Good Reads
By Kamangir • Nov 6th, 2007 • Category: Good ReadsRising Voices Seeks Micro-Grant Proposals for Blog Outreach - Deadline: November 30th.
Sleep-walking to war - Great piece by Iason Athanasiadis,
A few nights ago, a high-level former official in the Clinton administration predicted to me a strike on Iran by March next year. In her Harvard speech, Dergham concurred, adding that “the logic of it would be to wait until sanctions bite [and] give Mohamed el-Baradei a little time to deliver.” The former official said that September’s mysterious Israeli strike on Syria was a successful test of an American missile against the new Russian radar system that Moscow sold to Damascus and Tehran, ahead of a strike against Iran. According to the source, the Syrians were warned in advance through back-channels that they would be getting hit and advised to keep mum about it as it was “not personal”.
DAM: Palestinian hip hop from Israel - On the Face
Posted by Kamangir
Author's email address: arash@kamangir.net | All posts by Kamangir
Previous Post: People of America, Israel, and elsewhere, we sincerely apologize
Next Post: Good Reads
Archer
It was an interesting article, but the major objection of author to the views of other people at Harvard were their political connections. Yes, some of them were connected with Al Hayat and therefore with Saudis, some may not know what is going on in Iran as there were connected with neo-cons, but Mr. Athanasiadis is himself based in Iran and working on his articles from Tehran. I wonder if he can write articles which completely oppose politics of IRI and still be able to live and work in Iran.
Just a thought.
Kamangir: He is not in Iran anymore. Are you Iason?
Kaman
“.J ason Athanasiadis (Greece), freelance reporter working in Iran, will study the politics and economies of Central Asia and explore Third World economic development and the future of energy markets.” For a year.
I assume he will want to go back to Iran, don’t you think so? So will he write something which prevents him from going back there?
My main objection is not to his viewpoint, what I am objecting is his pointing out to other people connections with this or that country but not making clear his own connections to IRI.
Kamangir: I’ll ask him. Thanks for raising the point.
Thanks so much for the link, Kam. That’s very sweet of you.
Kamangir: You are most welcome.
Good thing Boston is about 450 miles from Washington and that its the parents of the Crimson that have money and power and not their children. The US is not going to strike Iran and even then Iran will not get a nuclear weapon. Russia wants another nuclear armed Islamic state on its soft underbelly competing for hegemony amongst the ’stan’ countries about as bad America wishes it had Mexico’s economy. While this game of brinksmanship is profitable both monetarily and politically, for Russia and Iran on the one hand and the US on the other, respectively, it remains a game of escalating threats and economic plays.
Talking about journalism.
According to Rooz there is a new memo issued by National Security Council regarding the censorship. The unmentionables are quite interesting:
- News, reports, pictures, or video clips that in any way may undermine the power and competence of armed and security forces;
- News that reflect personal or organizational conflicts in the regime;
- News that covers casualties of security forces while on duty;
- News that misinforms public opinion;
- Information or analyses of events that create the impression of incompetence and mismanagement in the leadership of armed and security forces;
- News that may undermine the unity of Shia and Sunni, or national unity of the country;
http://www.roozonline.com/english/archives/2007/11/national_security_council_issu.html
What the poor iranian journalists will be able to write about, I guess that leaves them covering familly fights and successes of police/regime/army of IRI.
Like this:
“Today, our security forces arrested 30 criminals at the University of Tehran”
*sigh*
Kamangir: That, unfortunately, is correct.
It’s been almost 4 years that people are predicting war on Iran and everyone of the rumors has been just a rumor. Remember Seymour Hersh had a “first hand” information that last summer has the time when Bush was going to attack? I am thinking, that maybe this is exactly what America wants, just leaking rumors after rumors to destabilize Iran psychologically. A great chess player, Nimzowitsch, once wrote:”The treat is stronger than execution” . An attack doesn’t even have to come to fruition to have a devastating effect on the enemy!
I will take this kind of war anytime!
Kamangir: Not a bad idea. Though, I think, and this is just my humble opinion, that as soon as different fractions in the American administration find the best scenario the bombing campaign will start.
“Kamangir: Not a bad idea. Though, I think, and this is just my humble opinion, that as soon as different fractions in the American administration find the best scenario the bombing campaign will start.”
I, most respectfully, must disagree.
Archer
I have not been interested in Iran for as long as other people are on this blog, particularly the Iranians here ;-), but for the last couple of years I did hear “USA will attack Iran, now/next week/next month/in a couple of months”
Why you are so convinced that US will attack Iran?
It may attack, true, but all this fuss in newspapers now is connected to the presidential campaign. The liberals talk about this so americans will say “Neo-cons were/are clueless in Iraq, now they are clueless about Iran, we will not choose them again”. As for dems, although I do not follow much american politics I heard Barack Obama was talking about attacking………………Pakistan. Pakistan, Kaman, not Iran. btw. I think attacking Pakistan is a really bad idea too.
“The former official said that September’s mysterious Israeli strike on Syria was a successful test of an American missile against the new Russian radar system that Moscow sold to Damascus and Tehran, ahead of a strike against Iran. According to the source, the Syrians were warned in advance through back-channels that they would be getting hit and advised to keep mum about it as it was “not personalâ€.”
Hah?
Leo
One of the first comments on the strike on Syria was - surprise, surprise - on Palestinian website. At that time palestinians claimed it was a strike against the weapons depository. The mention of nuclear installation came later.
I assume that Jason Athanasiadis read only what Syria and/or some former CIA/government official/army member claimed. Unfortunately many people believed and do believe Syria even after the photos of the assumed nuclear installations before and after the bombardment were posted on the internet by independent website.
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/SuspectSiteUpdate26October2007.pdf
There are always such people, and you can not convince them that the things they believe are as far from truth as possible. It is waste of time even to try.
As for his take on Dergham stake in Lebanon i.e.”if Lebanon falls to the mullahs, then we’re all f*cked.” - We may not be f*cked and definitely IRI won’t be, but majority of Lebanese (including many shi’a) will certainly be f*cked, and quite badly at that.
One may agree or disagree with Mr. Athanasiadis views on war with Iran, but I believe that he should concentrate either on the subject of Iran, or he should stick to the subject he studies - economy and politics of Central Asia.
ps. Archer, after deep internal debate ;-) I retract my comments about my objections to what Mr. Athanasiadis wrote. I object not only to his comments about other people connections with this or that country but also to his viewpoint.
“I object not only to his comments about other people connections with this or that country but also to his viewpoint.”
Ella, agreed.
Kam,
Today’s headline in Britain (America’s closest ally and eyes and ears in Tehrean–The US fears Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear installations.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article2827787.ece
Kam,also you can read this at
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1290331.ece
Carlos, I personally believe that the information in that old Times article was intentionally leaked by the Israeli military, something that I have suspected on several occasions with Times articles that have to do with important Israeli affairs.
Ever since Rupert Murdoch bought the Times back in the 80s, it has been steadily becoming more populist and less reliable, while still retaining an old image and reputation of respect. In this, I believe that Israel has found it to be a good medium for psychological warfare on occasions.
Actually, with a history of earthquakes and a large number of faults in Iran, especially today if one occurred near a large population and nuclear facilities, could be an instantaneous event far more devastating than any single military attack against that country.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/world/world_deaths.php
http://www.iranian.com/Iranica/June97/Earthquake/Text2.html