. That would appear to be damning for Truthdig’s credibility as a progressive news and politics website.

Report this

By Folktruther, March 18, 2009 at 9:04 am Link to this comment

This piece, by an ostensibly progressive site, is the reason that the American people are so deluded and incredibly misinformed about foreiegn affairs in general and Israel in particular.  And why US-Israqel may well bomb Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons.

the presuppositions underlying the title of the piece, which is often the only part people read, is that Iran has nuclear weapons and that she is concealing them.  And then Zionists like Sepharad state that Ahmadminjad has threatened to use his nukes on Israel.  And the American mass media repeat these deceits and state, falsely, that he has threatened to wipe Israel off the map.

this TRUTH INVERSION is standard in the Zionist media, disguising both US and Israeli aggression.  It is atually Israel that has nuclear weapons and is concealing them, and US-Israel is threatening to attack Iran under the guise of defense.  Not the reverse.

This truth inversion is standard in Zionist truth, disgusing Israeli ethnic cleansing, robbery of the Palesitians of the country, homes and businesses, and Isreal’s foreign policy based on war.

Zionists, for example, like Inherit and Sepharad, maintain that the world is anti-Semitic, including the Uigars of China, the Xosa of Africa, and the Nepalese, whem probably most of the people of the world have never heard of the Jews.  The reason for this truth inversion is because what Israel is doing would be opposed by all decent people, and Isreal has contempt for the opinons of mankind. Which is needed to continue its stealing and violence and barbarism.  So Zionists pretend that the world opposes Jews rather than Jewish fascism opposing the people of the world.

the most effective deception of the American people is acheived by pseudo-progressivess, who get people to identify with conservative, and fascist, policies, often while pretending to oppose them. And truth inversion is a standard tactic for doing so.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 18, 2009 at 6:56 am Link to this comment

re: By Shingo, March 18 at 12:30 am:

Shingo, I guess we really shouldn’t be surprised that this “progressive” website is passing along unfounded suppositions supporting the Israel lobby’s alarmist claims about Iran’s nuclear program. After all, Truthdig completely ignored the Charles Freeman matter. That alone speaks volumes.

Report this

By Shingo, March 17, 2009 at 9:30 pm Link to this comment

lana freeman,

The point is that not only is there no evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, but that the IAEA and America’s intelligence agencies also say as much.

In spite of this, the US government and the writer of this article are ignoring all that and pretending like the case has already been proven.

In this respect,it is the same as the Iraq debacle. the assumption is that Iran is making nukes and that the reason we haven’t found any evidence is because they are hiding their program.  We’re back to demanding they prove a negative.

Report this

By lana freeman, March 17, 2009 at 9:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Just because Bush & cronies manufactured Iraq WMDs, it does not mean that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons. Actually, Iran has more than one reason to do that: US invasion of Iraq, the threat from Israel, hostility by Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries.

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, March 17, 2009 at 9:13 pm Link to this comment

exactly.

what kind of freak is posting this Propaganda?

we’re sick of this crap.

Report this

By Shingo, March 17, 2009 at 9:10 pm Link to this comment

Yes I do like the way this article is framed.

“Why does Iran pursue a nuclear bomb? And will Iran come out of the nuclear closet?”

This is akin to being asked if you still beat your wife.  It just goes to show that some of us have learned nothing from the Iraq WMD fraud.

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, March 17, 2009 at 8:56 pm Link to this comment

Please tell me this article is a joke.

NO IRAN-BASHING ON TRUTHDIG, please…

We DO NOT want a war with Iran,

got that??

Report this

By Shingo, March 17, 2009 at 6:09 pm Link to this comment

Sepharad,

The reason Hezbollah were surprised at Israel’s reaction after Hezbollah crossed into Israel, is because Israel’s actions were not consistent with rescuing the the kidnapped soldiers.  Israel used the incident to ramp up the conflict into a full scale attack on Southern Lebanon.  Bear in mind that Israel routinely crosses into Gaza, was routinely violating Lebanese and Syrian air space and hijacking ships outside Israeli waters, but of course, when Israel does it, it’s an act of self defense right?
Prisoner exchanges had worked in the past without much fallout, so Hezbollah’s leadership naturally expected this to apply again.  What they hadn’t counted on was that Israel were already planning to attack Lebanon and waiting patiently for a such an incident.  Notice that nothing Israel did for the weeks that followed involved any efforts to secure the release of the prisoners?

Israel has demonstrated concerned about its soldiers when it has been convenient.  They have made little or no effort to secure the release of Gilad Shalit, only using him as a pawn to make unreasonable demands that they knew would be rejected.  Like the Hezbollah incident, Israel’s response to the capture of Shalit did not include any effort to rescue hi or secure his release.

Like political leaders here, the Israeli leadership exploit public sentiment when it comes to the troops.  They mourn the death of their troops, but continue to maintain militaristic policies.

Israel has 8000 Palestinians in it;s prisons, 1000 of them having never been charged and nearly 400 of them children. 

If Israel were serious about wanting to stop suicide attacks, all they need do is withdraw from the territories and release Gaza from it’s vice like grip.  Israel has been blockading Gaza for 2 years.  The last time Israel was blockaded, it argued that it was an act of war.
According to the author, Robert Pape, 90% of suicide attack cases are linked directly to territorial disputes, not religion.  Israel’s leadership as made a calculated decision to risk these attacks as a cost of expansionism.

Hezbollah like Hamas rarely provoke Israel.  The recent attack on Gaza was in fact the result of Israel’s provocation of Hamas.  Hamas had held tot eh ceasefire until Israel broke it.  The reason Israel broke it?  Because Hamas were showing too much restraint for Israel’s liking.  Restraint means a move towards moderation.  Moderation means Israel would have to negotiate with Hamas, which they don’t want to do.  That is why Israel is coddling Abbas.  He is weak and they know that they will get a better deal with him, so their goal is to drive and maintain a wedge between Fatah and Hamas.

Speaking of Shalit, what does;t get mentioned is that the day before his capture, Israelis troops kidnapped 2 Palestinians from Gaza city.  No one knows their names and they have never been heard of since, but that is to be expected, because Arab life is cheap.  The capture of Shalit was a response to this kidnapping, which was undoubtedly a provocation by Israel.

Why do you have trouble believing the reports of IDF soldiers being brutal in Gaza?  The brutality of IDF troops is a matter of record.  Have you not read about the countless times IDF troops fired at the heads of Palestinian children? A few years back, one IDF solider emptied 2 clips of rounds into the body of a 13 year old Palestinian girl.  He was lated acquitted of any wrongdoing.  IDF troops have been caught using Palestinians as human shields.
Before Israel eradicated the Arab population in Palestine, it was a thriving civilization. It had nothing to do with their contact with the modern Jews of Israel.

Here is what the Palestinian population looked like in 1914.

http://www.uruknet.de/?colonna=m&p=51428&l=x&size=1&hd=0

As you can see, they were doing fine before Israel came along.

Report this

By Dag Andersson, March 17, 2009 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

@Sepharad
Your claim:

Why, when Sharon pulled all the Jews out, did Hamas then choose to begin fighting and starting the whole cycle that is bad for Palestinians inside Gaza
Likewise, last Sunday the Israeli government began pulling down eight checkpoints in the Jordan Valley area as a sign of good faith-and that same day two Israeli traffic officers driving by in a patrol car after a nearby checkpoint was dismantled, were murdered as they drove by

is wide off the Mark:
On the former assertion, let me quote Dov Weisglass:

The disengagement is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that’s necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians.”

The “fighting” in Gaza came as a result of Mohammed Dahlan /Abba’s connivance with Elliot Abrams and the West’s inability to accept Hamas as democratic elected government.


On the latter assertion:
From Haaretz: 
Police: West Bank shooting not caused by checkpoint removal
Senior police officials say that the removal of checkpoints and the low intensity of Israel Defense Forces operations in the West Bank did not contribute to Sunday’s shooting death of two traffic cops in the Jordan Valley.

Your writing reminds me of “The Downing Street Memo” – where the intelligence is build around the Policy. Maybe you should try the other approach : Let your political view be determined by what you read , see and hear from a variety of media outlet.

Report this

By Shingo, March 17, 2009 at 2:44 pm Link to this comment

Sepharad,

Quite frankly, I am amazed that anyone with any intelligence can post this garbage and expect to get away with it:

“What I don’t understand is why, when Israel takes a step back (pulling all the Jews out of Gaza) violence is increased, then crossings are closed, rocketings increase, IDF hits Gaza hard .... Why, when Sharon pulled all the Jews out, did Hamas then choose to begin fighting and starting the whole cycle that is bad for Palestinians inside Gaza, Israelis outside Gaza, everyone?”

The answer is s blatantly obvious, it barely deserves a response, but for your benefit, here is a fitting explanation care of the only comprehensive schcolarly history of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. It’s been translated into English, called “Lords of the Land”, by Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar .

“After Israel withdrew it’s forces from Gaza, in August 2005, the ruined territory was not released for even a single day from Israel’s military grip, or from the price of the occupation that the inhabitants pay every day. Israel left behind scotched earth, devastated services, and people with nearly a present or a future. The Jewish settlements were destroyed in an ungenerous move by an unenlightened occupier, which in fact continues to control the territory and kill and harass it’s inhabitants, by means of it’s formidable military might.”

So you see Sepharad, while Israel withdrew from Gaza, it did not release Gaza “for even a single day from Israel’s military grip, or from the price of the occupation that the inhabitants pay every day”.

If he Israeli government began pulling down eight checkpoints in the Jordan Valley, it did so for pragmatic reasons, not altruistic ones. After all, Israel have annouced plans to demolich 80 homes in East Jerusalem and build another 73,000 in the West Bank.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 17, 2009 at 1:58 pm Link to this comment

Sepharad earlier claimed that we must all indulgently dismiss Moshe Dayan’s 1973 threat to nuke Egypt as mere “emoting”. Sepharad thinks that any Middle Eastern leader who might have seen Dayan’s threat as a reason to develop a nuclear deterrent for his own country must be a raving anti-Semite yearning for a new Holocaust.

Anyway, I replied to Sepharad’s insulting and patronizing crap below, but Sepharad seems conveniently to have missed it and let it slip down the page. In my reply I pointed out that Seph’s downplaying of Israel’s threatening behavior is just more of the double-standard garbage that pseudo-liberal Zionist “experts” have been making actual liberal Americans swallow for decades, on pain of being slapped with the scarlet letter A for anti-Semite.

For Sepharad’s convenience, I reprint my reply here:

Re: By Sepharad, March 17 at 1:35 am:

Sepharad, you may say that we must understand that Dayan was only “emoting” in 1973 when he threatened to nuke Egypt. Perhaps that’s all it was.

But it is a measure of how completely Israel dictates US politics and journalism that

(a) American “experts” regularly refer with urgent alarm to Ahmadinejad’s supposed threat to nuke Israel - a threat that is based on a tendentious interpretation of a dishonest translation of a remark from a leader who does not have military authority,  only nominally presiding over a country which has no nuclear weapons, isn’t developing any as far as anybody knows, and hasn’t launched a war of aggression in over two centuries; yet

(b) American pundits ignore completely Israel’s 1973 threat to nuke Egypt, coming from a person with actual military authority, leading a nation that does indeed have a large nuclear arsenal, as well as the unquestioning backing of a gigantic nuclear superpower and a recent history of wars of aggression. Consequently, it’s even easier for staunchly pro-Israel American “experts” (the only kind of “experts” we’re ever allowed to hear from) to treat any possible ambition by other countries in the Middle East to acquire nuclear weapons as arising from sheer, irrational anti-Semitism, instead of from a prudent appreciation of the extreme danger which nuclear-armed, megalomaniac, expansionist Israel poses to every living thing in the Middle East.

Report this

By Sepharad, March 17, 2009 at 1:51 pm Link to this comment

daga, you are right; violence begets violence in Gaza or Cairo or Iraq. What I don’t understand is why, when Israel takes a step back (pulling all the Jews out of Gaza) violence is increased, then crossings are closed, rocketings increase, IDF hits Gaza hard .... Why, when Sharon pulled all the Jews out, did Hamas then choose to begin fighting and starting the whole cycle that is bad for Palestinians inside Gaza, Israelis outside Gaza, everyone? Likewise, last Sunday the Israeli government began pulling down eight checkpoints in the Jordan Valley area as a sign of good faith—and that same day two Israeli traffic officers driving by in a patrol car after a nearby checkpoint was dismantled, were murdered as they drove by. Is that a message that taking down checkpoints and easing traffic situation for Palestinians is a bad thing to do? Is it an attempt to get the Israelis to put checkpoints up again so there is something to complain about? I truly do not understand and would like to. I understand that Palestinians resent Israelis in Gaza and West Bank territories but when they begin moving in the direction Palestinians seem to want—i.e., out—they get attacked.

Report this

By Sepharad, March 17, 2009 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment

Fadel, thanks for the additional details. I did not know the Alawites were Shi’ia, or if I did I forgot it. Even so, killing that many fellow Moslems, Muslim Brotherhood or not, is harsher than anything Mubarak has done, isn’t it?

Report this

By Dag Andersson, March 17, 2009 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

@Fadel Abdallah

Ty for your informative and insightful comment.

However I beg to differ on your last paragraph:

However, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is quite powerful and resilient despite all the persecutions and crackdown of the secular administration of the US/Israel-supported dictator Husni Mubarak!

I would say the Brotherhood is powerful because the persecutions-much the same way US are “recruiting”
Al Qaida members in this stupid “War on Terror” and Hamas is profiting from IDF’s brutality in Gaza.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, March 17, 2009 at 12:38 pm Link to this comment

By Sepharad, March 17 at 1:01 pm #

“The present Syrian President’s father, Hafez Assad, belonged (as do most Syrians) to a very small, off-beat Sunni sect. He was so worried about being overthrown that he ordered the massacre of 10-20,000 standard-issue Sunnis in Hama.”
===============================
The above quotation from the pseudo-scholarly Sepharad is an example of how incoherent, misinformed, and slanted information she keeps passing on these threads, pretending that she is a scholar of Arabic-Islamic history, current political scientist, and a scholar or Islamic religion, all wrapped in one strange know-it-all Zionist propagandist.

Here are the facts that a sixth grader in Syria and the Arab world know:

Religiously, the Hafiz Al-Asad family belong to a minority religious Shi’i sect called the “‘Alawites” while the majority Syrians are Sunni Muslims. But the Asad family are known to be totally secular in orientation and their rise to power was due to their leadership position in the secular Ba’th Party, which was the same party that produced the secularist Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Actually, the founder-ideologue of this Ba’th Arab nationalist was a a secular Arab Christian.

The regrettable incident in Hama, in which some 10 thousands Syrians were killed, was a move by the secular state to subdue a powerful branch of the Muslim Brotherhood who were in state of rebellious against the authority of the state. The Muslim Brotherhood in Syria were a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in the late 1930’s. They are still the most powerful religious group in Egypt, and Hosni Mubarak considers them his sworn enemies and keeps putting their leaders in jail under flimsy intelligence arrangements. The Muslim Brotherhood of Syria has been crushed and they are no longer players in the politics of Syria. However, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is quite powerful and resilient despite all the persecutions and crackdown of the secular administration of the US/Israel-supported dictator Husni Mubarak!

Report this

By Dag Andersson, March 17, 2009 at 11:42 am Link to this comment

@Ed Harges
I agree with you that Israel firsters/ onlies will try to continue Feith’s /OSP’s campaign of disinformation vis a vis WMD in Iran. However OSP was , as I’m sure you recall created to circumvent CIA and State department and feed the WHIG’s around Cheney’s office with false intelligence.
Such “ Locus minoris resistentiae” is not yet established in the new administration, and I doubt the various neocons in Obama’s administration will be able to created a concerted action without revealing too much of their agenda. Which of course is and has always been to make US bleed for Zion.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 17, 2009 at 10:20 am Link to this comment

Has Blair picked a replacement for Freeman? The Israel lobby wanted Freeman out because he was clearly not going to go along with Israel’s plans to gin up a war against Iran by producing convenient phony “intelligence” in the “Office of Special Plans” tradition. But Blair must be so angry, it’s hard to imagine that he’ll now pick someone that AIPAC loves.

Isn’t it likely that the Israel lobby will now target Blair?

Commondreams reports that Blair may be in danger:

Dennis Blair, who went to the Senate and strongly defended his appointee, may be the next target for Freeman’s antagonists as they push for alarmist intelligence on Iran.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/03/13-8

Report this

By Sepharad, March 17, 2009 at 10:01 am Link to this comment

Louise, Agree with you that Gates probably is the only one who has their head screwed on straight. I think Obama did well in picking Gates as a leftover. For that matter, I think Freeman was a smart pic.

I’m a leftwing MeretzUSA Zionist (affiliate group of Meretz party in Israel) and concerned for Israel’s well-being as well as that of the U.S. Given that the Israelis were angry and/or scared enough to somehow let Netanyahu sneak back in charge, Freeman would have been a good way of offsetting any lame-brained schemes Netanyahu might be hatching. Not saying I think Freeman per se all other things being equal was the right choice: he’s enamored of the Saudis and just as calculating but not as shrewd, and wouldn’t have been up to the task in any other intelligence capacity. But Obama was smart re the placement he had in mind for Freeman, and I’m surprised that he caved.

Obama needn’t court AIPAC any longer; he’s already elected. Besides, there are only six million American Jews and more of them are like me than there are like, say, Daniel Pipes. We want the best for Israel and agree that Netanyahu is probably the worst possible choice to lead. His election is partly the fault of Meretz in Israel. Against the advice of Peace Now’s Amos Oz, who is just one of many peace—not pacifist but peace—advocates in Mertz, the leaders regarded themselves as too pure to align with Labour because Barak compromised himself by agreeing to any coalition that would get either himself or Tzipi Livni in as PM. As a result, Meretz has only three seats in the Knesset and instead of Livni, an ex-Mossad agent who was willing to have a small civil war if that is what it took to get the settlers out of the West Bank, we have Netanyahu/Lieberman. But our Meretz’s far left peace creds are intact. I understand the impulse: in the U.S. election, I was tempted to vote for Kucinich or McKinney but panicked at the prospect of waking up to McCain/Palin, and voted for Obama.

Also agree that dumbbells don’t doublecheck facts and are the folks who lead us into stupid wars. Finally agree that the U.S., Israel, Europe and many others are in danger of collapsing economically, so everything else may be moot until the dust clears. If it ever does.

But Ahmadinejad was wrong that Americans sparked the Sunni-Shiia conflict. Historically it hasn’t taken much to spark it, as the one general who wanted to keep us from stumbling into the Iraq fiasco, Shinseki had noted in Bosnia. Sectarian conflicts have always been part of Islam’s history. The present Syrian President’s father, Hafez Assad, belonged (as do most Syrians) to a very small, off-beat Sunni sect. He was so worried about being overthrown that he ordered the massacre of 10-20,000 standard-issue Sunnis in Hama. The mostly-Sunni Arab countries are frightened of a powerful Shiia Iran, which is why nearly all of the begged Bush to not attack Iraq, as they saw it as a strong counter to Iran.  But enemies with a common enemy can also temporarily join, as have Sunni Syria and Shiia Iran and Iran’s proxies Shiia Hezbollah and Sunni Hamas.

As I said to Shingo regarding the people of the Levant, it is also hard to predict what people inflamed by their God and his prophet wil do next.

Report this

By Sepharad, March 17, 2009 at 9:12 am Link to this comment

Shingo, yes, I was referring to Ahmadinejad stating that “we” (he himself or Iran?) would wipe Israel off the face of the earth. But as I said, I’d be surprised if he were allowed to do so much as throw a shoe at anyone without the ayatollahs’ blessings.

Re Hezbollah, it alarmed me when Nasrallah said he was surprised at Israel’s reaction after Hezbollah crossed into Israel and kidnapped (subsequently killed) “only” two soldiers: in the past I’ve relied on Hezbollah, though as bent on destroying Israel as is Hamas, to at least have enough knowledge of their mortal enemy to predict how they will or will not respond to a given provocation.

Israel has always shown itself to be VERY concerned about its soldiers, to the point of being willing to exchange hundreds of bad actors, including those with Israeli blood on their hands, for the return of soldiers. Though I disagree with this policy I understand it. Everybody’s kid is drafted at age 18 for a couple of years then can return to finish their education or become a career soldier and also finish their education. Because it’s such a tiny country, and everyone is, has been, or has a loved one in the army, every soldier is felt to be every one’s chid. (Also the entire country feels entitled to react strongly if the IDF is sent into a stupid war, or a badly-planned, badly-led war.)

Many Israelis understand how unreasonable it is to release hundreds of militants and get a couple of dead bodies or one live one (as is still hoped for Gilad Shalit), but most don’t say so. Recently, one man who’s only child was killed by a suicide bus bomber, said he disagreed with the policy because one had to think about the children who would be killed as a result of released militants. But he added, “I do understand. If it were my kid, I’d trade them Tel Aviv.”   

Hezbollah like Hamas surely knows this about Israelis. So why would they provoke Israel? And Israel, knowing their enemies’ do this over and over, should end the policy of releasing large numbers of prisoners for one soldier (unless, as that father said, it happened to be my kid) because it only encourages them to kidnap more IDF soldiers. (I’ve wondered how much of the carnage in Gaza and stories of IDF soldiers being brutal—which I have trouble believing—might have arisen from the discovery, once in the city, that there were many traps and explosions rigged not to kill but to capture and kidnap, through a maze of underground tunnels, soldiers walking into a house to search.)

I’ve digressed at length here, but I guess my point is that it must be very difficult for anyone to predict what anyone in the Levant will do. For that reason, both sides should try very hard to avoid provocations as both sides stumble sideways and reluctantly toward peace and a second state. You know I am a zionist, a Meretz zionist to be specific, and as such clearly see that the second state is the only hope for a decent life for both Palestinians and Israelis and their children. Whatever you think of Israel, if you look around at the other Arab states and their socieities you will see that the Palestinians are in many ways ahead of the other Arab socieities which conceivably may be due to what they have learned during their contact with the more modern Jews of Israel. Though Hamas and Hezbollah are doing their best, they have not yet made most Palestinians backward Islamists, most Palestinians still love their children slightly more than they hate Jews, and are educated enough to realize that ALL their problems are not caused by Israel. They also have a clear vision of what Arab socieites are really like, haven been rejected over and over by nearly all of them.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 17, 2009 at 9:07 am Link to this comment

Re: By Sepharad, March 17 at 1:35 am:

You may say that we must understand that Dayan was only “emoting” in 1973 when he threatened to nuke Egypt. Perhaps that’s all it was.

But it is a measure of how completely Israel dictates US politics and journalism that

(a) American “experts” regularly refer with urgent alarm to Ahmadinejad’s supposed threat to nuke Israel - a threat that is based on a tendentious interpretation of a dishonest translation of a remark from a leader who does not have military authority,  only nominally presiding over a country which has no nuclear weapons, isn’t developing any as far as anybody knows, and hasn’t launched a war of aggression in over two centuries; yet

(b) American pundits ignore completely Israel’s 1973 threat to nuke Egypt, coming from a person with actual military authority, leading a nation that does indeed have a large nuclear arsenal, as well as the unquestioning backing of a gigantic nuclear superpower and a recent history of wars of aggression. Consequently, it’s even easier for staunchly pro-Israel American “experts” (the only kind of “experts” we’re ever allowed to hear from) to treat any possible ambition by other countries in the Middle East to acquire nuclear weapons as arising from sheer, irrational anti-Semitism, instead of from a prudent appreciation of the extreme danger which nuclear-armed, megalomaniac, expansionist Israel poses to every living thing in the Middle East.

Report this

By Shingo, March 16, 2009 at 10:40 pm Link to this comment

Sepharad,

We’re you pointing a scenario of Ahmadinejad emoting about destroying Israel?  The fact is Dayan was careless or brazen enough to suggest it at the time. 

As far as Ahmadinejad is concerned, I agree that he would hardly be allowed to nuke anyone without consent of the Ayatollahs. Even Hezbollah are pragmatists when it comes down to business.  Nasrallah admitted that had he expect the overt response from Israel in the wake of the capture of Israeli soldiers in 2006, he would have done things differently.

Report this

By Sepharad, March 16, 2009 at 10:35 pm Link to this comment

Shingo, Moshe Dayan emoting on the subject did not mean that Israel came even close to thinking about using nukes against Egypt. (His colleagues were shocked and disapproving; he later had the grace to be embarrassed about his outburst.) It would take more than one freaked-out general to do a Slim Pickens riding the bomb down.

I won’t quibble with you about how well Ahmadinejad was or was not translated threatening Israel. I don’t think he would be allowed to nuke anyone without approval from the ayatollahs and I doubt they’d give it. (Hezbollah’s finger on the trigger would make me uneasy, but there are so many Iranians who are so civilized and sane that it’s hard to be too worried about it.)

Report this

By Shingo, March 16, 2009 at 9:54 pm Link to this comment

Sepharad,

Ahmadinejad has never threatened Israel, let alone threatened to use the nukes Iran does not have on Israel.

Thus, he will not be using the nukes he does not have against anyone with whom he is in relious disagreement.

Ignoring the fact that the IAEA, the NIE and Un all say Iran has no nuclear weapons program, Iran haven’t even attempted a nuclear test.

Israel does have nuke and came close to using them during the 1973 war with Egypt.

Report this

By Sepharad, March 16, 2009 at 8:57 pm Link to this comment

Nobody will blame Iran for starting a nuclear arms race in the Middle East because Pakistan’s Dr. Khan has spread the how-to near and far. For all we know the true jihadis have it, especially since they are so cozily ensconced in the Swat Valley.

Maybe people are upset because Ahmadinejad has threatened to use his nukes on Israel which means by extension he’d use them against anyone with whom he is in relious disagreement or whom he simply wakes up feeling badly about. Israel may have the bombs but they’ve never brandished them. They negotiate peace treaties, not nuke-you-out-of-existence threats, and when attacked have always responded with conventional weapons. Besides, Ahmadinejad is not completely in control of Iran and the country has many clear-headed people.

Report this

By Nap, March 16, 2009 at 6:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Progressive movement? Such as growing a spin? Americans are occupied people now, propaganda wolves and sensationalist mutts entertain and analysis the elephant and pony show. In fact I noticed new programming from the media.

Report this

By radson, March 16, 2009 at 4:49 pm Link to this comment

To Folktruther
I had suggested that you take a hook of vodka ,not drink the entire bottle.You are beginning to slur your words,the last part of your post seems incomplete ,will there be a follow-up

Report this

By Craig Sipple, March 16, 2009 at 2:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why would a blog called “TRUTHdig” blattently lie to me?

Why is the commentator this this post regourgatating false propaganda that the Iranian Pres. said he wants Israel whiped off the face of the Earth, when the record now shows that he was talking about zionism being doomed to failure by its own nature?

This is now known and accepted as a fact… A FACT!... what the hell are you people trying too pull?

You are off my list of favorites as from now as you cannot be trusted.

Report this

By Folktruther, March 16, 2009 at 12:18 pm Link to this comment

Truthdig has always been a pro-Zionist pseudo-progressive newsleatter which allows minor deviations from the pro-Israel theme. the headlines give the pro-Israeli position- Iran is pursuing a bomb- with demurrers in the fine print, which fewer people read, and read less attentively.

A true progressive movment has to be an anti-Zionist movment, against war, economic inquality, and a looming police state.

Report this

By Druthers, March 16, 2009 at 8:52 am Link to this comment

Will the day ever come when instead of being surrounded and engulfed by “believers” a few thinkers show their faces and armed with facts and reliable information to uphhold their thoughts inform us rather than just string us along?

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 16, 2009 at 3:33 am Link to this comment

re: By ESN, March 15 at 2:28 pm:

It’s true that the article is actually somewhat more sympathetic to Iran and critical of Israel than at first appears, but the comparison to Israel’s nuclear development is misleading in a way that favors the Israeli position.

For example, the piece tells us that while Iran claims to be developing nuclear technology solely for peaceful use, we should be suspicious, because that’s what the Israelis said, and then it turned out that they were after all working on a bomb.

There’s a huge difference in the Iranian situation: Israel never signed the NPT nor allowed any inspection of its nuclear facilities. Iran has signed and abided by the NPT, and it has allowed IAEA inspectors full access to its nuclear facilities.

So you see, ESN, the comparison to Israel, as presented in this article, conveys a misleading impression — an impression that helps the Israelis make their case.

Report this

By wadosy, March 15, 2009 at 11:40 pm Link to this comment

trying to ignore the whole thing in hopes it will go away?

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 15, 2009 at 7:18 pm Link to this comment

”... their puppet govt and media on one side, and people who’ve been paying attention on the other side….”

Gee, what’s the other 98% of the population doing in this scenario?

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 15, 2009 at 7:18 pm Link to this comment

”... their puppet govt and media on one side, and people who’ve been paying attention on the other side….

Gee, what’s the other 98% of the population doing in this scenario?

Report this

By wadosy, March 15, 2009 at 2:32 pm Link to this comment

looks to me like we’re in the middle of a william gibson “cold civil war”, with the neocons, their puppet govt and media on one side, and people who’ve been paying attention on the other side.

the neocons will box us into a choice: more wars overseas or a hot civil war in the states.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 15, 2009 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment

The indispensable Wadosy writes:

”...haim saban, the “i’m a one issue guy, and that issue is israel…” guy, bought univision, the biggest spanish language TV network recently… which ought to be useful in herding the spanish-speakers.”

Oh lord, Wadosy, that is a huge piece of bad news.

Report this

By wadosy, March 15, 2009 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

“It’s outrageous…”

it’s worse than outrageous, once you start thinking about it.

nobody in their right mind could expect us to swallow the same lies from the same people who lied us into iraq… and that means that the liars are prepared to deal with massive skepticism…

...which explains the FEMA camps, the DHS, and the looming police state.

.
obama’s election could be a preemptive action against urban discontent, and haim saban, the “i’m a one issue guy, and that issue is israel…” guy, bought univision, the biggest spanish language TV network recently… which ought to be useful in herding the spanish-speakers.

hillary’s his favorite politician… he was hoping she’d be president, but i guess he’ll have to settle.

In an interview with Forbes Magazine Saban was asked how he thinks the Democratic Party could get back into the White House in 2008. Saban answered three times: “Vote for Hillary Clinton.”

Saban added that Clinton will be a great president and she has the best vision for the future of the United States.

Haim Saban supports Hillary for 2008 israeltoday

.
meanwhile, the israel lobby has got to feel good about their victory over freeman, which should pave the way for more phony intelligence against iran… remember that little outfit in sharon’s office, fabricating evidence of iraq’s WMDs? ...looks like a replay.

The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon’s office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam’s Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise.

Office of Special Plans wikipedia

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 15, 2009 at 12:35 pm Link to this comment

It’s outrageous that this article asks, “Why does Iran pursue a nuclear bomb?”

The question implies that we know that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb. That is a completely false implication. Nobody knows that.

Iran has “enough material” to make a nuclear bomb, ONLY IF that material were to be transformed into highly enriched uranium. That is a huge transformation, more complex and difficult than making diamonds from soot. Iran has not shown the capacity or intent to do that, and all of this material is under the watchful eye of the IAEA.

Furthermore, the LOW-enriched uranium Iran does have has a perfectly peaceful and obvious use: nuclear energy production.

Report this

By ESN, March 15, 2009 at 11:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The problem with this posting is that it doesn’t provide a link to the actual article by Jamal Dajani in the Huffington Post: 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamal-dajani/will-iran-come-out-of-the_b_174624.html

In fact, Dajani argues what several commenters here are saying, namely that Iran has a right to build a nuke and draws parallels to the clandestine Israeli program.

Report this

By Louise, March 15, 2009 at 9:54 am Link to this comment

I think we have here an Admiral linked at the hip to a group who think George W. Bush made sense. Remember, Bush was openly calling for an attack on Iran. Stupid Bush. Adm. Mike Mullen, should know better. But then he, like too many others, has to rely on “intelligence” that actually gets the courtesy of being called intelligent. My goodness, how much of a stretch was it to believe Bush was intelligent?

Personally if given the choice, I’ll listen to Gates. Remember back when he was taking his marching orders from Bush? Remember how hard it was for him to look the press or a congressman asking a question in the eye? What a difference! Doesn’t seem hard for him any more. Amazing how liberating telling the truth can be!

Iran tests missiles. Naughty, naughty. They should be exactly like us. Saying one thing while doing another. Oh duh ... they are!

Israel’s long-held policy says the world must co-operate to defuse a nuclear threat. That in spite of their sneaky development of a whole bunch of nuclear threats. Followed by years of denying they are a nuclear threat.

Yep! Saying one thing while doing another.

“Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad… assured that the United States and the Zionist regime of Israel will soon come to the end of their lives,” the Iranian president was quoted as saying. “Sparking discord among Muslims, especially between the Shiites and Sunnis, is a plot hatched by the Zionists and the US for dominating regional nations and looting their resources,” Ahmadinejad added.”

Lets disect that. The US and Israel are indeed in the throws of possible collapse. As are a whole lot of other places. Life as we know it could come to an end if we don’t soon bring to accountability the greedy bastards who have destroyed our economy. Damaged our credibility. Run up trillions of dollars in debt to feed their need for power, oil and their fantasy threats, which they turn into actual war!

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see where we’re headed if we don’t start doing things right. And it has nothing whatever to do with anything Ahmadinejad threatens. Anyone can understand bad policy leads to collapse! But lets face it. Those in power in Israel, and those leftovers who still think they’re in power here can and will twist anything said by anybody to match the lies they create. Nothing new there!

Actually reading between the lines, this video seemed to mock Israel’s validity as much as it did Iran’s. And those pictures? Seen them so many times before, alleged to be in so many different countries. Dumbbells don’t usually check and double check. And in my mind there is no doubt, people who make up reasons to start a war are real dumbbells!

They’re the ones who need to come out of the closet!

Report this

By randyha, March 15, 2009 at 9:30 am Link to this comment

I think that this video makes a compelling argument on why Iran would want to make a nuclear bomb. With Israel having 200+ nukes why wouldn’t it try to do the same in self-defence? Didn’t Pakistan do the same thing?

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 15, 2009 at 7:36 am Link to this comment

Daga is right. As nuclear expert Gordan Prather clarifies, the claim that Iran has “enough material” for an a-bomb is a lie. Iran has an amount of enriched uranium that might be enough to make an a-bomb if it were highly enriched. But this material is not highly enriched, and there is no evidence that Iran has the capacity or intent to enrich it to weapons-grade level. Furthermore, Iran’s possession of this material is clearly justified for the stated purpose: the production of nuclear energy, to which Iran has a perfect right under its treaty obligations.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, March 15, 2009 at 7:35 am Link to this comment

Any thing that comes from mainstream Western media sources on Iran is just propaganda bullshit, intended to echo the Israeli Zionist propaganda to continue its control and its colonial expansion in the area. Therefore, to seek enlightenment on this issue, one needs to turn to free, independent voices, like the article below by Timothy Gatto!
==================================
Iran: The Propaganda Never Stops
By Timothy V. Gatto

http://www.countercurrents.org/gatto130309.htm

Even though Iran has not fought a war for conquest in over two hundred years, our government, our media, our politicians and our “ally” Israel continue to beat the war drums and cast Iran in the harshest light possible. We forget that Iran gave us permission to use their airspace to engage the Taliban and Al Quaeda and provided information as to the whereabouts of their leaders. This stopped when George Bush included them in his “axis of evil”. Way to go, George…”

Report this

By radson, March 15, 2009 at 7:30 am Link to this comment

Well I don’t feel any more educated by this educational non profit video .Why do they call it Mosaic ,perhaps Enigma would have a better ring to it.As for “coming out of the closet” that is precisely what the Obama Administration should do ,and so WHAT if Iran is developing Nuclear technology how many industrialized countries ,if they so chose, could build a bomb in short notice.Since when is War a non profit organization, this sounds like WMD part Two.

Report this

By Dag Andersson, March 15, 2009 at 6:21 am Link to this comment

Of course Iran has enough nuclear material to make a bomb. So has some 50- 60 other countries around the World, as is their inalienable right according to NPT.
  The big Q is what kind of material they are producing. Low enriched Uranium (LEU) designated for powerplants or High (HEU) used in nuclear warheads.
  According to IEAE and US’ latest NIE are there no indications that Iran is engaged in HEU-production

See Gordon Prather @Antiwar.com

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, March 15, 2009 at 6:19 am Link to this comment

Is Truthdig under new management? First, they very suspiciously ignore entirely the Israel Lobby’s jihad against Charles Freeman, then they post blatant Israeli/neocon propaganda ginning up the case for war against Iran. What the hell is going on?

Report this

By b, March 15, 2009 at 1:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

O.K. scratch my comment.  I made it without reading the article by Jamal Dajani on Huffington post…who is really making somewhat of the same point I was trying to make.  sorry.

Report this

By b, March 15, 2009 at 1:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The writer states that while Israel does not acknowledge its own nuclear weapon, Iran is the one that should come out of the nuclear closet!?!  Classic pro-Israel / anti-non-Israel logic.  Let’s give the Israeli’s a free pass on their own clandestine nuclear program and attack anyone that is not Israel and may have a clandestine nuclear program.  Don’t tell me, I know what’s next…Iran is the one that is to blame for starting a nuclear arms race in the middle east..even though Israel is the first to have one…but we turn a blind eye to everything they do, don’t we?  Then you wonder why they act as though they have carte blanche to mass murder their neighbors.

Report this
 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook