Yup, if somebody really attempted it, I’d assume that it was somebody who wanted to destroy Iran. Thank god that we now (almost) have a president who’s smart enough to work that out, and at least give the intelligence services time to investigate before acting.
Was the guy on the radio named John Miller, or John Barron or David Dennison?
Very unlikely. See unlike the current leader of the US, the leaders of Iran actually pay close attention to world politics. They know that Biden is showing an inclination to reinstating the Iran nuclear accord, and that it was Trump who authorized the attack against Soleimani. Which is why they singled him out in their arrest warrant to Interpol.
On the other hand this threat perfectly fits the agenda of a right wing activist who hopes to shut down the electoral vote confirmation, wants to exacerbate anti Muslim sentiment in the US, and has a poor understanding of the US/Iran conflict such that they think that they threat the broadcast is the sort of thing that Iran would actually do.
I’m married to an Iranian woman and I am close with her extended circle of family and friends.
I would assert, quite strongly, that Iranians have a much better sense of perspective on their own government, and on the relationship between the American public generally and the U.S. government, than the inverse. There is no equivalence as implied above.
Right?! I mean Trump did say it was going to be wild today.
I’m going to try to be very careful with what I say here.
I don’t think the threat was an official act by an authorized agent of the Iranian government.
I don’t think that there is enough information right now to do more than take a wild guess on who or why. It’s possible it was an American right-winger who wanted to disrupt the vote count and used a “false flag.” It’s possible it was some who genuinely wants revenge for Soleimani’s death. It’s possible it’s a crank who just wants to sow chaos.
Please note that I was careful in my original post to say “many Iranians”, not “all Iranians” or even “most Iranians.” I did draw an equivalence with American attitudes towards Iran, and I will admit I overstepped there with precision and accuracy in an attempt at brevity and clarity. From everything I know and have read, the average Iranian generally has a more sophisticated and accurate understanding of the U.S. political system than vice versa. But do you really think that every Iranian and Iranian sympathizer really draws a sharp distinction between American presidential administrations? Again, Iran and the U.S. have been involved in a low-intensity conflict that has flared up into quasi-war multiple times since 1979, through seven U.S. presidential administrations, of both parties.
Having said that, I think it’s frankly silly to rule out even the possibility that the threat had exactly the motivations it said it did based on the idea that an Iranian or Iranian sympathizer wouldn’t want to target a vote to install the candidate who defeated Trump.
It’s a joint session of the U.S. Congress, which (in theory, we’ll see if Pence actually shows up) will be attended by the Vice President of the administration that ordered Soleimani’s assassination. I don’t see how you can seriously argue that it’s impossible that an Iranian or Iranian sympathizer would see an attack on that gathering as an opportunity to avenge General Soleimani’s assassination.
Again, I’m not arguing that the threat was actually motivated by genuine anger over General Soleimani’s assassination. I’m just saying the possibility shouldn’t be ruled out out of hand.
As a general matter, joint sessions of Congress held for any reason are the single richest softest target the USA ever offers to its adversaries of whatever stripe.
A successful “decapitating strike” in the argot would profoundly alter the course of history for the USA and who or whatever was deemed to be the culprits. Despite the fact that what remained of the US government would be fully able to manage the nation and also prosecute an appropriate response on a planetary scale.
It’s not surprising that someone for some reason decided to threaten this one. I have to assume most such sessions see an increase in the flux of threats the intelligence community is on top of every day of every year.
The threatening party this time just chose a novel means of sharing the threat with the public. Which strongly suggests their motive is to influence the public, not the government.
I personally doubt an official Iranian government connection. At the same time, all governments contain rogue elements, competing factions, alternate centers of power, etc. Some governments are much more hydra-headed and rogue-ish than others. Could this be something cooked up by elements within the IRGC on its own? Possibly. But not likely IMO.
I stand by my prediction it’s a US-based RW crank.
Most countries are aware of even subtle differences between regimes, whether it’s a democratically-elected regime or if it’s a regime in which there is an outgoing head of state handing over the controls to a hand-picked successor. Iran is acutely aware of the differences between a Biden administration and the potential for more favorable treatment, and the outgoing administration which was determined to coordinate with regional powers to destabilize the region in an attempt to foment revolution against the Ayatollah.
But that aside, Iran is not crazy; they quite frequently engage in provocative behavior for sure, but it’s typically confined to their own neighborhood. The last thing they’d ever want to do is to give the United States a clear and compelling reason to bomb the shit out of it, leaving them to pick up the pieces. That would probably be the end of the Ayatollah’s regime. Iran’s regime does whatever it does for the purposes of self-preservation.
Good summary, as usual, LSL.
To clarify, I could see some members within Iran threatening to hit the Capitol, but like you, I tend to think that they’d be rogue members acting in the minority. But to actually have the balls to try it? No way.
Please see my post #26
If you or anyone else who knows more than I do (zero) about restricted airspace has time for some ignorance busting, I see this map:
And this one:
Most people flying into or out of DCA travel very close to the capitol. But I’m assuming those are highly define routes and any deviation would result in . . . some sort of reaction. But we’re talking seconds(? I don’t have a good sense of speed or distance) away.
I get the distinction you were making. But I don’t think I’m being pedantic - I think I’m disagreeing with you.
Burning a cross in someone’s front yard is clearly different from lynching them. But they are both acts of terrorism.
Osama bin Laden publicly talked about destroying the World Trade Center buildings before al-Qaeda tried to do so unsuccessfully with a car bomb, then successfully with hijacked air liners. The IRA (in)famously frequently announced their bombings before carrying them out.
I don’t think this specific threat is credible, and it’s certainly not same as physically carrying out an attack on the Capitol, but that doesn’t mean it’s not terrorism.
As to whether this threat actually scared anyone, the original title of this thread was “CBS reports Iran plans to attack the Capitol tomorrow.” The original CBS report describes the threat as “chilling”. I obviously don’t know for certain if anyone was actually scared, but it was certainly reported by both CBS and the OP as a scary event.
But that’s also beside the point. I’ve never seen an operational definition of terrorism that included anyone successfully being scared, just that the intent is to inflict terror. I mean, if a campaign of random bombings of public spaces targeting civilians actually increased the resolve of the target population, would you then argue it wasn’t really terrorism?
The TFR over Washington DC is not such a big deal. Anyone flying through it needs to talk to ATC while doing so. That’s it. There’s no great investigation that you are who you say you are, or that your intended route must be the most direct from one side to the other.
Having said that, the proximity of DCA to the Capitol, etc., is useful in that the few miles immediately adjacent to any busy airline airport is already locked down and heavily surveilled just for traffic management and deconfliction purposes. So any airplane heading towards those buildings that’s not part of the expected traffic flow into our out of DCA will be highlighted very quickly.
Where Washington differs from, say, New York which also has airport(s) near downtown, is in the military / Secret Service defensive measures in place to deal with whatever is unwilling to play nice with ATC.
Although the proximity of DCA is in fact a hindrance to the more … kinetic … responses in the military’s ponderous argot. Jets are passing the key buildings by barely 1 minute’s flying time all day every day. Mistakes happen occasionally although I personally have never made that mistake nor personally know anyone who has. Despite these mistakes occurring weekly (?? Total WAG), DC is not littered with the carcasses of shot-down airliners.
So whatever kinetic defensive measures there are are apparently very, very last-ditch. Or asleep at the switch. I have to assume that for a joint session they’ll be augmented and on more of a hair trigger. Fortunately I’m not working today, so if somebody f***s up today, it won’t be me.
I’m envisioning the floor around a bug zapper now. Thanks for the explanations!
I’ve wondered something similar, but about Olympic opening ceremonies. So many heads of state attend such ceremonies that a terrorist act could potentially take out 100+ world leaders all at once. Security must be immense for that.
That scenario is covered a few Tom Clancy novels down the line, in Rainbow Six. The bad guys infiltrate the Olympics dressed as maintenance workers so they can deliver a biological weapon that will infect the crowd (and from there, the whole world).
Who needs an Olympics for that; all we need is a live market in Wuhan and a couple of pangolins.
Too soon?
Leading to the easy conspiracy theory: it was Israel, hoping they could get their best friend, the criminally insane CFSG, to launch a few missiles at their mortal enemy before he heads to … Scotland ?
[I know: Scotland won’t have him. I’m beginning to lose track of his festivity plans for the day he gets evicted]
NB: My gut tells me that this was a big nothing-burger, too.
There are a bunch of events that have multiple world leaders in the same location at once, like a UN General Assembly opening, a G7 or G20 summit, the World Economic Forum in Davos, a Commonwealth meeting, etc. (Looking ahead, I expect the funeral of Elizabeth II to be very well-attended.) The various security services have arrangements to secure such events but I’m sure they’re nervous the whole time.
This is certainly possible, but another possibility is a foreign government other than Iran who wants to destabilize the US. We have credible reports from US intelligence services that such foreign powers have been weaponizing social media to spread dissent. It would be fairly trivial for a foreign power to have made this threat over the airways. One agent in place with the proper sort of radio is all it would take. Virtually any nation state has the resources to pull this off.
So anyone who wants to mess with the US, and wouldn’t be particularly put out if Iran suffers a bit as well, is a candidate.