While We Sleep.....War With Iran Is Being Planned
Check out this CBS report (and video) about supposed Israeli plans to attack Iran. I think there is a very good chance it will happen soon. The Israelis will start by attacking but the US will jump in to help Israel finish the job. As was the case with the UK and France in the Sinai campaign of 1956, the US intervention will be pre-arranged. Or Israel will attack, Iran will respond by hitting our forces in Iraq, and Bush will use that as casus belli.
I hear the one major obstacle to this is the presence of Bob Gates as Secretary of Defense.
He is flatout against any attack by us or by Israel.
Will that be enough to stop the next war? Hopefully it will be because we sure cannot count on Congress -- neither Republicans nor most of our favorite liberal Democrats -- to oppose war with Iran. SEE: See this on Congress and Iran.
This resolution will be on the House floor any day now. Expect overwhelming vote FOR.
And this for some horrific humor. (The humor is unintended).
Comments (30)
MJ, what troops are they planning to use? Seriously, aren't we pretty much out of rested ground forces? Or do they just plan to bomb a lot and hope for the kind of miracle that never happens.
And, uh, we're not out of bombs and planes? Won't a thiord war just crack the military and pretty much necesitate a draft?
June 25, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If anyone is reckless enough to start bombing Iran it would be Bush/Cheney. However, they are hopefully not that dumb."
Oh, but Bush is that dumb and Cheney is that sick.
June 25, 2008 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The above should be in reply to NobleCommentDecider.
June 25, 2008 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's pretty obvious we're not going to invade Iran, if you're following the issue at all. (duh) If anything happens it would be bombing suspected nuclear facilities, much as Israel recently did in Syria.
Which, to be clear, is a very dangerous idea I'd rather see avoided, or perhaps even ruled out entirely. Obviously it's a sticky problem and debated internationally what should be done about an Iranian nuclear program and nuclear proliferation generally.
While it's tempting to bomb Iran to prevent them from going nuclear, it also seems likely they will eventually succeed. What sort of relations will we have over the long term and do we want Iran's government to be more militant and reactionary, or moving towards moderation and resumption of normal ties to the west? If one looks at Iranian history and culture, differences are certainly NOT irreconcilable.
This is foolish brinkmanship and lousy political leadership on both sides.
June 25, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we bombed, in the short term Iran can flood explosives into Iraq or otherwise retaliate asymmetrically. Making Iraq even more unstable and prompting Bush/McCain to argue for continued occupation, indefinitely.
Bush would move more troops to the border and have more cross border skirmishes. That could escalate to the point where we're launching larger scale bombing campaigns against Iran.
Which would be a disaster all around.
Iraq would go to hell.
Global opinion against the US would probably turn even worse as we escalated the war. As we saw from the recent S Korean protests against US beef, prompting the entire government to offer resignations, once global public opinion reaches a tipping point it has very serious consequences for us. I get the feeling we're dangerously near a global cultural tipping point against the US much as what happened to the Soviet Union during the cold war.
***
If for example there were to be more boycotts of US goods and services globally and our economy takes another body blow, in conjunction with populist anti-US sentiment in democratic allies, a global run on the dollar, a permanent move to the Euro, and other economic meltdown scenarios become real possibilities.
Those in the Bush Admin seeing this from a purely military and conventional perspective are playing a very, very dangerous game.
Sure, technically we can bomb Iran into oblivion. But realistically the consequences would be far greater for us due to global fallout, anti-US sentiment, populist outrage against US goods and services, and ultimately terrorism.
June 25, 2008 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kozmik,
Here's another thought;
if Iran gets bombed they send their Army into Iraq to attack our troops. That's the shit that might hit the fan.
June 26, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get real. That's just goofy and a distraction from issues.
Iran obviously won't "invade" Iraq. Iran would never enter into a conventional war with the US military.
The Iranian air force and runways would be quickly destroyed by air strikes and cruise missiles from the two carrier groups in the region.
The remaining regular Iranian army, such as Iranian infantry and armor, would be easily decimated by US planes and gunships if they entered Iraq without air cover. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.
We know that, they know that, most people know that.
June 26, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kozmik,
wow, I wasn't aware the Iranian armed forces were so helpless.
June 26, 2008 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kozmik,
Here's another thought;
if Iran gets bombed they send their Army into Iraq to attack our troops. That's the shit that might hit the fan regarding Iran.
June 26, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Israel needs the US to take out first the anti-aircraft guns so that they can then bomb Iran, so we won't be jumping in to "finish" but we'll be in at the get-go.
June 25, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
It depends on where the (hypothetical) facilities are located and how extensive the bombing would be.
Israel has F-15 capable of long range strikes if refueling in Iraqi or Gulf airspace. They're also capable of attacking air defenses. If there was a small strike on a single facility they could probably do it.
***
Our government has 2 carrier groups in the Persian Gulf capable of refueling and launching several hundred Tomahawk missiles. (at $1M/ea)
***
However, it's been rumored for a while that Iran may have air defenses capable of defeating stealth technology. For example, arrays of sensors can monitor ambient radiation from cell phones and radio and such, and then abnormalities that even a stealth aircraft creates can be detected by processing vast amounts of data. It's a bit like looking for moving black dot against a sky of stars.
Iran was rumored to build an air defense system based on the principle of many coordinated sensors which can theoretically see stealth aircraft. So, there's also the question of whether Iran can shoot down a B2 or stealth fighter, and what that would mean if it happened.
There's also the question of whether the Bush Admin would want to test that air defense if in fact they've built it.
***
So, yeah, it's all nuts. A lot of things could be happening, or nothing.
June 25, 2008 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, MJ, for this latest hair-raising info re our collective future. With all due respect, I have grown to truly loath Israel these past few years (or, rather, their Likud leadership). Funny, back in the day, I spent some glorious time in Haifa. Seems now like another lifetime. :-/
BTW, I was unable to get the video to play. Am having a midweek Monday, it would seem.
Thanks again. You are one of my favorite editors here.
June 25, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Coralsea. I'm sorry the vid doesnt play.
June 25, 2008 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, MJ. Not your fault. Am slightly pissed, though, for having sat through the CBS news in vain; nary a mention of this was raised. That's a half an hour I'll never get back. ;-)
BTW, further info on-topic in today's Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/2188501/US-military-chief-to-visit-Israel-for-talks-on-Iran.html
June 25, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Israel isn't our problem. Joe Lieberman isn't even our problem. Senators like Amy Klobuchar and Evan Bayh whose states are not under the remotest threat from Iran are our problem. These fools are going to have us bungling into a world war someday while they're out having lunch with some lobbyist who isn't from their state and who doesn't give a damn about their constitutents. But Israel isn't the problem and it's lobby isn't the problem. Stop voting for the people who are the problem.
June 25, 2008 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh right, it's all the fault of Democrats! Though Joe Lieberman somehow manages to get a pass. That really makes sense... :rolleyes:
How did I know Bluebell, one of our resident Freepers, would come to that conclusion right on Destor's heels?
June 25, 2008 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, bluebell. My cute little troll has become obsessed with you as well. Just ignore it.
June 25, 2008 10:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
He'd make a good Republican when it comes to his definition of accountability. Don't blame them for anything even when they sponsor the bills.
June 25, 2008 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I've cut it off from substantive replies.
Always nice to see your reality based posts, though!
June 25, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
S.RES.580
Sponsor: Sen Bayh, Evan [IN
June 25, 2008 10:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
If anyone is reckless enough to start bombing Iran it would be Bush/Cheney. However, they are hopefully not that dumb. I don't believe Israel would initiate a bombing campaign without US approval.
I would be interested if active duty or recent Iraq veterans would comment on how they feel at Bush opening a new combat front (against a nation with 3 times the population of Iraq), a third war, while the previous two wars are going into their 7th and 6th years, and the economy is sinking.
June 25, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
That the attack is being planned is not news MJ.
The only question is when, not if. I believe it will be after the election regardless of which party wins.
Now the impotent US Congress could intervene and stop this insane and quite illegal act of aggression, but they won't. And with a leaderlike Obama who has already capitulated to the authoritarians' demands on FISA we have no hope that he might correct the situation once elected.
Seems to me the only real option is if the citizenry itself takes direct action, but we are too busy watching tv, growing fat from our horrendous diet and lack of excercize and besides, most Americans won't give a damn because they won't even be aware of it since it won't be covered by corporate media until it's too late.
June 25, 2008 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know blueballs is a troll. But is it of the PUMA or repuke variety??
June 25, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just read Bluebell, Destor, and Oleeb and your question should be obvious.
It can't be PUMA because there's no internal logic for a PUMA. They've all praised Hillary one moment, then claimed Obama is a traitor and as bad as Hillary the next minute. The only consistent position is to weaken the Dem frontrunner.
They're all freepers and maybe the same person. Maybe "fake Naders" would be more descriptive.
Their main tactic is driving wedges and generally flinging shit while claiming ideological purity.
June 26, 2008 1:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I thought I detected a foul stench.
Oh Koz! It's you again, hurling insults for no reason.
What a delight your childish, unprovoked namecalling is! Do your parents know you go online and do this sort of thing or are you doing it without their permission?
June 26, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Israel attacking Iraq would be suicidal. Not in the sense that the response would be totally lethal, but rather in a longer-term sense. I don't doubt that HalliBushCO is sufficiently mentally unbalanced to do this, but I have trouble with the idea Israel is.
Pat Lang raised the issue of air space and Israel getting permission from the Saudis, Syrians, Turks, even Iraqis, to do this as being absurd. Mounting such an attack, then, would involve committing acts of war against those countries they overflew to get to Iran. So it wouldn't just be a limited air strike with minimal collaterals in Iran, it would be a regional blow-up with missiles flying all over the place just to protect the Israeli strike before it gets to Iran. And then again to get them back into friendly airspace. It would mean instant regional war and the US couldn't control that.
Insane is an understatement.
June 26, 2008 12:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
An attack on Iran would be much more disastrous than even the most pessimistic believe.
When Iranian president Ahmadinejad says that Israel on the verge of “disappearing" many think that he is talking about an improbable, mutually obliterating, atomic exchange. It isn’t that simple, although the danger to Israel is no less real. Contemporary Israel’s economy depends on its concentration of scientific and technological talent, the mere existence of an Iranian nuclear bomb, the Israeli government believes, would trigger an exodus of the educated elite that could spell disaster for the country. "Iran would be in a position to destroy the Zionist dream without even pressing a button," Ephraim Sneh, a retired general and cabinet minister told Der Spiegel. As the German news magazine points out, “no one knows better than the Israeli leadership just how much power lies in the mere belief that a country has nuclear weapons.”
This is so urgent for Israel, that the cease fire with Hamas and the proposed peace talks with Syria could be no more than distracting maneuvers for an impending attack. According to a former CIA agent, Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institute quoted on Al Jazeera, "There is some risk that Israel thinks it has limited time to act and it has a green light from American politicians. We will see a Middle East in flames." We could also see the price of oil double in a matter of days. Global food prices have risen nearly 40 percent in the last year and much of that is driven by the rising cost of oil which has gone up by $40 a barrel in the same year. The poorer the country the more destabilizing these prices are.
A war that raised the cost of bread and gasoline could have a direct and devastating effect on Egypt, a country the world seems to have forgotten despite its being the most populated and the most militarily and culturally important country in the Middle East. Bread riots are now a daily occurrence in Egypt. It’s most popular political movement is the Muslim brotherhood. As the New York Times Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Thomas Friedman wrote, “What’s happening is that the basic bargain between the Egyptian regime and its people — which said, “We will guarantee you cheap food, a job, education and health care, and you will stay out of politics” — is fraying. The only part of the bargain that’s left is: “and you will stay out of politics.” Those readers who have no memory of Gamal Abdel Nasser may think I am exaggerating Egypt's keystone quality in the Arab and Muslim world. Rest assured I am not. An Islamic Egypt in these times would electrify the entire Muslim world... the entire world.
June 26, 2008 8:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you heartily about the extreme danger an attack on Iran portends for the world. I wish more people and especially the media were aware of and following all this. But they aren't. Bush is hell bent on bringing civilization down it seems and people here in America have no understanding of how easy it is to destroy the stability and liberty we have always enjoyed. If the middle east explodes in war and chaos and the price of basic commodities skyrockets worldwide, the entire world will be transformed perhaps irrevocably and much for the negative. Those who speculate about things like this as though it were a sporting event or something that would be happening to others and leave us unaffected are in for a very rude awakening if we allow an attack of any kind on Iran. I am amazed on an ongoing basis how Americans (especially our political and business leaders) seem to miss the key point that destabilizing the world is a bad thing for America and that we stand to lose more than anyone else if the world descends into chaos and war.
June 26, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
More unintended humor:
"Any effort to denuclearize the Korean peninsula must contend with the fact that North Korea is the most secretive and opaque regime on the planet."
From Rice's WSJ Editorial.
June 26, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Iran is attacked, by the US or Israel, I suggest all American citizens build a bomb shelter.
As to Bluebell's attack on Klobuchar and Bayh, he/she is partially right, lets not forget all the Democrats in the House and Senate who voted to give Bush the OK to go to war, or the Democrats that support the new FISA bill.
June 26, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink