Mark Warner's Nukes

by emptywheel

Well, it appears to be all Warner all day today.

Someone mistook me for a bigtime blogger and I got invited to attend Mark Warner's post-talk blogger chat. I asked the first question, which went something like:

I'm going to ask the Iran question, but I'm going to get at it sideways. You said that Iran is the biggest WMD threat out there. But Pakistan is a tremendously unstable country right now. And if Musharraf fell, Al Qaeda could get the bomb within 6 weeks. And al-Baradei has just said that Iran does not now have the bomb. So why is Iran the biggest threat?

He then listed several reasons why Iran was a threat: Ahmadenijad's nuttiness, a "regional strategy," support for terrorism. I pointed out that none of those things were WMDs. I'm not certain, but I'm fairly sure he argued that Hammas was a big threat, although he did later admit that Al Qaeda is a threat.

Anyway, I think I at least made him think about this differently.

Comments

[Hornet]

If those were his answers, he DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE ANYWHERE NEAR the presidency.

He's an idiot. And unread. And uninformed.

Eat him out of house and home. Best use of his campaign dollars.

[kim]

Great, good effort and question. It must be fun.

[jmba]

Great question. You definately showed him that progressive bloggers are intelligent and tough and aren't going to give anyone a free ride. On that note...if you happen to speak with Harry Reid I would love to find the answer to the question..."Where is phase 2 of the senate intelligence report on pre-war Iraq" Yesterday Boxer was asked about using (is it article 21?) to shut down the senate to go into closed session to speak about it. Well there is still no phase 2 report. I am wondering where it is. Just throwing it out there. Thanks :)

[jmba]

I know it is way off topic, but it happens to be a little pet peave of mine.

[Hornet]

I second jmba's request, if you can manage it:
"Where is phase 2 of the senate intelligence report on pre-war Iraq"

[joejoejoe]

Iran's President Ahmadinejad is going to a World Cup soccer match in Germany on June 21. I don't think Europe is quite as steadfast in their deadlines as the US if they are inviting the Iranian President.

See Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff's piece at the Washington Note.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001469.php

[p.lukasiak]

well, if we're going to discuss pet peeves.... I'm sick of seeing YKOS as a gathering of "thousands of bloggers". ALthough there are lots of "name" bloggers attending, most of those in attendance are readers of blogs who understand that the internet can be a powerful engine of change, and want to be a part of that change (or just wanted to meet some of the people they have been communicating with through comments and diaries on DailyKos for years.)

[CaseyL]

I was neither strongly for nor strongly against Warner, but if he's climbing aboard Bush's "Next Stop: Iran!" train, he's lost any credibility he ever had with me.

[eric]

It's becoming apparent that a large number of people in power are attempting to lead the country into the "terrorism = WMD" idea without actually saying it. I think that and the nebulous "regional strategy" are the guiding principles to the US' foreign policy posture.

[Rayne]

Great job, EW. That's TWO pols -- including Boxer -- now ID'd by the YKos process as needed an education.

p.s. fabu job on the Plame panel!!!

[DemFromCT]

p.lukasiak

the term is used interchangably.. bloggers are posters on Daily Kos and front pagers as well. I like "managing editors" for the front pagers, "bloggers" for the diarists, but whatever.

[cbl]

emptywheel,

listening to you at the Plame panel has been one of the highlights of YKOS - hope you are enjoying yourself -

this "response' sure smells like Mark Mellman, Joe Hansen, does anyone know who Warner's 'consultant' is ? would really like to hear Jerome's impression of this -

[Casey]

Please tell me (or refer me)to more about Boxer. Did she REALLY endorse Lieberman?

[cho]

These are the exact same "reasons" lieberman gave in his question and answer period at the Ukranian Social Club in Windham on 4-23-06

"Real quick now, Iran, unfortunately, a real danger. These people the State Department calls it and, in this case almost everyone agrees, the most significant state sponsor of terrorism in the world. They have the blood of Americans on their hands. And now you have got this fanatical person who's come to power, who says he's going to kill some, to a crowd of thousands in Teheran [unintelligible] open up to the United States of America. I think we have to take this seriously. You can't assume he's just making idle comments and therefore someone like this having nuclear weapons is a real danger to us.

To which, my hero, Questioner #5, responded:

Questioner #5: With all due respect, Senator, this isn't about Iran. It's not about Iraq. It's about us. It's about our miserable butchering of foreign policy. We can't change who the President of Iran is, but the worst thing we can do, the absolute worst thing we can do, was rattle our sabers, after we botched [unintelligible] and tell them you can't do this, right after he walks out of India, the President of the United States walks out of India, where he cuts a sweetheart deal with a neighbor of theirs, to work out the supply of nuclear technology.

"This is insanity. If the Iranians have a lunatic for president, so do we."

[Pointed Head]

Don't kid yourself, Empty Wheel.

Don't get me wrong - your website is brilliant... but the idea that you might have gotten him to think differently about this subject is a long shot.

If this man is willing to say "Iran is the biggest WMD threat out there" he is so far lost to simple reason that nothing you say is going to make a difference. When an elected official speaks to you like this, so insultingly, like some kind of automated talking point robot, the truly revolutionary response would be to:

1. Walk away
2. Throw your drink in his face
3. Ask him if he is bought and paid for by the Israel Lobby
4. Ask him whether or not he is a fucking moron or something

Of course, simple questions about Iran's natural resources, political structure, topography, languages, religion, and history would be enough to reveal that this guy is a complete and total idiot.

[Frank T]

Great question.

I saw your photo at fdl--wow, superfine! Apologies for the superficiality, etc.

[emptypockets]

So this may be a dumb question but: what was the right answer?

One person I discussed it with ventured, "The difference is that there's a huge US presence in Pakistan. Suppose you have on your block a known killer who you know has been going out trying to buy a gun, and a guy who keeps a gun locked at home but who you know has a juvenile delinquent kid at home who has threatened you. Who is the more immediate threat?"

(Personally I'd move to another block.)

Seriously -- what would have been the best answer for Warner to give?

[JohnLopresti]

I read a top level Gore organizer joined his staff last year, Monica Dixon.

[Truth Teller]

Yeah, how dare Mark Warner attempt to be a politician and punt on a question from a nobody, and give an answer that ? I am SO much smarter than Warner is. What a loser he is. All that crap about his business history and his governorship...he's a stupid doofus.

Thank god we have such a long proven track record of truth tellers winning the Presidency. Fight the Power!!

[Kagro X]

Maybe he won't think differently about Iran. But we can hope he'll think differently about whether or not the blogosphere will roll over for him.

And though it's not as earth-shaking a change, that's worth hoping for, too.

[Pointed Head]

Truth Teller - I don't get it. Irony? Double Irony? What gives?

I am not suggesting that anybody is smarter than Warner but I am fairly certain that I could tell you more about the Middle East in 15 minutes than you'll ever get from all of Warner's stoopid ass sound bytes.

It doesn't take much to even know just a little about US policy in relation to Iran and the rest of the Middle East. The man can't be that dumb.

But dumbness isn't really the issue. It's not stupidity we are dealing with here. It's ambition, self-censorship, cowardice, and indifference.

[Pointed Head]

Kagro - my point is that he's obviously not even thinking AT ALL about Iran. It's just an abstract talking point for him; something to position himself around safely. That's what his stoopid ass remark tells me.

I said that it wasn't dumbness but you know what... maybe there's a little bit of that too.

Here's a to do: when you bump into him next - ask him what countries border Iran.

Ask him who is in charge of the military.

Ask him how many people live there, how much oil is produced each day, and what bodies of water the country is contiguous with.

Ask him where Tehran is located.

Ask him what language is spoken there.

If he can't give you answers to all of these very basic questions, why would you think he knows anything about any purported WMD or any purported super double top secret information that... purportedly... puts our lives in danger?

[darrelplant]

Frank: Unless Iran's a greater threat to Pakistan, there is no "right" answer. If the best he can come up with is reason's Iran's a threat, I can think of any numberof actual, greater potential threats, not the least of which is are the loose nukes from Russia that the Bush adinistration has neglected to do anything about.

As for the guy who says that there is a "huge US presence in Pakistan", he's full of crap. We have 130K+ troops in Iraq, a country of 25 million and we can't keep the peace there. Pakistan has a population of 165 million, more than half that of the US, as well as a fairly modern military (something the Iraqis didn't have). That's roughly a 13:2 ratio. And I'm pretty sure we don't have anywhere near the 800,000 troops available it would take to turn Pakistan into the equivalent of Iraq.

Oh, and did I mention that Iran's population is three times that of Iraq?

[Invisible Paradigm]

Warner said in a recent speech that it is good that Bush is engaging in diplomacy with Iran. If he is that naive, I can safely say I will not be supporting him for any higher office.

[MayBee]

How does what Howard Dean said fit in with your thoughts about Warner?
"...Secondly, under no circumstances will a Democratic Administration ever allow Iran to become a nuclear power." Feb 28, 2006.

Are you quibbling that Iran is the biggest nuclear threat out there? Or do you hope that a Democratic Administration might allow Iran to be a nuclear power? Or do you disagree with Dean on this one as well?