Slog - Comments on The Morning News

Comment by Gabriel

Gabriel — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:12:19 -0800

Iran has said they are suspending the release of Turney because Britain has caused an "international outcry" regarding the incident. I can't believe what a stupid blunder Iran has made in doing this. They have gained nothing and will gain nothing, and it only serves to give an opening to those who want to attack Iran. They've really shot themselves in the foot.

Comment by Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:18:09 -0800

those silly suicide bombers...what are they thinking?

i find it interesting that the 'confessions' of the British soldiers were made under duress...what exactly goes on in Guantanamo?? are the confessions made there done by gentle pleading?

Comment by raindrop

raindrop — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:29:08 -0800

If only there was a way to have a timetable for withdrawl without setting a time.

Comment by Gabriel

Gabriel — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:39:59 -0800

Do not watch this video if you don't want to see Karl Rove rapping about killing little animals and David Gregory trying to dance behind him. Things just became a lot clearer for me.

Comment by hyperlinker

hyperlinker — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:47:25 -0800

Comment by cressona

cressona — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:12:40 -0800

There's a terrific op-ed piece in today's New York Times about on-street parking. Hey, it even has a line from George Costanza. Really:
Gone Parkin'

Comment by Tim Keck

Tim Keck — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:14:09 -0800

@1
Don't underestimate the Iranians. They're far more sophisticated in these type of manufactured confrontations than the UK.

Comment by hyperlinker

hyperlinker — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:17:30 -0800

Comment by hyperlinker

hyperlinker — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:18:27 -0800

Comment by Gabriel

Gabriel — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:19:25 -0800

@7 To me it seems more about attention-getting, without much consideration of what to do after the initial act. I mean, what does Iran expect to leverage out of this?

To me, it seems eerily similar to the beginnings of the Lebanon war last summer. We now know that Israel planned the actions long before their soldier was abducted, but the abduction gave them an opening and a certain legitimacy they didn't have before.

I also think that parading the soldiers in front of the cameras and forcing a confession were a big mistake. The British people in general are war-weary, but this has riled the blood in a big way.

Comment by Tim Keck

Tim Keck — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:36:29 -0800

@10. Lebabon exactly. Iran pushed Israel into a no win situation and Iran came out stronger in the region because of it.
When your only diplomacy is war (US, UK) and you can't go to war (because you're loosing your ass in Iraq) you're in trouble. Iran has plenty of options and they are going to fuck Israel, UK and The US over and over for years. What is the UK going to do?

Comment by Tim keck

Tim keck — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:39:27 -0800

"Lebanon" that is. "Lebabon" is where Cinnebons come from...

Comment by Gabriel

Gabriel — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:40:09 -0800

@11 I don't believe that the UK and US are going to sit on the sidelines and let Iran do anything simply because things in Iraq aren't going well. Iran seems to believe that's the case, but if they stretch this hostage scenario out much longer they might find otherwise.

Comment by Gabriel

Gabriel — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:43:21 -0800

In fact, I'd say that the dire situation in Iraq makes some form of attack on Iran more likely perhaps. The US will argue that the insurgency would be entirely under control if not for outside meddling. Look at how Vietnam spread to Laos and Cambodia.

Comment by tsm

tsm — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:07:51 -0800

@6 - interesting. Street parking is probably too cheap here, too. Although I drive rarely these days, my trips are always accompanied by a lot of cruising around Capitol Hill looking for an open space because renting a space costs so much more than it's worth to me. It's the rational thing for people like me to do, but it probably increases the traffic in the neighborhood considerably.

Comment by Lloyd Clydesdale

Lloyd Clydesdale — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:11:48 -0800

You would think that whomever prods the other side into attacking first would have the advantage.

Comment by L. Gallop

L. Gallop — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:15:13 -0800

Lets start a non-scientific poll about Bush.

Bush is:

a) a fucktard.

b) an asshat.

c) this is offensive to asshats and fucktards,

Comment by golob

golob — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:29:54 -0800

Re: Iran.

There is an element of tit-for-tat going on here. The US raids an embassy (sovereign Iranian territory) in Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq and boldly declares that US special forces are regularly entering Iran.

Iran retaliates by capturing UK sailor. Capturing and holding hostage US servicemen would be too provocative -- eliciting memories of the 1979 Revolution too crisply. The Iranians are counting on the greater restraint of the UK.

Also worth remembering: Increasing tension increases oil prices. Iran is utterly dependent upon a barrel of oil remaining somewhere at or above $60/barrel. Short of starting a full on shooting war, it is in their interest to keep things simmering along at maximum heat.

Finally, we might want to go to war with Iran, but short of cracking out nuclear weapons, we really cannot. Our military is in shambles thanks to Iraq.

Comment by DOUG.

DOUG. — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 11:01:45 -0800

Gabriel@10: I must have missed the video of Iran "parading the soldiers". All I've seen are images of them quietly eating.

But I've heard the word "parading" used quite frequently in the past two days. To me, this term is charged with POW overtones and helps fuel the Bushies' desire for a confrontation.

Comment by Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 11:04:24 -0800

Bet it will be World War Three by next week. The Bushies have been aching for a reason to attack Iran. And the military activities in the crowded Persian Gulf? Gee, makes you hope that nothing ...... unfortunate should happen.

Comment by Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:14:02 -0800

This just in about Iran. BRITAIN WILL NOT NEGOTIATE!!!

Hmmmm, what will all these religous nuts who so desperately want Armagedon (sp) to happen do when all the fighting happens and there is no god to rescue them?

Comment by Mike in MO

Mike in MO — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:38:01 -0800

If this gets any more heated, we're all screwed

Comment by golob

golob — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:49:12 -0800

If anyone is curious, there is an older War Nerd column that steps through what a US-Iranian war might be like.

Comment by Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:51:07 -0800

@ Mike in MO

I am just going to say "Bush is not MY President" when all hell breaks loose. Remember when Rush L and the rest of the right wing wackos said that about Clinton? The days when the GOP though purjury was a HUGE problem. The days when we only had to deal with cum stains on dresses. Oh the sweet innocence of days long gone.