CNBC fucks up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

The middle east has been a powder keg for a hell of a lot longer than this administration has been in power. If there was a report that Iran tested nukes out of nowhere during the Clinton administration, or Bush Sr.'s administration, you'd get the same "oh shit" reaction.

---

Agreed. 100%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mman

Actually, I think many would agree your statement was pretty stupid. Bush and his administration are not the only people responsible for the society of fear that is so persistant in everything.

---

I never saw Dems or the media hyping the "OMG IRAN HAS NUKES" angle before the administration brought it up. If you want to make a general point about both parties and the media using fear as a tool, fine, but when it comes to Iran the buck stops at the current White House's propaganda machine and that's a fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

The middle east has been a powder keg for a hell of a lot longer than this administration has been in power. If there was a report that Iran tested nukes out of nowhere during the Clinton administration, or Bush Sr.'s administration, you'd get the same "oh shit" reaction.

---

Bullshit and you know it. If it came out of nowhere then more people would have been skeptical about it, but like I said because the current administration has been hyping the shit out of Iran's supposed program the people felt they had more a reason to panic. To say that the knee-jerk reaction to hearing that anyone fired off nuclear missiles compares to when it's someone who we've been misled to believe has a fully functional nuclear program is delusional.

You can't bully your way out of this one Godaddy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

If it came out of nowhere then more people would have been skeptical about it

---

Cautious skepticism... on wall street? Really?

Are you seriously trying to say that the reaction would have been the same kind of panic if this had come out of nowhere compared to with the bullshit associated with it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Are you seriously trying to say that the reaction would have been the same kind of panic if this had come out of nowhere compared to with the bullshit associated with it?

---

Yes I'm pretty sure that when Clinton was in office. If this report came out , the reaction would have been the same.

Depends on what you mean by "bullshit associated with it." Iran having a nuclear program is a recent scare tactic, but Iran not being our buddy and generally being a place to keep a careful eye on is not. It's not as though people thought Iran was nice and cuddly before Bush came along, they've been on our bad side for a while and we on theirs. This is why your Sweden comparison falls flat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Depends on what you mean by "bullshit associated with it." Iran having a nuclear program is a recent scare tactic, but Iran not being our buddy and generally being a place to keep a careful eye on is not. It's not as though people thought Iran was nice and cuddly before Bush came along, they've been on our bad side for a while and we on theirs. This is why your Sweden comparison falls flat.

---

Alright, I have a better one. If it ran over the wire that Syria had launched nuclear missiles, do you think there would be the same panic? I certainly don't, because no one has ever talked about a Syrian nuclear program. There has been painting of Syria as being run by a madman. Sure, Iran was our enemy prior to nuclear program story, but they were essentially ignored. Now though, when you say Iran and nuclear people get afraid, irrationally afraid. Why? Not because of a CNBC flub, but because of the Bush administration's propaganda.

1994
Although the Clinton administration has called for a total embargo of nuclear technology on Iran, China and Russia agree to sell nuclear facilities to Iran in 1994, while other nations such as Japan and Germany continue to sell Iran high-tech dual-use technology. Israel is concerned that Iran may acquire key nuclear components from the former Soviet Union, thus shortening the predicted eight to ten years Iran is expected to need to be able to produce nuclear weapons.
—Leonard Spector, "'Islamic Bomb' West's Long-Term Nightmare," Washington Times, 19 January 1994, p. A19.

January 1994
Italy seizes ultrasound equipment bound for Iran at the port of Bari. The equipment can be used for reactor testing.
—Anthony H. Cordesman, "Iran and Nuclear Weapons: A Working Draft," Center for Strategic and International Studies, 7 February 2000.

4 January 1994
US Undersecretary for International Security Lynn Davis says that Iranian nuclear procurement is "inconsistent with any rational civil nuclear program." The CIA has concluded that Iran's nuclear program is in its "infancy stage," but that Iran could possess nuclear weapons by the year 2000.
—Security Affairs, April-May 1994, p. 3; Jack Kelley, "Nuclear Program in the works/US firms many have helped supply parts," USA Today January 4, 1994; in Lexis-Nexis, <http://www.lexis-nexis.com/>, 13 February 1994.

It's all TEH BUSH's fault. All of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Alright, I have a better one. If it ran over the wire that Syria had launched nuclear missiles, do you think there would be the same panic? I certainly don't, because no one has ever talked about a Syrian nuclear program. There has been painting of Syria as being run by a madman. Sure, Iran was our enemy prior to nuclear program story, but they were essentially ignored. Now though, when you say Iran and nuclear people get afraid, irrationally afraid. Why? Not because of a CNBC flub, but because of the Bush administration's propaganda.

---

Keep digging Gozen, you're almost to the bottom.

To the general public, hearing the words "Middle East" and nuclear generally cause unrest. Don't pretend like it doesn't to defend your performance in this thread. Christ, I had a bad chicken sandwich at lunch today, should I call for the end of the Bush administration for that too?