Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSlate: Trump's Weak Case Against Iran
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/06/trump-iran-gulf-oman.html
If Iran did attack two tankers in the Gulf of Oman this week, as President Donald Trump claims, hes doing a lousy job of making that case to the rest of the world.
The sad fact is he has to make a case because, in his 2½ years in office, he has told so many lies and alienated so many allies. If he decided to respond to the attacks with new economic pressure or military action, he would need the support of those allies, and to earn that support, he would need to present extraordinarily persuasive evidence of Irans culpability.
He has not yet produced that evidence. It was an egregious mistake to let Secretary of State Mike Pompeo make the initial accusation against Iran. First, Pompeo is on record as supporting regime change in Tehran; for him to come forthinstead of a more relevant figure, such as the secretary of defense or the director of national intelligenceinfuses the charge with bias.
Second, the language Pompeo used was less than compelling. It is the assessment by the United States government that the Islamic Republic of Iran is responsible for the attacks, he said on Thursday. The assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the sources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication.
Among several things missing here is the level of confidence in the assessment. The omission is unusual and possibly, for that reason, telling. When U.S. intelligence agencies first analyzed the theft of emails from the Democratic National Committee in the spring of 2016, for example, they concluded with high confidence that Russia was the culprit. When chemical weapons were fired in Syria in April 2017, Trumps secretary of state at the time, Rex Tillerson, said U.S. intelligence had a very high level of confidence that the weapon used was sarin nerve gas and that the attack was ordered by Bashar al-Assads regime. ThenSecretary of Defense James Mattis said that hed personally reviewed the intelligence and had no doubt that the Syrian regime was responsible.
On Friday, the Pentagon released fuzzy video footage of sailors on a small boat removing an object from the side of a ship. Officials said that the small boat belonged to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the object was an unexploded mine, and the ship was one of the two tankers that were attacked. Maybe. We all await footage showing sailors from a similar boat placing a mine on the side of a tanker. The picture is further muddied by the fact that the Japanese owner of one of the tankers has since claimed that the hole in his ship was well above the waterbeyond the reach of someone in a small boat.*
</snip>
If Iran did attack two tankers in the Gulf of Oman this week, as President Donald Trump claims, hes doing a lousy job of making that case to the rest of the world.
The sad fact is he has to make a case because, in his 2½ years in office, he has told so many lies and alienated so many allies. If he decided to respond to the attacks with new economic pressure or military action, he would need the support of those allies, and to earn that support, he would need to present extraordinarily persuasive evidence of Irans culpability.
He has not yet produced that evidence. It was an egregious mistake to let Secretary of State Mike Pompeo make the initial accusation against Iran. First, Pompeo is on record as supporting regime change in Tehran; for him to come forthinstead of a more relevant figure, such as the secretary of defense or the director of national intelligenceinfuses the charge with bias.
Second, the language Pompeo used was less than compelling. It is the assessment by the United States government that the Islamic Republic of Iran is responsible for the attacks, he said on Thursday. The assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the sources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication.
Among several things missing here is the level of confidence in the assessment. The omission is unusual and possibly, for that reason, telling. When U.S. intelligence agencies first analyzed the theft of emails from the Democratic National Committee in the spring of 2016, for example, they concluded with high confidence that Russia was the culprit. When chemical weapons were fired in Syria in April 2017, Trumps secretary of state at the time, Rex Tillerson, said U.S. intelligence had a very high level of confidence that the weapon used was sarin nerve gas and that the attack was ordered by Bashar al-Assads regime. ThenSecretary of Defense James Mattis said that hed personally reviewed the intelligence and had no doubt that the Syrian regime was responsible.
On Friday, the Pentagon released fuzzy video footage of sailors on a small boat removing an object from the side of a ship. Officials said that the small boat belonged to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the object was an unexploded mine, and the ship was one of the two tankers that were attacked. Maybe. We all await footage showing sailors from a similar boat placing a mine on the side of a tanker. The picture is further muddied by the fact that the Japanese owner of one of the tankers has since claimed that the hole in his ship was well above the waterbeyond the reach of someone in a small boat.*
</snip>
And, again, WHY would Iran attack a Japanese tanker with Abe in Iran?? That makes zero sense!
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 490 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Slate: Trump's Weak Case Against Iran (Original Post)
Dennis Donovan
Jun 2019
OP
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)1. K&R