| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Iranians Forced To Go Undercover |
| 2006-08-22 |
| August 22, 2006: The U.S. government has forced Iran to change the way it loads weapons in aircraft that are headed for Syria. American intelligence officials revealed how satellite reconnaissance had spotted Iranians loading eight C-802 anti-ship missiles, and three launchers into a Russian made Il-76 transport. This happened a day after a C-802 fired from the Lebanese coast had damaged an Israeli warship. Iraq refused to let the Iranian aircraft enter its air space. When the Iranian Il-76 headed for Turkey instead, the Turks said the Iranian aircraft could only transit Turkey if it first landed to see if it was carrying weapons in its cargo. The Il-76 declined and returned to an Iranian air base. The Iranians know they are being watched by American spy satellites, and high flying recon aircraft (Global Hawk and U-2) as well. But they thought these spy-in-the-sky efforts would not get down the level of checking the loading of cargo aircraft. As a result of this particular incident, which was probably made public mainly to aggravate and annoy the Iranians, loading cargo will be a lot more complicated in the future. Weapons to be shipped by air will have to be loaded on trucks while under cover, and the truck itself will have to be covered in such a way that the identity of the weapon is not disclosed. Then the aircraft will also have to be loaded in such a way that overhead reconnaissance cannot observe what it going onto the aircraft. Even that may not be enough, as nations, which Iranian transports normally fly over, may demand the right to inspect all cargo aircraft headed for Syria. The Israelis may even get involved, by announcing they will shoot down any Iranian heavy transports, suspected of carrying weapons for Hizbollah, that enter Syria. Israel is not happy with how so many countries just stood idly by while so many weapons were sent to Hizbollah. This time around, those shipments, or attempted shipments, won't be risk free. |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #17 You're not a fan of the great (or at least late) Herman Kahn, 6? Story I was told by someone who was there at the time: Kahn was quite obese in his latter years, 400+ lbs. Had an indoor pool built by his home so he could swim laps for exercise. BBC was coming to interview him in, IIRC, the late '60s. He wasn't a fan of BBC and it was likely they would caricature him as Dr. Strangelove. When the BBC crew showed up, Kahn was swimming. In the nude. Gotta love an attitude like that .... |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-08-22 19:41 |
| #16 There's also Thinking About the Unthinkable, for those who want examples of how he thought through possible scenarios for use of nuclear weapons. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-08-22 19:38 |
| #15 Herman Kahn. I'll wait.... |
| Posted by: 6 2006-08-22 19:30 |
| #14 Economics aside, it sure would be nice to see some unanimity from our allies. I'll be following closely the Air Force's recent foray into synthetic fuel acquisition. Tony, that's the one. Thank you so much. I really look forward to reading it. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-22 16:42 |
| #13 Zenster, I think the book you're thinking of is 'On Thermonuclear War' by Herman Kahn. |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2006-08-22 15:31 |
| #12 Oil demand is not very elastic, especially for the Japanese who are already the world leaders in sqeezing value form each barrel. Take out 14% (3M barrels/day) from US supply and imagine the difficulty. It would be even worse in Japan. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-08-22 15:13 |
| #11 Your're correct, Zen that the Japanese have a thing about oil embargoes. Goes back to 1941 at least. All Japan is doing is pointing out that they really get screwed worst by an oil crisis and if there's any way to avoid one, they'd like to. Doesn't seem unreasonable, especially as there are more effective measures that can be taken. I'm hoping we can also get some Kurds lost to blow up a refinery or two. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-08-22 15:06 |
| #10 Japan will call on the international community to impose the sanctions in stages ... Good input, NS. Hookay, so why is it that, in the face of how dire the threat of Iran's nuclear aspirations are, Japans wants such gradual punative measures put into place? One would think that Japan's collective phobia vis nuclear weapons would vigorously spur them towards much more harsh and swift measures. [Apologies to the moderators for derailing this thread. Sinktrap as needed.] |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-22 15:00 |
| #9 Thank you, ed. That's more like it. So, this beggars the question of exactly why Japan is so loathe to back our demand for sanctions. Any takers? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-22 14:53 |
| #8 Japan will propose that the international community refrain from imposing a ban on Iranian oil exports in the first stage of any sanctions that might be imposed should Tehran not halt its uranium enrichment, government sources said. Japan will call on the international community to impose the sanctions in stages, and to lift the measures as soon as Iran suspends its uranium enrichment, the sources said Sunday. Doesn't sound like a Japanese refusal to consider Iranian sanctions to me. Especially as the sanctions I expect are a cut off of imports into Iran, especially gasoline, not a cutoff of exports. The sanctions will be designed to foment an internal overthrow of the government. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-08-22 14:52 |
| #7 14% of Japan's oil imports are from Iran. They are in the process of moving away from Iranian oil. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-08-22 14:44 |
| #6 Japan's economy is dependent on Iranian oil to a very large degree. It would do them and us no good to see their economy collapse and their pro-military government lose office. So, this makes it worthwhile for us to sit back and watch the torrent of inflated petrodollars flooding into Iran be used to kill our own troops in Iraq and propel genocide against Israel? Japan and other civilized countries need to take the bit between their teeth and threaten Iran with sanctions, if only to show a united front in dealing with the mullahs' nuclear ambitions. If Japan is so entirely dependent upon Iranian oil, then they have made some extreme errors in judgement. Iran is palpably unstable and long overdue for regime change. If Japan is adamantly opposed to this notion, then they are part of the problem. For them to be wholly subserviant to the whims of a violent thugocracy is simply idiotic. I will certainly give credit to India for having placed its relationship with Iran at risk during their recent pipeline negotiations. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-22 14:29 |
| #5 In light of Iran's declaration of and renewed efforts at anti-Semitic genocide, Japan's refusal to consider Iranian sanctions, especially as an American ally, is particularly repugnant. Japan's economy is dependent on Iranian oil to a very large degree. It would do them and us no good to see their economy collapse and their pro-military government lose office. They're doing pretty well WRT China and NORK, which frees us more to deal with Iran et al. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-08-22 14:14 |
| #4 Israel is not happy with how so many countries just stood idly by while so many weapons were sent to Hizbollah. That "not happy" phrase rates right up there with our own use of "unhelpful." The "so many countries" part constitutes a global disgrace. In light of Iran's declaration of and renewed efforts at anti-Semitic genocide, Japan's refusal to consider Iranian sanctions, especially as an American ally, is particularly repugnant. As I am currently in the middle of reading William Burrows' "Deep Black", this particular item is quite amusing. I'll add that the book's style is quite different from that of another author whose name sounds just like his. Off Topic Request: I made (and lost) a note about a book title mentioned here recently regarding the actual use of nuclear weapons in war-fighting mode. If someone remembers posting about it, would they please mention it in this thread. I'd be much obliged. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-22 14:01 |
| #3 Anti-Israel UN tool Terje Roed-Larsen ( says that if Israel discovers Hizballah smuggling arms into Lebanon, they should file a complaint through diplomatic channels: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/753234.html Snake oil cure-all UN Diplomatic Channel = Jacob's ladder to Heaven, no doubt. |
| Posted by: Duh! 2006-08-22 13:42 |
| #2 Somehow I think that shooting down a few of these flights would send a stronger message than merely making the Iranians ship their weapons through a mildly less-convenient process. But what do I know? |
| Posted by: WhitecollarRedneck 2006-08-22 12:34 |
| #1 Head-on collision with a drone, you say? How sad... |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-08-22 12:04 |