. . . in Brooklyn, of all places! The only decent flight from Midway (my closest airport) to LaGuardia in NYC (close to the venue) left at 6 a.m. To get it, I decided to get a 4 am Uber to Midway, arriving at 4:30. I set my alarm for 3 a.m.
But I woke up spontaneously at 2 a.m., groggy as hell, and decided to check the news about the U.S. strike on Iran. I didn’t learn much that I didn’t know last night, and of course we don’t know how much damage the bunker busters caused. As expected, Iran threatens retaliation, and I worry that, though U.S. bases and troops in the Middle East are prepared, terrorism will be enacted by Iranian sleeper cells in the U.S.—like the several (failed) assassination attempts on Masih Alinejad.
Back to the trip. I had a religious Uber driver who blasted Jesus music all the way to the airport, but I didn’t have the heart to ask him to turn it down. One thing I learned was that “pop Christian music” uses the word “Jesus” over and over and over again, often drawing it out for many seconds. It is Jesus and not God who is the theme of this music (of course they are said to be identical), but it struck me that a whole genre of music is based on a fictional person.
Midway was extraordinarily crowded at 4:30 in the morning, but I remembered it was Sunday and people were going home. I did manage to find a Dunkin Donuts open in the airport terminal, which was a great relief, providing me with a huge coffee and two donuts. The flight to New York on Southwest Airlines (now much more expensive) was uneventful: I slept during the entire 105-minute flight, and I’m still knackered.
This is boring but I have no brain cells to bloviate about world affairs. Brooklyn is rainy, gray, and not very hot (79º at present, 92º predicted). When I recover from the way-too-early flight, I’ll explore a bit and prepare for the Heterodox Academy Meeting, the reason I’m here. I’m on the panel below with several bigwigs (Wednesday, 12:30-1:50), which is of course intimidating. I’ll do my best:
I have to see the Brooklyn Bridge, which is nearby, as it’s the world’s most beautiful bridge. (I lived in NYC in 1972-1973 when I started grad school at Rockefeller University and then did 13 months of alternative service as a conscientious objector.)
In the meantime, I invite readers to discuss the main topic of the day: the war between Iran and Israel/U.S. I gather from the news that nearly every country has condemned the American attack on Iran, though I think that many secretly approve it. Many Democrats excoriate the action while most Republicans approve of it. I’ve already given my opinion, and now it’s time for readers to express theirs. Feel free to do so in the comments below.
Go for it PCC(E) – power through – …
I’m searching for a good sort of thing to write, but eh – I know that airport feeling – oof.
… maybe think of the duck family, to boost the spirits..
Coffee and Dunkin’ Donuts are always a welcome comfort. Have a good meeting!
I was surprised that the United States dropped 14 bunker-buster bombs, 12 on Fordow and two on Natanz. I expected only two bombs, the number that a B2 can carry. Clearly the U.S. wanted to complete the job in one operation. We’ll see what happens.
I read commentary this morning that the aim of the bombing may have been to destroy the access points to the core of the underground facility, rather than the core itself. If making it inaccessible is as good as destroying it, then the strategic aim would have been accomplished.
I heard a Senator (Kelly of Arizona, I think) say something on the lines of “I could have supported this attack if it had come after a month of further negotiations proved unsucessful, but not now.” That sounded like double-talk. He would have been saying the same thing after the elapse of that further month. If he was really opposed to America taking that action, he should have said so. That would at least have been a truthful statement of his position. Instead, he wanted to have it both ways – not opposed in principle, but never willing to carry out the action. Did he really believe Iran was going to agree during that month to abandon its program to produce a bomb? I doubt it.
You are so right.
This reminds me of the hand-wringing I had been reading—until yesterday—questioning how close Iran really was to a bomb. Was it a matter of days, as some were saying, or many months? The answer? It doesn’t matter. The program needed to be destroyed. Pretty much the same thing here. Negotiations or not, the program needed to be destroyed. Do people really believe that a month of talk would result in Iran carrying through on a negotiated commitment to end its program?
By my count, negotiations have been going on for years.
David McCullough wrote a book about the building of the Brooklyn bridge. It is a rather good book, that I have read (actually listened to). Sadly, many lives were lost in the building of the bridge. Most of the lives were lost from the bends (which was not understood at the time). Interesting enough, the construction manager was probably Emily Roebling. Sadly, the John Roebling died early on, in the building of the bridge and Colonel Washington Roebling was crippled by the bends.
I apologize in advance, for not discussing Iran.
I read that book; it’s excellent!
The same author also wrote a biography of the Wright Brothers. This book is also recommended.
I’m with Sam Harris on the bombing of the Iranian Nuclear sites. He is no friend of Trump but, when he approves of something Trump does, he doesn’t mind saying so. If only more democrats were as intellectually honest…I mean if more democrats were only as intellectually honest…I think.
Writing on Substack Harris says,
“I believe that the decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was both necessary and courageous.”
and concludes,
“… we can only hope that the millions of Iranians who yearn to live in a free, prosperous society will seize this moment to reclaim their country—and return it to the modern world.”
Inshallah!
As seems frequently to be the case, Sam is right on the mark.
I’m so tired of the knee-jerk character of politics these days, with Democrats automatically opposing anything Trump does and Republicans automatically approving. While I am generally anti-war, like someone raised in the Vietnam era tends to be, there are times when one has to look at a bigger picture, and this is one of those times.
I don’t care who undertakes any action or policy, I only care what the action or policy is, and its wisdom when considered with some reasonable level of objectivity. It’s why I think Sam Harris gets things right so often, and it’s also why, with no intention of being obsequious, I enjoy reading Prof. Coyne’s views in these pages.
This hope of Sam’s is naive. This kind of attack will only strengthen their resolve and push them to really build a bomb.
Resolve is important. Actual capability is far more so. At minimum, disabling the sites buys significant time. If during that time some further lawn-mowing seems appropriate to buy more time, that is still much better than the earlier (pre-bombing) situation.
Welcome to my home, boss!
I’m right across the river in Manhattan (maybe you’ve heard of it? Small island off America). hehhee
The conference looks great – perhaps our paths will cross on your trip!
Meanwhile get some sleep. 🙂
best regards and welcome,
D.A.
NYC
For beautiful New York City bridges I’d also suggest Hell Gate Bridge, the main span of a long rail viaduct off Manhattan on the way north to the Hudson River corridor. It’s a little out of the way because all the main rail lines in Manhattan are underground to Grand Central and Penn. Most of the photos of the bridge you see on Google Maps are taken from boats.
The graceful curve of the main arch rings fits in well with the four massive art-nouveau towers that resist the outward thrust that all arches apply (which is what makes arches interesting.) In form it resembles the Bayonne Bridge and the Sydney Harbour Bridge but it is heavier, to tolerate the oscillating loads of heavy steam locomotives on four tracks. It is the longest, heaviest rail arch span in the world. It was second only to the Quebec Bridge (a cantilever) in length for a railway bridge of any design until someone recently managed to make a suspension bridge stiff enough to handle modern lightweight electric passenger trains, which is easier.
The Brooklyn Bridge is nice, too. The first time I saw it, as an adult, I felt a thrill. “Wow. Just like every movie and TV show set in New York, evah!” But Hell Gate says industrial America to me.
Yes Leslie. My favorite comment from friends visiting me here in NYC is “It feels just like a movie!”.
Even I feel that sometimes in Central Park or (the rare times I’m in) Times Square.
For architecture fans this city has it all. Even my corner of it (Chelsea, SW Manhattan) is like an architecture/art museum tour just walking my dog or going downstairs.
And the human element is often hilarious. We put up with a lot of crap and it is horribly expensive but I still “heart” NY!
D.A.
NYC
The key thing in Manhattan is to look up. Not just a yokel gawking, “Jeez, lookit all the tall buildings,” but to see the architectural facades four or five stories above the street. Even the rooftop water cisterns with the reinforcing hoops that get closer together near to the bottom are right out of a movie. (Of course they are!) Ditto the exterior black steel fire escapes, although I don’t know how many of them are left.
Contemporary Christian Music? Totally revolting.
Indeed; that’s why I wanted to ask the guy to turn it down. But I was too cowardly. So I had to listen to “JEEEEEEE-SUS!” sung repeatedly for half an hour.
🎶🎶
“My JEEsus don’t like hanky-panky”
[Repeat, ad nauseam]
Saw some religious music program at my parents’ place years ago. A helmet-haired, gaudily made-up female singer, standing in the dark with a spotlight illuminating just her head and upper torso, eyes closed, head tilted slightly back, whispering, over and over, “Thank you, Jesus…thank you, Jesus…thank you, Jesus.” I commented, to the derision of my parents, “Geez! That could be from a porn movie!”
(“Geez”, of course, being the leading man’s nickname. Not wishing to lower the tone further I am resisting the Muse’s hints of plausible titles for such movies. 🙂)
I have a question about whether Iran ever intended to use nuclear weapons against Israel. I have not found information online that supports that, so I (gag) asked Chat GTP if there is any evidence that they ever planned to nuke Israel. A key detail that it provided was:
Statements Often Misinterpreted
Some inflammatory statements by Iranian officials, particularly about Israel, are sometimes misinterpreted or mistranslated as genocidal threats involving nuclear weapons, but they typically refer to political regime change, not nuclear annihilation.
Conclusion
No, Iran has not officially threatened to use nuclear weapons. However, due to the lack of transparency, past nuclear secrecy, and hostile rhetoric, many countries remain deeply concerned about the potential for nuclear weapon development and use in the future.
Anyway, I have not seen evidence that they ever intended to actually use them, but I also think that there is ample reason to bomb the hell out of their military infrastructure because they are openly providing for proxy wars against Israel. This is good enough reason to end their nuclear ambitions too, since it is best that they don’t have them as a deterrent.
I remember seeing on Bill Maher a Texan republican saying if Iran was happy to use their own 9 yo boys as mobile mine detectors in the field and blind their women for showing a bit of hair then anything and everything is permissible for Iran’s enemies.
Another salient point to consider is that mutual assured destruction would be ignored by Iran as they welcome the opportunity to die for the cause and receive the raptures with the 72 virgin prize. You cannot assume a death cult will make decisions rationally or humanely.
I think it is important to believe when they say “Death to America” or “Death to Israel” they literally do mean it. Nobody needs to see how they will achieve it but only they fervently do want it.
On side note an Australian government spokesman has come out saying we must give peace and negotiations a chance. Neither overt criticism nor support and the PM and Foreign minister have said nothing publicly. Probably too busy finding out what public announcement will get them the most votes.
I agree with you about the nuclear claims, Mark. That is apparently also what US intelligence said in March. Netanyahu has been making false claims about the status of Iran’s nuclear program for 30 years. You can look up his speeches to the UN about this. They are laughably phony. It’s the Bush/Powell Iraq playbook all over again.
The speeches are so ridiculous that they are re-appearing now on late night comedy shows. This is really worth watching, whatever your politics. Netanyahu first appears at timestamp 7:30:
I can also possibly agree that a focused strike against the military might be possibly justified because of the actions of their proxies. However, this is complicated by uncertainty in the degree of coordination between Iran and its proxies, and the ease with which politicians could lie about this (from both sides). I think military responses should be directed against the proxies, and other kinds of punishments should be directed against Iran.
But unfortunately, the US and Israel have now both said that they want to displace the civilian population of Tehran as well. This is not really about the nuke sites, it is about regime change, at least for Israel. The nuke claims, like the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, are just a pretext to affect public opinion. And it seems to be working.
Netanyahu’s assertions that Israel’s goal is to defang Iran and that any ensuing regime change would be a lagniappe are very much more credible than Iran’s assertions that it has not / does not / will not seek a nuclear bomb, which are belied by the undisputed fact that 60%-enriched uranium has exactly one plausible use. (Refining it to highly enriched uranium as fuel for Iranian nuclear-powered submarines is not remotely on the horizon.)
Actually, HEU (way above 60% enrichment) does have some non-military uses. For example, medical radioisotope production. Does Iran have non-military plans for HEU? I doubt it.
Canada is a world leader in medical radioisotope production. It makes them in its CANDU power reactors which use unenriched natural uranium, in particle accelerators, and in the research neutron-source reactor at McMaster University which uses High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium agreed to be < 20% U-235. The Mac reactor once upon a time used highly enriched uranium but like owners of many similar reactors the university transitioned to HALEU to reduce its attraction to nefarious characters.
Canada has no uranium enrichment capacity so McMaster has to buy its uranium from reputable foreign suppliers. Ditto with our foray into small modular reactors which also use HALEU.
https://nuclear.mcmaster.ca/facilities-equipment/facility-list/mcmaster-nuclear-reactor/
This reply is meant for Leslie MacMillan. The Canadian design uses heavy water (deuterium oxide) as a moderator. Roughly stated, Canada succeeded where Germany failed. Heavy water (as a moderator) lets natural Uranium to be used for a chain reaction (super pure graphite can also be used). Iranian production of heavy water would set off alarms around the world. Worse, tritium is a byproduct of using heavy water as a moderator. If Iran used heavy water, they would produce tritium as a byproduct. That would be extremely alarming. Note that Canada produces lots of tritium (and makes sure that is it used for non-military purposes).
Iran does have a heavy-water reactor, Arak. It has never been loaded up with (natural) uranium. Israel bombed it earlier this month because natural uranium reactors produce plutonium using either heavy water (CANDU) or graphite (Manhattan Project) as a moderator to slow the neutrons down enough to allow the U-238 nuclei to catch them. Canada agrees not to attempt to extract plutonium from its spent fuel.
Iran also has a large light-water commercial power reactor, Bushehr, which is IEAE-compliant and hasn’t been attacked this time around. Iraq heavily damaged an earlier version during that war.
Heavy water is benign and inert but very expensive. Canada currently doesn’t produce any heavy water, although it did for a while at two heavily subsidized make-work plants in chronically depressed Cape Breton Island, a politically sensitive backwater that had no chemical or nuclear engineering expertise whatsoever. Both predictably ran out of tax money and failed. A country that started production of D2O would be telegraphing its plans to build natural uranium reactors, which would not be in itself any cause for objection if the country had forthrightly endorsed nuclear non-proliferation….but is suspicious in a country already using light-water, low-enriched uranium reactors for electricity.
As for tritium, in situ production in CANDU heavy water during operation is the sole source for tritium for research purposes (as for laser fusion experiments recently in the news). The heavy water has to be periodically “weeded” of radioactive tritium. This is a dead end of enquiry because once these reactors eventually shut down there will be no more civilian tritium. (The United States independently sources the tritium it uses to boost fission (with a brief pulse of fusion) in the imploded primaries of its nuclear weapons. Tritium is not essential to nuclear weapons, though. As a pure gaseous radiological terror weapon I suppose it could be dangerous…but enormously expensive.
https://apnews.com/article/arak-heavy-water-reactor-iran-israel-airstrikes-628381fb9b0706bacac8a1b8820b1cf3#
Unfortunately much of what we ordinary folks, even the ones with technical interest in it, think about Iran’s nuclear program has to be based on conjecture about the regime’s true motives. Enriching hundreds of pounds of uranium to 60%, while always shouting “Death to America! Death to the Jews!” says a lot. Even if “death!” is interpreted theologically across the language barrier as “salvation!”, I’ll take my chances on eternal damnation, thanks.
I do hear what Lou Jost is saying. Fundamentally this comes down to what executives of states decide to do in their foreign policy, which their own citizens have almost no input into. Not so much different from when Kings made it on the secret advice of their ministers. Kings had to worry about regicide and usurpation, Presidents about impeachment and losing a bid for a second term, Prime Ministers about losing the confidence of Parliament. Of the three, Parliament has the most leverage because the psychological barrier to action is lowest.
I am not arguing that Iran has not taken steps to build a bomb; just that there is not much evidence that they are close. I am showing that Netanyahu has been crying wolf about this for decades, and regime change by force is in fact his goal, not lagniappe.
I am trying to put myself in the place of an Israeli.
Imagine that you live in a country, surrounded by enemies, and one rather powerful neighbor in particular has been calling for the violent destruction of your country ever since its inception. They fund and help train proxy militias to attack your people, and those militias regularly launch missiles into your population without regard to civilian versus government targets. Members of these militias and their greater population, have repeatedly called for the murder of every single individual with your national identity. They even put it into writing as a formal goal.
Of course your countries leaders and military can (and should) fight back against those that directly attack you. But more-so, I think you definitely can strike back at the military and leaders of that other nation that supplies those militias. Let them act all surprised and hurt, and exclaim “why are you attacking me??“. Yeah, right.
And then imagine that powerful nation is building nuclear weapons. Now they never say they intend to use them on you, in fact, it’s pretty clear that this enemy intends to still be around when your people are annihilated so… probably they intend to use them as a deterrent, and to never actually use them. Hypothetically, they could hand them over to those militias… that is a thought. Anyway, yes, those facilities for developing nukes have gotta go!
Welcome to my neck of the woods! Be prepared for record-breaking temperatures through Wednesday.
It is hard to believe that the Brooklyn Bridge is over 150 years old. What an engineering marvel.
As far as the Iran bombing, I think it is more about Trump trying to shed the TACO label than anything else. Psychopathic narcissist that he is. I hope it works out, but I am cautiously optimistic.
I just saw that Iran has voted to close/blockade Hormuz. They may not be in much position to enforce that after Israeli degradation of their air forces, altho it would be in Russia’s interest to help them since higher oil prices would help Russia.
Did anyone believe for even a single second that B2s were headed for Guam?
I think any hope for internally driven regime change in Iran is dead for now. Remember the unification of almost all factions in the USA after 9/11.
In 1983 my dad and I went to the Centennial fireworks celebration for the beautiful and historic Brooklyn bridge. We had to go quite a few hours early to get a good perch on the FDR (shut down for the show) and took turns holding a place at the rail over those hours. It was the most spectacular fireworks show I’ve ever seen.
I heard a few anonymous Iranians in interviews on NPR today who were happy about the attacks. But (surprise!) nobody on camera on the street in Tehran was happy. I’d need to watch it again to try to judge how indignant they were, tho. It seemed surprising that a Western reporter could seemingly genuinely walk freely on the street there, tho, which may also say something.
Also, Israel’s strikes could not have been so devastating if Mossad hadn’t had many sources embedded there, which also suggests considerable hidden opposition to the regime.
I expect opinions in Iran will vary. Some, especially people in larger cities who have education and some connections to the outside, could be genuinely hopeful for regime change (unfortunately they will probably be disappointed unless they attempt it themselves). But I think the greater population in the countryside are far more conservative.
Your trip story reminds me of an experience I had years ago. When I finished my Peace Corps gig in Africa, I decided to backpack home via Asia. My first stop was a few days in Bombay, then an Air India fight to Bangkok. Upon arrival well past midnight, I find they’ve lost my luggage, and given the hour I stay at the airport, trying to nap at a table, then bleary-eyed I haggle with the airline people about my bag, and they throw me a bit of cash to buy some new clothes while they wait to see if arrives the next day. So I make my way downtown, upset and exhausted, and wander around for a while, finally finding my way to a lovely temple in the midst of several back alleys. After sitting a while I left through another door to find myself in a Dunkin Donuts. After 2 years in the Peace Corps mostly drinking tea because the coffee was so bad, I suddenly find myself taking in that unique Dunkin smell of coffee and donuts, and almost cried from how wonderful it was; I knew I’d be okay. I don’t eat donuts all that much anymore, but I always smile now when I see a Dunkin Donuts. As for Iran, they’ve been an existential threat to Israel and the US for decades now, and their funding of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah and god knows who else has caused nothing but instability and destruction across the middle east. I’m no Trump fan, but I’m glad the US finally took some action, as it’s clear the rest of the world wasn’t going to. And Iranians deserve to live normal lives once and for all.
Here are my guesses on Iran. My guess is that Iran will retaliate by firing missiles at US bases, and not by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Why?
Closing the Strait of Hormuz means all-out war with the US. A war, that Iran is likely to lose. That means (in all likelihood) regime change in Tehran. Something the Ayatollahs want to avoid.
China opposes (probably) the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. China’s oil comes through the straits of Hormuz.
Closing the Strait means no money for Iran.
Saudi Arabia has pipelines that bypass the Strait of Hormuz. Iran doesn’t.
Of course, my crystal ball is cloudy. I didn’t think Trump would ever attack Iran. I was obviously wrong.