5 thoughts on “Haaretz’s Yossi Melman Served as Stratfor Source – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. i’m no military expert, but there was much reporting on the possible ineffectiveness of multi-ton, aerial bombs against iranian nuclear facilities, and now we’re being told that a couple of israeli and kurdish commandos have crippled the iranian program. something doesn’t add up.

    from ha’artz a few months back:

    “speaking to the Wall Street Journal on Friday, U.S. officials estimated that even the 15-ton bombs would not be powerful to put a full stop to Iran’s nuclear program, either because of some of the facilities’ depth or their newly added fortifications.

    One unnamed officials said Pentagon analysts estimated that currently held conventional bombs would not be effective against Iran’s enrichment plant in Fordo, adding that a tactical nuclear would be the only option if Washington sought to destroy the facility.

    “Once things go into the mountain, then really you have to have something that takes the mountain off,” the official told the Wall Street Journal.

    Speaking of the uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, one official indicated that the U.S.’ MOPs could suffice, adding, however, that “even that is guesswork.”

    so a squad of commandos took ‘the mountain off’ and there were no reports of such activity?

  2. George Friedman, i.e. the other Friedman, is the founder of StratFor. A very impressive mind and an inspirational personal history. Son of Shoah survivors, he went from an Austrian refugee camp to being a multimillionaire and major player in international politics.

    But the dude’s work is no more air tight than Thomas Friedman’s. In 1991 G. Friedman wrote a book that predicted Japan would grow as a naval power and war would erupt between Japan and US.

    Loony toons, and some of these Stratfor Emails are absolutely laughable.

    1. an ‘inspirational personal history’? advising on the use of ‘honey pots’ for political blackmail, and colluding with Goldman Sachs to convert such material into cash, for example, that’s inspirational? sounds like meyer lansky. not inspirational to me at least.

      and how do you follow with this collective non sequitor: “A very impressive mind . . .”, “But the dude’s work is no more airtight than Thomas Friedman’s.” ‘Thomas Friedman’ and ‘impressive mind’ are mutually exclusive descriptions.

    2. You just ain’t trackin’ very well this morning, Marc.

      If you don’t consider rising from a refugee camp to being an alpha-dog in international politics and a multimillionare as impressive, then you’ve lost any sense of objectivity. A person doesn’t have to be a left wing-nut to have an inspirational personal history.

      There is no non sequitur [pls note correct spelling] in saying that a person who has an impressive mind may produce work that is not air tight. None whatsoever.

      The non sequitur comes in your claiming that there was a non sequitur.

      How, pray tell, are the assertions “an impressive mind” and “the dude’s work is no more air tight than Thomas Friedman’s” mutually exclusive?

      Irrespective of whatever problems any of us may have with Thomas Friedman’s positions, for one to say that Friedman does not have an impressive mind is to admit that one is just too dense or too dogmatic to see it.

      Either you are misstating my comments intentionally just to have something to blather on about, or you need another cup of java.

      1. no, denis, there is really nothing impressive about rising from miserable circumstances later to succeed at creating misery for others. i know of people who were brought up in abuse and poverty, yet when they go on to be successful criminals i don’t find their success the least bit impressive. the intelligence milieu that friedman apparently operates in is a net positive for hiim personally but a net negative for the vast majority of the rest of us.

        and, no, no part of tom friedman, his mind or otherwise, is impressive. i have read enough and heard enough to conclude that he is a mediocrity, his writing juvenile, his analysis more often wrong than not. if you believe otherwise, given the volume of his ‘work’ i am certain that you’ll be able to quickly provide a link to some bit of impressive political analysis on friedman’s part. i don’t think it exists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link