Oops: Pentagon history mistakes Iran for Iraq
"Do you think it would be a good idea if one of them changed their name to make it very different sounding from the other one?" he asked Secretary Baker.
"Ain't there a real danger that someone give like a message over the radio to one of them fighter pilots whatever saying bomb 'Ira...' and the geezer don't hear it properly and bomb Iran rather than Iraq?"
"No danger," Secretary Baker gamely replied.
In an official history published on its web site, however, the Defense Intelligence Agency really has confused Iran and Iraq.
Among the"world crises" that transpired during the 1980s, the DIA history cites"an Israeli F-16 raid to destroy an Iranian nuclear reactor."
See"Defense Intelligence Agency: A Brief History" (originally published in 1997) at page 14:
But there never was an Israeli attack on an Iranian nuclear reactor.
Rather,"The description appears to match Israel's raid on Iraq's [Osirak] nuclear reactor" in 1981, observed Gideon Remez, an Israeli scholar who is co-author of the recent book Foxbats Over Dimona (Yale, 2007).
"Today's preoccupation with Iran's nuclear program seems to have been projected onto the events of 27 years ago," Mr. Remez suggested this week in an email message to DIA public affairs.
"If that is indeed the case, I'd recommend a correction," he wrote.
comments powered by Disqus
- 'Sexist' Paris streets renamed in the name of feminism
- NYT profiles a path-breaking transgender pioneer who became a judge
- CIA Plans Huge Release of Top-Secret Reports From the 1960s
- South Dakota drops history as a high school requirement
- The Forgotten History Of 'Violent Displacement' That Helped Create The National Parks
- Historian author Antony Beevor says his new World War 2 book may anger Americans
- Ron Radosh and Allis Radosh plan to defend Warren Harding in a new book
- Historians tackle America’s mass incarceration problem
- Report: Russian studies in crisis
- Ken Burns: Donald Trump’s birtherism — a “politer way of saying the ‘N-word'” — proves America isn’t remotely “post-racial”