Russia and China have armed Iran to the teeth, Iran also have advanced domestically made missiles anti ship missiles, torpedoes, and high electronic warfare capabilities. An attack on Iran will lead to a huge world disaster.
I think there will be an attempt at War and the plan will be this (in reference to the video above):
1. The Dimona Nuclear Plant will be secretly shut down well in advance to prevent fallout from any retaliatory strike by Iran.
2. Multiple false flags will be used at the outset of the conflict to show Iran sinking oil tankers, engaged in terrorist attacks etc. It is likely the conflict will be initiated with a minor incident against Iran - a surgical strike in response to some supposed Iranian transgression, or conflict in Syria with which Iran has a defense pact? The War will then be escalated rapidly, until Iran truly lashes out, enough to allow a full scale response.
3. The ships in the Gulf will be semi expendable. They will be tasked to do the best they can, but the focus of the air war will be staged primarily from land bases.
4. The Israelis and US may not immediately bomb the Iranian nuclear reactor but will capture it later on via a ground war covered by aircraft. The air attack will heavily bomb everything else for a long period of time.
5. There will be a communications blackout on Iran and propaganda put out (if necessary) to vilify the Iranians under attack.
(6) It is also possible that at some stage a tactical nuke will be used on the Iranian nuclear reactor making a ground invasion "unnecessary". This is a "bad" option because of the fallout danger and the ending of the bombing operation which the protagonists would want to continue for as long as possible.
Indeed, I think the primary objective would be to dismantle Iran with a long bombing campaign designed to partly fracture the country if possible.
The Iranians can be beaten by existing US and Israeli (and NATO?) forces so long as one is prepared to accept some causalities and not expect a quick campaign. Consider what happened in Libya. If proxy "rebels" could be generated for an attack inside Iran then this would be huge bonus element in the attack plan.
Remember the goal here is not really to bomb the nuke plant but the breakdown of an entire country.
The War here, of course, is totally unnecessary. Iran is not a threat to anyone. The collateral damage in these attacks is only going to kill many thousands of innocent people. Yes, this attack will cause an economic calamity.
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, February 2nd, 2012.]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I see the utility of the US or Israel creating some "false flag" event because, well, I don't believe the existence of such a concept will be allowed over national airwaves during the ensuing crisis.
The fact is, the US military believes it can destroy whatever the Iranians have and it doesn't care what sacrifices the rest of the US people, economy, or infrastructure will suffer from any Iranian retaliation.
The cost benefit analysis has been done and since the Iranians have no nuclear weapons they shouldn't be expected to do much damage anywhere.
The Iranians, if they were smart, would have the IAEA on site doing whatever studies they think needs to be done with the proviso that no information be passed that could be used to target Iranian personell.
Next, I would have the Iranian government make as many friends as they can. In addition, make as many contracts with China, Russia, and India, as they can for future oil exports. This will make these countries have a stake in whether the Iranian government stays in power despite American extortions.
The next thing will be for the government to prepare its people to respond just in case the US or Israel carries out a sneak attack on Iran.
Agreed !
At one point I wrote to the Iranian Ambassador saying that they really needed to do as much as they could to avoid War with the USA because the people of Iran will undoubtedly be exposed to Depleted Uranium weapons.
I hope they paid attention.
Spook !
spook,
I would be surprised if any e-mails to Iranian ambassadors ever made it to them. Isn't there technology designed specifically to control whether some party X, say Iranian ambassadors, get their mail. The routers just don't forward?...or some such nonsense.
I'm suspecting because of where Iraq is and the weather, and such, the Iranian people are already being exposed to significant depleted uranium weaponry.
The stuff is heavy, but it's ground down into a fine dust. It's mixing with the rest of the dust. It's eventually going to start getting trapped in people's boots, and so on.
And, as for what the U.S. military will do to them after they attack...I imagine the "bunker busters" will be the largest munitions involved, unless things go awry. All the U.S. will be tasked with first is to take out 80 some facilities, some of them protected by being underground. The missle launching facilities, those they know about, can be destroyed by missle or fixed wing aircraft. If the Iranians have any airforce, those will be taken out while they are still on the ground by the first wave of sneaker jets...
Everything will have been planned by guys who've studied Yamamoto's best work.
I don't believe the U.S. military will be much concerned about what else it needs to destroy. There was some concern to "Decapitate" the government. The thought there was that once you take out the mullahs then the oppressed Iranians will rise up and greet the American troops as liberators. Roses and candy bars, and all that.
But, I suspect they have given uop on that thought. The likely aftermath will be that the 70 so million in population will be mostly injured or too shocked to do much resisting at first, and then, not be inclined to greet Americans warmly afterward.
I suspect the U.S. will intend to break up the country into little factional pieces so that they are all weak and manipulable. The strength of Iran has been its size and combined resources. If one part of the country is made to seceed, and not share with other parts, then there is great social discord created. I expect that will be the goal. Divide and conquer,...then steal.
s.
Spook,
Do you think MADD will effectively assure the US military attacks Iran?
I mean, the deterrent that I hear offered by people interested in stopping the US from attacking Iran is the fact that Iran is friends with Russia and China. This is supposed to raise the prospect that Russia has a nuclear deterrent and that will make the US pause.
But, how would that be? Isn't the US nuclear arsenal a deterrant to Russia's getting involved? The US can say to Russia, China, et al, that if they get involved in any way the US will destroy x cities.
So, then, Russia will have to weigh whether their support for Iran is worth x many million of its citizens and so many cities.
I think the US calculates that it is the bully and knows pretty well how it is the biggest bully on the block. No, I don't believe the US will be phased by any involvement by Russia.
The other option for the Russians would be to sell or give advanced weaponry to the Iranians, much as the US gives advanced weaponry, like nuclear weapons, jet fighters, bunker buster bombs, etc, to Israel.
I think maybe there is some room for Russia to do this. However, I wonder whether there is some concern by the Russians whether there would be blowback. Maybe the Iranian government hasn't given the Russians exactly what the Russians want in exchange for the weapons technology that Iran wants. The Russians could be trying to make the best deal too.
The US probably can figure out exactly what the Russians might be supplying to the Iranians....and make counter-moves.
s.
spook,
What is the goal of all this saber rattling by the US?
I wonder why they make such a big noise when they plan on attacking, dividing, and stealing no matter what. Why give the Iranians such a big warning?
Some have thought that the goal in raising tensions is to make the Iranians do something stupid,...that could be used to justify an ensuing war with them. The problem has been that the Iranian military is too disciplined to take the bait.
Some have wondered whether the US has been arguing and rattling in order to warn the Iranians about changing out of petro-dollars. The US is interested in keeping its dollar as the dollar of exchange.
Since it seems Iran will get gold for its oil going to India and China, this strategy and warning seems not to have worked. Hence, I suspect, there will be even more reason to think the US will quickly go in to destroy the Iranian government.
Some people have thought that the whole point is about independence and the desire to prevent anyone from creating an economic or military competitor. This is part of the dominance strategy. In a similar way the US still embargoes Cuba, works to overthrow Chavez, undermines independent governments all over the place.
The idea there is that if you let these guys get a foothold, being independent, then eventually at some time in the future you might have to go into a more expensive war with them. It's basically a cost saving strategy.
So, if we destroy Iran now, we won't have to pay higher costs in the future.
Then there's the greater Israel theory.
There's the "its all about the oil" theory.
There's all kinds of reasons for the US to attack and destroy Iran. Isn't that peculiar?
s.
spook,
I wanted to go into this peculiarity.
It's peculiar because there is no one articulating reasons not to attack and destroy Iran.
I will leave aside R. Paul's arguments for the moment.
It's not the stated policy of the US to, say, support the rule of law and to thereby "keep the peace." If it were, then there would be the argument that there is no evidence that Iran has any nuclear weapons program, whereas Israel does. This would make the US, as a policing agent, make Israel's behavior and in-house weaponry an issue.
It just seems impossible for the US to be the world's police and be so close to one of the world's law-breakers.
The US also makes money selling munitions to foreign governments, which itself creates unrest and contributes to law breaking. The US cant be much of a police agency if it makes money on the side arming the world's crooks.
I heard this argument recently. The ability of the US to be a police agency in the world depends on, well, it's having a very big stick. But also, the world's populations have to think well of the US's character. They have to think the US is fair and just and interested in serving and protecting. However, this assumption about the US's moral character is being undermined by its making such a big case out defenseless countries that it beats up and steals from.
So, when the cops on our streets beat up some old woman or shoots a dog or guns down a black person guilty of being black, the moral character of cops in general is being undermined. The police have become more of an occupying force than servants of a justice system.
In the same way, the US military is becoming a force for international stealing.
Iran has succeeded in defending itself in the eyes of the international community because it has not taken the bait offered by the US military or Israel. There has not been any effort to argue that the mullahs are hurting their own people. This was a big argument to invade Iraq, that Saddam was killing his own population.
I think Iran has succeeded in making itself an innocent victim by arguing that it has not invaded anyone in a long time compared to its antagonists. It has argued that it has followed the law with respect to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which allows them to develop nuclear power.
I think Iran has been able to make points in the Islamic world by supporting Hamas and Hezbollah because no other Islamic governments have done so, and the people on the street have therefore thought that their own governments must be owned by the US.
Again, what is the goal of US action toward Iran? I think in an environment of such high discord, the ability of the US to make changes in other fronts is easier. There is a certain zone of confusion that's set up and so the US ca, say pass the Patriot act, or SOPA, and other legal maneuvers that will make their job at home easier. Or, they can disrupt Iranian efforts to make friends and economic allies easier, under cover of trying to isolate an international terrorist state.
The US is yelling and screaming about how much a threat Iran is so it can quietly get its ducks in a row easier.
So, the big story isn't the yelling and screaming. Instead, it's about the ducks.
s.
S,
The US establishment, made up of different but overlapping interests, is playing many games at once.
The actions in the "war on Terror" definitely serve the police state at home.
Actions in the Middle East serve oil interests, arms corporations and Israel.
Actions globally serve banking interests (IMF, Fed Reserve/Dollar Hegemony) and corporations etc etc.
There's duplicitous actions aplenty.
There's also corporate media propaganda and censorship to try and keep things looking as justified, or as semi-legal, as possible to make sure there is not too much outcry over bombing the heck out of innocent people.
I agree with all of what you are seeing here. It makes perfect sense that a number of interests are "out to get" the Iranian Government.
And I sent that letter via the postal service rather than email. I don't know what chance it had but I tried.
You were bullseye with your first comment about Iran being as transparent, and innocent looking, as possible - while gaining help from Russia and China.
The Iranians need to avoid being blitzed. In 10-20 years the regime in the US may change. I just hope it is less aggressive than what we have to put up with today !
Spook
Post a Comment