Holy shiznit! Newsweak link: "Will Iran's *Nuclear* Missile Test Trigger War?"

[KamaAina]

the actual subhead just reads "missile test", but you can see the blatantly misleading link off to the right of any Slate article, like this one:

http://www.slate.com/id/2195178

or on the Top Ten most viewed of the article itself:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/145244/page/1

Now you know as well as I do that Iran doesn't have any nukes, thus no nuclear missiles -- but remember, we're living in a country where something like 40% of the people still think Saddam was responsible for 9/11, while barely one in seven can find Iraq on a map. :dunce:

How long before some poll breathlessly reports that 97% of the 'Murkin peepul think Iran does have nukes? :scared:

Bonus tidbit from the text of the article:

But there appears to be increasing daylight between Washington, which is eager to avoid military action, and Jerusalem, which is reluctantly coming to the conclusion that there may be no choice.

Washington is eager to avoid military action? Then what's with all the saber-rattling? :eyes:

edit: another dunce-cap smilie preceded by a misspelling...

[tekisui]

1. I hear a lot of propaganda heading our way.

The drums for war are approaching.

Little slips like this until we are bombarded with Iran nuke fear mongering.

[gateley]

2. Slick. nt

[bananas]

3. The web page title uses "Nuclear"

It's in the window title and the web page source:

<title>Will Iran's Nuclear Missile Test Trigger War? |
Newsweek Voices - Michael Hirsh | Newsweek.com</title>

[KamaAina]

4. Yup.

but not the actual headline, so's it can't go in LBN or anything like that. :nuke:

edit: more to the point, won't show up on search engines. Sleazeballs.

[C_U_L8R]

5. Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of photoshop

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/in-an-iranian-image-a-missile-too-many/index.html?hp

[Rick Myers]

6. It's gonna get crazy, my friends...

Iran's largest, the Shahib-3 is capable of delievering a one ton warhead out to 1250 miles. But, the Iranians are actually looking at the S-3 as a launch vehicle for sats. I guess you'd call it 'dual-use.' I've seen several articles about this 'missile,' and the consensus is it mirrors the US development of ballistic missiles that lead to sats and manned flight.

I do NOT suggest this thing can be used as a weapon, but lobbing a 2000 pound conventional bomb 1250 miles into Israel doesn't have much strategic value. I suppose there are Bio/Chem warheads that would be much more worrisome.

Finally, detonating a 'bomb' doesn't mean you can weaponize it. Prototype nukes are very large objects...

[gateley]

9. Interesting info.

I know (from listening to Biden on Pakistan) that the "bomb stuff" was in one area, and the delivery system in another. (I'd always assumed it was in one neat unit.) Is that what you mean by weaponizing it?

[whistle]

7. Bush, Cheney and their neocon backers are madness in search of war

[spanone]

8. i'm watching with eyes wide open as the media beats the drum louder and louder