As crazy as it sounds, the crazies in the white house
are preparing an attack.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010906I.shtml
Attack on Iran: A Looming Folly
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 09 January 2006
The wires have been humming since before the New
Year with reports that the Bush administration is
planning an attack on Iran. "The Bush administration
is preparing its NATO allies for a possible military
strike against suspected nuclear sites in Iran in the
New Year, according to German media reports,
reinforcing similar earlier suggestions in the Turkish
media," reported UPI on December 30th.
"The Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel this week,"
continued UPI, "quoted 'NATO intelligence sources' who
claimed that the NATO allies had been informed that
the United States is currently investigating all
possibilities of bringing the mullah-led regime into
line, including military options. This 'all options
are open' line has been President George W Bush's
publicly stated policy throughout the past 18 months."
An examination of the ramifications of such an
attack is desperately in order.
1. Blowback in Iraq
The recent elections in Iraq were dominated by an
amalgam of religiously fundamentalist Shi'ite
organizations, principally the Dawa Party and the
Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq
(SCIRI). Both Dawa and SCIRI have umbilical
connections to the fundamentalist Shi'ite leadership
in Iran that go back decades. In essence, Iran now
owns a significant portion of the Iraqi government.
Should the United States undertake military action
against Iran, the ramifications in Iraq would be
immediate and extreme.
In the first eight days of January, eighteen US
troops have been killed in Iraq, compounded by another
twelve deaths from a Black Hawk helicopter crash on
Saturday. Much of the violence aimed at American
forces is coming from disgruntled Sunni factions that
have their own militias, believe the last elections
were a sham, and hold little political power in the
government.
If the US attacks Iran, it is probable that
American forces - already taxed by attacks from Sunni
factions - will also face reprisal attacks in Iraq
from Shi'ite factions loyal to Iran. The result will
be a dramatic escalation in US and civilian
casualties, US forces will be required to bunker
themselves further into their bases, and US forces
will find themselves required to fight the very
government they just finished helping into power.
Iraq, already a seething cauldron, will sink further
into chaos.
2. Iran's Armaments
Unlike Iraq, Iran has not spent the last fifteen
years having its conventional forces worn down by
grueling sanctions, repeated attacks, and two
American-led wars. While Iran's conventional army is
not what it was during the heyday of the Iran-Iraq war
- their armaments have deteriorated and the veterans
of that last war have retired - the nation enjoys
substantial military strength nonetheless.
According to a report issued by the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in December of
2004, Iran "has some 540,000 men under arms and over
350,000 reserves. They include 120,000 Iranian
Revolutionary Guards trained for land and naval
asymmetrical warfare. Iran's military also includes
holdings of 1,613 main battle tanks, 21,600 other
armored fighting vehicles, 3,200 artillery weapons,
306 combat aircraft, 60 attack helicopters, 3
submarines, 59 surface combatants, and 10 amphibious
ships."
"Iran is now the only regional military power that
poses a significant conventional military threat to
Gulf stability," continued the CSIS report. "Iran has
significant capabilities for asymmetric warfare, and
poses the additional threat of proliferation. There is
considerable evidence that it is developing both a
long-range missile force and a range of weapons of
mass destruction. It has never properly declared its
holdings of chemical weapons, and the status of its
biological weapons programs is unknown."
A MILNET brief issued in February 2005 reports,
"Due to its position astride the Persian Gulf, Iran
has constantly been a threat to the Gulf. The so
called 'Tanker' wars in the late 1980s put Iran
squarely in the bullseye of all nations seeking to
transport oil out of the region. Even the small navy
that Iran puts to sea is capable enough to harass
shipping, and several cases of small boat operations
against oil well heads in the Gulf during that period
made it clear small asymmetrical tactics of the
Iranian Navy could be quite effective."
"More concerning," continued the MILNET brief, "is
the priority placed on expanding and modernizing its
Navy. The CSIS report cites numerous areas where Iran
has funded modernization including the most
troublesome aspect, anti-shipping cruise missiles:
'Iran has obtained new anti-ship missiles and missile
patrol craft from China, midget submarines from North
Korea, submarines from Russia, and modern mines.'"
It is Iran's missile armaments that pose the
greatest concern for American forces in the Gulf,
especially for the US Navy. Iran's coast facing the
Persian Gulf is a looming wall of mountains that look
down upon any naval forces arrayed in those waters.
The Gulf itself only has one exit, the Strait of
Hormuz, which is also dominated by the mountainous
Iranian coastline. In essence, Iran holds the high
ground in the Gulf. Missile batteries arrayed in those
mountains could raise bloody havoc with any fleet
deployed below.
Of all the missiles in Iran's armament, the most
dangerous is the Russian-made SS-N-22 Sunburn. These
missiles are, simply, the fastest anti-ship weapons on
the planet. The Sunburn can reach Mach 3 at high
altitude. Its maximum low-altitude speed is Mach 2.2,
some three times faster than the American-made
Harpoon. The Sunburn takes two short minutes to cover
its full range. The missile's manufacturers state that
one or two missiles could cripple a destroyer, and
five missiles could sink a 20,000 ton ship. The
Sunburn is also superior to the Exocet missile. Recall
that it was two Exocets that ripped the USS Stark to
shreds in 1987, killing 37 sailors. The Stark could
not see them to stop them.
The US aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt is
currently deployed in the Persian Gulf, with some
7,000 souls aboard. Sailing with the Roosevelt is the
Tarawa Expeditionary Strike Force, which includes the
USS Tarawa, the USS Austin, and the USS Pearl Harbor.
The USS Austin is likewise deployed in the Gulf. The
Sunburn missile, with its incredible speed and ability
to avoid radar detection, would do terrible damage
these ships if Iran chooses to retaliate in the Gulf
after an American attack within its borders.
Beyond the naval threat is the possibility of Iran
throwing its military muscle into the ongoing struggle
in Iraq. Currently, the US is facing an asymmetrical
attack from groups wielding small arms, shoulder-fired
grenades and roadside bombs. The vaunted American
military has suffered 2,210 deaths and tens of
thousands of wounded from this form of warfare. The
occupation of Iraq has become a guerrilla war, a siege
that has lasted more than a thousand days. If Iran
decides to throw any or all of its 23,000 armored
fighting vehicles, along with any or all of its nearly
million-strong army, into the Iraq fray, the situation
in the Middle East could become unspeakably dire.
3. The Syrian Connection
In February of 2005, Iran and Syria agreed upon a
mutual protection pact to combat "challenges and
threats" in the region. This was a specific reaction
to the American invasion of Iraq, and a reaction to
America's condemnation of Syria after the death of
Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, which was widely
seen as an assassination ordered from Damascus. An
attack on Iran would trigger this mutual defense pact,
and could conceivably bring Syria into direct conflict
with American forces.
Like Iran, Syria's military is nothing to scoff
at. Virtually every credible analysis has Syria
standing as the strongest military force in the Middle
East after Israel. Damascus has been intent for years
upon establishing significant military strength to
serve as a counterweight to Israel's overwhelming
capabilities. As of 2002, Syria had some 215,000
soldiers under arms, 4,700 tanks, and a massive
artillery capability. The Syrian Air Force is
comprised of ten to eleven fighter/attack squadrons
and sixteen fighter squadrons, totaling somewhere near
650 aircraft.
Syria also possesses one of the largest arsenals
of ballistic missiles in the region, comprised
primarily of SCUD-derived systems. Iran, North Korea
and China have been willing providers of
state-of-the-art technologies. Compounding this is the
well-based suspicion that Syria has perhaps the most
advanced chemical weapons capability in the Persian
Gulf.
4. China and the US Economy
While the ominous possibilities of heightened
Iraqi chaos, missiles in the Gulf, and Syrian
involvement loom large if the US attacks Iran, all
pale in comparison to the involvement of China in any
US/Iran engagement.
China's economy is exploding, hampered only by
their great thirst for petroleum and natural gas to
fuel their industry. In the last several months, China
has inked deals with Iran for $70 billion dollars
worth of Iranian oil and natural gas. China will
purchase 250 million tons of liquefied natural gas
from Iran over the next 30 years, will develop the
massive Yadavaran oil field in Iran, and will receive
150,000 barrels of oil per day from that field. China
is seeking the construction of a pipeline from Iran to
the Caspian Sea, where it would link with another
planned pipeline running from Kazakhstan to China.
Any US attack on Iran could be perceived by China
as a direct threat to its economic health. Further,
any fighting in the Persian Gulf would imperil the
tankers running China's liquefied natural gas through
the Strait of Hormuz. Should China decide to retaliate
against the US to defend its oil and natural gas deal
with Iran, the US would be faced with a significant
threat. This threat exists not merely on a military
level, though China could force a confrontation in the
Pacific by way of Taiwan. More significantly, China
holds a large portion of the American economy in the
palm of its hand.
Paul Craig Roberts, writing for The American
Conservative, said in July of 2005 that "As a result
of many years of persistent trade surpluses with the
United States, the Japanese government holds dollar
reserves of approximately $1 trillion. China's
accumulation of dollars is approximately $600 billion.
South Korea holds about $200 billion. These sums give
these countries enormous leverage over the United
States. By dumping some portion of their reserves,
these countries could put the dollar under intense
pressure and send U.S. interest rates skyrocketing.
Washington would really have to anger Japan and Korea
to provoke such action, but in a showdown with China -
over Taiwan, for example - China holds the cards.
China and Japan, and the world at large, have more
dollar reserves than they require. They would have no
problem teaching a hegemonic superpower a lesson if
the need arose."
"The hardest blow on Americans," concluded
Roberts, "will fall when China does revalue its
currency. When China's currency ceases to be
undervalued, American shoppers in Wal-Mart, where 70
percent of the goods on the shelves are made in China,
will think they are in Neiman Marcus. Price increases
will cause a dramatic reduction in American real
incomes. If this coincides with rising interest rates
and a setback in the housing market, American
consumers will experience the hardest times since the
Great Depression."
In short, China has the American economy by the
throat. Should they decide to squeeze, we will all
feel it. China's strong hand in this even extends to
the diplomatic realm; China is a permanent member of
the United Nations Security Council, and could veto
any actions against Iran proposed by the United
States.
5. American Preparedness
American citizens have for decades taken it as a
given that our military can overwhelm and overcome any
foe on the battlefield. The rapid victory during the
first Gulf War cemented this perception. The last
three years of the Iraq occupation, however, have
sapped this confidence. Worse, the occupation has done
great damage to the strength of the American military,
justifying the decrease in confidence. Thanks to
repeated deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan,
recruiting is at an all-time low. Soldiers with vital
training and know-how are refusing to re-enlist.
Across the board, the American military is stretched
to the breaking point.
Two vaunted economists - one a Nobel Prize winner
and the other a nationally renowned budget expert -
have analyzed the data at hand and put a price tag on
the Iraq occupation. According to Linda Bilmes of
Harvard and Nobel Laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz of
Columbia University, the final cost of the Iraq
occupation will run between $1 trillion and $2
trillion, surpassing by orders of magnitude the
estimates put forth by the Bush administration. If an
engagement with Iran envelops our forces in Iraq, and
comes to involve Syria, our economy will likely
shatter under the strain of fighting so many countries
simultaneously. Add to this the economic threat posed
by China, and the economic threat implicit in any
substantial disruption of the distribution of Mideast
petroleum to the globe.
If Iran and Syria - with their significant
armaments, missile technologies and suspected chemical
weapons capabilities - decide to engage with the
relatively undersized US force in Iraq, our troops
there will be fish in a barrel. Iran's position over
the Gulf would make resupply by ship and air support
from carriers a dangerous affair. In the worst-case
scenario, the newly-minted American order of battle
requiring the use of nuclear weapons to rescue a
surrounded and imperiled force could come into play,
hurling the entire planet into military and diplomatic
bedlam.
Conclusion: Is Any of This Possible?
The question must be put as directly as possible:
what manner of maniac would undertake a path so
fraught with peril and potential economic catastrophe?
It is difficult to imagine a justification for any
action that could envelop the United States in a
military and economic conflict with Iraq, Iran, Syria
and China simultaneously.
Iran is suspected by many nations of working
towards the development of nuclear weapons, but even
this justification has been tossed into a cocked hat.
Recently, Russian president Vladimir Putin bluntly
stated that Iran is not developing its nuclear
capability for any reasons beyond peaceful energy
creation, and pledged to continue assisting Iran in
this endeavor. Therefore, any attack upon Iran's
nuclear facilities will bring Russia into the mess.
Iran also stands accused of aiding terrorism across
the globe. The dangers implicit in any attack upon
that nation, however, seem to significantly offset
whatever gains could be made in the so-called "War on
Terror."
Unfortunately, all the dangers in the world are no
match for the self-assurance of a bubble-encased
zealot. What manner of maniac would undertake such a
dangerous course? Look no further than 1600
Pennsylvania Avenue.
George W. Bush and his administration have
consistently undertaken incredibly dangerous courses
of action in order to garner political power on the
home front. Recall the multiple terror threats lobbed
out by the administration whenever damaging political
news appeared in the media. More significantly, recall
Iraq. Karl Rove, Bush's most senior advisor,
notoriously told Republicans on the ballot during the
2002 midterms to "run on the war." The invasion of
Iraq provided marvelous political cover for the GOP
not only during those midterms, but during the 2004
Presidential election.
What kind of political cover would be gained from
an attack on Iran, and from the diversion of attention
to that attack? The answer lies in one now-familiar
name: Jack Abramoff. The Abramoff scandal threatens to
subsume all the hard-fought GOP gains in Congress, and
the 2006 midterms are less than a year away.
Is any of this a probability? Logic says no, but
logic seldom plays any part in modern American
politics. All arguments that the Bush administration
would be insane to attack Iran and risk a global
conflagration for the sake of political cover run into
one unavoidable truth.
They did it once already in Iraq.
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/TXWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
***************************************************************************
{Invite (mankind, O Muhammad ) to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom
(i.e. with the Divine Inspiration and the Qur'an) and fair preaching, and argue
with them in a way that is better. Truly, your Lord knows best who has gone
astray from His Path, and He is the Best Aware of those who are guided.}
(Holy Quran-16:125)
{And who is better in speech than he who [says: "My Lord is Allah (believes in
His Oneness)," and then stands straight (acts upon His Order), and] invites
(men) to Allah's (Islamic Monotheism), and does righteous deeds, and says: "I
am one of the Muslims."} (Holy Quran-41:33)
The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "By Allah, if
Allah guides one person by you, it is better for you than the best types of
camels." [al-Bukhaaree, Muslim]
The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) also said, "Whoever
calls to guidance will have a reward similar to the reward of the one who
follows him, without the reward of either of them being lessened at all."
[Muslim, Ahmad, Aboo Daawood, an-Nasaa'ee, at-Tirmidhee, Ibn Maajah]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All views expressed herein belong to the individuals concerned and do not in
any way reflect the official views of IslamCity unless sanctioned or approved
otherwise.
If your mailbox clogged with mails from IslamCity, you may wish to get a daily
digest of emails by logging-on to http://www.yahoogroups.com to change your
mail delivery settings or email the moderators at [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
title "change to daily digest".
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/islamcity/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
