You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Secret US air force team to perfect plan for Iran strike
2007-09-23
THE United States Air Force has set up a highly confidential strategic planning group tasked with “fighting the next war” as tensions rise with Iran.

Project Checkmate, a successor to the group that planned the 1991 Gulf WarÂ’s air campaign, was quietly reestablished at the Pentagon in June.
Checkmate is good. But I prefer "Help The 12th Imam Find Daylight". Or maybe "Good Day for SPF 100000". Just Kidding! But if we're gonna have to be a bear, might as well be a Grizzly.
It reports directly to General Michael Moseley, the US Air Force chief, and consists of 20-30 top air force officers and defence and cyberspace experts with ready access to the White House, the CIA and other intelligence agencies.

Detailed contingency planning for a possible attack on Iran has been carried out for more than two years by Centcom (US central command), according to defence sources.

Checkmate’s job is to add a dash of brilliance to Air Force thinking by countering the military’s tendency to “fight the last war” and by providing innovative strategies for warfighting and assessing future needs for air, space and cyberwarfare. It is led by Brigadier-General Lawrence “Stutz” Stutzriem, who is considered one of the brightest air force generals. He is assisted by Dr Lani Kass, a former Israeli military officer and expert on cyberwarfare.

The failure of United Nations sanctions to curtail IranÂ’s nuclear ambitions, which Tehran claims are **cough** peaceful, is giving rise to an intense debate about the likelihood of military strikes.

Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, said last week that it was “necessary to prepare for the worst . . . and the worst is war”. He later qualified his remarks, saying he wanted to avoid that outcome. France has joined America in pushing for a tough third sanctions resolution against Iran at the UN security council but is meeting strong resistance from China and Russia. Britain has been doing its best to bridge the gap, but it is increasingly likely that new sanctions will be implemented by a US-led “coalition of the willing”.

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who arrives in New York for the United Nations general assembly today, has been forced to abandon plans to visit ground zero, where the World Trade Center stood until the September 11 attacks of 2001. Politicians from President George W Bush to Senator Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2008 race for the White House, were outraged by the prospect of a visit to New York’s most venerated site by a “state sponsor” of terrorism.
Let him visit. I'm sure we can get our hands on a few Iranian EFP mines to provide security along the way.
Bush still hopes to isolate Iran diplomatically, but believes the regime is moving steadily closer to obtaining nuclear weapons while the security council bickers about the shape of the table.
Ya think?
The US president faces strong opposition to military action, however, within his own joint chiefs of staff. “None of them think it is a good idea, but they will do it if they are told to,” said a senior defence source.

General John Abizaid, the former Centcom commander, said last week: “Every effort should be made to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but failing that, the world could live with a nuclear-armed Iran.”
X. Wrong answer!
Critics fear Abizaid has lost sight of Iran’s potential to arm militant groups such as Hezbollah with nuclear weapons. “You can deter Iran, but there is no strategy against nuclear terrorism,” said the retired air force Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney of the Iran policy committee. “There is no question that we can take out Iran. The problem is the follow-on, the velvet revolution that needs to be created so the Iranian people know it’s not aimed at them, but at the Iranian regime.”
Blow up any seats of government. Drop leaflets stating purpose. Drop bombs on mosques of extremist Imams who incite violence. Internet, TV, and radio campaigns. Threaten utilities of areas that make trouble. Show pictures of what people look like after a month of no water, fuel, or electricity. Or sewer, not that there will be much need for it after a week with no food. Offer rewards for tips that turn out. Nuke Pyongyang as an example. Threaten to involve Iraqi army. I'm sure Checkmate can think of something.
Checkmate’s freethinking mission is “to provide planning inputs to warfighters that are strategically, operationally and tactically sound, logistically supportable and politically feasible”. Its remit is not specific to one country, according to defence sources, but its forward planning is thought relevant to any future air war against Iranian nuclear and military sites. It is also looking at possible threats from China and North Korea.

Checkmate was formed in the 1970s to counter Soviet threats but fell into disuse in the 1980s. It was revived under Colonel John Warden and was responsible for drawing up plans for the crushing air blitz against Saddam Hussein at the opening of the first Gulf war. Warden told The Sunday Times: “When Saddam invaded Kuwait, we had access to unlimited numbers of people with expertise, including all the intelligence agencies, and were able to be significantly more agile than Centcom.”

He believes that Checkmate’s role is to develop the necessary expertise so that “if somebody says Iran, it says: ‘here is what you need to think about’. Here are the objectives, here are the risks, here is what it will cost, here are the numbers of planes we will lose, here is how the war is going to end and here is what the peace will look like”.
Don't forget to include plans to seize munitions, explosives stockpiles, etc.
Warden added: “The Centcoms of this world are executional - they don’t have the staff, the expertise or the responsibility to do the thinking that is needed before a country makes the decision to go to war. War planning is not just about bombs, airplanes and sailing boats.”
Posted by:gorb

#18  a particular iman's well needs to be melted with the heat of 10,000 suns so he can never crawl out of it.... he he he he...
Posted by: 3dc   2007-09-23 22:23  

#17  Moud's consistent refusals to stop Iran's ambitions ala NUCLEAR ENRICHMENT, + Asymmetric Warfare [defensive "People's War, i.e. 20Milyuhn BASIJ armed "Volunteers"] > can be SUMMED UP AS IRAN WANTS BE INVADED BY THE USA-ALLIES, NOTSOMUCH DOING THE INVADIN'. Can also be ascribes as IRAN WON'T STOP UNTIL ITS FORCIBLY/ MILITARILY OCCUPIED *LEST WE FERGIT, THERE WERE NET NEWS REPORTS THAT IRAN'S MULLAHS WERE NOT AGAINST USING WMDS INCLUDING NUKES ON IRANIAN SOIL AGZ FOREIGN INVADERS.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-09-23 20:31  

#16  Bombing may indeed set back Iran's indigens ambitions, but only for a time and is exclusive of any nucmats = Nuke-WMD munitions transfers from 3rd Party nations hostile to the US or Western democracy. "TIS ONE REASON WHY DUBUYA WANTS US TMD IN EASTERN EURO + PATRIOTS IN ISRAEL-TURKEY - but we all know how Russia feels about US TMD near its borders/peripheries, don't we!? RUSSIA'S ATTITUDE > why the USN needs its own ARSENAL SHIPS wid GMD capabilities. WHen Russia talks about defeating US GMD, besides traditional or well-known methods of attack, IMO they are also talking about dev LR, UNDERWATER STANDOFF missle systems = MISSLE-TORPEDOES CAPABLE OF REMOTE/INDEPEN UW MANEUVER which will "pop up" only near their designated targets.
KOMMERSANT/WAFF.com > RUSSIA is dev its own robo USV capable of being armed wid warheads. Recall WW2 = JAPANESE MANNED, TORPEDO/BOMB-ARMED SUICIDE MINI-SUBS.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-09-23 20:23  

#15  Heh.

Frank, It got a luke warm from the WSJ, so I'm going to watch my Victory at Sea DVD. Tell me how it was tomorrow.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-09-23 19:36  

#14  Defence make de good neighbour.
Posted by: Excalibur   2007-09-23 18:49  

#13  btw - "The War", the Ken Burns special on WW2 is on PBS tonight - record and watch....you'll be glad you did
Posted by: Frank G   2007-09-23 18:34  

#12  defence make de good neighbor.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-09-23 18:00  

#11  Show pictures of what people look like after a month of no water, fuel, or electricity.

Better yet, start distributing a well-produced and exceptionally vivid Middle Eastern version of "The Day After". Include highly persuasive depictions of recognizable landmarks vaporizing and familiar urban areas being rubblized and firestormed, right down to the burning concrete.

Spend the DVD's second half showing the jolly times had by all as they crawl out from beneath the ruins and begin dining on field mice for their Ramadan feasts. Graphically portray the deprivations and suffering that Islamic terrorism will win for the Muslim world.

Defence is the British spelling.

Derived from the ordinary root word, "fence".
Posted by: Zenster   2007-09-23 17:43  

#10  I'll say it.

"Nuke 'em. Nuke the bastards."

They've been at war with us since 1979. It's time to end that war in a loud and deafening manner such that the rest of the world understands exactly what it means to f^ck with us and keep on f^cking with us for that long.

If that means we have to be bastards to the rest of the world, so be it. Better to be live bastards and hated than dead bastards and mourned (or not even).

Posted by: FOTSGreg   2007-09-23 16:36  

#9  we get set for the second coming of Curtis LeMay

I'd settle for the second coming of Arthur Harris.
Posted by: DMFD   2007-09-23 13:57  

#8  Debka says Pooty is going to Terhan to meet with Nutjob....
Posted by: Gomez Cheng3497   2007-09-23 12:24  

#7  Don't get all defencive on us TW.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-09-23 11:56  

#6  Defence is the British spelling. My spellcheck ticks me on that every time.
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-09-23 11:42  

#5  Actually, any plans should steer far away from nuclear weapons use on our part. As for the decades of planning, I'd hope their considering the stuff pretty far afield from the purely military, and in that sense, the coup from the 50's should have been the starting point, even though it was followed by the Shah's rule - as for 1941 or before - it's the cultural background that would be useful, you're correct in the waste of anything else smacking of logistics or similarly data-based conclusions.

For that matter, we've been contesting these issues since the shores of Tripoli episode, though the Persian setting is so far afield from that.
Posted by: Thrinesing Prince of the Welsh6043   2007-09-23 10:47  

#4  CENTCOM was created in 1983.

Iran was not a major threat to the US in the 1950s. In the 1960s-early 1970s under the Shah it was an ally. I personally had a job offer to work in Teheran on a command and control system explicitly designed along the same lines as the one being created in the US at the time.

Plans depend on a great deal that changes over time: weapons systems, doctrine, force structure, geopolitical environment. Anything shelved 'since 1941' would scarcely be worth reading or building on.

But I take it what you really mean is that you'd like to see nuclear weapons used on Iran.
Posted by: lotp   2007-09-23 10:29  

#3  I see it is the Times of London reporting and all, but this line begs for Clintonian parsing:

Detailed contingency planning for a possible attack on Iran has been carried out for more than two years by Centcom (US central command), according to defence sources.

Please, please, please say it ain't quite so.

1st - Centcom has existed for quite a while, but I'm not conversant enough to know if it was around in the early fifties, which is when, at a minimum, we should have begun planning these matters.

2nd - Maybe "detailed" is the unelaborated word here - in that we've note considered traffic signals or portable helipads or persian chromium reserves in prior planning, or similarly tertiary issues.

3rd - Perhaps the qualifying use of "more" refers to plans taken off the shelf for the first time since late December 1941

4th - Maybe the Times is just sending smoke signals and the wind caught them the wrong way - they did spell defense interestingly.
Posted by: Thrinesing Prince of the Welsh6043   2007-09-23 10:20  

#2  Hearts & minds, MM, hears & minds!
Posted by: gromgoru   2007-09-23 09:34  

#1  While the muzz wait for the return of the 12th imam (unlikely) we get set for the second coming of Curtis LeMay (imminent)...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2007-09-23 08:49  

00:00