drewkitty | the coming Iran war

Iraq/n bumper sticker

The Bush administration has launched a "significant escalation" of covert operations in Iran, sending U.S. commandos to spy on the country's nuclear facilities and undermine the Islamic republic's government, journalist Seymour Hersh said Sunday.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/29/us.iran/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

drewkitty says:

That the Bush administration will do its best to start a war with Iran before Bush leaves office is inevitable. For one thing, I am owed a steak dinner if it happens.

I've seen this coming since 2006, particularly after this article in the New Yorker.

Based on this latest CNN article, we are now in the final planning stages. Note that many of the Iranian facilities we are most interested in destroying are too difficult to destroy with air strikes. The U.S. will need to use Special Operations units on the ground, for the lesser targets to lase them, for the greater targets to destroy them directly (and probably not get out afterwards).

When the war starts, the billion-dollar question will be whether the Iranians are successful in interdicting the Straits of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world's oil now passes, and for how long. One rumored plan for this is here.

The active or passive cooperation of Russia and China would be the margin of victory or defeat, especially with access to space reconnaissance which the Iranians would not otherwise have. If the Russians or Chinese went so far as to provide logistics support to the Iranians, the situation could become extremely messy.

Certainly the Iranians have large numbers of mines and speedboats. They have some modern aircraft, sophisticated cruise missiles, and attack submarines. In the face of an offensive war, it seems likely that chemical weapons would be used, against which merchant shipping has no defense.

There is no question of 'regime change' in Iran. The Persian people will resist armed attack and invasion. Any attempt at occupation would be horrifyingly expensive and we simply do not have the troops. The likelihood of terrorist acts against Americans abroad and at home approaches unity.

Is this the legacy we should leave to our next President? Bush clearly thinks so.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/news-desk/2008/3/11/6-signs-the-us-may-be-headed-for-war-in-iran.html

1. Fallon's resignation [in protest? after this article in Esquire? also a official denial]
2. Vice President Cheney's peace trip [to negotiate with key allies as before the last war]
3. Israeli airstrike on Syria [preemptive strike to take out east-looking radar coverage?]
4. Warships off Lebanon [missile defense for Israel]
5. Israeli comments [about 'not going it alone' against Iran]
6. Israel's war with Hezbollah [an Iranian ally]

(fiction) http://www.rense.com/general69/dayone.htm Day One - The War With Iran

(not fiction, sadly enough) http://www.mytroops.com/blog/ralph-peters-12-myths-21st-century-war-american-legion/

12 Myths of 21st-Century War By Ralph Peters

Myth No. 1: War doesn’t change anything.
Myth No. 2: Victory is impossible today.
Myth No. 3: Insurgencies can never be defeated.
Myth No. 4: There’s no military solution; only negotiations can solve our problems.
Myth No. 5: When we fight back, we only provoke our enemies.
Myth No. 6: Killing terrorists only turns them into martyrs.
Myth No. 7: If we fight as fiercely as our enemies, we’re no better than them.
Myth No. 8: The United States is more hated today than ever before.
Myth No. 9: Our invasion of Iraq created our terrorist problems.
Myth No. 10: If we just leave, the Iraqis will patch up their differences on their own.
Myth No. 11: It’s all Israel’s fault. Or the popular Washington corollary: “The Saudis are our friends.”
Myth No. 12: The Middle East’s problems are all America’s fault.

Note that I agree with all of these as myths. I simply come to radically different conclusions, especially with respect to No. 3 and No. 7. Insurgencies can be defeated only with a river of blood we are unwilling to pour. Ruthlessness in a just war is a necessary evil; ruthlessness in an unjust war is as morally indefensible as the war itself.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Not hard to believe that these two idiots would actually go forward with a strike on Iran. Unfortunately they are less than poor students of history..when was the last time any country successfully wage a war on THREE fronts.

Ziggy

It's debatable that Iran is a different front. It's more of a continuation of the current Iraq front, given the Iran Insurgency Support. Still, the real question that is in front is do we really want to declare what will ultimatly end up being a religious and ideal war of Democracy (Or in Bush's case, Christianity?) vs. Islam? That's what it's going to ultimately end up brewing to, in my opinion.

It's a stupid situation, one which a president without a previous legacy might have avoided completely. I honestly am not sure other nations would sit by idle on the Iran question, though. A Nuclear Middle East is something that most super powers can't afford to have happen.

I hate this mess.

There is an enormous difference between Iran choosing to support insurgents in Iraq and thereby providing them logistics and sanctuary, and a main force war between the United States and Iran.

The Islam vs. The World meme has been a concern since the early 70s. We have done everything possible short of bombing Mecca and Medina to help make it so, ranging from our support of the Shah in Iran through the support for both sides in the Iran-Iraq War, increased dependence on OPEC, entanglement with Saddam Hussein and support for the "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan (you know, the same ones we're fighting now), landing Marines in Beirut only to parade them ineffectually and get 400+ of them killed, ad nauseum. Most of this has been under staunch Republican leadership, by the way.

Note that I am not an apologist for fundamentalist Islam. That meme has to go. I'd rather see the Islamic powers mature out of it through economic development and cultural drift, but if we must bury the sharia state under a pile of Arab bodies, so be it.

An invasion of Iran by the United States is the kind of fatal error that causes jihadis to come in their pants thinking about it. For one thing, it brings in all the OPEC powers squarely against the USA. For another, it ties our military up in all sorts of unpleasant ways that keep us from hunting jihadis. For a third, it will at least temporarily wreck the US economy until we go on an actual war footing. Last but not least, it is the most powerful recruitment tool for the world jihad that they dare to imagine.

As for a nuclear Middle East, we had one the moment we helped Israel get the Bomb. Ironically, this form of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) may be all that is keeping the lid on. The Arab powers can trust Israel not to launch an unprovoked first strike -- and can rely absolutely that Israel WILL indulge in absolutely massive, brutal retaliation if Israel is struck first.

the coming Iran war

Iran War......

Re: Iran War......

Re: Iran War......