Neocons Say Everyone’s a Neocon on Iran

[laststeamtrain]

Neocons Say Everyone’s a Neocon on Iran

by Ali Gharib

As a short follow up to Daniel’s post yesterday on Krauthammer’s Projections (http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=264), I wanted to quickly mention that the neocons are not only projecting their wants and desires for the Middle East onto Iranians, but also onto President Obama.

On Thursday, the neoconservative editorial board of the Wall Street Journal went so far as to indirectly suggest, by using an anonymous quote from an administration official, that Obama actually wants the crisis in Iran to end swiftly with an Ahmadinejad victory:

"His foreign policy gurus drew up an agenda defined mainly in opposition to the perceived Bush legacy: The U.S. will sit down with the likes of Iran, North Korea or Russia and hash out deals. In a Journal story on Monday, a senior U.S. official bordered on enthusiastic about confirming an Ahmadinejad victory as soon as possible. “Had there been a transition to a new government, a new president wouldn’t have emerged until August. In some respects, this might allow Iran to engage the international community quicker.” The popular uprising in Iran is so inconvenient to this agenda."

It’s shocking enough to make such a suggestion, but all the more shocking considering that it is the ideological comrades of the WSJ editorial board who, ahead of the election, explicitly expressed support for an Ahmadinejad victory (cf. Daniel’s post on Neocons for Ahmadinejad)...http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=267

[JohnyCanuck]

1. Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated "Color Revolution?"

By Paul Craig Roberts.

A number of commentators have expressed their idealistic belief in the purity of Mousavi, Montazeri, and the westernized youth of Terhan. The CIA destabilization plan, announced two years ago (see below) has somehow not contaminated unfolding events.

The claim is made that Ahmadinejad stole the election, because the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted. However, Mousavi declared his victory several hours before the polls closed. This is classic CIA destabilization designed to discredit a contrary outcome. It forces an early declaration of the vote. The longer the time interval between the preemptive declaration of victory and the release of the vote tally, the longer Mousavi has to create the impression that the authorities are using the time to fix the vote. It is amazing that people don’t see through this trick.

As for the grand ayatollah Montazeri’s charge that the election was stolen, he was the initial choice to succeed Khomeini, but lost out to the current Supreme Leader. He sees in the protests an opportunity to settle the score with Khamenei. Montazeri has the incentive to challenge the election whether or not he is being manipulated by the CIA, which has a successful history of manipulating disgruntled politicians.

There is a power struggle among the ayatollahs. Many are aligned against Ahmadinejad because he accuses them of corruption, thus playing to the Iranian countryside where Iranians believe the ayatollahs' lifestyles indicate an excess of power and money. In my opinion, Ahmadinejad's attack on the ayatollahs is opportunistic. However, it does make it odd for his American detractors to say he is a conservative reactionary lined up with the ayatollahs.

Commentators are "explaining" the Iran elections based on their own illusions, delusions, emotions, and vested interests. Whether or not the poll results predicting Ahmadinejad's win are sound, there is, so far, no evidence beyond surmise that the election was stolen. However, there are credible reports that the CIA has been working for two years to destabilize the Iranian government.

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06192009.

[MajorChode]

2. The fringe nut neocons will probably try and claim vindication from the Iran unrest

It's not much different from when the wingnuts claimed Raygun "won" the cold war. They simply manufacture their own reality that fits their warped view of the world. The fact is Raygun extended the cold war by strengthening the hard liners in the Soviet Union. The same is true of Bush and Iran. Had Bush not invaded Iraq, we would have seen the political unrest in Iran years ago.

[Enthusiast]

3. I'm with you, Chode.

Neocons will say anything with a straight face as if it is the absolute truth even though they know it is a complete fabrication. U.S. foreign policy seems to turn every action into a long term negative. Why is that?

[MajorChode]

8. Because they are allowed to get away with it

The problem with the mainstream media is they have been bullied by the wingnuts into giving them a soapbox for whatever nonsense they choose to spew out of the fear of being labeled unfair or unbalanced. So out of repetition they gain legitimacy because they can't be reasonably challenged or marginalized. You don't give a streetcorner preacher a public forum simply because they have a dissenting point of view. If someone is obviously a moran, they should be ignored.

Back in the day when you only had three networks, those three networks were all competing for the same audience. Journalistic integrity was of prime importance and was defended at all costs because they couldn't survive otherwise. With the advent of cable news, you can afford to cater only to the fringe nuts and build a media empire out of just that. Then the other major networks have to at least somewhat compete on that level for fear of losing more market share since their "integrity" can be attacked, even if those attacks have absolutely no merit. That's exactly how a junkie moran can manage to create headlines every other day, and no legitimate newsman can stand up and call bullshit because in doing so they would be steamrolled by the right wing lie machine and all the other networks would stand back and watch it happen.

[Enthusiast]

9. Good explanation, Chode. Thanks nt

[annabanana]

4. Well. they WOULD say that, wouldn't they?

Always remember that their philosophy considers propaganda and lies fully justified as long as the ends are served.

They say it right up front. They aren't shy about it.

[laststeamtrain]

6. Leo Strauss regretted that Machiavelli wrote The Prince & spilled the beans.

They're happy though that most of us are too stupid to know what that means.

Alas...

[billyoc]

5. Good, that may shame a few cruise missile liberals into shutting the fuck up about it.

[ck4829]

7. They've been saying they were responsible for this uprising since day one

It's starting to get pathetic.