The discussion centers around the potential for a U.S. military attack on Iran, exploring various viewpoints on the likelihood, implications, and sources of information regarding such an event. Participants express concerns about regional instability, political ramifications, and the credibility of news sources reporting on the situation.
Participants do not reach a consensus on the likelihood of a U.S. attack on Iran or the reliability of the sources discussing this potential action. Multiple competing views remain regarding the implications and motivations behind such an attack.
Limitations include the reliance on unnamed sources and the potential for misinformation in media reports. The discussion reflects a variety of opinions on the credibility of different news outlets and the interpretation of geopolitical events.
Readers interested in U.S. foreign policy, Middle Eastern geopolitics, media analysis, and public sentiment regarding military actions may find this discussion relevant.
After receiving secret briefings on the planned air strike, Senator Diane Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana, said they would write a New York Times op-ed piece "within days", the source said last week, to express their opposition. Feinstein is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Lugar is the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee.
Ms Music said:Well, how about the other way around? I have been recently been warned that all the Shi'ite women and children have all disappeared from my region in preparation for a possible attack... Either way, it is pretty scary for the US...
And have him replaced by the puppetmaster whose hand is up Bush's backside? Sounds messy, unless both are impeached together. Then President Pelosi would be the first female commander-in-chief.chroot said:I have the feeling that if Bush tried to attack another country right now, the people would find a way to replace him long before his tenure expires.
- Warren
"That story was inaccurate. Senator Feinstein has not received any briefing – classified or unclassified – from the Administration involving any plans to strike Iran," Philip J. Lavelle, the California Democrat's press secretary, wrote in an e-mail to RAW STORY Wednesday. "In addition, she has not submitted an op-ed to the NYT, or any other paper, on this subject in recent days. She has been a strong advocate for diplomacy with Iran, and will continue to be one."
Lugar spokesman Andy Fisher was more succinct: "No briefing. No oped. No conversations. No story."
lisab said:Ms Music, are you in the ME?
Ms Music said:Sorry, what do you mean by the ME? (I am not very good at acronyms)
I try to keep abreast of stories in the foreign press because the press in the US are pretty timid about some subjects, plus I like to get the viewpoints of people abroad, especially in regard to US policies.Cyrus said:I never even heard of the 'Asia Times' before you posted this.
turbo-1 said:I try to keep abreast of stories in the foreign press because the press in the US are pretty timid about some subjects, plus I like to get the viewpoints of people abroad, especially in regard to US policies.
Anti-US garbage? Is it possible that people in China, India, Russia, England, Turkey, South Africa, etc, etc, might have some views that are well-founded, honest and worthy of our attention? The conglomerates that run the US media machine don't have a lock on truth, nor on objectivity.Cyrus said:Yeah, but normally its anti-US garbage.
turbo-1 said:Anti-US garbage? Is it possible that people in China, India, Russia, England, Turkey, South Africa, etc, etc, might have some views that are well-founded, honest and worthy of our attention? The conglomerates that run the US media machine don't have a lock on truth, nor on objectivity.
A graduate of Yale and Stanford's creative writing program, Cohen is currently a special correspondent for Macau Business magazine and writes guidebooks for Lonely Planet. Before Hong Kong, Cohen was a TV news producer at CNN in Washington and a US diplomat in Africa.
The Asia Times is not a reliable source of news. However, they do have a great critique of that new capitalist/western philosopy propaganda film that topped the box office last weekend: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE24Dj01.htmlturbo-1 said:According to Asia Times...
Yes, his lack of political capital is one of the many reasons why this just isn't in the realm of possibility.chroot said:I have the feeling that if Bush tried to attack another country right now, the people would find a way to replace him long before his tenure expires.
- Warren
Not too credible if he doesn't check sources.Cyrus said:That being said, he seems to be pretty credible.
We may never know if he didn't check his sources, or if his sources were either misinformed or if they recanted on the release of the story. Perhaps he will give us the back-story in the near future to clear this up.Evo said:Not too credible if he doesn't check sources.
Do a forum search for atimes.com There are plenty of citations of it in P&WA, most of them pretty funny (like the OP and the Indy review I linked above).Cyrus said:I never even heard of the 'Asia Times' before you posted this.
Given the supermarket-tabloid nature of the Asia Times, it is more likely that they just flat-out made the story up. There won't be any recanting - tabloids don't do that sort of thing.turbo-1 said:We may never know if he didn't check his sources, or if his sources were either misinformed or if they recanted on the release of the story. Perhaps he will give us the back-story in the near future to clear this up.
Yes. What does that have to do with anti-US garbage like the Asia Times?turbo-1 said:Is it possible that people in China, India, Russia, England, Turkey, South Africa, etc, etc, might have some views that are well-founded, honest and worthy of our attention?
Clearly. But just being non-American doesn't automatically make a source objective either. There are good sources and bad sources overseas. This one is an absurdly bad source. It isn't that tough to see: I just went to the homepage and picked the first juicy anti-American propaganda piece that caught my eye, when I linked the Indy review.The conglomerates that run the US media machine don't have a lock on truth, nor on objectivity.
Yes, it makes no sense and just gives less and less credibility to the hate mongering side of the press.quadraphonics said:Probably more interesting than the details of Asia Times is the following question: why are certain segments of the media/population so obsessed with the idea of Bush attacking Iran? There is almost zero chance of such a thing happening, and yet every week or two, a bunch of new unsubstantiated stories and rumors seem to pop up, indicating that there is a hungry audience for this idea. I get the impression that some people have invested so much into their image of Bush-as-warmonger that they are almost hoping for such an attack to provide them one last jolt of validation. Is it anxiety about his imminent departure from politics, and the consequent ungrounding of their political identities? It will be interesting to see how these types respond next January, when Bush leaves office without attacking Iran.