Slashdot Mirror


Iran War Clock Set At Ten Minutes To Midnight

Hugh Pickens writes "The Atlantic has assembled a high-profile panel of experts, including a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iran, a Senior Vice President at the Council on Foreign Relations, a Deputy Head of the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, and a military correspondent at Haaretz, to periodically estimate the chances of conflict with Iran. The Iran War Clock is not designed to be pro-war or anti-war. Instead, the purpose is to estimate the chances of conflict in the hope of producing a more informed debate. Each panelist makes an individual estimate about the percentage chance of war and we report the average score and based on this number, the Iran War Clock is adjusted so that the hand moves closer to, or further away from, midnight. 'On the one hand, the panelists are highly knowledgeable. On the other hand, there are sufficient members of the panel that any individual error should not have an overly negative effect on the aggregate prediction.' If there is a zero percent chance of war, the clock hand is at 20 minutes to midnight. Each extra 5 percent chance of war moves the hand one minute closer to midnight. 'We're humble about the accuracy of this prediction, which is really a collective "gut-check" feeling. But it may be closer to the truth than the alternative forecasts available.' The panel's first estimate puts the odds of war in the next twelve months at 48 percent, consistent with predictions market Intrade.com, which estimates a 40 percent chance of a U.S./Israeli strike by December 2012."

21 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Brilliant! by nman64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hearing the ticking of a clock and seeing a deadline approaching always has a calming effect!

    I'm sure this will be taken every bit as seriously as the Doomsday Clock.

    1. Re:Brilliant! by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      A symbolic clock is as nourishing to the intellect as photograph of oxygen to a drowning man.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  2. Framing? by Haffner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is possibly the most deliberately confusing way to try to explain our chances of war to anyone. Twenty minutes to midnight means a 0% chance? Why are we restricting a scale designed to have 720 minutes to just 20? This is just designed to scare people (for whatever reason) into thinking war is more probable than it really is. I have no problem with the panel, just the manner in which they displayed their results.

    --
    "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
    1. Re:Framing? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This was my first thought too!

      If there is a zero percent chance of war, the clock hand is at 20 minutes to midnight

      We're basically rigging the system to LOOK like war is inevitable no matter what we do. This sounds like a PR event to get people READY for war more than give a realistic assessment.

      People will see "20-minutes to midnight" and think OMFG!@!@!@!@!11111@@@@@ (internet has changed how people thing)

      If you're used to seeing we're only 20 minutes from war- when war comes it is just because it is a foregone conclusion. No reason to complain to the government... we've been this close all along!

      Using the same scale we're currently at 20 minutes to midnight before Obama personally castrates all men in West Virginia using a switch blade knife... only 20 minutes from midnight folks... it's inevitable- don't fight it.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:Framing? by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't we have a left wing liberal as a president right now?

      You're f-in kidding, right?

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  3. All we are saying..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is give peace a chance.

    1. Re:All we are saying..... by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Eventually, they will ride the peace train long enough to arrive at Nuclearville.

      In Islam, they have a word for this: Hudna. Basically, a call for peace, or temporary cease-fire, when you need to reload. The fact that the religion/culture of this area of the world is taught this concept, and has a word for it, should speak volumes. Bin Laden called for peace when he was being bombed in 2001. Hamas has called for peace when they were attacked by Israel. None of them seriously want peace; just time to reload.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  4. So in other words... by brainzach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The chance of going to war with Iran is a 9.5 based on a scale from 9 to 10.

  5. Can I get that in Libraries of Congress? by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    WTF - a zero chance of war means 11:40pm. Shouldn't that be closer to 12:01 AM? I mean 10 minutes to midnight (when, I presume, we launch the pumpkins and somebody gets caught wearing rags instead of a ball gown) sounds a lot worse when compared to a 24 hours day than to a 20 minute window.

    Threat Level for the day: Chartreuse

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  6. Doesn't seem to be any outrage here by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I assume none of you tech types are actually going to die in Oil War III?

    1. Re:Doesn't seem to be any outrage here by oodaloop · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, it'll be just like the last World War that started when Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility in 1981.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  7. And More Framing? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is possibly the most deliberately confusing way to try to explain our chances of war to anyone. Twenty minutes to midnight means a 0% chance? Why are we restricting a scale designed to have 720 minutes to just 20? This is just designed to scare people (for whatever reason) into thinking war is more probable than it really is. I have no problem with the panel, just the manner in which they displayed their results.

    I thought the same thing. Why not simply say "48% chance of war by December 2012"? Another thing I found quite humorous was that this is titled "The Iran War Clock" which made me think 'damn those war mongering religious fundamentalists' but then when I get to the end of the summary I see they reference a "U.S./Israeli strike" which makes me think 'perhaps this should be called The U.S./Isreali War Clock'? I mean, is this clock about Iran nuking a neighbor or Israel? Or is this clock about the US and Israel tag-teaming on Iran? Or is it a split and, if so, what's that split on the 48%?

    And yet another peculiar thing was that I searched around for the panel's positions and stances of each member in order to understand why this war clock is now at ten minutes and how this is any different than, say, the past twenty years of Iran. It's a coin flip that war will break out by the end of the year? Hasn't this always been sort of the sentiment with Iran? What makes this so different now, specifically?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  8. Further analysis. by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Funny

    'We're humble about the accuracy of this prediction, which is really a collective "gut-check" feeling

    Actually, we asked two guys if there would be a war. One said "yes", the other "no". So we were going to say there was a 50% chance, but then we changed it to 48% because that sounded more scientific.

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  9. Re:Student of American History by alen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    except the US has now been at war for almost 11 years and most people are tired of it and the 5000 or so dead soldiers. there is close to 0 public support for another war

    and the US army isn't ready for it either

  10. Do *not* follow Israel to Masada by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Every Israeli is require to serve in the military (or equivalent public service). And when those soldiers finish basic, they do it on top of Masada. Pretty powerful message. Better to take on the Roman Empire and be completely wiped out than to compromise, even in the slightest.

    If Israel wants to jump off the cliff and start a war, that's their business. If they would rather all die than to compromise with the Palestinians or Iranians in any way, that's their call. Build all the provocative settlements on Palestinian land you like, put up more walls to ghettoize them even more, kill all the Iranian nuclear scientists you like. Keep being pricks all you want.

    But this American doesn't want to follow them off the cliff that they seem DETERMINED to jump off of. I don't want to see my President start World War III out of some foolish bullshit belief that Israel is looking out for ANYONE else but Israel, that we're BFF's. Find another way to get the Jewish vote, Mr. President.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Do *not* follow Israel to Masada by Dan667 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      israel is the drunk girl at the bar that starts fights, but expects you to fight them.

    2. Re:Do *not* follow Israel to Masada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Odd, I'm an Israeli vet and I've never been to Masada as a soldier. Have been to the wailing wall at my end of bootcamp ceremony though.
      What makes you think we Israelis are so suicidal? we wouldn't have made such progress in mere decades if we didn't value life.
      Yes, there is a certain sense of paranoia in us Jews. But you're not paranoid if they are really after you ;-)
      We have to come up with a credible threat against Iran otherwise no sanctions at all would be placed against Iran's insane regime. Obama was falling all over himself trying to approach them when the forged elections and subsequent slaughter of demonstrators forced him to give up that pipe dream. Do you seriously want them to obtain nuclear weapons? Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt (if they don't all starve by then) have made it clear they will join the nuclear club if that happens. How is that in America's interest?
      I think an actual strike on Iran will end badly. Ending that psycho regime via sanctions will be good for everyone.

  11. you cannot have war profiteering by Dan667 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    with out new wars.

  12. Re:Too late by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Iran has been at war with us since the revolution.

    More like America has been at war with Iran since 1953, when the CIA overthrew their popular democratically elected leader for oil profits. Learn some history. The 1979 revolution was payback after years of being under an American puppet leader.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  13. Re:That is one hell of a complicated way of saying by busyqth · · Score: 5, Informative

    They don't speak arabic in Iran.

  14. Re:Ides of March by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Informative

    they have no desire to get nuked

    Fortunately for them Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, just a civilian nuclear energy program. Even Israeli intelligence feels attacking Iran is a bad idea. Though, it'd be real good for the military industrial complex and the financiers.

    I'd like to think we'd go along as a show of support

    Really, we should kill people in far off lands who don't threaten us because some war-mongers are creating propaganda about fake weapons of mass destruction? Didn't we just learn this lesson?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)