Civil Liberties

Bah Bah Bah, Bomb Bomb Iran

|

Earlier today, Radley put up a short blog about the Stu Bykofsky column which says another 9/11 style attack on the United States would unify the country and refocus its policies on terror, the true threat to America.

As evidenced by the expanded eavesdropping bill that just made it through a Congress that gives the DOJ more unchecked power — see E.J. Dionne's rationalization for this latest instance of Democrats' callow incompetence here — another 9/11 attack would only embolden the government to encroach upon our civil liberties more and probably lead to more bloodshed worldwide.

Remember, one of the things that 'united us' in the days following 9/11 was bloodlust. Vengeance went hand-in-hand with the fervent patriotism in the bars and at the water coolers across the nation. If there was even the slightest bit of evidence linking a domestic attack to Iran — or if a tie could be made up — a four- or five-digit death toll would be more than enough to override common sense and skepticism against an invasion.

Attack or no, Cheney & co. are getting ready.

NEXT: CiF: No to "Quisling" Refugees

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’d like to see less stupid YouTube inserts on H&R

  2. They have to give a shout out to all us RISK-obsessed basement dwellers once in a while.

  3. If we’re goin 2 bomb iran…we better do it b-4 they get WMDs.. B-cause once they have WMDs…they can rest-asure that US nor ISRAEL will mess with them.

    Hey, Here’s one 4 u:

    Do u know u can prove that GW Bush knew IRAQ had NO WMDs…we invaded.

    obviously, we would never invade a country with WMD We never have (N. Korea, Russia, China)

  4. I’d like to see less stupid political inserts in the White House.

    The latest line is – no, seriously, I’m not making this up – that the Iranians are backing the Taliban.

    The Taliban, who slaughtered the Iranian embassy staff when they took Kabul in the 1990s.

    The Taliban, who ruthlessly persecuted Afghanistan’s Persian and Shiite minorities.

    The Iranians, who agreed to assist us in our war against the Taliban by closing their border and, if necessary, rescuing our downed pilots.

    How stupid do they think we are?

  5. The latest line is – no, seriously, I’m not making this up – that the Iranians are backing the Taliban.

    The Taliban, who slaughtered the Iranian embassy staff when they took Kabul in the 1990s.

    The Taliban, who ruthlessly persecuted Afghanistan’s Persian and Shiite minorities.

    The Iranians, who agreed to assist us in our war against the Taliban by closing their border and, if necessary, rescuing our downed pilots.

    They also suggested Saddam Hussein, a secular fascist, was in bed with Osama bin Laden. So no, this doesn’t surprise me one bit.

  6. Saddam slept with a lot of people…but perhaps NOT Osama

  7. We (the USA) have slept with ALL OF THEM…we are TEAM AMERICA…World Prostitute

  8. Really good! The “Not News” Icon for Fox was certainly appropriate cuz when it comes to foreign matters they are indeed not news but rather, propaganda.

  9. Cesar,

    A Taliban/Tehran connection is even dumber than a Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. There were never hostilities between Iraq and al Qaeda. Al Qaeda never staged attacks against Iraqi interests. Iraq never helped us wage a war against bin Laden. The theorists of Wahabbi Islam never declared Arab Nationalists to be infidels.

    An Iranian/al Qaeda connection is like a Saddam/al Qaeda connection times fifty.

  10. How stupid do they think we are?

    Do you really want to know?

  11. But after the next attack, will we all be quick to dismiss the M/YY Truthers?

  12. Actually, I heard someone from the administration say that Iran was fairly well behaved in Afghanistan. Though he also said that talking about Iran as a monolith is crazy. Some parts of the Iranian government apparently are suspected of giving weapons and money to the Taliban (today’s version, that is), just not in any major way. No one ever said that Iran is easy to pigeonhole.

  13. The Iranians, who agreed to assist us in our war against the Taliban by closing their border and, if necessary, rescuing our downed pilots.

    How stupid do they think we are?

    We are now at war with Eurasia. We are allies with Eastasia.

  14. An Iranian/al Qaeda connection is like a Saddam/al Qaeda connection times fifty.

    Times fifty? Why, that’s…I don’t even know what that is!

  15. joe:

    The latest line is – no, seriously, I’m not making this up – that the Iranians are backing the Taliban.

    Yeah, and when Hamid Karzai expressed his gratitude for the Iranian assistance in fighting the Taliban, the Bush administration and the neocon propaganda machine went into frantic truth suppression mode!

    (Thunderstorm in Denver area-gota power down for now)

  16. The Iranian government is a lot like the old Soviet Union. Their structure of government is so convoluted its difficult for an outsider to tell who is in charge.

  17. How stupid do they think we are?

    In a couple of months, if they start claiming that Iranians eat puppies, we’ll know.

  18. In a couple of months, if they start claiming that Iranians eat puppies, we’ll know.

    You know, marinaded in Shiraz and cooked with cumin, puppy is actually quite tasty.

    (I keed! I keed!)

  19. I am convinced that sometime next year, whether there is another terrorist attack or not, the Bush administration will attack Iran.

    It is virtually certain that the Republican nominee will be far behind in the polls at that point, and the White House will be in a panic regarding the need to “do something” about Iran before “those appeasers” get into the White House.

    Terror attack or no terror attack, diplomatic incident or no diplomatic incident, provocation or no provocation, ally support or no ally support, these guys will attack Iran on their way out the door. They’ll mix it in with the scores of pre-emptive pardons they’re going to announce for the torturers and murderers that the Military Commissions Act didn’t manage to immunize. Just watch.

  20. An attack on Iran is not necessary, and I think we’ll pretty much ensure no overthrow of the current regime if we go through with one. Without us engaging in a needless invasion, a more liberal Iran arising is probably more likely than not.

    Of course, if they do something crazy, then screw ’em. Frankly, they’re lucky they took our embassy during the Cold War and not afterwards.

  21. How stupid do they think we are?

    Quite. Given all of the anecdotal evidence that is provided to me daily (not just on chat boards and the web, but all around), I would have to agree with them that many people are uninformed (read: stupid).

  22. RON PAUL does not think we should bomb Iraq.

  23. Was there a point to this post, or was it just an excuse to post that lame YouTube video?

  24. Considering this administration performed one of the greatest “Whoops, my bad” in American history, the “evidence” against Iran is going to have to be way, way, way stronger than, oh, a “slam dunk”.

  25. I loved the word Dionne used to describe the Dem vote: they “allowed” the bill to pass. As if the bill was a sentient being walking through a gate! As if a congressman has a third choice when it comes to voting in addition to “Yea” or “No”!

  26. “If there was even the slightest bit of evidence linking a domestic attack to Iran – or if a tie could be made up – a four- or five-digit death toll would be more than enough to override common sense and skepticism against an invasion”

    Because the obvious and sensible thing to do would be to ignore such evidence and let Iran attack and kill US civilians with impunity. Reason number 99,9999 why Reason is not a serious publication when it comes to foreign policy.

  27. John-

    Do you think there are any scenarios intermediate between “do nothing in response to clear evidence of a culprit” and “invade and occupy in response to a tiny shred of evidence that may or may not be reliable”?

    Because the post you respond to said “even the slightest bit of evidence” rather than “strong evidence”. Keep that in mind.

    Oh, and you just invoked the drinking game rules:
    Reason number 99,9999 why Reason is not a serious publication when it comes to foreign policy.

    Drink!

  28. Johnny Clarke –

    Why do you think they will need evidence?

    That’s the funny thing about Ron Paul’s claim that a Gulf of Tonkin type incident might be set up. I would agree, if I thought that Bush gave a shit at this point – and I don’t think he does. You only stage an incident to have a pretext for war if you’re worried about having a pretext for war. If you’re not going to ask the UN for a resolution and you’re not going to ask the Congress for authorization, what do you need a pretext for? You don’t. You just act. And that is what this administration will do – just act.

    Actually, I’ll amend my earlier statement to say that they may not even do it in response to polls. I wouldn’t be surprised if they waited to see how the election turns out, and then bombed Iranian facilities in late November if the Democrats win. “Lame duck THIS!” the T-shirts can say.

  29. Do you think there are any scenarios intermediate between “do nothing in response to clear evidence of a culprit” and “invade and occupy in response to a tiny shred of evidence that may or may not be reliable”?

    Well considering Dave Weigel said he opposes even investigating possible interference by Iran in Iraq (“it’s a causus belli!”)it’s not unreasonable to think many people here would oppose a serious investigation into whether a hypothetical future attack was perpetuated by Iran, for fear that evidence would actually be found.

    Unless the attack was declared, thats how it would go of course. First there is a little bit of evidence, then an investigation, then maybe you find more evidence or not.

  30. If Iran actually does attack us or becomes a really awful and imminent threat–something I’d need some pretty compelling evidence of–then sure, bomb away. Until then, how about we not do it?

    All of this may just be diplomatic saber-rattling, which can be effective.

  31. Contrary to US Propaganda…IRAN is NOT suicidal.

    The ONLY reason they are developing NUKEs is because they know that NUKEs is the ONLY thing that will KEEP US and UN OUT.

  32. Pro Liberate,

    Time to start the weekend and listen to some Def Leppard.

  33. Jeez, is Demokraticunderground down for repairs today?

  34. Pro Liberate,

    Or perhaps The Jesus & the Mary Chain if you perfer? Or Filter? Or Snow Patrol?

  35. I reveal my musical preferences to no man!

    You know, I went to a Def Leppard concert when I was in high school, in the Before Time. I guess I liked them then, but I don’t like them now. Huh.

    My collaborators at Urkobold have much more obvious tastes.

  36. I never paid close attention to popular music, so for years I had no problem assuming the chorus to Barbara Ann–which I enjoyed–was “Bah, bah, bah… bah, bah-berraang.” (scat talk?)
    Then the radio show I listened to as a kid, Bobby Barbee and the B-bar-B Riders… well, I was never able to connect the dots/bars until recently.
    What can I say?
    So, in closing, may I suggest everyone listen more carefully to music, and no bombing of anyone by anybody.
    Peace.

  37. semm,

    If you think really hard, you might be able to come up with another reason why David Weigel might not think that inviting this particular administration to put together an investigation into Iran is the wisest idea.

    I know, we can put Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Perle on it. Then we can get at the truth and advance our national interest.

  38. I reveal my musical preferences to no man!

    I don’t know, you took to that Der Commissar reference pretty quick.

  39. thoreau,

    Times fifty? Why, that’s…I don’t even know what that is!

    Actually, it’s zero, not that I think about it.

    You look at it, and you think, how much more stupid could it possibly be? And the answer is, none. None more stupid.

  40. Does John still have faith that this administration could be honest about the quality of the evidence.

    If there is real evidence that Iran was behind something like that I say it can’t go unanswered. I would view it as Iran declaring war on us. But this administration has proven honesty with the American people means nothing. There is no reason why anyone should believe anything they say.

  41. Quite right, Rick Barton. He’s doing the same thing with Malaki right now.

  42. I never paid close attention to popular music, so for years I had no problem assuming the chorus to Barbara Ann–which I enjoyed–was “Bah, bah, bah… bah, bah-berraang.” (scat talk?)
    Then the radio show I listened to as a kid, Bobby Barbee and the B-bar-B Riders… well, I was never able to connect the dots/bars until recently.
    What can I say?
    So, in closing, may I suggest everyone listen more carefully to music, and no bombing of anyone by anybody.

    Clearly you guys don’t know the work of Frank De Lima, a stand-up comedian living and working in Hawaii. He wrote a fantastic ‘History of Hawaii’ with appropriate words set to late fifties-early sixties rock songs. The song about Pearl Harbor, was, of course:

    Bah Bah Bah
    Bombs from Japan (2)
    Way up in the skies was a really big surprise
    Bomb Pearl Harbor, Bomb Pearl Harbor…

    Albums can be purchased at http://www.frankdelima.com/store.html

    De Lima is brilliant, funny, and a respecter of nobody. The rest of his canned history of Hawaii is great too. Listen to his story of Captain Cook, to the tune of Mack the Knife…

  43. In a couple of months, if they start claiming that Iranians eat puppies, we’ll know.

    You know, marinaded in Shiraz and cooked with cumin, puppy is actually quite tasty.

    (I keed! I keed!)

    Shiraz? HAHAHAHAHA!

    Thoreau, everyone knows you marinate red meat in Cabernet.

  44. Was Saddam Arab or Persian?

    Iran is Persian if I am not mistaken.

    Is Bush the Dumber just a puppet for the house of Saud?

    Was Michael Moore right?

    (not sarcasm this time)

  45. I’d like to see less stupid YouTube inserts on H&R

    Hey, You Tube is where it’s at, man. Except nobody has uploaded Sawyer Brown doing Six Days On The Road.

    Turning Iran into a sea of molten glass would be sound strategy. Instant gratification. Imagine the power the USA would project with all those televised images of a smoking black crater of a hole in the ground. AccuWeather forecasting RealFeel temps of 3000 degrees, no American troops deployed, no war dead, nothing for Cindy Sheehan to rally around. For the cost of one transatlantic flight we’re done. In. Out. No more smelly camel jockeys. Come on boys, it’s the right thing to do.

  46. Shiraz? HAHAHAHAHA!

    Thoreau, everyone knows you marinate red meat in Cabernet.

    Syrah (shiraz) is Persian, so they’re only being patriotic. Boy, does it impart a funny taste, though – I laughed and laughed…

  47. What everybody neglects to mention is that Iraq is Iran’s next-door neighbor. If some foreign superpower invaded Mexico, would we really be expected to just sit on our thumbs and whistle Dixie?

    No, we’d be funneling money and arms to the side of the resistance. What was the Cuban missile crisis supposed to BE about, anyway?

    When we do it, it’s Protecting Our Shores. When other nations do it, it’s Supporting Terror.

  48. Uh, which Bomb Iran are you referencing? The studio version or the one from the party when they were all drunk? I suspect the latter.

  49. Pro Liberate,

    Beastie Boys? Sabotage!

  50. “If some foreign superpower invaded Mexico, would we really be expected to just sit on our thumbs and whistle Dixie?”

    Why not? Mexico is invading the USA and we aren’t doing a damn thing about it.

    But wait, it’d be somebody else’s borders we’d be protecting , so sure, we’d probably go all out.

  51. I just wish that they had included in their flying photos section some shots of the adulterers being stoned and some gays hanging from cranes. To complete the picture.

  52. PEEK A BOO KKKenKKK

    WHEEEE WHEEEEE WHEEEEEEEEE!

  53. “Turning Iran into a sea of molten glass would be sound strategy. Instant gratification. Imagine the power the USA would project with all those televised images of a smoking black crater of a hole in the ground. AccuWeather forecasting RealFeel temps of 3000 degrees, no American troops deployed, no war dead, nothing for Cindy Sheehan to rally around. For the cost of one transatlantic flight we’re done. In. Out. No more smelly camel jockeys. Come on boys, it’s the right thing to do.”
    Mr. Sewer,
    First we get this Frank DeLima guy out in Hawaii to set your above to music. Then we see how it plays.
    You’d be willing to wait that long wouldn’t you?

  54. “Remember, one of the things that ‘united us’ in the days following 9/11 was bloodlust. Vengeance went hand-in-hand with the fervent patriotism in the bars and at the water coolers across the nation.”

    I don’t remember that at all, actually. I remember people wanting to kill bin Laden and his terrorist buddies, but not any sort of indiscriminate desire to kill civilians by Americans. Given your haziness about the recent past, I’m skeptical about your authority on future events.

  55. Goddammit, Jonathan, it’s a blog POST, not a blog. The blog is the medium, the post is the message.

    You would not say, “I just wrote a diary in my diary.”

    entry: diary :: post: blog

    For Pete’s sake!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.