[Changleen]

Kinda interesting article:

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/northamerica/article_1207355.php/Outside_View_If_and_when_Bush_`Iraqs`_Iran

Outside View: If and when Bush 'Iraqs' Iran

WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- A strategic thinker who called all the correct diplomatic and military plays preceding Operation Iraqi Freedom now sees diplomatic failure and air strikes against Iran`s nuclear facilities. The war on Iran, he says, started a year ago when the United States began conducting secret recon missions inside Iran.

Sam Gardiner, 67, has taught strategy at the National War College, Air War College and Naval War College. The retired Air Force colonel recently published as a Century Foundation Report 'The End of the `Summer of Diplomacy`: Assessing the U.S. Military Option on Iran.'

President Bush and his national security council believe seven 'key truths' that eliminate all but the military option, according to Gardiner, who adds his own comments.

1. Iran is developing WMD -- 'that is most likely true.'

2. Iran is ignoring the international community -- 'true.'

3. Iran supports Hezbollah and terrorism -- 'true.'

4. Iran is increasingly inserting itself in Iraq and beginning to get involved in Afghanistan -- 'true.'

5. The people of Iran want a regime change -- 'most likely an exaggeration.'

6. Sanctions are not going to work -- 'most likely true.'

7. You cannot negotiate with these people -- 'not proven.'

Gardiner says when Bush 'Iraqs' Iran, air strikes will not be limited to the country`s widely scattered nuclear facilities, but will also include military air bases (some of them only 15 minutes flying time from Baghdad); air defense command and control; terrorist training camps; chemical facilities; medium-range ballistic missiles; Gulf-threatening assets; submarines; anti-ship missiles; and naval ships, including small, fast minelayers. He reckons 'an attack of relatively high certainty on nuclear targets would require 400 aim points ... 75 of these would require penetrating weapons.' Air target planners believe this can be done after five nights of bombing.

Vice President Dick Cheney is convinced 'if there is even a 1 percent chance of a country passing WMD to a terrorist, the U.S. must act,' Gardiner writes, which means, 'The Bush administration finds itself obliged to reject non-military options.' Israeli pressure on Bush to act before he leaves the White House is also part of the equation, he argues. But the president has a larger agenda than simply retarding Iran`s nuclear ambitions.

Iran`s interference in Iraq is a major source of concern. It continues to supply weapons, funding and training to insurgents as well as militia armies in Iraq. Those who advocate attacking Iran say this justifies U.S. retaliation. But Israel and the Bush administration agree they cannot allow Iran to acquire the knowledge to make a nuclear weapon and that Iran is near 'the point of no return.'

'The case against (Iran`s) regime is so forceful, and so multifaceted,' Gardiner points out, 'that it becomes clear the goal is not simply to do away with the regime`s enrichment program ... but to do away with the regime itself.'

President George W. Bush, writes Gardiner, sees himself like Winston Churchill standing against the appeasers, and 'believes the world will only appreciate him after he leaves office, talks about the Middle East in messianic terms, and is said to have told those close to him that he has got to attack Iran because even if a Republican succeeds him ... he will not have the same freedom of action that Bush enjoys.'

Gardiner reminds us air planners almost always fall short of promises -- e.g., World War II, Korea, Vietnam and more recently Israeli air attacks on Hezbollah. 'No serious expert on Iran believes the argument about enabling a regime change,' he says, and 'it is far more likely such strikes would strengthen the clerical leadership and turn the U.S. into Iran`s permanent enemy.' Which is what President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad prays for five times a day.

Iran`s retaliatory capabilities are both regional and global. Hezbollah is the primary line of counter-attack, with terrorist assets in Europe, Canada, the United States and Latin America. Iraqi militia leader Moqtada al-Sadr has said publicly U.S. forces would be targeted if Iran were attacked. Al-Sadr also controls the large 140,000-strong Facilities Protection Service forces that guard oil pipelines and other strategic objectives.

No sooner than the first U.S. bomb impact in Iran, mines will be sown in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 40 percent of the world`s oil consumption passes daily. Iran also has sleeper cells among Shiite workers in Saudi Arabia`s eastern oil fields. Oil would quickly skyrocket to $200 a barrel.

With prices surging to this level, concludes Gardiner, a 'global synchronized recession, intensified by the existing U.S. trade and fiscal imbalances,' would soon follow.

Syria and Iran signed a mutual defense agreement June 15 under which Syrian forces would be involved if Iran were attacked. Such a crisis could quickly escalate into a regional war.

Unlike the six months of preparations for Operation Desert Field and the deployments that preceded Iraqi Freedom, the Iran buildup will 'not be a major CNN event.' They will take place below the media`s radar screen, such as moving Air Force tankers to staging bases and the movement of additional Navy assets to the region. 'We can expect the number of administration references to Iran to significantly increase,' Gardiner wrote, with four principal themes -- Iran`s nuclear program, terrorism, the threat to Israel`s existence, and the Iran-al Qaida link.

Congressional approval? When Democratic Congressmen offered an amendment to the Defense bill in June that would have required the president to get authorization before taking military action, the amendment failed. A strike on Iran, as seen by the White House, has already been authorized. It`s part of the global war on terrorism. So the strike on Iran could be ordered any time in the next two years.

So will he / won't he?

I've previously thought that even Bush is not deluded enough to try this, but there has been a lot of chatter about it in the press recently.

 

[Westy]

I've come to the conclusion that we need to go back to the stance of absolute war. The cold war seemed much more fun. None of this crap of "if we feel you are a threat we will enter a limited engagement for a long period in with no definate outcome and we will do our best to make sure your people come out of it with a better standard of living". Let's let everyone do whatever the hell they like but if they attack us we will just turn them into a glowing wasteland. Just let everyone know in advance and maybe we could just nuke Texas off the map to let them know we mean business.

 

[bjanga]

is said to have told those close to him that he has got to attack Iran because even if a Republican succeeds him ... he will not have the same freedom of action that Bush enjoys.'

Frightening. I think bush knows Iraq was a mistake, but I wonder if he thinks he can do a better job in Iran.

Along Westy's line of thought, maybe we should get all of this out of the USA's system. Things are not going to be unfcked for a long time.

 

[SofaKingBanned]

Frightening. I think bush knows Iraq was a mistake, but I wonder if he thinks he can do a better job in Iran.

You make it sound like Bush isn't a puppet?

 

[Transcend]

Attacking Iran would be a global disaster. As the general in the above article mentioned, it would basically shut down world wide oil distribution for a short time, as well as cutting off major supply points. Economies world wide would go into a tailspin.

There is no way that outsting one loud mouthed leader with global domination aspirations wopuld be worth it. He has aspirations, but he could be shut down in about 3 seconds should he choose to act on them.

Same goes for Kim Jong Il btw, without the repurcussions. Neither arearen't anything that an all out invasion couldn't take care of in under 7 days. ( A real full scale invasion, not this nonsensical half hearted invasion crap the US favours lately.)

 

[bjanga]

You make it sound like Bush isn't a puppet?

I think that Bush thinks he is not a puppet.

Also, to Bush the economic implications of attacking Iran are offset (somewhat at least) by the religious implications.

 

[Changleen]

Also, to Bush the economic implications of attacking Iran are offset (somewhat at least) by the religious implications.

And that's why he's the biggest threat to world peace and a fvcking sub-moron.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Nobody is going to attack Iran with as badly as crap is going right now. Chrissakes.

 

[blue]

Bush & Co. would be impeached.

Iran should launch a ground invasion of Iraq. Who's got money on the Iranians?

 

[SofaKingBanned]

 

[MudGrrl]

Bush & Co. would be impeached.

patriotic 'mericans don't impeach anyone.

and the rest of us will probably have our rights stripped away so we can't do anything about it.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

patriotic 'mericans don't impeach Republicans.

Fixed it for ya.

 

[balwan]

Kinda interesting article:

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/northamerica/article_1207355.php/Outside_View_If_and_when_Bush_`Iraqs`_Iran

So will he / won't he?

I've previously thought that even Bush is not deluded enough to try this, but there has been a lot of chatter about it in the press recently.

Well folks, get ready for the worst......

http://www.debkafile.org/

Read the sixth story down - Looks like the countdown to war will not be a "major media event" as predicted by the general:

DEBKAfile reports: The American Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group joins US build-up opposite Iran

October 20, 2006, 12:37 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tuesday, Oct. 17, the Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group steamed into the Persian Gulf to join the US naval, air and marine concentration piling up opposite Iran’s shores. It consists of the amphibious transport dock USS Nashville, the guided-missile destroyers USS Cole and USS Bulkeley, the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea, the attack submarine USS Albuquerque, and the dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island.

The Iwo Jima group is now cruising 60 km from Kuwait off Iran’s coast. As DEBKAfile and DEBKA-Net-Weekly reported exclusively two weeks ago, three US naval task forces will be in place opposite Iran in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea by October 21. The other two are the USS Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group and the USS Enterprise Strike Group.

 

[goofy]

Where's the rep button

 

[balwan]

Nobody is going to attack Iran with as badly as crap is going right now. Chrissakes.

Well, the naval buildup off Iran's shores (as referenced above), would suggest otherwise.....

 

[JohnE]

I, for one, as an active duty military member, do not think any of these clowns is "hunky dory." I am just trying to tolerate the bs until retirement, at which time I will move to Cananda, or maybe Aus, or even W. Europe. Or even some tropical island...
Although the way they continue to slash vets benefits, there may be no retirement for any of us soon.
Go Bush! (Go away...)

 

[golgiaparatus]

just nuke Texas off the map to let them know we mean business.

LOL! Is that like breaking your own finger to show someone just how crazy you really are? "DONT 'F' WITH ME..." :SNAP:

 

[ohio]

LOL! Is that like breaking your own finger to show someone just how crazy you really are? "DONT 'F' WITH ME..." :SNAP:

I'd equate it more to excising your own tumor (and cauterizing it with gunpowder, Rambo-style).

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Nobody is going to attack Iran with as badly as crap is going right now. Chrissakes.

you can thank that to dubya.

the cost-oportunity of the iraqui war (in economic/human and strategic terms) is way too high.

even from a machiavelicaly perspective, what a retard to compromise US security by allocating valuable resources to a negligible treath, when the real deal was coming.
now, even if things get worse, there is virtually not much the US can do, as its stretched thin over there, and public support is too low for a new war. unless they attack first or something. W gave away the upper hand and pre-emptive ability for too cheap.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

LOL! Is that like breaking your own finger to show someone just how crazy you really are? "DONT 'F' WITH ME..." :SNAP:

thats actually quite a good technique in certain circles.
say, you are in prison, you´ve got a sharp wire and somebody threatens you with another knife and you are in relative disadvantage.

by displaying some irrationality (like slashing your arm) you send a clear message you arent afraid of pain/death and will fight accordingly..... and if you get to out-irrationalize the other guy, a fight (with a substantial chance of you dying) might not even start.
trading in a 50% chance of death by a 2in shallow cut in your arm is quite a rational good deal.
thats why inmates in the most badass prisions in the 3rd world have their arms full of slashes.

 

[MMike]

thats actually quite a good technique in certain circles.
say, you are in prison, you´ve got a sharp wire and somebody threatens you with another knife and you are in relative disadvantage.

by displaying some irrationality (like slashing your arm) you send a clear message you arent afraid of pain/death and will fight accordingly..... and if you get to out-irrationalize the other guy, a fight (with a substantial chance of you dying) might not even start.
trading in a 50% chance of death by a 2in shallow cut in your arm is quite a rational good deal.
thats why inmates in the most badass prisions in the 3rd world have their arms full of slashes.

Um...how do you know so much about that?

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Um...how do you know so much about that?

because "am from the streets, bitch!".

actually, i read it on a book of statistical analysis of irrelevant stuff.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

because "am from the streets, bitch!".

actually, i read it on a book of statistical analysis of irrelevant stuff.

Read: Alexis has many tattoos on his arms to hide scarring....

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Read: Alexis has many tattoos on his arms to hide scarring....

yes, am tough like that.
chuck norris aint got nothing on me, i´d outslash an emo and freak him out and fatality!. alexis victory.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Outslash an Emo!! LOL!! POTD!

 

[rockwool]

Seems like Hizbollahs succesfull resistance this past summer has impressed most of the Lebanese fractions as they're being armed by Syria. That must mean they are somewhat uniting with Hizbollah and as a country.

http://www.debkafile.org/article.php?aid=1221

 

[blue]

Well, the naval buildup off Iran's shores (as referenced above), would suggest otherwise.....

I wouldn't call that a "naval buildup".

If you said another carrier group and an amphibious carrier group took a trip to the Gulf...