Revolutionary Moderation

Here we go



Couldn't avoid blogging this: I was wrong about Syria. Iran is next on the menu:

Prompted by evidence that Iran is harboring top al-Qaida operatives linked to last week's suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia and fears that Tehran may be closer to building a nuclear weapon than previously believed, the Bush administration has begun debating whether to take action to destabilize the Islamic republic, U.S. officials said Thursday.



.......................



Although one senior official engaged in the debate said "the military option is never off the table," others said no one was suggesting an invasion of Iran, although some officials think the United States should launch a limited air strike on Iran's nuclear weapons facilities if Iran appears on the verge of producing a nuclear weapon. By some estimates, Iran could have a nuclear weapon within two years. (emphasis mine)

Do you notice the article completely removes the source of that estimation, even as a human presense ("sources say...")? Do you want to bet that estimate comes from the same source that brought you the estimates of Iraq's WMD capacity? Do you want to bet both estimates were pulled from the same ass?



But even if the "estimates" are backed by hard evidence, shouldn't it concern the Americans a little that we hear information like that from the government of the United States, and the instinctive reaction is to not believe it? Shouldn't they have been a little more careful with their reputation? Nice work, American government, you big fat idiot liar! Go cry Wolfowitz to someone who cares.