"The countries hurt most are America’s allies in Asia and Europe... ." No: the country hurt the most is Iran. And Lebanon and Palestine, who for decades have been terrorized by Netanyahoo's Israel. We must never forget how Israel's and the US's forever wars have ravaged the people of these and other countries.
You are exactly right, both in pointing out one of the several misleading comments in yet another poor Contrarian article about the war, and about the intense destruction and dangers created by the US/Israeli alliance.
Malinowski says there have been "hundreds' of deaths 'related fighting in Lebanon'. He then weirdly links to a nearly month-old BBC article, as if nothing has happened since then.
For one, it's not 'hundreds' - as of today over 2500 men, women and children have been killed in Lebanon, which includes hundreds of children, at least 100 health care workers, and several journalists, just since early March. A million people have been displaced while Israel has effectively annexed the southern portion of the country, blowing up every bridge connecting it to the north, and threatening Christian and Druse residents to not shelter their displaced Shiite neighbors.
This number does not include the 4000 killed by the IDF in Lebanon from the fall of 2023 to the earlier 'ceasefire' in Nov 2024...and does not include the several hundred more killed by Israel during that 'ceasefire' until early March this year.
These people were not killed in 'related' fighting', they were killed by the IDF. Malinowski's passive description that only credits some vague 'fighting' for these intentional mass killings is typical of The Contrarian's coverage these days.
I have not seen even one mention anywhere in the Contrarian of Israel's mass slaughter in Beirut and other locations in Lebanon only hours after the last 'ceasefire' was announced on April 8th. Over 300 people were killed in densely populated areas, with no warning. Malinowski does not mention this. Instead he conveniently links to an article that was published weeks before this war crime when referring to the 'related fighting' in Lebanon.
Later in the piece, Malinowski makes this preposterous statement:
'Trump’s more ambitious and worthy goals — ensuring that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon or threaten us or its neighbors — were absolutely achievable by military means but only if he’d had the stomach to remove Iran’s regime. '
Every word in this sentence is flat out ridiculous. Trump had no 'worthy' goal..did he have any clear goal at all? Trump himself claimed that last year's US/Israeli attack on Iran that killed over 1000 people (also ignored by Malinowski) 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. Was the 'ambitious' goal to obliterate. it even more? The notion that Iran 'threatened' the US was also ridiculous..as you point out, the biggest threats across the Middle East, by far, are those brought by the US/Israel alliance.
Did Malinowski actually write with a straight face that these 'worthy goals' were 'absolutely achievable'? By what, a ground invasion that would take months, years, a la the Iraq War that Jennifer Rubin loved so much? He says only that it would take 'a land invasion with significant American military casualties'...he does not say this of course would be a terrible, completely batshit crazy thing to even consider...he also does not bother to mention this would costs thousands, maybe even millions of Iranian lives.
Like Rubin, Malinowski seems more upset that these 'goals' won't be achieved, not that this war is brazenly illegal and immoral, not just by US law but by the UN charter and even a conservative view of international law, let alone by basic standards of humanity.
The 'liberal' subtle, yet not so subtle, neo-hawk views in The Contrarian lately (maybe not just lately) are an uncomfortable reminder of past eras.
When Malinowski talks about Trump's lack of resolve ('if he’d had the stomach to remove Iran’s regime') he sounds a lot like Charles Schumer last summer:
'"When it comes to negotiating with the terrorist government of Iran, Trump's all over the lot. One day he sounds tough, the next day he's backing off..'
When Schumer said then that Trump's team "lets Iran get away with everything" .. he sounds exactly like Rubin 2015-16.
I am tired of 'centrist' hawks and tired of Never Trumpers being exalted as progressive leaders. The base of the Democratic Party, and a big chunk of the American electorate overall, sees past this garbage.
And as a PS: look what's happened to Ukraine since it surrendered its nuclear arsenal. Trusting the word of wanna-be despots like our president, Netanyahoo and Putin doesn't seem to work out well for the trusting.
I too have sympathy for all the civilians hurt by this war. But to say that the people who hurt the most are Iranians, Palestinians, and Lebanese is interesting. All three have evil factions that hate America and Israel: the Iranian government, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Are you including these entities in your list? Is that why you've picked these three? Why not the Ukrainians among others?
I didn't mention the Ukrainians because the author's reference was to the war in Iran--and while that war has had an effect on the whole world, it's primary effect is on the people of Iran. And the neighboring countries have all, one way or another, been caught up in the US's and Israel's decades-long wars in the Mideast. I say that the Iranians, Palestinians and Lebanese have been damaged the most because they have. Yes, Iran, Palestine and Lebanon all have groups who hate the US and Israel. As the US and Israel have groups who hate them in return. I'm sorry but given history, I consider the US and Israel the greater offenders. And they are the only countries (of those named) which have nuclear weapons.
I am not going to argue the history of the Middle East and Israel except to note that it is clear that you place no responsibility for anything that has happened between Israel and the surrounding countries on the 75+ years of war, terrorism, and murder waged on Israelis by these three groups and others in the Arab world. Do I criticize Israel for some of its actions, of course, particularly now. But I do not hear anything from you that likewise finds any fault with Israel's relentless enemies.
I had in mind the first of all the history of the US in the Mideast, especially Iran in this context, then the history between the Palestinians and Israelis since the Partition Plan of 1947. While I haven't defended the three groups you mentioned in your first response, you are defending Israel and seem to characterize the Israelis as the ones victimized by their enemies. What about the Palestinians and now the Lebanese victimized by Israel? When you mention the "75+ years of war, terrorism, and murder waged on Israelis" by the three groups you mentioned (none of whom has been in existence for 75 years), you overlook the reasons for the wars between Israel and various Arab states, particularly Palestine.
The Arab nations around Israel have tried to destroy it since the state was founded. The current terrorist entities are just part of that. Yes, I am defending Israel -- but I am not saying that it is perfect by any means nor that the Lebanese and Palestinian civilians are not at all victimized. You, however, seem not to see the other side of the story at all.
The state of Israel was founded with a massive wave of crimes against humanity, killing thousands and driving thousands from their ancestral homes. Not only were the Israelis never held accountable, they were rewarded with a state that has continued the terrorism for 75 years under the guise of a nation's right to exist. People have an inalienable right to exist, not states.
I can't speak for Donna, but from what she wrote here, it seems quite obvious that she didn't mention Ukraine because that is utterly irrelevant to this discussion. Sh also did not mention Venezuela, or Cuba, or any number of other locations.
Again, not to speak for her, but she also did not choose to engage in the whataboutism employed by those that defend and justify Israel's flagrant apartheid- driven ethnic cleansing, genocide, and belligerent lawlessness across the Middle East (as always, in cahoots with its BFF, the USA) because she correctly asserts that 'US's forever wars have ravaged the people' of 'Iran, Lebanon, Palestine' and 'other countries (such as Yemen and Syria).
Her statement is not merely 'interesting', it is entirely accurate, and relevant to a discussion about the Iran/Lebanon war started by the US/Israeli alliance.
Here's a quick body count just from the past 2.5 years created by this alliance. This does not include the massive displacements, the countless injuries, the amputations, the thousands of illegal kidnappings (sorry, 'detentions'), or so many other clear war crimes:
A bare minimum of 72,000+ killed in Gaza, including about 800 more since the 'ceasefire' was enacted last fall, with more every single day. This number is very likely already above 100,000 when all the bodies still buried in rubble, and deaths due to starvation, infant mortality, disease, and other factors directly caused by Israel's terror and devastation are included. There is no end in sight.
At least 1000 killed in the West Bank by the IDF and its proxy lynch mobs called 'settlers' that the IDF and the Israeli state openly arm and support.
At least 1000 killed in Iran last year, and at least 3000 more killed since Feb 28th by the US/Israeli alliance in its unprovoked, illegal war.
4000 killed in Lebanon by the IDF between Oct 2023 and Nov 2024, several hundred more killed during the 'ceasefire' until March of this year, then 2500 more killed since then, with more nearly every day in Lebanon during this current 'ceasefire'
Several hundred killed in Yemen over a number of attacks in the past 2.5 years
Hundreds more killed in Syria in that same time...
(and oh yeah, note that Israel is a state, not a religion)
Thank you Jason. I don't have the arsenal of facts to bring to this discussion that you have. But for the life of me I cannot understand how the US thinks it gets to decide who's entitled to have nuclear weapons and who is not. Whatever happened to sovereignty? Anyone who reads the news knows that Iran does not have clean hands in this mess. (Neither neither does the US or Israel.) But If I had a nuclear-armed neighbor as bellicose as Israel, whose wars are bankrolled by the biggest military spender on the planet, I'd be loathe to give up the right to parity in munitions. There's no way that Iran should be denied the authority to develop nuclear power unless Israel too is stripped of its nuclear weapons.
Personally I think all nuclear weapons should be destroyed--if they even can be, or effectively de-fanged. And while I was very thankful that the Pope has denounced the Iran war in the context of the just-war theory, in fact no modern war can be justified, IMO. Given the character of modern armaments, nations can wipe out whole neighborhoods or villages or "civilizations," if that is your inclination, without seeing the whites of your opponents' eyes. Without being on a battlefield at all. Leaving behind poisons that will remain for decades. Chess, ping-pong, Uno: any of these competitions would be a better way to solve conflicts.
And yes, the numbers of deaths being reported seem vastly undercounted. Thank you for citing the numbers that make the devastation more real to readers. Jen soft-pedals the war crimes being committed.
It's clear that not only was this illegal war not fought to help the democracy movement in Iran, but it has made their efforts far more difficult, with even more extreme leadership in place that has no reason whatsoever to trust anything the US or Israel says or does at this point. It would surprise no one if Iran pursues nuclear weapons now.
And yes,. I am getting more and more tired of The Contrarian's coverage on this topic.. this war in Iran in particular has made it impossible for me to ignore Rubin's longstanding positions on JCPOA and on Middle East military actions in general.
You don't even really need to read between the lines to see many writers in this outlet are not against this war so much as mad that, in Malinowski's words, the 'worthy goals' that were 'absolutely achievable' will not be accomplished, because Trump did not '(have) the stomach' for it.
Thank you, Tom, for the breakdown of costs, munitions and options; and for seeing what so many of see but which is ignored too much by Congress and people of a particular political persuasion.
Donnie, baby, has proved to the world that any "pledge not to strike again" will never again be something any other country--or We The People--could trust. Any country with even the slightest bit of brains will never trust us again. They may sign treaties or documents, but it will be completely without any belief that the United States, which used to have a good reputation--not everywhere, but in a majority of places--will actually do what it "pledges."
The two party system that exists in the US today elected Trump because the Democratic party refused to recognize how unpopular Biden's support for Israel's genocide had become with voters. They served wealthy donors instead of constituents and, as usual, the world suffers the consequences.
I'm doubtful that our standing with Europe will ever recover from Don the Con. Remember back in 2021 when President Biden told our allies "America is back"
Our allies, no fools, stifled their yawns and laughter and responded with "yes, but for how long?"
The allies hit the nail on the head! Even if the next President is a sane adult and recognizes the value of alliances, nobody anywhere will believe that the commitment will outlast the next president.
ENOUGH already with the term “mad king”! Good grief, by the tens of thousands we have demonstrated AGAINST the notion of a “king” and we do ourselves no favors referring to him as one, even if negatively. Thank you.
Indeed. People seem to forget the US brought this on themselves with when they participated in a coup that overthrew Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953, the result of which was a tyrannical Shah that the US kept in power, torturing the Iranian people for 25 years. This was the precursor to the current regime.
It is pure (dark) comedy to read Malinowski state:
'(Trump) could make a deal with Iran that would not be much better, if at all, than the one President Barack Obama struck a decade ago, which Trumpers have denounced ever since.'
..when there was no louder, fiercer critic of Obama's Iran nuclear deal than Jennifer Rubin.
Maybe if Irena would like some more hawkish neocon attacks on Iran, she should just read anything Rubin wrote during the Obama years, but especially around 2015 when JCPOA was in the news.
Here's a few choice quotes from Rubin:
'The Obama team’s lackadaisical attitude toward Iran — concealing incriminating evidence, beginning the endless round of talks about talks, and hushing any discussion about a military option — suggests they really don’t have the will to deprive Iran of nuclear weapons.' (this is actually pretty similar to something Malinowski says about Trump in this piece that I referenced in another comment - back then it's not TACO, it was OACO)
'“Obama won’t defend Western civilization.....this deal (JCPOA) threatens Israel immediately, this threatens the entire Middle East, but it threatens the United States of America.... This is really about the survival of Western civilization.”
'if you examine the Iran deal in any detail, you will be horrified as to what is in there."
'10 reason the Iran deal is ludicrous' (headline)
'The effect of the nuclear deal is clear: Iran has only increased its aggression'
'As historically dishonest and obnoxious in its moral relativism as Obama’s Cairo speech was, it was most egregious and damaging in its treatment of Iran — or its non-treatment of Iran’s nuclear threat.'
"Obama's deal is worse than no deal, destructive of attempts to prevent WMDs. It is not merely ineffective, but hugely dangerous."
It galls me that I have to be embarrassed by his abject weakness and bear all of the consequences. Get him out of my life.
"The countries hurt most are America’s allies in Asia and Europe... ." No: the country hurt the most is Iran. And Lebanon and Palestine, who for decades have been terrorized by Netanyahoo's Israel. We must never forget how Israel's and the US's forever wars have ravaged the people of these and other countries.
You are exactly right, both in pointing out one of the several misleading comments in yet another poor Contrarian article about the war, and about the intense destruction and dangers created by the US/Israeli alliance.
Malinowski says there have been "hundreds' of deaths 'related fighting in Lebanon'. He then weirdly links to a nearly month-old BBC article, as if nothing has happened since then.
For one, it's not 'hundreds' - as of today over 2500 men, women and children have been killed in Lebanon, which includes hundreds of children, at least 100 health care workers, and several journalists, just since early March. A million people have been displaced while Israel has effectively annexed the southern portion of the country, blowing up every bridge connecting it to the north, and threatening Christian and Druse residents to not shelter their displaced Shiite neighbors.
This number does not include the 4000 killed by the IDF in Lebanon from the fall of 2023 to the earlier 'ceasefire' in Nov 2024...and does not include the several hundred more killed by Israel during that 'ceasefire' until early March this year.
These people were not killed in 'related' fighting', they were killed by the IDF. Malinowski's passive description that only credits some vague 'fighting' for these intentional mass killings is typical of The Contrarian's coverage these days.
I have not seen even one mention anywhere in the Contrarian of Israel's mass slaughter in Beirut and other locations in Lebanon only hours after the last 'ceasefire' was announced on April 8th. Over 300 people were killed in densely populated areas, with no warning. Malinowski does not mention this. Instead he conveniently links to an article that was published weeks before this war crime when referring to the 'related fighting' in Lebanon.
Later in the piece, Malinowski makes this preposterous statement:
'Trump’s more ambitious and worthy goals — ensuring that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon or threaten us or its neighbors — were absolutely achievable by military means but only if he’d had the stomach to remove Iran’s regime. '
Every word in this sentence is flat out ridiculous. Trump had no 'worthy' goal..did he have any clear goal at all? Trump himself claimed that last year's US/Israeli attack on Iran that killed over 1000 people (also ignored by Malinowski) 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. Was the 'ambitious' goal to obliterate. it even more? The notion that Iran 'threatened' the US was also ridiculous..as you point out, the biggest threats across the Middle East, by far, are those brought by the US/Israel alliance.
Did Malinowski actually write with a straight face that these 'worthy goals' were 'absolutely achievable'? By what, a ground invasion that would take months, years, a la the Iraq War that Jennifer Rubin loved so much? He says only that it would take 'a land invasion with significant American military casualties'...he does not say this of course would be a terrible, completely batshit crazy thing to even consider...he also does not bother to mention this would costs thousands, maybe even millions of Iranian lives.
Like Rubin, Malinowski seems more upset that these 'goals' won't be achieved, not that this war is brazenly illegal and immoral, not just by US law but by the UN charter and even a conservative view of international law, let alone by basic standards of humanity.
Great commentary, Jason. Those who write on this substack call themselves "Contrariaans' but sometimes aren't quite there.
The 'liberal' subtle, yet not so subtle, neo-hawk views in The Contrarian lately (maybe not just lately) are an uncomfortable reminder of past eras.
When Malinowski talks about Trump's lack of resolve ('if he’d had the stomach to remove Iran’s regime') he sounds a lot like Charles Schumer last summer:
'"When it comes to negotiating with the terrorist government of Iran, Trump's all over the lot. One day he sounds tough, the next day he's backing off..'
When Schumer said then that Trump's team "lets Iran get away with everything" .. he sounds exactly like Rubin 2015-16.
I am tired of 'centrist' hawks and tired of Never Trumpers being exalted as progressive leaders. The base of the Democratic Party, and a big chunk of the American electorate overall, sees past this garbage.
And as a PS: look what's happened to Ukraine since it surrendered its nuclear arsenal. Trusting the word of wanna-be despots like our president, Netanyahoo and Putin doesn't seem to work out well for the trusting.
ps- thank you for your comments here, that inspired me to re-read this article and follow the enclosed links.
I too have sympathy for all the civilians hurt by this war. But to say that the people who hurt the most are Iranians, Palestinians, and Lebanese is interesting. All three have evil factions that hate America and Israel: the Iranian government, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Are you including these entities in your list? Is that why you've picked these three? Why not the Ukrainians among others?
I didn't mention the Ukrainians because the author's reference was to the war in Iran--and while that war has had an effect on the whole world, it's primary effect is on the people of Iran. And the neighboring countries have all, one way or another, been caught up in the US's and Israel's decades-long wars in the Mideast. I say that the Iranians, Palestinians and Lebanese have been damaged the most because they have. Yes, Iran, Palestine and Lebanon all have groups who hate the US and Israel. As the US and Israel have groups who hate them in return. I'm sorry but given history, I consider the US and Israel the greater offenders. And they are the only countries (of those named) which have nuclear weapons.
I am not going to argue the history of the Middle East and Israel except to note that it is clear that you place no responsibility for anything that has happened between Israel and the surrounding countries on the 75+ years of war, terrorism, and murder waged on Israelis by these three groups and others in the Arab world. Do I criticize Israel for some of its actions, of course, particularly now. But I do not hear anything from you that likewise finds any fault with Israel's relentless enemies.
I had in mind the first of all the history of the US in the Mideast, especially Iran in this context, then the history between the Palestinians and Israelis since the Partition Plan of 1947. While I haven't defended the three groups you mentioned in your first response, you are defending Israel and seem to characterize the Israelis as the ones victimized by their enemies. What about the Palestinians and now the Lebanese victimized by Israel? When you mention the "75+ years of war, terrorism, and murder waged on Israelis" by the three groups you mentioned (none of whom has been in existence for 75 years), you overlook the reasons for the wars between Israel and various Arab states, particularly Palestine.
The Arab nations around Israel have tried to destroy it since the state was founded. The current terrorist entities are just part of that. Yes, I am defending Israel -- but I am not saying that it is perfect by any means nor that the Lebanese and Palestinian civilians are not at all victimized. You, however, seem not to see the other side of the story at all.
The state of Israel was founded with a massive wave of crimes against humanity, killing thousands and driving thousands from their ancestral homes. Not only were the Israelis never held accountable, they were rewarded with a state that has continued the terrorism for 75 years under the guise of a nation's right to exist. People have an inalienable right to exist, not states.
I can't speak for Donna, but from what she wrote here, it seems quite obvious that she didn't mention Ukraine because that is utterly irrelevant to this discussion. Sh also did not mention Venezuela, or Cuba, or any number of other locations.
Again, not to speak for her, but she also did not choose to engage in the whataboutism employed by those that defend and justify Israel's flagrant apartheid- driven ethnic cleansing, genocide, and belligerent lawlessness across the Middle East (as always, in cahoots with its BFF, the USA) because she correctly asserts that 'US's forever wars have ravaged the people' of 'Iran, Lebanon, Palestine' and 'other countries (such as Yemen and Syria).
Her statement is not merely 'interesting', it is entirely accurate, and relevant to a discussion about the Iran/Lebanon war started by the US/Israeli alliance.
Here's a quick body count just from the past 2.5 years created by this alliance. This does not include the massive displacements, the countless injuries, the amputations, the thousands of illegal kidnappings (sorry, 'detentions'), or so many other clear war crimes:
A bare minimum of 72,000+ killed in Gaza, including about 800 more since the 'ceasefire' was enacted last fall, with more every single day. This number is very likely already above 100,000 when all the bodies still buried in rubble, and deaths due to starvation, infant mortality, disease, and other factors directly caused by Israel's terror and devastation are included. There is no end in sight.
At least 1000 killed in the West Bank by the IDF and its proxy lynch mobs called 'settlers' that the IDF and the Israeli state openly arm and support.
At least 1000 killed in Iran last year, and at least 3000 more killed since Feb 28th by the US/Israeli alliance in its unprovoked, illegal war.
4000 killed in Lebanon by the IDF between Oct 2023 and Nov 2024, several hundred more killed during the 'ceasefire' until March of this year, then 2500 more killed since then, with more nearly every day in Lebanon during this current 'ceasefire'
Several hundred killed in Yemen over a number of attacks in the past 2.5 years
Hundreds more killed in Syria in that same time...
(and oh yeah, note that Israel is a state, not a religion)
Thank you Jason. I don't have the arsenal of facts to bring to this discussion that you have. But for the life of me I cannot understand how the US thinks it gets to decide who's entitled to have nuclear weapons and who is not. Whatever happened to sovereignty? Anyone who reads the news knows that Iran does not have clean hands in this mess. (Neither neither does the US or Israel.) But If I had a nuclear-armed neighbor as bellicose as Israel, whose wars are bankrolled by the biggest military spender on the planet, I'd be loathe to give up the right to parity in munitions. There's no way that Iran should be denied the authority to develop nuclear power unless Israel too is stripped of its nuclear weapons.
Personally I think all nuclear weapons should be destroyed--if they even can be, or effectively de-fanged. And while I was very thankful that the Pope has denounced the Iran war in the context of the just-war theory, in fact no modern war can be justified, IMO. Given the character of modern armaments, nations can wipe out whole neighborhoods or villages or "civilizations," if that is your inclination, without seeing the whites of your opponents' eyes. Without being on a battlefield at all. Leaving behind poisons that will remain for decades. Chess, ping-pong, Uno: any of these competitions would be a better way to solve conflicts.
And yes, the numbers of deaths being reported seem vastly undercounted. Thank you for citing the numbers that make the devastation more real to readers. Jen soft-pedals the war crimes being committed.
100%.
It's clear that not only was this illegal war not fought to help the democracy movement in Iran, but it has made their efforts far more difficult, with even more extreme leadership in place that has no reason whatsoever to trust anything the US or Israel says or does at this point. It would surprise no one if Iran pursues nuclear weapons now.
And yes,. I am getting more and more tired of The Contrarian's coverage on this topic.. this war in Iran in particular has made it impossible for me to ignore Rubin's longstanding positions on JCPOA and on Middle East military actions in general.
You don't even really need to read between the lines to see many writers in this outlet are not against this war so much as mad that, in Malinowski's words, the 'worthy goals' that were 'absolutely achievable' will not be accomplished, because Trump did not '(have) the stomach' for it.
This is exactly the type of incisive analysis for which I'm happy to subscribe. Plus, I got a good laugh out of your opening paragraph!
Thank you.
14 months to undo 80 years of careful diplomacy. This is a worse result than binge eating a for 14 days after months of working out!
Thank you, Tom, for the breakdown of costs, munitions and options; and for seeing what so many of see but which is ignored too much by Congress and people of a particular political persuasion.
Donnie, baby, has proved to the world that any "pledge not to strike again" will never again be something any other country--or We The People--could trust. Any country with even the slightest bit of brains will never trust us again. They may sign treaties or documents, but it will be completely without any belief that the United States, which used to have a good reputation--not everywhere, but in a majority of places--will actually do what it "pledges."
Makes me sick.
Excellent writing Tom! Thanks!
The two party system that exists in the US today elected Trump because the Democratic party refused to recognize how unpopular Biden's support for Israel's genocide had become with voters. They served wealthy donors instead of constituents and, as usual, the world suffers the consequences.
I'm doubtful that our standing with Europe will ever recover from Don the Con. Remember back in 2021 when President Biden told our allies "America is back"
Our allies, no fools, stifled their yawns and laughter and responded with "yes, but for how long?"
The allies hit the nail on the head! Even if the next President is a sane adult and recognizes the value of alliances, nobody anywhere will believe that the commitment will outlast the next president.
ENOUGH already with the term “mad king”! Good grief, by the tens of thousands we have demonstrated AGAINST the notion of a “king” and we do ourselves no favors referring to him as one, even if negatively. Thank you.
Is anyone on The Contrarian going to write an in-depth article about Iran and all the ways it causes chaos and instability around the world?
What about the chaos and instability caused by the US and Israel?
Indeed. People seem to forget the US brought this on themselves with when they participated in a coup that overthrew Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953, the result of which was a tyrannical Shah that the US kept in power, torturing the Iranian people for 25 years. This was the precursor to the current regime.
Um, yea, right again.
It is pure (dark) comedy to read Malinowski state:
'(Trump) could make a deal with Iran that would not be much better, if at all, than the one President Barack Obama struck a decade ago, which Trumpers have denounced ever since.'
..when there was no louder, fiercer critic of Obama's Iran nuclear deal than Jennifer Rubin.
Maybe if Irena would like some more hawkish neocon attacks on Iran, she should just read anything Rubin wrote during the Obama years, but especially around 2015 when JCPOA was in the news.
Here's a few choice quotes from Rubin:
'The Obama team’s lackadaisical attitude toward Iran — concealing incriminating evidence, beginning the endless round of talks about talks, and hushing any discussion about a military option — suggests they really don’t have the will to deprive Iran of nuclear weapons.' (this is actually pretty similar to something Malinowski says about Trump in this piece that I referenced in another comment - back then it's not TACO, it was OACO)
'“Obama won’t defend Western civilization.....this deal (JCPOA) threatens Israel immediately, this threatens the entire Middle East, but it threatens the United States of America.... This is really about the survival of Western civilization.”
'if you examine the Iran deal in any detail, you will be horrified as to what is in there."
'10 reason the Iran deal is ludicrous' (headline)
'The effect of the nuclear deal is clear: Iran has only increased its aggression'
'As historically dishonest and obnoxious in its moral relativism as Obama’s Cairo speech was, it was most egregious and damaging in its treatment of Iran — or its non-treatment of Iran’s nuclear threat.'
"Obama's deal is worse than no deal, destructive of attempts to prevent WMDs. It is not merely ineffective, but hugely dangerous."