Home > Analysis, media, News, Opinion, politics > U.S. Media Preparing Americans for Invasion of Iran

U.S. Media Preparing Americans for Invasion of Iran

February 20th, 2012 Leave a comment Go to comments

A U.S. or U.S.-backed attack on Iran seems to be a foregone conclusion if we simply look at how the U.S. media covers the issue. FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting) recently had this to report while looking at U.S. media, “Do TV Networks ‘Practice’ for War?

02/13/2012 by Peter Hart
Alexander Cockburn’s latest piece at CounterPunch (2/10/12) included this from a tipster:

I was visiting ABC News the other day to see a friend who works on graphics. When I went to his room, he showed me all the graphics he was making in anticipation of the Israeli attack on Iran; not just maps, but flight patterns, trajectories and 3-D models of U.S. aircraft carrier fleets.

But what was most disturbing–was that ABC, and presumably other networks, have been rehearsing these scenarios for over two weeks, with newscasters and retired generals in front of maps talking about missiles and delivery systems, and at their newsdesks-–the screens are emblazoned with “This Is a Drill” to assure they don’t go out on air (like War of the Worlds).

Then reports of counter-attacks by Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets on Israeli cities–it was mind-numbing. Very disturbing–when pre-visualization becomes real.

Does that kind of thing actually happen? Well, yeah.

CBS “practiced” covering a U.S. bombing of Iraq back in 1998–and the footage was apparently fed to a satellite (L.A. Times2/20/98):

CBS jumped the gun Friday on a possible U.S. attack on Iraq: The network inadvertently transmitted a practice news report via satellite that could be picked up by television stations and viewers with special equipment.

To try out new graphics for combat coverage in the event the U.S. goes forward with the threatened bombing of Iraq, CBS anchor Dan Rather was rehearsing with Pentagon correspondent David Martin over a closed line between CBS‘s New York headquarters and its Washington news bureau. The report was mistakenly sent up to a communications satellite.

More broadly though, Glenn Greenwald has made the case that the major U.S. media are in fact more eager for war than the U.S. government itself:

Many have compared the coordinated propaganda campaign now being disseminated about The Iranian Threat to that which preceded the Iraq War, but there is one notable difference. Whereas the American media in 2002 followed the lead of the U.S. government in beating the war drums against Saddam, they now seem even more eager for war against Iran than the U.S. government itself, which actually appears somewhat reluctant.

What happens to India, a supposed “friend,” for not going along with the Iranian oil embargo? It gets called out like this:

India’s decision to walk out of step with the international community on Iran isn’t just a slap in the face for the U.S. – it raises questions about its ability to lead.

Except this “international community” when one thinks about it actually doesn’t include India, China, Russia, and basically the majority of people on this planet!

As a reader recently commented on the blog, perhaps President Obama would have “no choice” when comes to election time later this year – that he is compelled by Americans to directly attack or to sanction Israel to invade Iran. After all, that’s what a democracy is about isn’t it? If the public wants war, the government better give it.

Below is a segment from Russia Today looking at U.S. media, and unsurprising also concludes cheer-leading for war:

Americans should really think. Is this truly what they want? Is it sustainable that America invade a new country every few years? Wouldn’t those war costs be better spent funding NASA, NSF, and education so Americans are more competitive in our globalized world?

Categories: Analysis, media, News, Opinion, politics Tags: ,
  1. LOLZ
    February 21st, 2012 at 06:56 | #1

    My prediction is that someone will probably complain about this blog saying negative things about the US and not China, again.

    Agreed with the points made here though. The US media has been brain washing people into supporting wars for a while now by giving generally one-sided coverage. People complain about Chinese nationalism but I think Western media perpetuates far more nationalism especially when it comes to wars and military interventions in other nations.

  2. February 21st, 2012 at 09:10 | #2

    Got to agree with you re: news networks pre-planning.
    US middle -eastern foreign policy is run by nutters and lunatics.
    Furthermore, I would classify CNN as a Class A criminal organisation.
    (Not that that lets China off the hook on any number of issues, domestic or fp.)

  3. jxie
    February 21st, 2012 at 10:12 | #3

    An air-raid to take out some Iranian targets by the Israelis is an order of magnitude more difficult than the previous daring ops taking out Syria’s and Iraq’s. First, it’s much further away with a much more difficult terrain to navigate through. Iran’s air defense system is in much worse shape than Russia’s or China’s, but it’s not totally toothless. You have to factor in the possibility of Israeli F15Is and F16Is being shot down by Iran’s S300 missiles. If they do get shot down, what then? Regardless the outcome, if Iran sends a few missiles with conventional bombs to Israel that destroy a few blocks of a couple of Israeli cities as a revenge, will Israel go nuclear?

    The talk is if Iran goes nuclear, it becomes an existential threat to Israel. Well, I’ve got news to you, Israel being a nuclear state, is already an existential threat to Iran, or any other Middle-Eastern Muslim states.

  4. February 21st, 2012 at 13:01 | #4

    greenwald again has excellent pieces in salon about the media’s war efforts. I have concluded that most people in the western media likely do not value human life.

  5. February 22nd, 2012 at 00:56 | #5

    And the same people in the next minute can be championing for “human rights” with a straight face is quite something.

  6. zack
    February 22nd, 2012 at 02:28 | #6

    oh i’m sure they do care about human lives, but only if they’re caucasian lives. They don’t much care for any others though.

  7. February 22nd, 2012 at 19:13 | #7


    Many don’t care for caucasian lives either. Hell many don’t even care for their own lives or the lives of their families. I won’t be surprised if they would send their children off to war without hesitation. Those who don’t value the lives of themselves or their family often do not value the lives of others as well.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.