Eubulides wrote:
>> Is this a prediction?
>>
>> It remains to be seen whether the *current administration* controlling
>> the institutions of the USG can credibly commit successor
>> administrations -and the voters who put them in office- to open-ended
>> arms races against any *imagined* rival or whether this is just a
>> classic testosterone fueled game of chicken that will de-escalate in
>> ways none of us are privy to before the next major election cycle in
>> the US.

Iran calls it psychological warfare:

Iran Says US Waging Psychological Warfare in Nuclear Dispute
By VOA News
09 April 2006
http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-04-09-voa14.cfm?renderforprint=1

Iran is accusing the United States of waging psychological warfare,
following media reports saying the Bush administration is studying
options for military strikes to force Tehran to abandon its nuclear program.

In today's Sunday's editions, The Washington Post newspaper quotes
current and former U.S. defense officials as saying a Pentagon study of
military options is part of a coercive diplomacy to get Iran to end its
nuclear fuel program. The report also says no U.S. attack appears likely
in the short term.

In a separate report citing unnamed sources, The New Yorker magazine
says the Bush administration has increased clandestine activities inside
Iran as well as planning for possible air strikes.

U.S. officials have said the administration is working on a diplomatic
solution to the nuclear issue, although no options have been ruled out.

Washington accuses Iran of using its nuclear program as a cover for
developing an atomic bomb. Iran insists its nuclear intentions are peaceful.

The New Yorker report also quotes a former U.S. official as saying
President Bush views Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as "a
potential Adolf Hitler."

Iran's decision in January to restart its nuclear uranium enrichment
program, prompted Britain, France and Germany to break off more than two
years of negotiations with Tehran. The Europeans then backed a U.S.
demand to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which can impose
sanctions if it finds Iran' nuclear program violates the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP, AP and Reuters.


Jim Devine wrote:
For example, we already see Hillary Clinton defining herself this way and she's 
quite
a hawk (by more objective standards) as a result.
I blogged this today on dKoz, apparently the anti-war elements are
hounding her (it's SUCH a pity!):

Anti-war hecklers interrupt Sen. Clinton at Brown (Providence, RI)
University
by leighm
Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 10:53:02 AM PDT

A 15 hour old story, and only 20 media outlets covered it (according to
Google).

She never missed a beat:

"Despite the heckling, Clinton did not stop her speech, which was
general in tone. Her only direct reference to the Iraq  war was to decry
the substandard equipment issued to American soldiers."

I guess 'leadership' means never having to listen to your constituents.

More follows, from News24, South Africa:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/9/13532/53702

(I also included a piece from Brown University's daily newspaper)


Leigh
http://leighm.wordpress.com/

Reply via email to