King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has repeatedly urged the United States to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear programme, according to leaked US diplomatic cables that describe how other Arab allies have secretly agitated for military action against Tehran. […]
The Saudi king was recorded as having "frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons programme", one cable stated. "He told you [Americans] to cut off the head of the snake," the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir said, according to a report on Abdullah's meeting with the US general David Petraeus in April 2008. […]
The leaked US cables also reveal that:
• Officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran's nuclear programme to be stopped by any means, including military.
• Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war". […]
The cables also expose frank, even rude, remarks about Iranian leaders, their trustworthiness and tactics at international meetings. Abdullah told another US diplomat: "The bottom line is that they cannot be trusted." Mubarak told a US congressman: "Iran is always stirring trouble." Others are learning from what they describe as Iranian deception. "They lie to us, and we lie to them," said Qatar's prime ministe
This isn't my favorite because I want to bomb Iran, but because A) the oppressive, two-faced, triple-dealing House of Saud deserves each and every embarrassing diplomatic disclosure the universe can provide, particularly (though certainly not only) vis-a-vis the United States; and B) the whole thing complicates any number of simplistic Mideast/foreign policy narratives.
I am both naive and irresponsible, so it's my hunch that among the governments that suffer most from these disclosures, America's will be pretty far down on the list. A comparatively open society, even one whose government insists on acting as global cop and uses a massive secrecy apparatus for that project, cannot long support a foreign policy that is in direct contrast to stated activities and aims. And scanning the headlines on this thing so far I haven't seen any OMG-style revelations about what the United States is doing (please correct my impression in the comments). It's the regimes who lie constantly to their oppressed citizens who stand to lose the most face, I would think.
Though the data-dump doubtlessly makes American diplomacy more complicated and circumspect, there are potential upsides to that development, not least of which is the demonstration that U.S. governance can easily withstand gamma-ray blasts of sunlight. One can only hope (with some optimism, at least in the long term) that the example of Wikileaks, if not precisely the organization itself, will spur similar revelations about the conduct of far more oppressive regimes.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com
posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary
period.
Subscribe
here to preserve your ability to comment. Your
Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the
digital
edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and
ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Personally, I have a very hard time believing that this guy Bradley Manning accessed and divulged all of this information himself.
Much of it may have come from him, but my bet is that there are probably numerous people leaking info, possibly including people at the State Department itself. State has always been our weakest link in international diplomacy. It naturally attracts people with hidden agendas and divided loyalties.
I can't guarantee
that they won't
come after you.
The [world governments].
Your broadwave about [the diplomatic reports]
has weakened their regime.
They are not gone
and they are not... forgiving.
Glenn Greenwald had a column a while back that pointed out that the only evidence there is against Manning is the word of one person who is both mentally disturbed and will do anything for fame/money.
I think he's talking about Adrian Lamo, whom I actually know from kindergarten, and as a friend of friends. Uhm, no, he's not mentally disturbed. And I'm almost certain he's not out for fame or money.
I'll say it right now. Wikileaks is an unassailable good. Now if only they were better at getting into other countries computers...I'd like to see some internal Chines or French diplomatic reports.
I'd like to see how much horse trading goes on directly between North Korea and South Korea, re: how complicit the south is in keeping their northern cousins under the boot all in the name of "stability", realpolitik style.
That, and whether the US thinks Putin's Batman outfit has nipples.
I suppose you're only familiar with the new Batman movies. Michelle Pfeiffer? Ha! The only true Catwoman is Julie Newmar, Lee Meriwether, or Eartha Kitt. And I didn't need molded plastic to improve my physique. Pure. West. And why doesn't Batman dance anymore? Remember the Batusi?
The most interesting thing has been just how little clout the US has on the international scene. China is engaged in an open cyber-war with the US and Administrations are afraid to even acknowledge it. The Sauds dictate foreign policy in the ME. US foreign policy seems to be directed at desperately maintaining the hegemonic status quo while the rest of the world doesn't even care and simply passes us by.
You have to admit it does have some great Clancy-esque conspiracy angles to it. 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, we end up invading Iraq under the pretense that they helped trained Al Q. Wikileaks reveals that the Saudis are the number one financial supporters of Al Q, and that SA is pressuring the US to make a move on the next country to the one we invaded.
Only a fool thinks that the US ever unilaterally ran the world or was a hegemon. And only a fool believes that the only choice in foreign policy is either the US ruling as a hegemon or some other country "dictating foreign policy." In reality, there's always negotiation and push and pull on all sides in foreign policy.
But some people insist on believing that either the US drives all foreign policy (and that other countries bear no responsibility, only being reactive to what the US does), or that when the US decides to take other countries' views into account, it means that the other country is dictating.
Still other people somehow think that the US not bombing Iran when the Saudis urge the US to is proof that the Saudis dictate foreign policy.
The cables reveal that the US routinely ignores what Israel and the Saudis say, the nobody trusts the Iranians who lie all the time, that North Korea ships missiles to Iran, that organized crime is involved with the Russians, that the US is aware of Pakistani untrustworthiness and Afghani corruptions and constantly pushes the countries, but is of course limited.
Gotta say, John, I don't always agree with you, but I'm never bored or un-enlightened by what you have to say, and in this case, there's no daylight between us. I hope you don't mind if I borrow with attribution this summary of your take on things, because it's pretty perfect.
The Sauds don't make Middle Eastern foreign policy so much as they heavily lean on it. For all the bitching some do about AIPAC, the House of Saud literally showers money on academic institutions, charities, and foundations, while plying members of the State Department with gifts and promises of jobs after their time in government.
Ellie, you don't like The Clash? If you want, just click on any link by Warty. I guarantee whatever you hear will make you forget "Rock the Casbah". Or click this (not a Rick Roll).
Rape accusations are almost expected against a man who has succeeded more than the powers that be are comfortable with. Belichik, Obama, they're all the same.
That?s the pathetic thing about Assange, playing James Bond against the US because he knows they won?t touch him. Try disclosing secrets about the Iranians, the Russians or the Chinese, how many interviews would he be giving?
Too hot to handle?
I've seen lots of things in the secret cables that just reinforce claims that Americans have been making.
The Arab governments wanting to bomb Iran thing.
Iran using the Red Crescent to sneak in spies and weapons.
Iran lied to UN inspectors about Qom.
Hilarious EU scheme to boycott Ahmadinejad's inauguration, but keep the boycott secret so their invitations wouldn't get canceled first.
As repeatedly claimed by the US, other countries really, really don't want to take Gitmo detainees either.
At the very least this suggests that US officials sincerely believe their claims. (Unless this is an intentional leak?) I find more in the cables to challenge a leftist view of the world, but of course that's because this is presenting the US view of foreign policy.
The biggest embarassment to the US is arguably that Clinton has ordered HUMINT spying on other countries' UN officials, but I have to think that people know that that sort of thing goes on by all countries against all others.
Whenever there's some new leak the reaction I have after reading them is that the secret these motherfuckers are really trying to keep is how fucking clueless they are.
Also remember, there is an ancient (literally) antipathy between the Persians and the Arabs. The Persians usually got the better of the Arabs. This angle may be stronger than the Sunni/Shia divide. Iran views itself as the local superpower, tends to play a long game and look scary. Iran is also only a few steps away from revolution-the regime is having difficulty in the cities with dissent and corruption, and everywhere in the country economically.
I'd say that they'll star in the next Dan Brown thriller as the new underground cult-menace, but I think that already happened with a David Morrell novel.
I am both naive and irresponsible, so it's my hunch that among the governments that suffer most from these disclosures, America's will be pretty far down on the list ... It's the regimes who lie constantly to their oppressed citizens who stand to lose the most face, I would think.
Have you been paying any attention at all to the posts here, Matt, about the various levels of government in the U.S. constantly lying to and oppressing the citizenry?
Maybe if you had thrown in a "more than other regimes" qualifier it wouldn't have sounded quite so ... well ... naive.
Have you been paying any attention at all to the posts here, Matt, about the various levels of government in the U.S. constantly lying to and oppressing the citizenry?
Almost all the idiocy that the US government engages in is perfectly obvious and transparent. Most of it is done because it's at least arguably popular. Nothing you're talking about is any sort of great conspiracy about the government denying the idiocy that it's actually doing. No, they come right out and brag about it.
"Almost all the idiocy that the US government engages in is perfectly obvious and transparent. Most of it is done because it's at least arguably popular"
not the conspiracy theories part. But it shouldn't be suprising that the fed is the butt of so many conspiracy theories. It's a bunch of academes skulking about playing "second foundation" without a clue of what the fuck they are doing to the rest of us, and the authority to mess things up, too. It's a miracle the US economic/"moderately-free market" engine has kept us alive for so long.
I'm still waiting for the needle in the shit-heap. Nothing anyone's noted so far has warranted the dump.
I'm assuming someone (not the bitchy gay dude or the stupid haircut guy) is pulling a one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-others move here. The official explanation of who got what how is just too stupid and boring to be true?like they had a crazy James Bond story ready, then they went "Dude, that's way too James Bond. We have to keep it simple," and they made it too simple. Y'know?
(please correct my impression in the comments)
I'd have probably said "OMG-type," not "OMG-style," and maybe bolded the "OMG." But it's still flattering.
hiyo
I'm a little disappointed I'm not getting more secret-cufflink-explosives bang for my intelligence buck.
I want the United States to be better at dicking around with enemies and allies, and at generally manipulating world events in secret. State Department functionaries spying on their foreign counterparts? Yawn.
So releasing cables that amount to a daytime soap opera constitutes terrorism? King obviously has no place in Congress, let alone any idea what he's talking about.
Don't our government officials have to posture and denounce Wikileaks regardless of anything else just to say to other countries that they aren't the ones leaking the info? If we wannthem to continue to talk to us openly behind closed doors we have to at least pretend like the conversation will stay behind closed doors.
The "damage" is most likely to be that it will just make our international relations harder than they already are going forward. In order for diplomacy to work at all, there has to be a certain amount of discretion and trust. Would you be more or less likely to offer candid and sensitive information and opinions if you knew that they were going to be blabbed to the entire world?
I'd guess more candid, since what's the point of lying if you're going to be shown to be a liar? Nobody really trusted anyone before anyway (it just mostly went unspoken), and if this makes diplomats more honest with one another, perhaps Wikileaks could counterintuitively be beneficial in building trust in the long-term.
"So I don't agree with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that the disclosure is "unacceptable," nor with Rep. Pete King (R-NY) that Wikileaks should be prosecuted as a "foreign terrorist organization," or with Sen. Vinegar Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) that the Obama administration should "use all legal means necessary to shut down Wikileaks before it can do more damage.""
I take it that you would also take issue with the calm, rational, well-thought-out headline that AOL News is offering for this story, to wit: "POLITICAL MELTDOWN FOR WHITE HOUSE!"
"I take it that you would also take issue with the calm, rational, well-thought-out headline that AOL News is offering for this story, to wit: "POLITICAL MELTDOWN FOR WHITE HOUSE!""
They need to be quietly told that their hyperbole is showing.
Most of them here in Canada, for example, are too busy describing how angry the White House is to actually interpret the fucking documents.
Remember, working in media is not too much like any other job: most people just want to clock out and go home. Fuck duty -- I need to help my brother buy a patio table!
"The cables also expose frank, even rude, remarks about Iranian leaders..."
Ahmadinejad's garlic hummus farts are known to kill birds in trees fifty yards away.
It will take years to repair the damage to our intelligence gatherring capabilities (i.e., noses).
I can't find it now, but Assange was huffing about how the new leaks were going to show 'US human rights abuses and continuing torture'...
Makes me wonder if he read them.
There was another cable I read, it was an assessment by the Mossad, they said that SA could not be trusted with weapons because they had no idea what to do with them (or take care of them.) We just sold them several billion more.
If the Saudis doesn't take care of the weapons we sell them, shouldn't Mossad be happy? We get Saudi money and the Saudis get weapons they can't do much with.
I think the Mossad's concern was that the Saudis might not notice if a bunch of their weapons "fell off the truck" so to speak. And you can guess who's following Saudi trucks to pick up anything that falls off.
Well, I'd be more concerned about weapons that can fall off a truck: small arms, explosives, SAMs, things that Al Qaeda and the Taliban and such could actually use. I don't think we need to worry about F-15s and Apache helicopters and such. We could probably give those to terrorists and, assuming they could get them off the ground, they'd probably kill themselves before they could kill anybody else.
The cables also expose frank, even rude, remarks about Iranian leaders, their trustworthiness and tactics at international meetings.
Wow. Sunni Arabs don't like Shi'a Persians and want the big bad "crusaders" of America to fuck their shit up so the Arabs don't have to. How could anyone have guessed that? Why, one would very well have to pull his head from his own ass and take an unobstructed look at the Middle East to come to such a radical conclusion.
True, but my focus, which was probably unclear, was more on the Arab-Persian divide than the Sunni-Shia. Sunni regimes only fight each other when no handy enemies are present to hate on.
yeah, I kind of figured that...I just wondered if there was anything public about how this much stuff gets leaked...I mean wasn't that original helicopter massacre a single video from someone in the army? How does WL get all this consolidated info from state department communications around the world at this level of detail? A single person has access to this much? or is there an entire group of WikiLeakers inside the Government?
Why don't we just GIVE nukes to every country that wants 'em? After the Islamotards destroy Israel (and Palestine along with it), they can then destroy each other.
The only real outrage here is that America's intelligence capabilities are pretty sad. Spend tons of money-no Bourne, no Bond, no Section 9. Just the stuff that is fucking obvious. America should just subcontract its intelligence needs to the Mossad.
I think like TARP, this is another occasion where political divides are being turned on their head. In both cases, the far right and far left seem to share opinions while the Establishment freaks out like a chicken with it's statist head cut off.
In both cases, the wings have arguably different motivations. To the Left, TARP was just a bailout of the biggest corporations who wrecked our economy and to the Right it was a violation of free market principles and waste of money. To the anti-war Left, Wikileaks is an exposure of the failures of the Bush Administration and American military imperialism, and to the isolationist Right it exposes the futility of being the world's policeman and why we should not be involved with and waste taxpayer money on other countries' affairs. The TSA, the Drug War, etc. are other good examples where both the Left and the Right seem to be coming together on libertarian grounds and potentially bringing about real change.
Forgive the really obscure reference, but this made me think of the old (buried in the warehouse) Disney movie Song of the South.
Brer Fox catches Brer Rabbit, and Brer Rabbit begs him "Please, oh please don't throw me in that briar patch!" So Brer Fox throws him right in the briar patch. And laughing hysterically, Brer Rabbit says "Brer Fox, I was BORN in the briar patch!"
Oh, you want an explanation?
Hmm...a holy shitload of secret documents get leaked, and every US politician is on record begging Wikileaks not to release them. Then they do, and one of the most interesting bits just happens to reveal what assholes all our enemies are.
If we had released those documents ourselves, Ahmadinejad and CAIR and all the other apologists would claim that we fabricated evidence to demonize the Arab world. The only way that stuff could be taken seriously in the global community is if it appears to have been released by somebody else against our vehement pleas.
So we beg them, loudly, not to do the thing we secretly want them to do, just like Brer Rabbit.
No, well you are nuts, but I agree. It just seems awesome that way. Likely too complex to be conspiracy. Stupidity trumps cleverness. But still...meh, AWESOME.
Off topic, but I find it amusing that Disney, while publicly denouncing the film year in and year out, refuse to let the copyright lapse on Song of The South.
The company's entire meaning behind their millions of dollars spent on extending copyright almost ad infinitum is basically to prevent the film from seeing legitimate release in the U.S. ever again.
I like how the NY times is printing these stolen cables with abandon but less then 2 years ago it refused to publish the climate gate emails because they were stolen.
We?ve gone beyond the apparent illusion that wikileaks was disclosing corruption (the usual whistleblower) or anything secret he disagreed with (war in Irag, Afgh). What is the point?
Isn?t your right to privacy the same as some Ambassador?s when he emails the State Dept?
I can?t reconcile wikileaks with anything noble, it?s just some sick puppy with an agenda.
Where would you rather live, Saudi Arabia or Iran? While Iran is far from perfect, it is still by far a better place to live than Saudi Arabia. The Iranians do a better job of educating their population. In Iran many people want a less religious government; in Saudi Arabia most people who want regime change believe their government isn't Islamic enough.
Iran is going to get the bomb. There is nothing we can do to stop it. And we should not starting bombing Iran, a country with more pro-American citizens than Saudi Arabia.
It does seem Persians have a better culture than the Arabs. Arabs still divide themselves by tribes and clans, and do a terrible job of educating their children.
Where would you rather live, Saudi Arabia or Iran? While Iran is far from perfect, it is still by far a better place to live than Saudi Arabia. The Iranians do a better job of educating their population. In Iran many people want a less religious government; in Saudi Arabia most people who want regime change believe their government isn't Islamic enough.
Iran is going to get the bomb. There is nothing we can do to stop it. And we should not starting bombing Iran, a country with more pro-American citizens than Saudi Arabia.
It does seem Persians have a better culture than the Arabs. Arabs still divide themselves by tribes and clans, and do a terrible job of educating their children.
So, Abdullard's life is the one we've been hearing will be endangered by the leaks?
Bummer.
Personally, I have a very hard time believing that this guy Bradley Manning accessed and divulged all of this information himself.
Much of it may have come from him, but my bet is that there are probably numerous people leaking info, possibly including people at the State Department itself. State has always been our weakest link in international diplomacy. It naturally attracts people with hidden agendas and divided loyalties.
I can't guarantee
that they won't
come after you.
The [world governments].
Your broadwave about [the diplomatic reports]
has weakened their regime.
They are not gone
and they are not... forgiving.
+2 (hands of blue)
Glenn Greenwald had a column a while back that pointed out that the only evidence there is against Manning is the word of one person who is both mentally disturbed and will do anything for fame/money.
http://www.salon.com/news/opin...../wikileaks
the word of one person who is both mentally disturbed and will do anything for fame/money
Are you talking about Manning or Assange?
I think he's talking about Adrian Lamo, whom I actually know from kindergarten, and as a friend of friends. Uhm, no, he's not mentally disturbed. And I'm almost certain he's not out for fame or money.
I'll say it right now. Wikileaks is an unassailable good. Now if only they were better at getting into other countries computers...I'd like to see some internal Chines or French diplomatic reports.
I'd like to see how much horse trading goes on directly between North Korea and South Korea, re: how complicit the south is in keeping their northern cousins under the boot all in the name of "stability", realpolitik style.
That, and whether the US thinks Putin's Batman outfit has nipples.
I suppose you're only familiar with the new Batman movies. Michelle Pfeiffer? Ha! The only true Catwoman is Julie Newmar, Lee Meriwether, or Eartha Kitt. And I didn't need molded plastic to improve my physique. Pure. West. And why doesn't Batman dance anymore? Remember the Batusi?
That rant is supposed to end with, "...get off my lawn".
No mistake that no Chinese, Iranian or North Korean documents ever appear there.
Are you a Libertarian, or a nationcidal maniac?
The most interesting thing has been just how little clout the US has on the international scene. China is engaged in an open cyber-war with the US and Administrations are afraid to even acknowledge it. The Sauds dictate foreign policy in the ME. US foreign policy seems to be directed at desperately maintaining the hegemonic status quo while the rest of the world doesn't even care and simply passes us by.
When did we bomb Iran, Bingo?
Maybe "attempt" should be inserted there.
You have to admit it does have some great Clancy-esque conspiracy angles to it. 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, we end up invading Iraq under the pretense that they helped trained Al Q. Wikileaks reveals that the Saudis are the number one financial supporters of Al Q, and that SA is pressuring the US to make a move on the next country to the one we invaded.
Only a fool thinks that the US ever unilaterally ran the world or was a hegemon. And only a fool believes that the only choice in foreign policy is either the US ruling as a hegemon or some other country "dictating foreign policy." In reality, there's always negotiation and push and pull on all sides in foreign policy.
But some people insist on believing that either the US drives all foreign policy (and that other countries bear no responsibility, only being reactive to what the US does), or that when the US decides to take other countries' views into account, it means that the other country is dictating.
Still other people somehow think that the US not bombing Iran when the Saudis urge the US to is proof that the Saudis dictate foreign policy.
The cables reveal that the US routinely ignores what Israel and the Saudis say, the nobody trusts the Iranians who lie all the time, that North Korea ships missiles to Iran, that organized crime is involved with the Russians, that the US is aware of Pakistani untrustworthiness and Afghani corruptions and constantly pushes the countries, but is of course limited.
Gotta say, John, I don't always agree with you, but I'm never bored or un-enlightened by what you have to say, and in this case, there's no daylight between us. I hope you don't mind if I borrow with attribution this summary of your take on things, because it's pretty perfect.
"Only a fool thinks that the US ever unilaterally ran the world or was a hegemon."
So you mean congress, the president, and the entire state department is full of fools?
Check.
Thanks for opening the door for me to link to this.
The Sauds don't make Middle Eastern foreign policy so much as they heavily lean on it. For all the bitching some do about AIPAC, the House of Saud literally showers money on academic institutions, charities, and foundations, while plying members of the State Department with gifts and promises of jobs after their time in government.
OH RIGHT THANKS because I needed that earworm to start the day.
*cancels virtual subscription*
Ellie, you don't like The Clash? If you want, just click on any link by Warty. I guarantee whatever you hear will make you forget "Rock the Casbah". Or click this (not a Rick Roll).
What kind of monster doesn't like The Clash?
This'll clear your head out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO23EFLRboc
Overpowered by Funk...don't you love our western ways???
Hello. My friend
=== http://www.aeooe.com ===
Dedicated service, the new style, so you feel like a warm autumn!!!
WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT
YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!
thank you !!!
=== http://www.aeooe.com ===
But...but...I thought it was the evil "JOOZ" and their nefarious Zionist lobby that was pushing us toward war with Eye-ran?
*sniff* Now I needs to find another conspiracy theory to justify my latent Antisemitism under the guise of isolationism.
I'm surprised Assange is still alive.
Isn't he facing some kind of shady rape charge in Sweden?
Was he a character in The Girl with the dragon tattoo?
Rape accusations are almost expected against a man who has succeeded more than the powers that be are comfortable with. Belichik, Obama, they're all the same.
That you, Jonah?
That?s the pathetic thing about Assange, playing James Bond against the US because he knows they won?t touch him. Try disclosing secrets about the Iranians, the Russians or the Chinese, how many interviews would he be giving?
Too hot to handle?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.....nt_in_Iran
http://www.csmonitor.com/World.....d-about-it
I've seen lots of things in the secret cables that just reinforce claims that Americans have been making.
The Arab governments wanting to bomb Iran thing.
Iran using the Red Crescent to sneak in spies and weapons.
Iran lied to UN inspectors about Qom.
Hilarious EU scheme to boycott Ahmadinejad's inauguration, but keep the boycott secret so their invitations wouldn't get canceled first.
As repeatedly claimed by the US, other countries really, really don't want to take Gitmo detainees either.
At the very least this suggests that US officials sincerely believe their claims. (Unless this is an intentional leak?) I find more in the cables to challenge a leftist view of the world, but of course that's because this is presenting the US view of foreign policy.
The biggest embarassment to the US is arguably that Clinton has ordered HUMINT spying on other countries' UN officials, but I have to think that people know that that sort of thing goes on by all countries against all others.
What I get out of it is:
Really...REALLY!??! These guys are our best and brightest???
That's kind of my reaction too.
Whenever there's some new leak the reaction I have after reading them is that the secret these motherfuckers are really trying to keep is how fucking clueless they are.
@ John T. : You know, I've never seen a damage assessment on the first round of Wikileaks disclosures.
None of this comes as a surprise to anyone who reads http://www.stragegypage.com . RSS feed available.
Also remember, there is an ancient (literally) antipathy between the Persians and the Arabs. The Persians usually got the better of the Arabs. This angle may be stronger than the Sunni/Shia divide. Iran views itself as the local superpower, tends to play a long game and look scary. Iran is also only a few steps away from revolution-the regime is having difficulty in the cities with dissent and corruption, and everywhere in the country economically.
The Persians usually got the better of the Arabs.
That would explain why the Arabian Peninsula is full of Zoroastrians, I guess.
I'd say that they'll star in the next Dan Brown thriller as the new underground cult-menace, but I think that already happened with a David Morrell novel.
I am both naive and irresponsible, so it's my hunch that among the governments that suffer most from these disclosures, America's will be pretty far down on the list ... It's the regimes who lie constantly to their oppressed citizens who stand to lose the most face, I would think.
Have you been paying any attention at all to the posts here, Matt, about the various levels of government in the U.S. constantly lying to and oppressing the citizenry?
Maybe if you had thrown in a "more than other regimes" qualifier it wouldn't have sounded quite so ... well ... naive.
Almost all the idiocy that the US government engages in is perfectly obvious and transparent. Most of it is done because it's at least arguably popular. Nothing you're talking about is any sort of great conspiracy about the government denying the idiocy that it's actually doing. No, they come right out and brag about it.
Believing in conspiracy theories is naive.
^ This
Federal Reserve.
directly responding to the:
"Almost all the idiocy that the US government engages in is perfectly obvious and transparent. Most of it is done because it's at least arguably popular"
not the conspiracy theories part. But it shouldn't be suprising that the fed is the butt of so many conspiracy theories. It's a bunch of academes skulking about playing "second foundation" without a clue of what the fuck they are doing to the rest of us, and the authority to mess things up, too. It's a miracle the US economic/"moderately-free market" engine has kept us alive for so long.
I'm still waiting for the needle in the shit-heap. Nothing anyone's noted so far has warranted the dump.
I'm assuming someone (not the bitchy gay dude or the stupid haircut guy) is pulling a one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-others move here. The official explanation of who got what how is just too stupid and boring to be true?like they had a crazy James Bond story ready, then they went "Dude, that's way too James Bond. We have to keep it simple," and they made it too simple. Y'know?
(please correct my impression in the comments)
I'd have probably said "OMG-type," not "OMG-style," and maybe bolded the "OMG." But it's still flattering.
hiyo
I'm a little disappointed I'm not getting more secret-cufflink-explosives bang for my intelligence buck.
I want the United States to be better at dicking around with enemies and allies, and at generally manipulating world events in secret. State Department functionaries spying on their foreign counterparts? Yawn.
Your surprised there's a shia sunni divide? Or that it complicates mideast relations? In this day and age?
or you are, or you're
correction not needed. my surprised knows no bounds.
One of those days. Then again for me that's damn near everyday.
So releasing cables that amount to a daytime soap opera constitutes terrorism? King obviously has no place in Congress, let alone any idea what he's talking about.
King's just doing what most policitians do, play to emotions and not facts. Hell he was bitching even before he knew what was in the documents.
don't tell him wikileaks leaked the CRU data from east anglia.
Well, King benefits from complicating the definition of terrorism since he happily helped finance IRA terrorism in the 80s.
The Dagestan wedding one was entertaining, at least.
Drunk, automatic-weapon-carrying jetskiing FTW.
Sounds like a weekend at the lake and cabin?
Without BATF, that would be the weekend in many parts of our fine country.
Don't our government officials have to posture and denounce Wikileaks regardless of anything else just to say to other countries that they aren't the ones leaking the info? If we wannthem to continue to talk to us openly behind closed doors we have to at least pretend like the conversation will stay behind closed doors.
Have the wikileaks caused any damage at all except to make King Abdullah blush and raise some people's blood pressure?
The "damage" is most likely to be that it will just make our international relations harder than they already are going forward. In order for diplomacy to work at all, there has to be a certain amount of discretion and trust. Would you be more or less likely to offer candid and sensitive information and opinions if you knew that they were going to be blabbed to the entire world?
I'd guess more candid, since what's the point of lying if you're going to be shown to be a liar? Nobody really trusted anyone before anyway (it just mostly went unspoken), and if this makes diplomats more honest with one another, perhaps Wikileaks could counterintuitively be beneficial in building trust in the long-term.
IN other words, no one will trust us with their dirty little secrets anymore since what they say may actually be made to see the light of day.
BOOO TRANSPARENCY!!
"So I don't agree with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that the disclosure is "unacceptable," nor with Rep. Pete King (R-NY) that Wikileaks should be prosecuted as a "foreign terrorist organization," or with Sen. Vinegar Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) that the Obama administration should "use all legal means necessary to shut down Wikileaks before it can do more damage.""
I take it that you would also take issue with the calm, rational, well-thought-out headline that AOL News is offering for this story, to wit: "POLITICAL MELTDOWN FOR WHITE HOUSE!"
"I take it that you would also take issue with the calm, rational, well-thought-out headline that AOL News is offering for this story, to wit: "POLITICAL MELTDOWN FOR WHITE HOUSE!""
They need to be quietly told that their hyperbole is showing.
What about legacy media outlets apologizing for even having to report it?
"Can't we just write about how to use up all that leftover turkey?"
Most of them here in Canada, for example, are too busy describing how angry the White House is to actually interpret the fucking documents.
Remember, working in media is not too much like any other job: most people just want to clock out and go home. Fuck duty -- I need to help my brother buy a patio table!
I love that. I repeat something that YOU said, and it makes ME a terrorist.
this.
"The cables also expose frank, even rude, remarks about Iranian leaders..."
Ahmadinejad's garlic hummus farts are known to kill birds in trees fifty yards away.
It will take years to repair the damage to our intelligence gatherring capabilities (i.e., noses).
After Andy Samberg's love song to the Iranian President, I can't believe that there is anythin worse that anyone could possibly say.
I can't find it now, but Assange was huffing about how the new leaks were going to show 'US human rights abuses and continuing torture'...
Makes me wonder if he read them.
"Makes me wonder if he read them."
Or if he moonlights as an AOL headline writer.
There was another cable I read, it was an assessment by the Mossad, they said that SA could not be trusted with weapons because they had no idea what to do with them (or take care of them.) We just sold them several billion more.
If the Saudis doesn't take care of the weapons we sell them, shouldn't Mossad be happy? We get Saudi money and the Saudis get weapons they can't do much with.
And we then make a bundle in service & maintenance contracts. This is where the Soviets kept dropping the ball.
Israel and the Saudi's are the closest of allies. Their interests intersect on almost every issue.
I think the Mossad's concern was that the Saudis might not notice if a bunch of their weapons "fell off the truck" so to speak. And you can guess who's following Saudi trucks to pick up anything that falls off.
Well, I'd be more concerned about weapons that can fall off a truck: small arms, explosives, SAMs, things that Al Qaeda and the Taliban and such could actually use. I don't think we need to worry about F-15s and Apache helicopters and such. We could probably give those to terrorists and, assuming they could get them off the ground, they'd probably kill themselves before they could kill anybody else.
Thank goodness Ben Franklin's views on Louis XVI and his court didn't come to light until after Treaty of Paris.
The cables also expose frank, even rude, remarks about Iranian leaders, their trustworthiness and tactics at international meetings.
Wow. Sunni Arabs don't like Shi'a Persians and want the big bad "crusaders" of America to fuck their shit up so the Arabs don't have to. How could anyone have guessed that? Why, one would very well have to pull his head from his own ass and take an unobstructed look at the Middle East to come to such a radical conclusion.
Yeah, I kinda thought the whole Arab/Persian thing was out in the light. Then again, I forget that for many people, only Americans can be bigots.
Shit. The whole story of human history is to split over trivia and fight our cousins over nothing.
I suspect you're beating the Sunni-Shi'a thing to death. Plenty of Sunni regimes hate each other too for non-religious reasons.
True, but my focus, which was probably unclear, was more on the Arab-Persian divide than the Sunni-Shia. Sunni regimes only fight each other when no handy enemies are present to hate on.
How did wikileaks get all this stuff?
It seems that either someone has some serious tech (Wikileaks?) or a serious lack of it (the Gov).
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that it was leaked. Smiley face!
yeah, I kind of figured that...I just wondered if there was anything public about how this much stuff gets leaked...I mean wasn't that original helicopter massacre a single video from someone in the army? How does WL get all this consolidated info from state department communications around the world at this level of detail? A single person has access to this much? or is there an entire group of WikiLeakers inside the Government?
Someone gave it to them.
Why don't we just GIVE nukes to every country that wants 'em? After the Islamotards destroy Israel (and Palestine along with it), they can then destroy each other.
The only real outrage here is that America's intelligence capabilities are pretty sad. Spend tons of money-no Bourne, no Bond, no Section 9. Just the stuff that is fucking obvious. America should just subcontract its intelligence needs to the Mossad.
None of this is top-secret, so there is still hope for you.
*whistles*
I think like TARP, this is another occasion where political divides are being turned on their head. In both cases, the far right and far left seem to share opinions while the Establishment freaks out like a chicken with it's statist head cut off.
In both cases, the wings have arguably different motivations. To the Left, TARP was just a bailout of the biggest corporations who wrecked our economy and to the Right it was a violation of free market principles and waste of money. To the anti-war Left, Wikileaks is an exposure of the failures of the Bush Administration and American military imperialism, and to the isolationist Right it exposes the futility of being the world's policeman and why we should not be involved with and waste taxpayer money on other countries' affairs. The TSA, the Drug War, etc. are other good examples where both the Left and the Right seem to be coming together on libertarian grounds and potentially bringing about real change.
Forgive the really obscure reference, but this made me think of the old (buried in the warehouse) Disney movie Song of the South.
Brer Fox catches Brer Rabbit, and Brer Rabbit begs him "Please, oh please don't throw me in that briar patch!" So Brer Fox throws him right in the briar patch. And laughing hysterically, Brer Rabbit says "Brer Fox, I was BORN in the briar patch!"
Oh, you want an explanation?
Hmm...a holy shitload of secret documents get leaked, and every US politician is on record begging Wikileaks not to release them. Then they do, and one of the most interesting bits just happens to reveal what assholes all our enemies are.
If we had released those documents ourselves, Ahmadinejad and CAIR and all the other apologists would claim that we fabricated evidence to demonize the Arab world. The only way that stuff could be taken seriously in the global community is if it appears to have been released by somebody else against our vehement pleas.
So we beg them, loudly, not to do the thing we secretly want them to do, just like Brer Rabbit.
Or maybe I'm just nuts.
No, well you are nuts, but I agree. It just seems awesome that way. Likely too complex to be conspiracy. Stupidity trumps cleverness. But still...meh, AWESOME.
Shorter response: YES
Off topic, but I find it amusing that Disney, while publicly denouncing the film year in and year out, refuse to let the copyright lapse on Song of The South.
The company's entire meaning behind their millions of dollars spent on extending copyright almost ad infinitum is basically to prevent the film from seeing legitimate release in the U.S. ever again.
I like how the NY times is printing these stolen cables with abandon but less then 2 years ago it refused to publish the climate gate emails because they were stolen.
When are they gonna publish the Mohammed cartoons?
I like how we still call them "cables", like the State Department is still using the telegraph.
On second thought, it probably is.
"TOP IRANIAN NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS ATTACKED"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11.....wt=nytimes
Wonder if it was the Israelis or Saudis?
Or internal Iranian opposition, or a power struggle within the ruling elite, or....
Oh, come on now...let's not be naive
Just listing possibilities. I agree your guesses are more likely.
We?ve gone beyond the apparent illusion that wikileaks was disclosing corruption (the usual whistleblower) or anything secret he disagreed with (war in Irag, Afgh). What is the point?
Isn?t your right to privacy the same as some Ambassador?s when he emails the State Dept?
I can?t reconcile wikileaks with anything noble, it?s just some sick puppy with an agenda.
Nice interview in Forbes with Assange - check out page five of the interview for Assange views on free-markets...
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygr.....assange/5/
Yeah, it seems like assange is a libertarian.
More or less. He says he's learned from many political ideologies, but only goes on to talk about "American libertarianism"
Here are some of the other startling revelations from the leaked cables:
President Obama opines that U.K. prime minister, David Cameron "totally plays Nite Owl to [Deputy Prime Minister] Clegg's Rorschach".
Doomsday button lost to U.S.S.R. in drunken, late night, 1983 poker game.
Existence of a country called Yemen.
In 2006, the Jews relinquish control of the weather to small, Bombay start up.
U.S. state department has tried repeatedly, but unsuccessfully to convince Pakistan to show some skin on private government web cam.
China responsible for DoS attack on 4chan.org in retaliation for offensive Mao meme.
In 1971, Henry Kissinger had thousands of dildos smuggled into Cambodia from South Vietnam.
Killer Croc to be the main villain in upcoming Batman film.
Where would you rather live, Saudi Arabia or Iran? While Iran is far from perfect, it is still by far a better place to live than Saudi Arabia. The Iranians do a better job of educating their population. In Iran many people want a less religious government; in Saudi Arabia most people who want regime change believe their government isn't Islamic enough.
Iran is going to get the bomb. There is nothing we can do to stop it. And we should not starting bombing Iran, a country with more pro-American citizens than Saudi Arabia.
It does seem Persians have a better culture than the Arabs. Arabs still divide themselves by tribes and clans, and do a terrible job of educating their children.
Where would you rather live, Saudi Arabia or Iran? While Iran is far from perfect, it is still by far a better place to live than Saudi Arabia. The Iranians do a better job of educating their population. In Iran many people want a less religious government; in Saudi Arabia most people who want regime change believe their government isn't Islamic enough.
Iran is going to get the bomb. There is nothing we can do to stop it. And we should not starting bombing Iran, a country with more pro-American citizens than Saudi Arabia.
It does seem Persians have a better culture than the Arabs. Arabs still divide themselves by tribes and clans, and do a terrible job of educating their children.