Iran like a modern day Nazi Germany: Ex-CIA chief
Source: CNBC
Iran is trying to expand its empire much like Hitler's Germany before World War II, former CIA Director James Woolsey said Monday, citing Tehran's moves to exert its influence in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.
"They are doing it on a highly ideological basis. They never cease chanting 'Death to Israel' and 'Death to the United States,'" Woolsey said in a CNBC "Squawk Box" interview. "They are an imperial power and trying to become more of an imperial power."
Woolsey called for a halt in the six-nation nuclear talks with Iran, which include the U.S. "Given Iran's aggressiveness and the fanaticism of its leaders, I don't think we can do a reasonable deal with them. They'll cheat."
Read more: http://www.cnbc.com/id/102544838
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)I bet this James Woolsey has ties to the defense industry
starroute
(12,977 posts)He's the leading non-Jewish Neocon. He's the person who was spreading Saddam-was-behind-the-anthrax stories in 2001. He's the military-industrial complex's go-to guy.
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Woolsey_James
R. James Woolsey, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) under President Bill Clinton from 1993-1995, is a well-connected advocate of militarist U.S. foreign policies. He has supported the work of several neoconservative-led groups, including the Committee on the Present Danger, the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, the Project for the New American Century, the Center for Security Policy, among numerous others.
Since 2011, Woolsey has chaired the board of directors of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an important bastion of hawkish "pro-Israel" advocacy in the United States that has served as an outpost for many well-known rightist ideologues. Among his activities at FDD has been to support the work of its Energy Security" program, which advocates for the United States to break "break the oil monopoly" that helps prop up "regimes and individuals who fund terrorist activities."
Woolsey is also on the board of advisors of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a spinoff of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and formerly sat on the advisory board of the right-wing Jamestown Foundation.
In addition, Woolsey is a frequent consultant and advisor to private businesses, as well as government boards and panels. A former vice president of Booz Allen Hamilton, a Pentagon contractor, and partner at the high-profile D.C. law firm Shea and Gardner, Woolsey's experience includes serving as chair of his firm Woolsey Partners, serving as venture partner and senior advisor to VantagePoint Venture Partners, chairing an advisory group of the private equity fund Paladin Capital Group, and serving as counsel to the law firm Goodwin Procter.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/R._James_Woolsey,_Jr.
When James Woolsey, the former C.I.A. director and current Pentagon adviser, appeared on "Nightline" five days after 9/11 and suggested that America had to strike Iraq for sponsoring terrorism, Ted Koppel rebutted: "Nobody right now is suggesting that Iraq had anything to do with this. In fact, quite the contrary."
Mr. Woolsey replied: "I don't think it matters. I don't think it matters."
karynnj
(59,504 posts)"I don't think it matters" says it all in that context.
One thing that is very interesting is the way the neo con/rw/Netanyahu have all moved from - "you have to get a better deal" - to " No deal is good - they will cheat" - to "you should not even be negotiating with them.
In addition to Woolsey on the idea that even negotiating is wrong, there were Netanyahu's comments today:
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attacked the United States and other world powers participating in the Lausanne talks on Monday, saying that they are awarding Iran a prize for its aggression.
"The emerging agreement in Lausanne sends a message that there is no price to pay for aggression - on the contrary, Iran gets a prize for its aggression," Netanyahu said.
"Moderate, responsible countries in the region, primarily Israel but other countries as well, will be the first to be harmed by this agreement," he added.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.649592
Obama/Kerry have been moving against the long prevailing neo con policies. I would assume neither are surprised at the neocons and their supporters coming out of the woodwork to try to sabotage the international effort. This is an incredibly brave move on their part and their is a huge amount of hate being thrown at both.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Compare that with the legions of government lawyers committed to drawing up and enforcing various Iran sanctions. There is a complete asymmetry to the manifest terrorist threats and damages to the US from the Saudi-led and financed Sunni Jihadi militias -- including al Qaeda and ISIS -- versus Iranian-backed groups in the region.
The following is from a page linked to the FDD Energy Security" program, which advocates for the United States to break "break the oil monopoly" that helps prop up "regimes and individuals who fund terrorist activities."
Yet, as we see, despite the recognition that Saudi-backed terrorism has carried out the vast majority of terrorist attacks against the west in recent decades, US counter-terrorism efforts are very much one-sided against Iran.
http://henryjacksonsociety.org/2010/01/26/terror-finance-and-the-transatlantic-relationship/
with
Jonathan Schanzer
January 26, 2010
By kind invitation of Ben Wallace MP, the Henry Jackson Society was pleased to be able to host a discussion with Jonathan Schanzer, a former counterterrorism analyst for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis at the US Department of the Treasury. Mr Schanzer explained how terror finance is a critical component of terrorism and one that needs to be countered as much as terrorist ideology before offering remarks on the differences in approach between the Bush and Obama administrations as well as the US and the UK, identifying opportunities, successes and areas requiring improvement. Below is a transcript of the event on January 26, 2010.
Transcript
[ . . . ]
Saudi Arabia is another huge area of concern, and I am greatly frustrated with the efforts that United States has made to curb the financing of terrorism from Saudi Arabia. The lack of action is for one simple reason: we have a very strong alliance with Saudi Arabia over oil. There has been recognition within the United Sates that this needs to come to an end at some point. There are a number of movements that have started in the US that have devoted themselves to ending American dependence on oil and encouraging the development of the electric car or biofuels that might propel us away from gasoline. This is going to be necessary if we are going to rid ourselves of the oil problem which continues to finance terrorism. Every time we fill up a tank anywhere in the world, a portion of that that money goes to Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia, in turn, exports that through the propagation of Wahhabism, the radical interpretation of Sunni Islam.
Saudi Arabia has seen that some of this has come back to haunt the country. For example, there was a sharp drop off in the financing of the Hamas organisation after 2003. That was the year that a group by the name of al Qaeda of the Arabia Peninsula, the same group that was responsible for the ‘Christmas Day Bomber’ of last year, was carrying out attacks against the Saudi regime. The Saudis had been financing terrorism around the world and they began to realise that if you export it, there is going to be an element of it at home. Although the Saudis have curbed funding, it has not stopped entirely.
Three quarters of the mosque network across the United States is funded by Saudi Arabia, and many of them will teach a radical version of Islam that is antithetical to western ideals. They teach that Islam is the last, best, and only religion, and that westerners and Christians are infidels. That is unacceptable; it is a xenophobic interpretation of the faith.
How does one confront Saudi Arabia? Washington continues to weigh these challenges of needing a steady flow of affordable oil with the fact that, every once in a while, another terrorist attack arises from Saudi training, and that the majority of conflicts in the region have some Saudi footprint. I found it frustrating that we did not have ten people working full time on Saudia Arabia in the Treasury Department. It is political sensitivities that ultimately trump what I think is a matter of life and death. Saudi Arabia is going to be the lynch pin for most of the terror financing issues, and that will come down to ending our dependence on oil, and finding a way of no longer using petroleum to fund our economy. (bold and italics added)
Nihil
(13,508 posts)
sabbat hunter
(6,834 posts)it was necessary to point out he is not jewish? What is the difference if he is a jewish neo con, a non-jewish neo-con, or a believer in the flying spaghetti monster neo-con?
starroute
(12,977 posts)On one side, it's cited as proof that Neoconservatism isn't just a philosophical cover for being pro-Israel but is a coherent intellectual position. On the other, as an indication that the Israel Lobby and the military-industrial complex are allied in pushing for war. But either way, Woolsey is the name that comes up most often.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)CNBC, willing puppet of war, good for business.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)GFY, Jimbo.
LuvNewcastle
(16,855 posts)Saudi Arabia and Israel, I don't see how we can say shit to Iran about exerting its influence in the Mideast. That's not even counting how personally hypocritical it would be. American Exceptionalism is bullshit.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)They have the support and assistance of Russia and China...and that's pretty fucking scarey.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)If you were in Iran or Russia you might view the US as a scary country, I live here and I certainly do. I see it more as protecting each other & their interests. I really don't see China as scary at all, more likely if they're involved it is usually over economic issues & Iran has a lot of oil.
What is more troubling & Iran shares this ally is they both support & aid world class human rights violator Assad, but in Russia's case I didn't see it as all bad. You don't need chemical weapons to make a case against Assad but for some reason the US loves to talk about chemical weapons when getting rid of a bad guy so Kerry's joke more like I believe it when I see it Russia swooped in and got Assad to get rid of the chemical weapons which hurt the US case for war
asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)is read his bio..supported "OK Sharia Law legislation"..all that education - what a waste....he joined Frank Gaffney (ugh ugh ugh) in writing a book...Sharia - the threat to America...
Excuse me - Woolsey doth pull wool over our eyes....and reaps the monetary benefit of waging war....
White man greed!
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)When I think about all the analysis I listened to on CNBC - because - admittedly so, I was stupid...never again - my mantra - "trust but verify" - I research the smallest bit of info to a fault...
Larry Engels
(387 posts)Within hours of the September 11 attacks, Woolsey appeared on television suggesting Iraqi complicity. In September 2002, as Congress was deliberating authorizing President Bush to use force against Iraq, Woolsey told the Wall Street Journal that he believed that Iraq was also connected to the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building and the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._James_Woolsey,_Jr.#Iraq
bananas
(27,509 posts)Longer excerpt at http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016118710
What to Worry About in an Iran Nuclear Deal
A good deal makes the Middle East a safer place. A bad one makes matters worse. Here are some issues to keep in mind if nuclear talks lead to a provisional agreement.
JEFFREY GOLDBERG MAR 29 2015, 4:29 PM ET
<snip>
The more extreme positions on both sides are distasteful. The Pollyannas who not only seem to believe that Iran should be allowed to maintain an advanced nuclear infrastructure if it promises to behave nicely, but who also believe that this nuclear accord will somehow serve to convince the Iranians to moderate their approach to their neighbors and, for instance, stop sponsoring terrorism and murdering large numbers of people in Syria (among other places), are dangerous and naïve. On the other side, those who argue that no negotiated settlement will ever be good enough to keep Iran from the nuclear threshold—that only military action would guarantee an end to the Iranian nuclear program—believe that it is wise to start an actual war now in order to prevent a theoretical one later. If you believe that we are living in 1938, and that Israel, and the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia are playing the role of Czechoslovakia, then I suppose this position makes sense. I don’t think we are there, however.
<snip>
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)
project_bluebook
(411 posts)must have over imbibed during the LSD experiments of the 60's.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)that what we were doing when W started these wars (and in fact long before that)? Isn't that what ISIS is trying to do? We are definitely the pot calling the kettle black. Had we not tried to exert our influence over the ME after 9/11 we would not have any of this problem. As to being like Hitler - who has killed the most people in the ME in the last years?
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Please tell me how Saudi-Arabia is reasonable and can be trusted.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)...
Yet despite that history and the legacy it has left, I think Iraq and the coalition forces are making considerable progress against the Islamic State. In fact, I would argue that the foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by — and some guided by — Iran.
...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/03/20/petraeus-the-islamic-state-isnt-our-biggest-problem-in-iraq/
MisterP
(23,730 posts)we may be ready for another Orwellian pivot--and the barflies cheering the Qataris and Arabians shooting Qaddafi and wanting Assad next '11, and then hoping the Warthogs light up ISIS in '14, will be whooping it up as AQAP bombs Shiite mosques in Yemen and Iran next year (or maybe we'll just invade Saudi Israelia and be done with it)
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)· Pentagon admits one of 28 loads missing and blames wind
The Pentagon admitted on Wednesday that one of the airdrops of weapons intended for Kurds in the besieged Syrian town of Kobani almost certainly ended up in the hands of the Islamic State (Isis) fighters.
The Pentagon blamed the wind for possibly blowing the supplies off course and argued that one cache was not enough to make a significant difference to Isis.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/22/isis-us-airdrop-weapons-pentagon
(IraqiNews.com) On Saturday, the Security Committee in the Council of Salahuddin province revealed that unidentified aircrafts dropped weapons and equipment for ISIS southeast of Tikrit, indicating that there are countries that want to keep Iraq under the ISIS occupation.
Committee Chairman Jassim Al Jabara said in an interview for IraqiNews.com , “Our sources of intelligence received reports that unidentified aircrafts dropped weapons and munitions to the ISIS organization near Dour district (25 km south-east of Tikrit).”
Jabara added “This is not the first time ; an unknown aircraft dropped weapons and munitions to ISIS in Yathrib area south of Tikrit, several areas in Salahuddin, and in Mosul,” adding that, “We do not know to which source those aircrafts belong yet.”
Jabara continued, “There are countries that seek to keep Iraq under the ISIS occupation, and want to keep terrorism in Iraq by perpetuating the war through the fuel prices, and by providing terrorists with weapons and gear, after the victories achieved by security forces and the people,” pointing out that, “Our battle continues and its goal is victory.”
http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/urgent-unknown-planes-airdrop-weapons-isis-southeast-tikrit
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/30/us-denies-drone-strike-tikrit-killed-two-iranian-military-advisers
As one well-informed individual told me, “This (is) bad news. They really think the U.S. drops ISIS weapons, and they may start shooting these helicopters down.” Though some commentators assert that Iran’s desire for a favorable nuclear deal means it wouldn’t shoot down a U.S. helicopter, that’s a risky gamble. Like a vulture, Iran is always stalking its enemies, and it might gamble that its Shia militias offer plausible deniability vis-à-vis potential U.S. retaliation. But as the U.S. considers arming the Sunni tribes of western Iraq and eastern Syria, and the U.S. military increases its supply and support missions to Iraqi forces, this threat is likely to grow. Correspondingly, President Obama should warn Tehran that if U.S. personnel are killed by Iran-supported militias, the U.S. will retaliate directly. Simply hoping for the best is folly.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414221/iran-us-supports-isis-tom-rogan
MisterP
(23,730 posts)but, seriously, I've read these people's once-secret notes at the Reagan Library: there's some neocon conspirators (Cheney, Wolfie, Negroponte), some who just like to watch things bleed (Ollie), but the rest of the desk agents don't think more than 3-6 months ahead every time some crisis the US caused comes up: the field agents are even shorter-term, just confident in their ability to pull strings and "know the locals"
and in the long run CIA ops just end up backfiring: we give the Shah an auto-coup and get a wave of hatred (and the oil's out of our sphere of influence); we overthrow Arbenz and the successor gets shot by another colonel (and United Fruit gets sued bigtime); we mine Nicaragua and say Ortega's damaging its import/export and told him to stop mining the area; we spring Gallardo and Matta from jail and buy gigagrams of coke from them, then wonder where this cartel problem's coming from (oh, and tell Ortega to stop running drugs); we demand ultrareactionary Islamism rise in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Arabia, and then wonder where reactionaries are coming from; we dump money into Abdullah Yusuf Azzam and then get shocked when his buddy starts taking his beliefs seriously and blows a lot up; we demand even more ultraconservative Islamism rise in Libya and Syria and the Khaleej and then get shocked a second time
soon we'll just cut the lead time down to zero and back all sides of all fights at once
that'll bring peace
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)"So for the United States, only looking for puppet officials and client states is not how you can serve the interests of your country. You are the greatest power in the world now; you have too many things to disseminate around the world: knowledge, innovation, IT, with its positive repercussions. How can you be the best in these fields yet the worst in the political field? This is a contradiction. That is what I think the American people should analyze and question. Why do you fail in every war? You can create war, you can create problems, but you cannot solve any problem."
And what, from Assad's perspective, would a better Middle East strategy and a policy toward Syria look like?
"One that preserves stability in the Middle East," Assad said. "Syria is the heart of the Middle East. Everybody knows that. If the Middle East is sick, the whole world will be unstable. In 1991, when we started the peace process, we had a lot of hope. Now, after more than 20 years, things are not at square one; they’re much below that square. So the policy should be to help peace in the region, to fight terrorism, to promote secularism, to support this area economically, to help upgrade the mind and society, like you did in your country. That is the supposed mission of the United States, not to launch wars. Launching war doesn’t make you a great power."
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/03/30/syrias-president-assad-us-airstrikes-recruiting-bonanza-isis
sinkingfeeling
(51,470 posts)the whole world?
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)a 1930s Germany, shortly before the Reichstag fire, people look at me like *I* am crazy!
jalan48
(13,881 posts)
americannightmare
(322 posts)is that it took them this long to pull that fetid turd out of their asses!
swilton
(5,069 posts)Name one country that Isn't like Nazi Germany......
....I'll give you a hint!!!
USA! USA! USA! USA!
bemildred
(90,061 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)You'd think I would've run across this at some point. 
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)James Woolsey: Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind (John Taylor 1-14-2008 AntiWar.com post)
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/jtaylor.php?articleid=12208
Robert James Woolsey Jr (SourceWatch entry)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/R._James_Woolsey
James Woolsey (RightWeb page)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Woolsey_James
What about all those PAPERCLIP Nazis that were given identities and employment in the US intelligence community, and some of their offspring are still going strong generations later???
closeupready
(29,503 posts)they, instead, are busy chanting "Death to Israel" nonstop; nobody is going to school, nobody is driving cars, nobody is changing diapers.
Brother. 
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)How many people would negotiate and trust someone that constantly says "Death to you and your family"?
Playground bullies don't need thermonuclear devices.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)That horse has gone and the people making the most noise about Iran are the biggest bullies
on the playground - both armed with too many thermonuclear devices and being driven by
outright Nazis.
Darb
(2,807 posts)Just saying someone says something doesn't make it true or widely held.
Woolsey is a neo-con hack and toadie for the MIC.
roamer65
(36,747 posts)
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...killing hundreds of thousands and destabilizing the region.
