Friday News Roundup - International
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-12-16/friday-news-roundup-international
Nearly nine years after America attacked Iraq, the Pentagon declares an official end to its mission there. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta marked the occasion at a ceremony in Baghdad. The euro inches up against the dollar, but its outlook is clouded by a Standard and Poors ratings threat. Russian President Putin’s approval ratings tank as he faces the largest protests in Moscow since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Iran rejects a U.S. request to return a drone that Tehran says it brought down earlier this month. And the U.N. reports 5,000 civilians have died in Syrian government crackdowns. A panel of journalists joins Diane for analysis of the week's top international news stories.
Guests
David Ignatius
columnist, The Washington Post; contributor to “Post Partisan” blog on washingtonpost.com. His latest book is titled "Bloodmoney: A Novel of Espionage."
Nadia Bilbassy
senior U.S. correspondent, MBC TV -- Middle East Broadcast Centre.
Robin Harding
U.S. economics editor, The Financial Times.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
With respect to the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, wasn't the date set by President Bush? If true, the Republican's don't have any right to protest President Obama's actions. They can't have it both ways...
Wow David Ignatius just said that the Iraq war was harder on Iraqi's. And then more on the actual situation on the ground in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of dead and injured , millions displaced. I am especially bothered when I hear President Obama and others say "we need to turn the page to the next chapter on Iraq" Do any of your guest think it is important to hold those who lied this nation into an invasion based on a known "pack of lies" ACCOUNTABLE?
Can anyone of your guest explain at what point over the last 8 or so years holding people accountable for an intelligence snowjob that resulted in horrific death and destruction started being described as "witch hunts, retribution, vengeance" instead of justice and accountability? This seems the very least that our Reps or the International community could do for those who have needlessly lost their lives in that war of choice?
Did I miss it was someone held accountable for the Niger Documents etc?
Is it just me, or is the entire rationale for Iranian meddling in Iraqi affairs about to drive across the Kuwaiti border? Along with Iraqi tolerance for it?
What about Sadr's raison d'etre after the US troops leave?
Wonder if the US could trade the lives of the Iranian scientist that the US or israeli special forces more than likely assassinated for the US drone? Oh yeah those iranian scientist are dead.
Wouldn't they have a self-destruct device in this drone to prevent it from being captured (unless for some reason they wanted it to be)?
Kathleen: All indications are that the explosion and fire that killed the Iranian scientists was what is commonly referred to as a "screw up" on the part of Iranian technicians. This link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/image-sho...
is from the Washington Post.
Christopher Hitchens is dead. :(
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-christopher-hitchens-20111216,0,76.sto...
Iran has all ready reported objections to the UN.
How many of your guest think the US will covertly attack Iran soon? You know out of Iraq into Iran. So hopeful
Colonel Wilkerson thinks Israel and the US will overtly attack iran within 3 years?
Col. Wilkerson: US War w Iran '3 yrs. Away'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbT5XFnhUGw
Many other experts think an overt action towards Iran will take place come hell or high water
http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2011/12/14/the-inevitable-war-with-i...
St Louis
Even on the Diane Rehm show they reported 18 different explosions the last year at military facilities in Iran. Seymour Hersh wrote about alleged Israeli and US special forces on the ground in Iran almost five years ago. Assassination of Iranian scientist, Stuxnet, 18 suspicious explosions, the Obama administration story about alleged top Iranian officials involved with the attempted plan to kill the Saudi ambassador. Unsubstantiated and inflammatory claims being ramped up over the last 8 years and repeated on the Diane Rehm show and other MSM news outlets. Those claims about Iran being repeated at warp speed the last six months. Does not look good. Out of Iraq into Iran if Israel and the I lobby have their way.
Seymours articles about Iran
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/seymour_m_hersh/search?contributo...
I mean overtly attack Iran
Our pre-emptive strike into Iraq was a tragic example of a fallacy of leadership: Do something even if it's wrong. When I was in training for Vietnam as an Army Lieutenant, our training officers and NCOs stressed that this was NOT leadership. In the wake of 9/11, having failed to get bin Laden, Bush felt pressured to do something -- even if it was wrong.
United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) President, Ambassador Mark D. Wallace, issued the following statement Thursday regarding the U.S. House of Representatives' 410-11 passage of the Iran Threat Reduction Act yesterday, which includes the Iran Transparency and Accountability Act, requiring companies to disclosure their sanctionable Iran business to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC):
Leaving Iraq to go into Iran is this what we are supposed to get so hopeful about
It rarely gets stated, but one of the central Bush doctrines directly after 9/11 was not to allow rogue states to arm international terrorists. We invaded Iraq in part to keep a mad man from arming terrorists
What has happened to the Baghdad National Museum and its contents since the U.S. invaded?
It rarely gets stated, but one of the central Bush doctrines directly after 9/11 was not to allow rogue states to arm international terrorists. We invaded Iraq in part to keep a mad man from arming terrorists
Diane asks the right question about the media's complicity in promoting the Iraq war.
The answer of the panelist that the media should ask more probing questions about the national interest in the future sounds good
. . . BUT that is not the direction the country seems to be going. See recent AUMF and provision for indefinite detention of, even, Americans.
We may have turned the corner into a total national security state, not a healthy democratic one.
Diane thank you for admitting that reporters, journalist, host of national news shows did not ask challenging questions about the WMD claims. Lets hope and pray that they start doing it about the unsubstantiated and inflammatory claims being repeated about Iran.
Because over the last 8 years many unsubstantiated and inflammatory claims have been repeated on many news outlets with little to no challenging questions being asked.
don S. Diane has allowed Reuel marc Gerecht to repeat unsubstantiated claims about Iran during the last year on her program. No challenging questions.
Happening all through the MSM over the last 8 years
people who know more than most of us believe we are all ready in Iran and will go in in a more serious way soon
http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2011/12/14/the-inevitable-war-with-i...
http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/12/07/the_silent_war_with_iran
Neocons & the GOP National Security Debate
Share / Recommend - Comment - Permanent Link - Print - Saturday, Nov 26 2011, 6:32PM
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/
Comments on the influence of neoconservatives on GOP foreign policy establishment.
Former Dick Cheney chief of staff and now Heritage Foundation vice president David Addington dropped his strong aversion to the public spotlight and offered one of the questions to GOP presidential candidates at the national security/foreign policy debate last week sponsored by CNN, the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. AEI adjunct visiting fellow and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz also offered a question as did several other prominent neoconservatives.
Clearly, the foreign policy wing characterized by Richard Lugar, Chuck Hagel, even Henry Kissinger deserves endangered species status.
I shared some thoughts on the resurrection, yet again, of neoconservatives in the foreign policy establishment on The Rachel Maddow Show. Clip above.
-- Steve Clemons is Washington Editor at Large at The Atlantic, where this post first appeared. Clemons can be followed on Twitter at @SCClemons
Yeah, Kathleen, there was a certain surreal aspect to the implication that looking toward the future the media was going to miraculously do a mea culpa and become a fearless questioner of government motives, policy and 'information' as relates to foreign affairs and military force.
Go listen to Colin Powell talk about the lead up to his false flag speech at the UN. What he was told was solid intelligence and then of course was not. One source
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/2011/09/20119199344463...
But many folks warned us before the invasion that the validity of the intelligence was seriously questionable. Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, El Baradei said the Niger Documents were forgeries, former Cia analyst Ray McGovern, Kathleen and Bill Christison were writing like crazy about the shakiness of the sources of the false intelligence
Senator Durbin (who was on the intelligence committee) voted against the Iraq war resolution. Should have been a clue Hillary. They knew the intelligence was false. They knew. That is why hundreds of thousands of us marched, protested, lobbied our Reps, some arrested because we were hearing many experts coming out and saying hooey on the intelligence. But if you were not listening to alternative sources you would hear the same lies repeated on CNN, MSNBC etc by Wolfowitz, "mushroom cloud"Rice, Feith, Cheney, Bush etc etc. They knew they were repeating lies
Jason Vest wrote about where these lies were coming out of in the fall of 2002
http://www.thenation.com/article/men-jinsa-and-csp
Lt karen kwiatowski wrote about the sources of the lies later in the New Pentagon Papers
http://www.salon.com/2004/03/10/osp_moveon/
Go read Phase I and Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
They knew what they were saying was lies. Because they created and cherry picked the false intelligence
The panelist's (typical) breastbeating about how all American journalists could learn from their experience covering the prelude to the Iraqi invasion was wrong. While plenty of journalists served as propaganda agents for the invasion (including, of course, NPR - especially Scott Simon) there were those that didn't - I don't believe I saw a single misguided or delusional article on the Counterpunch website, and I never heard a gullible or deceptive guest on Democracy Now! Journalists don't need to learn, they know what they are doing and who they are serving. It's the consumers who need to learn - they need to learn who is giving them accurate information. I hear the same sort of drivel every day on NPR, in fact, it just gets worse. I still get good information from Counterpunch and Democracy Now! I listen to NPR to hear what the propaganda line is, not to be informed.
And the caller was wrong to think the war was over the assassination attempt on Bush Sr. There was never an assassination attempt, that was as real as the weapons of mass distruction were. I should clarify for the sake of people that think Saddam was a madman supplying weapons of mass distruction to terrorists - by this I mean "not at all real." A fake, a fantasy, a propaganda construct, a lie. Hope that clarifies sufficiently.
and to extend my own question: What's changed? Media types still want access, and large corporate money still controls the most significant media outlets. Also, too, when the noise machine is blaring military, freedom, democracy, terrorist, etc., etc., 24/7 how many of these media types are going to have the integrity, courage and insight to do anything but salute as expected? Or, if they don't, to paraphrase Khruschev, they'll get buried.
Don has not happened. Have heard Diane, Neal Conan, Christiane Amanpour, Stephanpolous, Bob Schieffer, Rachel maddow and so many more allow guest to repeat unsubstantiated claims about Iran on their programs over the last eight years. Never ever...yes Diane I am saying "never ever" ask challenging questions.
Terri Gross is a serial repeater of the unsubstantiated and inflammatory claims about Iran herself
Terri Gross' performance isn't worth the waste of a keystroke, which I have already done!
Thought it was humorous, the next statement after relating how Diane's hubby said "never use never'", Nadia said 'never', and Diane repeated 'never'. Not criticizing, just agreeing how difficult it is to remain awake and perceptive.
Don all few of the MSM outlets will have Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett on to discuss the situation with Iran. Both Leveretts were in the Bush administration and quit just before the invasion of Iraq because they disagreed. Hillary has directly negotiated with Iran. Flynt is a former middle east analyst. They have an incredible website about the RACE FOR IRAN.
I know Diane has had Flynt on in the past. But I believe it has been a very long while.
http://www.raceforiran.com/
Let's all hope and pray and push that it is not partially out of Iraq and headed into Iran. Enough of these policies and wars based on lies. Enough
Diane: Thanks so much for asking the tough question about journalists' role in the run up to the war. Yes, I agree that the Fourth Estate did not serve the country well at all, failing to probe hard and ask the difficult questions that needed asking before we blundered into the colossal misadventure of war in Iraq. I am concerned that the very same thing is happening as the 2012 presidential campaign ramps up. The questions not being asked? Candidates, pundits, congresspeople, etc. are not being pressed enough about the academic and factual underpinnings of the economic pronouncements they make, over and over and over again. As in the run up to Iraq, just because someone says something does not make it so! Specifically, I am referring to the Republican claim that tax cutting leads to economic growth, and its inverse, that raising taxes (especially on all those earning-more-than-a-million-dollars-per-year small business "job creators" that Tamara Keith, on your show this week, told us she could not find -- because they do not exist, a story in itself that has not been reported!) reduces job creation and growth. The preponderance of academic understanding, supported by data, data, and more data over the last five decades show that these claims are PATENTLY FALSE. See for example the great work of two University of Chicago professors, posted on yesterday's Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/obama-reaganomics_b_11506...). I am very very concerned that we, as an electorate, stand to be led down yet another rosy path with promises that are unsupported and unsupportable. Please, please . . . I hope that you on your show will begin to invite journalists, academics, pundits, etc., who *are* asking and answering these questions, and give them a platform on which to educate us.
not looking at all previous comments
it is good to see that the number of comments relating to the international hour comments to comparable to the comments on domestic politics. as of 901p est 12/16/2011
We all live on the same unique rock, embrace it.
-Romney
Hello,
am fan of the show...particularily of the Friday "round-up".
For my part, the strength and appeal of the show is Dianne's focus backed by a qualified panel.
Although I have not heard EVERY show (obviously), I feel that the panel often under represents the "non-Anglo Saxon" view when discussing European affairs.
For example - today, when discussing the current European situation the panel had US & UK representatives but no-one from ""Europe""....this has often been the case.
For the discussion to be balanced, surely an alternative view to that of the "Anglo-Saxons" would be refreshing (the Germans / French / et al are also weary of the 'Anglo-Saxon' gorilla!!).
Perhaps the views expressed by Der Spiegel, Frankfurter Algemein, Le Mond, etc would be insightful when put up against those of the NYT/WP/FT/ USA Today??
If it must be 'Anglo-Saxons only" perhaps the Economist could occasionally be represented ??
Sincerely,
John McNally