War With Iran? Henley Responds to Kolko
Matt Barganier,
October 01, 2007
We’ve seen how Seymour Hersh and Gabriel Kolko judge the prospects of an attack on Iran. Now Jim Henley responds to Kolko point by point.
War With Iran? Henley Responds to Kolko
We’ve seen how Seymour Hersh and Gabriel Kolko judge the prospects of an attack on Iran. Now Jim Henley responds to Kolko point by point.
Nick Charles
October 1st, 2007 at 11:31 am
Unfortunately, we are compelled to ask ” who the hell is Jim Henley and why should we care what he thinks of Kolko? “. It would be good to know what elevates him in the eyes of antiwar.com.
Best,
Nick
Matt Barganier
October 1st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Who the hell are you, who is this “we” you speak on behalf of, and why are you “compelled” to ask pointless questions? Do you have something to contribute to the discussion of Kolko’s argument, or are you just trolling?
Nick Charles
October 1st, 2007 at 1:12 pm
I know who Kolko and Seymore Hersh are, and why I should pay attention when they give opinion, even if I question some points.
I’m simply wondering who is Jim Henley and why antiwar.com chose his rebuttal over, say, mine or yours. There is no bio I can find at his website.
There is a whimsical photo of his dog. Which is sweet, but hardly puts my mind at ease in this regard.
Dain
October 1st, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Come now, Nick asked a good question and doesn’t deserve vitriol.
Matt Barganier
October 1st, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Rebut away if you like: that’s why we added a comments board. In fact, plenty of readers responded to my post on Kolko.
But you didn’t offer a comment of any substance. You just popped off a bit of witless graffiti. If Jim Henley is not famous enough to merit your attention, then by all means, go solicit David Broder’s opinion on Kolko’s argument. We go by arguments here, not names. Henley’s response to Kolko’s letter was thorough, interesting to me, and the only external response I’ve seen thus far.
Matt Barganier
October 1st, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Read Henley’s argument or don’t. Respond to it or don’t. But don’t whine about me linking to it.
Richard Steven Hack
October 1st, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Even Henley misses the point on the economy aspect.
The people in power DO NOT CARE! They make their money from the PRICE of oil – not the oil itself. They don’t care if the price of oil puts everybody else out of business. It won’t put THEM out of business!
The same applies to war profiteering. If you’re running a war, and you’re in the defense industry – which is a HUGE industry – you’re going to make money regardless of the rest of the economy.
Especially if you don’t understand economics! Which means that even if it’s true that the economy will tank under the pressure of a spiking oil price and China dumping the US dollar, THE PEOPLE IN POWER DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT! AND they don’t care!
The problem with people who deny a war in Iran is that they cannot bring themselves to understand that the people in power are CRIMINALS! They are NOT “honest politicians” (an oxymoron anyway) trying to solve the world’s problems!
Get a goddamn clue!
Nick Charles
October 1st, 2007 at 2:45 pm
“If Jim Henley is not famous enough to merit your attention, ”
Not my concern. Kolko isn’t famous either. I am simply wondering who Henley is.
- ” We go by arguments here, not names. ”
Well… you picked out Kolko and Hersch because they are recognized names, not randomly, I assume.
- “Henley’s response to Kolko’s letter was thorough, interesting to me, and the only external response I’ve seen thus far.”
This works for me, and I appreciate it. Its your show.
Best,
Nick
Hi
October 1st, 2007 at 2:55 pm
There is clash. A clash between the informed and those not. You sadly fall into the latter. I truly hope you learn something here to become the former.
Jaguar Paw
October 1st, 2007 at 5:15 pm
I come from the Los Angeles area, home to a LARGE Iranian-American community…
Having lived next door to an Iranian family on the west side of LA for about 5 years, I find it UNCONSCIONABLE that the death, destruction, misery,et we now see in Iraq could possibly be expanded by these blood thirsty LUNATICS!
NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
If they have a smoking gun on Iran…one which would MERIT war…then surely, we the people, have a RIGHT to ask for a declaration of war by the United States Congress!
Rowan Berkeley
October 1st, 2007 at 10:03 pm
I agree with Henley’s general drift, but his website is irritatingly twee (at least by my standards, but then, I am heavily into bone-crushing, death-oozing power electronics).
Tim R.
October 1st, 2007 at 10:04 pm
The “smoking gun” against Iran should have been September 11th 2001, and what do I mean by that? Shortly after Sept. 11th 2001, President Bush declared that we would no longer make any distinction between the terrorists and the nations that harbor and support them. Iran has harbored and supported terrorists for 28 years. They attacked our embassy, they helped Hizzbolah to kill 241 of our Marines, they support suicide bombers, they send military hardware to Iraq to kill our troops and the list goes on. According to the official 9/11 commission report they gave safe passage to many of the 9/11 hijackers. September 11 2001 was our “smoking gun.”
On 9/11/01 we were attacked not by Iraq or Iran, not by Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, not by Syria or Libya. No sir, we were attaked by radical Islam! Yes, thats right radical Islam. And the radical Islamic terrorists must be faced and fought and weeded out no matter what country they are in! And right now, we know Iran supports Islamic Terrorism. What people don’t understand is, we already ARE at war. There is a clash of civilizations going on and people don’t even see it.
Hi
October 1st, 2007 at 10:44 pm
When someone has good points, I listen to their points. Names mean absolutely zip to me. If someone makes enough good points over time, I remember their name. He might be a comer.
R. Nelson
October 1st, 2007 at 11:31 pm
C’mon, everyone. We all know Henley was a member of the Eagles.
Ken
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:38 am
Best observation of the lot. “the people in power are CRIMINALS!” You can bargain with criminals but it is unlikely that you can ever reason with them. This is a point with which the antiwar people are having a hard time coming to grips.
steve
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:14 am
“The “smoking gun†against Iran should have been September 11th 2001″
None of the hijackers were from Iran. Many were educated in Europe and came from Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda was originally founded and funded by US-Paskistan Intelligence services to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. Yes, the US gov. taught these
killers how to kill and gave them plenty of tools to do so. Why doesn’t the Pentagon bomb the CIA?
Do you think your dear leader will war against his family’s corporate partners?
“There is a clash of civilizations”
A small percentage of maniacs does not mean millions of people are guilty. If a murderer originates from a particular neighborhood, does that mean everyone in the neighborhood is responsible for his actions? If he is found guilty and executed, do you also execute everyone in the neighborhood including children and the elderly?
“President Bush declared that we would no longer make any distinction”
Who cares what he says, he is a documented psychopath. He does not own “we”, “you” or “I”. However, he apparently owns your mind.
Nick Danger
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:46 am
How about this idea, Nick C. — you read the post and find out if you should care? That will work fine, unless what you mean is you only respect the opinion of famous people.
“I’m simply wondering who is Jim Henley and why antiwar.com chose his rebuttal over, say, mine or yours.”
This is a wild guess, but I bet Matt chose his rebuttal because he thought it was good! I know, I know, he should have found out how much you knew about the author first, but he’s a busy man and slipped up!
Swami Barmi
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:10 am
“Iran has harbored and supported terrorists for 28 years.”
Please explain to us what your cut-off length of support is and what level of support qualifies as a terrorist supporter. We CREATED al Qaeda and we supported them for years in Afghanistan and continued to support them elsewhere, most notably in the Balkans. We created and supported the very group responsible for 9/11; how much more complicit a supporter do you need? We also continue to support and train Central and South American terrorists as well as any other terrorist group worldwide who’ll do our official bidding or our covert bidding.
Hezbollah does not qualify as an anti-American terrorist group despite the Beirut bombing. We made ourselves targets by being occupyers. When we left we were no longer a target of Hezbollah, simple as that.
“No sir, we were attaked by radical Islam!”
Like the drunken womanizing muslims who attacked on 9/11? It serves the warmongers’ purpose (on both sides) to paint this as a religious struggle, but it is, and always was, a political struggle for real estate and resources.
The bottom line for you is this: the military is in dire need of troops. This will be worse if we do as YOU WISH. YOU need to put on a uniform and carry a rifle and address your own delusions of fear. Unfortunately for our country, the common people responsible for enabling the rulers who lie us into being a-scared are themselves quivering cowards who won’t pick up arms and fight like men. And don’t pull the age crap Tim: children have lied about their ages to go to war in the past. Or way they bigger men than you?
goldhorder
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:24 am
ahhh my fav. poster Tim R.
We are going to kill muslims and keep killing muslims until they are all dead. The 6th commandment only applys to white christians. Muslim terroritst killed 3000 Americans 6 years ago…we have destroyed two countries and killed hundreds of thousands but we might as well keep going until they are all dead because we all know God rewards mass murderers.
Chris S
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 am
Keep on promoting the Big Lie. You’re obviously a true believer…
Chris S
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:32 am
Genocide is only attributed to “the bad guys”.
Tim R.
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:48 am
We destoryed two countries???
We liberated millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the former from radical Islamic insanity and oppression under the Taliban and in the later from a brutal and murderous tyrant. Do you honestly believe that these two countries were better off before our intervention?
Tim R.
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:50 am
Of course we should not kill all muslims! Don’t put words in my mouth to exagerate your point. We have a right to defend ourselves though and right now Islamic Faschism is a clear and present danger to our country and our way of life and we have every right to defend ourselves and if you can’t see that it is because of your very liberal sense of morality. Your a moral relativist and can’t see between right and wrong.
Chris S
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:19 am
By “liberate”, do you mean genocide? Since when does liberate mean “to kill and displace”? That entry must be the newly abridged neocon/Trotsky dictionary.
Yes. Iraq isn’t even a nation state anymore.
Like I said, keep promoting the Big Lie, you are obviously a true believer.
Chris S
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:24 am
who is “we”? Do you mean Israel? Because in the UNITED STATES, my country, I see the occupation and the police states we support as more of a threat than cave dwellers.
Now throw out the other lie, the “they will form the Caliphate and come over here” lie. These people haven’t been able to get along for over a 1000 years, yet I am supposed to believe they will all unite and come over here. Yeah, right.
Who is going to lead this glorious Caliphate? The Saudi Royal Family? Al Qaeda? Because it is well documented how OBL feels about the Saudi Monarchs. What a joke.
Israel has hundreds of illegal nukes to protect itself and its occupation with.
Chris S
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:29 am
Moral Relativism, that’s rich. Like the way the US media is relativist towards the number of people the US has murdered and displaced via the Iraq War?
The way that the media is subjective in its treatment of Israeli Policy? The way the Religious Right claim to be the Pro-Life party while supporting the ongoing slaughter of over a million Iraqi civilians?
The Moral Relativism card only works when you have the Moral High Ground, otherwise it is nothing but a Relativist arguing with another Relativist.
But you are NOT a moral relativist, right? If China cooked up some phony intelligence about WMD in Mexico and then invaded, killing and displacing a large part of the population, you would be OK with that?
Chris S
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:31 am
Come on now, we all know that only a Moral Relativist would dare compare the two… You are invoking 9/11 without demagoguing, someone call scoop and dump to take this unpatriotic traitor to Gitmo, stat!
Jaguar Paw
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:12 pm
There is no “smoking gun” with regard to Iran! The IAEA says Iran is in compliance. The CIA says Iran is 10 years away from getting nuke weapons! These are simply flat out LIES! Hence, any declaration of war by the United States Congress would have to be DENIED!
Iran had NOTHING to do with 911! Iran is Shia Muslim to boot, and the Al Qaeda terrorists are Sunni! Claiming Shia Iran would in any way aid Al Qaeda is like claiming militant Protestant groups are aiding Catholic terrorists in Northern Ireland!
If the Hezbollah attack on US Marines….28 years ago warranted war…then war should have been declared…28 years ago!
The 911 commission report is not credible given that it fails to even MENTION building 7, which somehow collapsed despite NEVER having been hit by any airplanes!
As a Mexican-American, I am acutely aware of the LIES promulgated by faux “news” and others in an effort to demagogue the issue of illegal immigration. One good example are the fanatics who foam at the mouth claiming “Illegal aliens murder 12 Americans daily”…however…as John Whiteside of the Houston Chronicle blogs….this claim simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.
http://blogs.chron.com/bluebayou/2006/11/fanning_the_immigration_flames.html
I now realize that the SAME tactics (lies) are used to stir up HATRED against ppl from middle eastern countries.
If the issue is simply Muslims having nukes, then whats up with Pakistan? Pakistan is an acknowledged nuke power with an unstable government. Brazil extracts energy from the nuclear fuel cycle…a procedure whose by-products could theoretically be used to produce “low yield” nuke bombs…Brazil also has millions of Muslim citizens…gee…maybe Brazil is next on the neo-con hit list?
The SAME ppl foaming at the mouth demanding Iranian BLOOD are the ones who told us Iraqs dictator had “wmd”! These are the same ppl who promised us a “cakewalk” in Iraq. That the Iraq war would “pay for itself with oil revenue”.
HOW CAN ANYONE TAKE THESE WAR MONGERING FANATICS SERIOUSLY A 2nd TIME?
The neo-cons are not only EVIL war mongers…they are INCOMPETENT war mongers at that!
No, I cannot FATHOM the thought of bombing Iranian families, like the one I used to live NEXT DOOR to! I cannot fathom blowing up Iranian power plants, water treatment facilities, roads and bridges, etc and creating millions MORE refugees (1/4 of Iraqis are now displaced) based on MORE lies by these evil war mongers!
Where is Osama Bin Laden anyway?
Hal
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Timmy R: Somebody has duped your brain if you think we have “liberated” anybody. Like the UK Liberated India (in the 19th century) or the French “liberated” Vietnam when they turned it into their colony; or the Japs “liberated” Nanking when they invaded? Amazing how many people can’t see through phony excuses for imperialism. And by the way “Islamic radicalism” is Islamic nationalism pure and simple. They are fighting (with terror) to drive the imperialists out. OUT, do you get the meaning of the word? Or do you think anyplace in the world where we decide to dump hundreds of thousands of soldiers belongs to us?????? In effect that we have the right to be IN anywhere we want?????
syvanen
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:40 pm
And your an illiterate, Timmy boy.
syvanen
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Kolko makes one good point that many of the posters here seem to miss. There are powerful voices on Wall Street that are concerned about American image because that is how they make money. Not all capitalists work in arms and oil. Brand America stands to lose big here. In the present context it should be a voice for reason.
Of course, all this talk is mostly irrelevant. The only variable that counts is what is going on in Bush’s head. I see him as a loser and an alcoholic. He keeps on trying the same things over and over again and is surprised to see that he always gets the same results. But there is always another try. Will he try to win this time by making the big plunge into expanded war? None of us really know.
Tim R.
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Two points: You mentioned Saudi Arabia and how most of the hijackers were Saudi. You are 100% correct! And we should have formally declared war on Saudi Arabia on September 12th 2001. Believe me, it burns me up that President Bush, just like Clinton and the rest, are in bed with the the detestable Saudi royal family. The Saudis have promoted radical Islam for many years and they are a disgusting, vile, and dangerous country. We need to listen to Al Gore and to develop alternative energy immediatly so that we can break our addiction to their oil and stop supporting their grotesque, malevolent, and terrorist supporting regime.
Second Point: Tell me this Steve, you say radical Islam is only a “small percentage” of people. Really? Read the Pew Global Attitudes Research Study co-chaired by Madeline Albright and you will enlighten yourself. There are very substantial percentages of Muslims who are radical and hold Bin Laden in high esteem. If you think Islam is a peaceful religion, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. Also, if they are so peaceful and only a few of them are maniacs, how come many of them were, literally, dancing in the streets on Sept. 11 2001? I wish CNN would replay that scene more often. For once they showed their true colors.
Tim R.
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Chris, you say we have “murdered” so many people in Iraq. In law school, I learned that the general definition of murder is “the intentional killiing of another human being, without legal justification.” By that defintion, how many people have we “murdered” in Iraq? Do you truly believe that we intentionally murder civilians in Iraq and what evidence can you cite?
Also, were you just as angry when Saddam was murdering tens of thousands of his own people? Did you protest outside the Iraqi embassy? Or maybe you think Saddam was a decent fellow and the Iraqi people were happy and content under his reign?
Tim R.
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:58 pm
Jaguar Paw, as a Mexican American, can you please explain to me why Mexico is allowed enforce its borders and decide who comes into their country but we are not allowed to? You know if I was a Muslim terrorist and I wanted to get into this country to do us harm, our porous borders would be the best place to enter from. Yet people like you say we are not allowed to enforce our borders. If an illegal immigrant demanded to come into your house would you have the right to lock the door? But yet the United States can’t lock the door on the border?
You know what I say? Build that fence! Build it high and build it long! And declare English as our official language becuase I am getting tired of pressing one for English and two for any other language!
Tim R.
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:05 pm
Hal, we never liberated anyone?!
JUNE 6th 1944!
Tell your nonsense to my relatives who fought their way up Normandy and tell that to my relatives who walked into the death camps and tell that to the people in the death camps who they rescued.
What rubbish!
Rowan Berkeley
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 pm
If teh Saudis support a war against Iran, they really must have forgotten what is common knowledge here in London – they’re next.
I say it’s common knowledge, because I personally witnessed Michael Gove, ex-foreign-editor of the Times and Tory MP, tell a group of zionist youth in Golders Green that Saudi would be taken down, albeit after all the other régimes, if they would just be patient.
This was before 9-11.
skyreader7
October 3rd, 2007 at 2:29 am
Bottom line: Bush is stupid enough to do it.
Would he get away with it?
I think it would be the straw that broke the camel’s back. The backlash from the American public would be huge. Forget about the public falling in line for another war. They don’t trust him as he has been proven to be a big liar. And it is beginning to dawn on them they are going to pay a pretty penney for his war criminal activities.
richard vajs
October 3rd, 2007 at 4:37 am
The War upon Iraq may have had many roots – oil, desire for military bases, revenge for 9/11, etc. None of these reasons were for civilized people but they made sense to a reptilian brain. Reasons for attacking Iran are limited to one – America is in love with an evil bitch (Israel) which is putting it on the line, “If you really love me, you will kill Iran for me”.
Max
October 3rd, 2007 at 4:57 am
China is not going to dump the dollar. they can’t. After the 1997 crash, the majority of their non-skilled and skilled laborers stuck their cash in US dollar accounts in the event another crash happened. This is why they are so reluctant to float their currency: it means a loss of retirement income for their own people. Ditto dumping the dollar. It’s political and economical suicide for them. A 15% change in the value of the dollar will devastate their citizens.
Max
October 3rd, 2007 at 5:03 am
We have no clue who were attacked by on 911. We only have what we were told three hours after the towers went down and unbelievable evidence was found in a car at Logan Airport and in a waste basket on Chambers St.
The main spokesman for the FBI said in June 2006 in response to a question about why Osama Bin Laden isn’t Public Enemy No. One in all the post offices around the country, “We have no proof Bin Laden did it.”
Tom Blanton
October 3rd, 2007 at 7:09 am
It is becoming obvious that Tim R is a pseudonym being used by Norman Podhoretz. Soon we will be hearing that America should nuke itself to prevent Osama from enslaving us all.
Julius
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:41 am
I am glad that Tim is so all knowing.
Perhaps Tim R can answer the following:
Where is the evidence to contradict the fact that the State Dept. allowed all these so called Hijackers to come through a single office in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia over complaints that most of these men were not Saudis by a responsible official in State who complained that something was very, very wrong and was told these men were “Ours” and he should just chill out.
Where is the evidence from the retiring head of the Monterey Language school that 3 of the so called hijackers were our boys who went through his school?
In the almost countless false flag operations to suck America into wars since the Polk administration, where is the proof that 911 was any different?
I suspect Iran will tone down the fun and games when the U.S. decides to mind its own business. The U.S. has no business being in the middle east. Plain and simple.
Alaska is awash in energy. I propose we take energy from our own back yard and mind our own business, instead of stealing control of other’s energy and doubling the price of it. Which is what has happened.
Jaguar Paw
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Call the white coats for these LUNATICS! Tell them to make sure they bring enough STRAIT JACKETS for them ALL!
http://foxattacks.com/iran
Jaguar Paw
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:05 pm
The WAR is bigger issue for America imo, though immigration would surely be a close second…but this is a WAR blog…nevertheless…
“Jaguar Paw, as a Mexican American, can you please explain to me why Mexico is allowed enforce its borders and decide who comes into their country but we are not allowed to? ”
Not being from Mexico, I cannot answer your question.
“Yet people like you say we are not allowed to enforce our borders.”
Ahem, WHERE did I did I state that?
Colonel_Khadafis_Fried_Chadian
October 4th, 2007 at 10:37 am
Wow. Way to build strawmen Tim. You truly are a tool.
Colonel_Khadafis_Fried_Chadian
October 6th, 2007 at 2:58 am
Tim many of the scenes of joyous muslims after 9/11 were completely faked. In fact you know that Palestinian woman who cheered before the cameras? Bribed with candy (yes, candy). Have you completely missed the fact that Iran expressed sympathy for us after 9/11 and that Ahmadinejad wanted to put a wreath on ground zero as a sign of respect but WE WOULDNT LET HIM?!