ABC News just broke the story:
Mitt Romney and Tom Tancredo reacted immediately:
So there are really two debates here:
Foreign policy – Is the proposed CIA action wise and/or justified?
Journalistic ethics – When a news outlet gets a tip about secret government doings like this, should they publish it or not?
Next.
I don’t know if the plan is wise or justified or not, but I know that they call covert actions “covert actions” for a reason, and that it’s remarkably irresponsible to go leaking classified or secret information.
It probably will accomplish nothing good, but consider that Iran is making progress in its nuclear program faster than was thought possible. Obviously the Admin feels it has to do something. And, thanks to the Iraq occupation, we don’t have the resources to take direct military action.
In this particular instance I agree. No American lives will be put at risk; the CIA will simply have to do what it does knowing the operation – at least, the existence of it – is no longer secret. But are there not situations where reporting a story might indeed put lives at risk?
Why in the world would you think it a good idea that a news agency or individual publish what were admittedly SECRET plans about a COVERT plan being undertaken in the interest of national security?
Whoever knowingly does so should be arrested and tried for treason. As should the people who did the leaking of this information.
But not to run it. This is just an easy means to blast the media for the Republican candidates.
It’s amazing to me how many people forget what people are defending when they are defending America.
Any CIA covert action that is in America’s best interest is done to PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE PRESS TO FREELY PUBLISH WHAT THEY FIND OUT. Without that their operation has no purpose.
As for the scandalization of a few idiots on the right. Who cares?
Bush administration gives permission for covert operations attempting to destabilize Iran.
So?
It’s not news, we’ve been working to destabilize Iran for years, they’ve been trying to manufacture a pretext to topple the Iranian government for a long time. They’ve been courting Iranian opposition leaders. We’ve overthrown past governments of theirs and have been messing with their politics ever since the Revolution.
This simply isn’t news. CIA has spies in Iran! ABC exclusive! Yawn. If it’s news to you, you need to pay more attention to your RSS newsfeeder. Maybe read some foreign press sometimes.
I don’t see any specific details about this operation. If this article gave anything away about anyone then those people were on the verge of discovery anyhow.
A bunch of vague BS about tactics to topple the regime doesn’t exactly count as hurting our national security. It’s irresponsible to leak information to the press if you do it accidentally. If it serves a purpose it’s tactical.
Not everyone agrees with the notion of toppling Iran. From my point of view it would be irresponsible NOT to publish it. I don’t feel any great love for the CIA. I am tired of them overthrowing foreign governments. If a couple of spies get killed as part of this diabolical arrangement, so what? It’s their job, they knew what they were getting into.
If the media runs it, they deserve to be blasted. If it’s a bad thing to leak it, it’s a bad thing to report the leak.
So it’s a good thing to destabilize foreign governments? If my Father rapes the neighbors daughter, would it be irresponsible for me to leak the information to my friend? Would it be irresponsible for him to leak it to the public at large because it might hurt my family?
Is it wise? Um…hell no. Especially if your security leaks like a barrel with no bottom.
Iis it ‘justified’? Depends on what that means. Iran isn’t exactly the cute little puppy we are kicking around in all this. In addition, while I’ve seen no definitive proof, where there is smoke there is probably fire where Iran’s OWN covert OPs are concerned.
No, I think its pretty irresponsible to just rush this kind of thing to the general news. That said, and for all that the Bush Administration is supposed to be the Ultimate Sooper Sekrit Evil Empire, the fault lies in the fact that these folks (or perhaps the myriad political enemies they have made) need to learn to keep their fucking mouths shut about classified operations and subjects.
Sheesh…they are like the fucking Keystone Cops…
-XT
That is not the question. Is falls to our elected leaders to determine what course(s) of action to take regarding national security and what we should or shouldn’t do around the world. It is not the job of a journalist to make those decisions or to undermine the government’s efforts. If we allow journalists to make these decisions, they are subverting our representative democracy. I don’t want these decisions usurped by any member of the press—right or left.
And people wonder how the left gets tagged for being soft on national security…
…
I agree with Lucy.
…
That said, while it’s not a wise thing to do, it’s a fairly appropriate thing to do, and god knows I expected the guv’mint to do it at least six years ago.
… okay, really, I expected various small scale operations towards that end to have been in progress since the Shah got kicked out.
Sometimes. Much cheaper and less dangerous than a war. Of course, such action would be justified only where war would be justified, and I don’t see that here. Iran is not directly threatening the U.S. or any of our allies. (They are meddling in Iraq, but we’re in no position to fault them for that.) In fact, Iran has not fought a war of aggression since the 1979 revolution – nor for centuries before that, AFAIK.
Unless, of course, they wanted it leaked. Unless, of course, they would like to provoke an unprovoked attack by Iran (say, a torpedo boat in the Gulf of Persia…) Which would, maybe, rally the American people to The Leader’s side and make all those pesky problems go away, drowned out by patriotic songs and anthems.
Of course, they would never do something like that, it would be wrong.
Because this is a country we’ve been at odds with for a long time, which a lot of people think we will bomb or invade soon. You don’t think people would be interested to know what the American government is doing there?
Secrecy is generally good for governments, as it lets them do what they think is right without scrutiny. That doesn’t mean government secrecy is good for the public.
And lest you forget, it’s supposed to be the public that determines whether or not the government is doing the right thing. It makes that determination using information it gets via the press.
Oh, I don’t wonder, I know exactly why. Because it works like a charm, to blubber the tears crocodilian about how much they just love, love,* love * Our Heroes while sending them off to kill and die for another exercise in geopolitical masturbation.
They do it because it works.
Not a wise move on W’s part, but what else is new? The US should not be in the business of destabilizing soverign governments in general. In this particular case, Bush is reaping what he sowed. By including them in his infamous “Axis of Evil” speech, he antagonized them. Just how does he expect a nation to react to such talk? Now they’re being difficult. I wonder why. So instead of engaging them diplomatically, and knowing the military is in no position to invade, he wants to use covert action to topple their government.
I give an emphatic “good job” to ABC. If the administration doesn’t want their dirty laundry aired, stop dirtying it.
And don’t give me this crap about the left being soft on national security. It is Bush that has weakened this nation with its incompetence.
So, they’re interested. That doesn’t mean that have a right to know. Being interested is hardly a yardstick for having a right to know.
The fact is that some secrecy is necessary for governments to operate. Or are you of the mind that is not the case? Perhaps we should have let people know about the Normandy invasion. I mean, there certaibnly was a lot of interest about the war.
So, I’ll just ask you point blank: do you think that the government should be able to hold anything in confidence in the interest of national security?
:eek: This appears to imply that there exists something called a “lethal presidential finding”. I’m kind of uneasily wondering what that might be, although I’m not sure I want to know.
The American people are not buying that steaming load any more. They don’t want another war, in Iran or any where else, and any press that exposes plans to do so can only go up in the public estimation. Being tagged with anything by the hawks is a badge of honor, and can only boost support in the general population.