Article

2005-05-13 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-05-13 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11128 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 This is such an amazingly perverse black comedy that, were it not actually happening, no one would buy it as fiction - it would simply be too absurd, melodramatic, and inane. Self-respecting actors would shun the roles as radioactive career-enders.

Referring the MM's to the UNSC is just another box to check off in the apparently MM-scripted march to a showdown.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 02:01|| 2005-05-13 02:01|| Front Page Top

#2 I am pretty sure France, Russia and/or China will veto any UNSC resolution on Iran.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-05-13 02:07|| 2005-05-13 02:07|| Front Page Top

#3 SPoD - I certainly agree: if the US were to insist the resolution have real teeth, indeed, the Gummy Bears would veto it. But I don't think that's a surprise to Dubya in any way.

Okay, I'll prolly regret it, lol, but here's my big picture take on all of this shit. There's a real and subtle strategy at work here, I believe. I'd say that there are 4 parts to it:

1) Expose all of the players to public scrutiny

2) Demonstrate / prove that the official game is now rigged to defeat or cripple American interests

3) Forge a new approach - one that actually is serious about problem solving and uses bilateral agreements to accomplish it.

4) Showcase a bona-fide long-term plan - completely different from the idiocy of those who went before him, merely reacting to events and attempting to buy off adversaries. Placation, accommodation, wasting valuable time and resources, and either allowing US capabilities to atrophy or actively dismembering them are the hallmarks of Clinton and Carter, in particular. The Bush Doctrine is Big JuJu - the effects are obvious to all except the willfully ignorant and self-blindered BDS freaks.

To accomplish 1 and 2, Bush still plays the game by the rules, as he did with Iraq, checking off the boxes along the way. That the UN failed so miserably, becoming mired in French shenanigans and Tranzi games, after being directly and publicly challenged by Bush to prove itself relevant, was not lost on the American public. The first real cracks in the UN's facade came via Iraq. America realizes that the entire Iraq situation would've ended in stalemate, which infuriates the Moonbats who would be happier if Saddam was still filling mass graves - and proved to the sane Americans that Bush has balls, says what he means, means what he says, and that the UN is a sham and a merely a featured venue for hobbling American interests and goals.

That the opposition, the Looney Left, Tranzis, EU Triangulators, et al, don't give him any credit for it afterwards, has begun to make the players much more clear to Joe Sixpack, too. Cracks run through some once-hallowed tenets of conventional wisdom. The incredible slant and bias of the MSM, for example, have been exposed more clearly than ever before - and the number don't lie: people, Americans, are turning away from them in drives. Another example is the never-ended efforts of the Socialists to suborn America, and that this is rooted in Academia and in certain government agencies, such as the State Dept, and that our once revered "allies" are, without doubt, not.

I believe that covers 1 and 2 pretty well. For 3, we have the efforts in Iraq - the much maligned coalition of the willing. Who's unwilling? France and Germany, primarily. Are they so important that their lack of support on Iraq make the US wrong? No - and Americans now see it. They now see France for whom they really are and are boycotting their products in sufficient number that the point is well and truly made. Germany, to a lesser degree, is now also seen as less an ally than adversary. Same goes for Turkey. Such betrayals are not forgotten and forever poison the well. Anyone who says they trust a cheating spouse is a liar, a fool, or both. It is NEVER the same again. Rummy nailed the bitches to the wall with "Old Europe". It hurt them and they squealed. The coalition worked. The bilateral approach is being proven every day with new trade agreements - which cause those lacking one to whine and whimper.

Interestingly enough, IMHO, item 4 has already been proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt. From the obvious scramble all across the M.E. to, at the very least, put up some "democratic" window dressing to the real hard fact that AlQ and its minions are fractured, running, and far less effective that they would be were it not for the Bush Doctrine and the stones to execute it. The Us Congress, for all of its recent stupidity and 3-ring circus foolishness, not only authorized Afghanistan, Iraq, the WoT, etc., but it has already approved action to stop Iran from acquiring nukes. HCONs 307, 332, 398 / SCON 73, 81 all explicitly state that "by all appropriate means" the US must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. HR 1823 demands Syrian accountability for supporting terrorist and the freedom of Lebanon. Shit has happened. It's all bad for the Bad Guys.

The recent Dhimmidonk Circus, aided and abetted with all means at the disposal of the MSM have failed - or will fail. These games will hand the Pubs even more House and Senate seats in 2006.

I am worried about who comes after Bush.

My take.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 03:41|| 2005-05-13 03:41|| Front Page Top

#4 Apologies for all the typos and gaps. I whacked it out in about 40 minutes - the topic deserves much more. Sigh.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 03:44|| 2005-05-13 03:44|| Front Page Top

#5 Just a few days ago I attended an international conference in lovely (but cold) Bavaria. Iran was one of the subjects.

It may not seem so in public but the positions of Europe and the US on Iranian nukes do not differ that much in whether we should allow the mullahs to have them. The difference of opinions and strategies lies in the way to stop them. It was interesting to hear the French view, that was less pronounced than the German one but still very much against Iran developing nuclear arms. It's the approach that sets us apart in some respects but there is one common point that brings us together again: "Iran first".

You probably know what that means. The strategy is, if Iran can't be persuaded to stop its nuclear ambitions, it must be set wrong in such an open, blatant way to get Europe, the US and possibly Russia to agree on action against the mullahs. A Chinese veto would be unwelcome but simply ignored (which may lead to China refraining from using its veto power).

European diplomatic actions have been (mostly) quietly endorsed by the US government to buy time. Iranian nukes are not seen to be happening in 2005 and probably not 2006, which gives the US time to pacify Iraq and free up combat forces, refill depleted stocks of smart weapons and allow for a slow build up of pressure on Iran, which you are going to see in the next months. This is wise because current options are limited.

Economic sanctions against Iraq without including oil exports are likely to fail. If they include oil, they will need to be enforced by a maritime blockade PLUS a Russian blockade (the most difficult part). Russia must be persuaded that Iranian nukes pose a vital threat to Moscow, therefore better intelligence and cooperation is needed.

Military strikes against Iranian nuclear targets are most likely to be of little effect and will possibly even strengthen the mullahs' grip on the Iranian population.

The strategy is to increase economic pressure (or economic rewards if Iran complies) and to strengthen the Iranian opposition. This is what Europe will probably agree on.

But we need Russia. Combined US and European efforts could win Russia over. If that happens the mullahs face certain doom.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-05-13 04:41|| 2005-05-13 04:41|| Front Page Top

#6 Russia is not currently getting with the program.
In fact just made a public pronouncement in oposition to the "wests" position in Iran and nuclear matters.

France, Germany and England are being led by the nose by the Iranian Theocracy. Nothing will come of it. Almost daily the Theocrats flaunt their intentions in the international press. We have a year at the outside to act. So the EU3 will have that time to do whatever they think they can. One year no more.

TGA I respect you however as .com put so well "Such betrayals are not forgotten and forever poison the well." Germany and France were not even willing to hold our coat in Iraq. They infact worked against the US and as far as I can tell still are. I want my country out of NATO. No US blood for western Europe again ever. No more borrowing money to defend Europe and help run the UN. I want the US out. All bases in western Europe closed. All our military material and units withdrawn from western Europe. Let the EU pay for the UN, NATO and it's own defense since the western European people and press can do nothing but carp on how wrong and evil my country is in every respect. For 40 years the US helped defend western Europe. Europe can't even be bothered to do what is right by the US today.

So go ahead Europe warn away.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-05-13 05:46|| 2005-05-13 05:46|| Front Page Top

#7 TGA - I have no doubt that Russia's "support" is for sale. Should "we" be willing to pay the tab, which would undoubtedly be huge as Putty has wasted his tenure, thus far, in building Russia in any demonstrable or substantive way, I also seriously doubt that Russia would stay bought. Russian contractual integrity is on a par with the word of the Mad Mullahs.

I also have no doubt that with or without Russian or MM cooperation, Bush will act against the MM's. He already has the congressional "mandate" in his pocket and he has clearly said they will not succeed. It was as close to unequivocal as I've heard him speak on any topic. And I find his record in keeping his word unsurpassed by any world leader.

The only questions, it seems to me, are these:
1) Will the Persian people do it?
2) Will Israel do it?
3) Will the US do it?
4) Some combination of the above?

That anyone buys, even for a second, the drivel that they have ever "stopped" their program while "negotiating" is simply ludicrous. I do not believe a blockade against exports will work, either. For example, I'm picturing a Chinese tanker entering the Straits of Hormuz, with a complement of Chinese military on board quite likely under those circumstances, and some blockade ships (whose, beside the US and maybe UK) being ordered to, after 3 or 4 failures by radio and hailing, forcibly stop it. How would you see that playing out? Will German ships be there, on station, and execute an order to shoot off the rudder of a Chinese flagged vessel?

In sum, I believe the evidence accumulated and publicly available thus far indicates they won't quit their efforts, Russia won't cooperate or we won't agree to Russian demands, China would be openly hostile and willing to subvert UNSC efforts - even if they abstain from the vote, and it will come to a military confrontation.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 05:48|| 2005-05-13 05:48|| Front Page Top

#8 BTW, what if other OPEC nations cooperated with their sister state, Iran, if she is blockaded? It would be easy for any of them to picture themselves in a similar situation, no? Chavez would join in protest without hesitation, regardless of the consequences to his country - because he doesn't care a rat-shit about Venezuela or its people, only himself. How much oil would be off the market? What effect would that have on the world's economy? How great would the pressure be to yeild? How long would the blockade last? Who would give up first?

Just one of many reasons, IMHO, a blockade is not an answer.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 05:54|| 2005-05-13 05:54|| Front Page Top

#9 Well .com we have a oil reserve that will last quite some time. I don't think any of the nations of Europe do. I think you can measure their reserves in weeks not what we have which is in months.

I also think the Chinese would be happy to stir the pot and keep us distracted.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-05-13 06:03|| 2005-05-13 06:03|| Front Page Top

#10 SPoD - In the SPR we currently have 53 days of "import protection" - of the 90 we're supposed to try to maintain. The draw-down limit is 4.3 Mbpd and it can begin 13 days after Presidential decision to release. You'll find that is less than current demand and, if refined products are not available - for whatever reason, it means we'd be relying upon domestic refining capacity to a larger degree - and it's maxxed out.

The real key is who else would love to take the US (hell, the world) down a notch by either reducing output (not necessarily taking a financial hit because prices would rise to meet market demands), refusing to contract with US (thus forcing us to the spot market), or cut it off, altogether with maybe only exports to symp regimes?

Big JuJu, bro.

The numbers are here at the good old DOE website.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 06:22|| 2005-05-13 06:22|| Front Page Top

#11 Do you think France or Germany have more than a few weeks worth of oil? China? We are ahead of them I am certain.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-05-13 06:40|| 2005-05-13 06:40|| Front Page Top

#12 Lol - yep, China's in a hole. Here's an article addressing it - from last December. Probably sufficiently current.

Posted by .com 2005-05-13 06:47|| 2005-05-13 06:47|| Front Page Top

#13 If we just used the reserve for "national defense" it would last longer too.

I am heading for the crib. burnt from both ends.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-05-13 06:49|| 2005-05-13 06:49|| Front Page Top

#14 SA is in the process of ensuring all its oil can be exported via pipelines that run West toward the Red Sea. There is some capacity to export oil through Oman bypassing Hormuz but its limited. By sometime next year perhaps 10 MBPD can go West and 100k BPD can go East in the event of a blockade. So who do you think will blink first if Hormuz is blockaded?

Posted by phil_b 2005-05-13 08:25|| 2005-05-13 08:25|| Front Page Top

#15 First of all, everyone hopes that Israel stays out of this. IDF action would terribly complicate things. Israel would never be able to take out Iran's nuclear program and it would absolutely enrage Muslim opinions against the West (not just Israel). But for actions against Iran to be successful, we need at least some tacit approval of the major oil countries. Saudi Arabia is not likely to join an oil embargo (they know that this time things are different and the US is not likely to tolerate a Saudi embargo), but if Israel is involved this could be different. Actually the West's dependence on ME oil will grow dramatically in the next years, so action now will probably do less economic harm than say in 5 years. Iran is a major oil exporter, but Europe and the US could live without Iranian oil for quite a while (especially if Iraqi production can grow fast enough). France gets most of its energy from nuclear power, Germany relies to a large extent on Russian gas. Due to the excellent infrastructure of public transportation Germans can reduce their driving habits with a lot less pain than Americans.
The consensus was that no one wants full blown military action. The best case scenario is, of course, Iran backing down and an eventual peaceful overthrow of the mullahs. The mullahs are of course aware of the Western dilemma. But they are also, despite being turbans, a deal smarter than Saddam: If the West, including Russia, form a united front, they will back down... that's the speculation.
Russia is the hard work. They want to become a world power again (futile attempt), showing America its place. If the Europeans can convince Putin that Russia's future lies in the West, and not with China, we will be getting somewhere. The Ukrainian revolution was a warning shot for Putin... it can happen in Minsk next, and even in Moscow. Also watch developments in Uzbekistan (already on the move) and Turkmenistan.
Chavez will not block oil exports. He might be up to something in the next years but right now he could not survive a move like that.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-05-13 10:29|| 2005-05-13 10:29|| Front Page Top

#16 Glad to "see" you, TGA, Was wondering if you were ill, now I see you were slumming around in *international circles* again.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2005-05-13 10:59|| 2005-05-13 10:59|| Front Page Top

#17 Well the "war" is over now for the next ten years... hopefully :-)
Busiest May ever...

Posted by True German Ally 2005-05-13 11:07|| 2005-05-13 11:07|| Front Page Top

#18 Yes, I imagine the commemorations can tend to get a bit unwieldy. Welcome back.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2005-05-13 12:53|| 2005-05-13 12:53|| Front Page Top

#19 Russia is the hard work. They want to become a world power again (futile attempt), showing America its place. If the Europeans can convince Putin that Russia's future lies in the West, and not with China, we will be getting somewhere. The Ukrainian revolution was a warning shot for Putin... it can happen in Minsk next, and even in Moscow. Also watch developments in Uzbekistan (already on the move) and Turkmenistan.

THe problem here is that "Russia" is not a unitary, disciplined, well-functioning state. Putin does not, probably cannot, control a wide variety of criminalized elements within the FSB, the border police, the army, the economics ministries, labs etc responsible for nuke technology and production. All of these have a huge financial interest in Iran's nuclear program and can easily thwart Putin's feeble efforts at cracking down.

The issue isn't so much whether Russia's with or against the "West" as whether Putin can rein in his own version of Pakistan's ISI. I doubt it.

Posted by thibaud (aka lex) 2005-05-13 13:26|| 2005-05-13 13:26|| Front Page Top

#20 Why in the world would Russia join with us to stop a nuke program *they* sold to the MMs???
It's not gonna happen!
Especially right now, when Russia's running out of friends and areas of influence in its old satellite neighborhood, as Bush made so clear to Putin just this week.
And you can bet the farm that Israel WILL get involved if they think that the first Iranian nuke-tipped missiles are ready to fire at Israel and I don't blame them.
You're a great guy, TGA, but it's easy to dream about the way you'd like the world to be when you live in post Cold-War Germany.
Just because Schroeder can schmooze with Putin at V-E Day in Moscow doesn't really mean "we're all friends now," to paraphrase Basil Fawlty.

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro">Jennie Taliaferro 2005-05-13 19:44|| http://www.greatestjeneration.com]">[http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2005-05-13 19:44|| Front Page Top

#21 Nother welcome back to JT.

Posted by Shipman 2005-05-13 19:51|| 2005-05-13 19:51|| Front Page Top

#22 hola JT!

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-05-13 19:54|| 2005-05-13 19:54|| Front Page Top

#23 Hey, guys!
Thanks for the warm welcome back--missed ya!
(it's been a strange, busy year, huh? But I haven't forgotten my RB pals. Ever.)

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro">Jennie Taliaferro 2005-05-13 20:15|| http://www.greatestjeneration.com]">[http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2005-05-13 20:15|| Front Page Top

#24 W00t! Jennie and TGA in one day, huzzah!

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2005-05-13 20:23|| 2005-05-13 20:23|| Front Page Top

#25 Jen, I'm probably the last person who harbors any dreams or illusions about Russia. I'm a rather cold "realpolitiker".
People who deride the European approach (and there are reasons to do so) must come up with alternatives. And right now, there are few.
The IDF cannot take out Iran's nuclear program, even if they manage to get a number of planes through unfriendly airspace. They simply can't. Iran has been expecting them for years, targets are underground, multiple and probably moving a lot. It can't be done. A short delay, maybe. Nothing to risk so much for.
A full blown US war against Iran is not on the agenda, either. Even if the US bomb the hell out of Iran, the nuclear program won't be stopped. Germany was under severe bombing every day, and still Albert Speer managed to increase (underground) arms production in 1943 and 1944, and it still went on in early 1945. The U.S. can't go full force either because they need spare capacities for a conflict with North Korea or even China that might take advantage of the situation. An invasion of Iran would be very difficult to achieve, an occupation quite impossible. We could only hope for an overthrow of the mullahs but we cant take this for granted.
Military options right now are limited. Economic sanction will only work if Russia is on board. Right now they certainly aren't. It will require a masterpiece of diplomacy to convince them that it is in their best interest to join the party.
Never say "it's not gonna happen".
Lots of things weren't believed to happen in 1988... or 2002.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-05-13 22:21|| 2005-05-13 22:21|| Front Page Top

#26 TGA. Would a "Project Phoenix" type program work against Iran?

Posted by 3dc 2005-05-13 22:46|| 2005-05-13 22:46|| Front Page Top

#27 First off, I'd like to say welcome back to Jennie, and also to TGA. It's nice to see both of y'all, and please excuse me for currently needing to remain an shambling faceless horror. As you read, you'll understand.

Jennie wrote:

Why in the world would Russia join with us to stop a nuke program *they* sold to the MMs???

It's not gonna happen!

Especially right now, when Russia's running out of friends and areas of influence in its old satellite neighborhood, as Bush made so clear to Putin just this week.

If you want to get in the realm of paranoid conspiracy theories, well, Russia is an oil exporting nation. IF they do something and as a result there's a war in the Middle East and the price of oil goes up, they make more money off of it. The problem with this hypothesis is they've been busily inhibiting the foreign investment needed to actually take advantage of the crisis when it comes.

Earlier, TGA wrote:

Chavez will not block oil exports. He might be up to something in the next years but right now he could not survive a move like that.

Well, the thing is, Chavez doesn't have to "cut off the oil" per se. There are things he can do to get the same effect. When his current term started, he was mismanaging the reservoir depletion of his current production setup, while also underinvesting in exploration, which, predictably, lead to a shortfall in production. This was a factor in why a lot of people at PDVSA (many of whom had previously supported him) went on strike. He not only fired those people, but banned them from working in the oil industry in Venezuela ever again. This hasn't had any effects, however, because oil industry work is pretty stupid, can be done by trained monkeys, and it's easy to replace the trained over years and years workers with politically connected idiots....

NOT!

Summarizing, he's mismanaged things, he's fired everyone in the state oil company who didn't go along, for as long as he shall run the ~~plantation~~ country (and he can't go back on that, because face is just about more important to a Caudillo dictator such as him as it is to a medieval Chinese mandarin), and NOW, as recounted earlier this week on Rantburg, he's also starting to run off what western corporations are still there and have maintained actual abilities to do things (via expatriate or Venezuelan employees) by threatening them with tax evasion.

The net result is that from a projected production level of 500,000 barrels a day today from back in 2000, it's now at 200,000 barrels a day, more or less. As long as he can keep that number sinking through a process of aggressive incompetence and stupidity, and make sure whatever's left is tied up in long-term contracts with China, he can do the same thing as Cutting Off The Oil, more or less, without having to live with having publicly made the decision to do so.

(And yes, that hurts Venezuela, but he doesn't care about that. Probably just the opposite: he thinks the more poor people he has, the greater his support. It's not like there have ever been any challenges to Castro because of what he's done to Cuba's economy over the last forty years... as Jerry Pournelle has pointed out, if you ignore the communist rhetoric Castro looks remarkably like the sort of central/south American dictator that's been the bane of the region's history for the past two centuries.)

TGA went on to write:

Germany was under severe bombing every day, and still Albert Speer managed to increase (underground) arms production in 1943 and 1944, and it still went on in early 1945.

On the other hand, not only do we have much better guided munitions than we did in WW2 (to the point where we could actually bomb a factory or power plant rather than dropping bombs in the general vicinity and hoping) but we've also done post-analysis of what we did wrong during the bombing campaigns in Germany and Vietnam. After WW2 ended it was discovered that the US and the allies had completely missed the fact that the German power distribution system was massively vulnerable to cascade failure if the right power distribution elements and generation plants were hit. It was a hard struggle for many on the allied side to get the resources to do things like close air support, or bombing/strafing of railroad yards and the like, because Air Marshall Harris and others like him had concluded that those wouldn't really work and weren't important compared to the campaign to dehouse German civilians. To a large extent, in WW2 the allies practiced strategic bombing where no actual real strategy was allowed.

Posted by The Anonymous Crawling Horror From Beyond 2005-05-13 23:12|| 2005-05-13 23:12|| Front Page Top

#28 Jennie -- welcome back! It has been a while.

TGA -- welcome back to the real world, such as it is. Catch your breath, take a long nap, then come back and share with us your wisdom and experience.

Faceless Horror, what would Chavez do for power and influence without oil to sell? I understand your point about his attitude toward his citizenry, but without a significant exports, who cares about his peacocking around?

Posted by trailing wife 2005-05-14 00:04|| 2005-05-14 00:04|| Front Page Top

00:04 trailing wife
00:01 docob
23:57 twobyfour
23:53 trailing wife
23:43 Sleth Glatle9076
23:40 Atomic Conspiracy
23:36 trailing wife
23:29 trailing wife
23:29 Phil Fraering
23:22 trailing wife
23:15 jackal
23:12 The Anonymous Crawling Horror From Beyond
23:12 Frank G
23:09 Fred
23:08 Silentbrick
22:54 trailing wife
22:54 RWV
22:46 3dc
22:39 Capt. Infidel
22:33 Phil Fraering
22:31 3dc
22:26 Frank G
22:21 True German Ally
22:12 Frank G