Article

2004-07-19 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 Atropanthe 2004-07-19 14:23|| || Front Page|| [11128 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Damnit, W. F**k your 2'nd term, we would all (awake American's) hate to see another 9/11 on an exponential scale to awaken our sleeping bretheren. Faster, and don't be a pussycat. Post November may be too late.

Michael, with due and proper kudos to Dan for doing alot of the legwork, thank you. Your clarity is refreshing, maybe W will open his eyes before he multiplies his father's mistake a million times.

Posted by Atropanthe 2004-07-19 2:42:12 PM|| 2004-07-19 2:42:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Anbody think that the real reason we are moving armor out of SK so quickly is for clean-up in Iran? The IDF makes the airstrike to flush the nuclear toilet...we put another armored division on the border to keep the blackhats at bay??

Posted by anymouse 2004-07-19 2:46:09 PM|| 2004-07-19 2:46:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 ABC News just today had a GW quote about the spicifics of the Iranian Brewhaha currently raging. He mentioned all the main points, Nuclar, AQ connections and such. Thats a good sign.

It's how you take out these guys out that is way beyond my feeble mind to game. But Ladeen made an interesting point about how past enemies shot their wad prematurely and forcing our response.

Posted by Lucky 2004-07-19 3:21:09 PM|| 2004-07-19 3:21:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Ledeen is making a huge mistake if he believes that there isn't an aggressive policy in place against Iran. It just isn't being delineated in a bright line way publicly. Yet.

Posted by AzCat 2004-07-19 3:28:21 PM|| 2004-07-19 3:28:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 I agree. Though I can see Ledeen's viewpoint, he hasn't been willing to give the administration much credit-- for either integrity or common sense-- on Iran: he wants action, he wants it right NOW, and has taken that position for many months.

The way I see it, the main purpose of the Iraq war was to establish the necessary prerequisites for getting down to the REAL nitty-gritty in the WoT: (1) establishing a secure supply of oil that is not subject to capricious shut-off by pissed-off Arab sheikhs or Persian mullahs, and (2) a secure land base that's adequate for large-scale American military operations against Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

Those are the two ingredients we've never had in the past. And now we have them.

Posted by Dave D. 2004-07-19 3:50:07 PM|| 2004-07-19 3:50:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 For my kids and their kids, your kids and all of of our kids sake, I hope you guys are right. Hopefully W is making the tough and right decisions behind the scenes.

But never matter how dark the hour, as a proud descendent of the Crusader Jordan d'Exeter who prevailed against the Moselm hordes on the banks of the River Jordan against all odds... Percussa Resurgo, "When struck down, I rise again."

Posted by Atropanthe 2004-07-19 4:24:54 PM|| 2004-07-19 4:24:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Dave, if W doesn't gain the second term, then those plans would be for naught. Thus the need for after faster, please.

sKerry take the fight the the terror masters? hah! Our great grandchildren and their grandchildren may still be fighting this crusade, in the streets of our cities, if that happens.

Posted by Atropanthe 2004-07-19 4:29:37 PM|| 2004-07-19 4:29:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 "Dave, if W doesn't gain the second term, then those plans would be for naught. Thus the need for after faster, please."

I hear ya, believe me: I've had a sharp knife out for the Black Hats ever since November, 1979. I knew then, during the Iran Hostage Crisis, and I've known every day since, that those people are at war with us and mean to destroy both us and our entire way of life. And my reaction on 9/11, as I watched the plane slam into the South Tower, was not "Oh, my God! We're at war!"; it was "Well, I wonder if we're going to start taking the goddamn murderous Muslim bastards seriously NOW and start doing something about them?"

Yes, if Bush doesn't win a second term, whatever plans he's made will most definitely come to naught: Kerry is no leader; he's a follower, like Clinton. Kerry's entire record of the last quarter-century suggests that if elected, we will see a prompt cessation of all meaningful activity in the WoT and a return to ineffectual, superficial piddling-around with the U.N. and the EU.

But at the same time, I really cannot see how Bush could possibly have pulled off any kind of forceful confrontation with Iran without first establishing a base for our forces in the area, and securing a supply of oil for the West; nor can I see how he could possibly do anything decisive right now, in the current political climate. Would you trust the Democrats to refrain from undermining the effort if they thought they could get a few more votes at the expense of thousands of American soldiers' lives? I wouldn't.

I suspect the administration had originally envisioned moving against Iran before the election this fall; but the Democrats threw a monkey wrench into the works by embracing their lunatic-left anti-war fringe. I didn't foresee that, and I suspect the Bush administration didn't, either. Who could have imagined the unity we all felt after 9/11 would be so quickly swept aside by domestic politics? I certainly didn't.

Posted by Dave D. 2004-07-19 5:11:05 PM|| 2004-07-19 5:11:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Maybe we should think in terms of the time we can keep all those carrier battle groups deployed. Oh, but wait, that's just an exercise.

Posted by Matt 2004-07-19 5:46:35 PM|| 2004-07-19 5:46:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 If W doesn't win in November, look for the wheels to come off the wagon. The same freakshow that Clinton had as a cabinet is waiting in the wings to "rectify" the "mistakes" of Rumsfeld, Rice, and Powell. Rudyard Kipling's "Recessional" best describes what would happen next:

Far-called, our navies melt away;
Â Â On dune and headland sinks the fire:
Lo, all our pomp of yesterday
Â Â Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!

Posted by RWV 2004-07-19 6:45:07 PM|| 2004-07-19 6:45:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 How are we going to go into Iran right away? Our military is tapped out, both financially and, momre importantly, from a manpower standpoint.

I don't get why the Bush Admin has not increased the size of the services, reversing some of the cuts of the Clinton years. While I agree with the Rumsfeld "be nimble" theory, we just have too much to do with the existing force structure. The reserves are not designed for repeated, long term deployments.

I would like to see the pres publicly cut some non-defense programs and redirect those funds to the military with the express purpose of adding 2-3 operational divisions. I know this will take some time, but this war is going to be a long one and we are going to need a larger force. Better to be ready sooner.

Posted by remote man 2004-07-19 7:23:58 PM|| 2004-07-19 7:23:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 RM - Where you been, bro? It's been lonely, but I've tried repeatedly to get this particular discussion off the ground - going waaay back (6+ months) when Old Patriot was around to argue with me. OS has teased us with an undescribed alternative - still waiting for him to reveal the game-plan (Now would be good, OS! Please? Help! Lol!)

Short-term or long-term? Short-term is nuke facility destruction. Long-term is regime-change...

Think:

1) Decap strike (TLAMs, cruise missiles, standoff Naval fire) Mad Mullahs, Rev Guard, Guardian Council, new Puppet Legislature, Basij... Have GPS coords, will decap...

2) Spec Forces ops for hard targets (fixed bases, etc.) and securing oil infrastructure

3) Arming populace - THEY are the boots on the ground and this will be, primarily, their revolution. Scale up or down the two previous items depending upon the degree with which they are willing to take on the Mullahs.

4) 100% Air Cover and helicopters (attack & transport) offered to facilitate native pop.

Just my 2 cents since no one else has ever been as stupid as me and tried to specify anything beyond the magic word "decap".

Puhleeze, jump in.

Posted by .com 2004-07-19 7:41:06 PM|| 2004-07-19 7:41:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 .com,

I think yours is the strategy. The general Iranian populace is the additional "2-3 operational divisions." They need air cover, and the decapitation strikes, but that shouldn't be a problem given that the Mad Mullahs are giving us plenty of reasons for us to hit them. As you said, the Iranin people "are the boots on the ground." And, they are damn sick of the Mullahs.

Posted by cingold 2004-07-19 7:58:07 PM|| 2004-07-19 7:58:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 If Bush loses in November I think you'll see a large scale attack on Iranian facilities by Israel before January. Followed by US forces provoking Iranian forces on the border to draw them into open conflict. War with Iran will be unavoidable before Bush leaves office in January.

That being said the odds of Kerry winning in November are almost non-existent.

Posted by Damn_Proud_American 2004-07-19 8:16:56 PM|| [http://brighterfuture.blogspot.com] 2004-07-19 8:16:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 As a general point the problem here isn't islam it's extremism. For many reasons on average muslims are FAR more religious than christians, jews etc. Most christians and jews believe in religion in an abstract way, they don't buy that things happened the way they're written... instead viewing these things as metaphors etc. They also understand that many of the rules written in the bible applied to a different time and are not applicable in today's world.

Many muslims take there religion word for word. This is the problem, it is not some abstract concept for them with metaphors and moral lessons. It is the word of god.

That being said there are moderate muslims who don't buy into the whole thing and view relgiion the way most christians and jews do. As a % they are rarer but they do exist.

The goal isn't to elimnate islam, because this is impossible. The goal is to elminate extremism. I believe spreading democracy and capitalism as quickly as possible throughout the world, using war as neccesary is the way to proceed. I also believe that if we don't act soon and with extreme aggresivness things will become MUCH more difficult for us shortly.

Posted by Damn_Proud_American 2004-07-19 8:33:03 PM|| [http://brighterfuture.blogspot.com] 2004-07-19 8:33:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 BTW, why is it (again) that student demonstrations in Iran arenât newsworthy? My wife had a bunch of Iranian friends in college and expects revolt, soon. These kinds of things are probably a warm up.

/*sarcasm on*/ Oh, thatâs right (I forgot), it doesnât bash the U.S. or Bush, so it canât be newsworthy. /*sarcasm off*/

Posted by cingold 2004-07-19 8:51:25 PM|| 2004-07-19 8:51:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 cingold - Oops, needed at least one carriage return between images!

I think they're ready, or nearly so. It stopped being a youth-only movement when they (The Basij thugs) started the brutality - that changed a lot of Joe Average Persian minds, and they now support the kids. I can see a few older people in the second photo - bottom left are 2 older guys.

If our CIA isn't frozen in place due to Tenet's resignation, then one would suppose they are mining contacts and offering real support to these people - and, without giving away the farm, trying to coordinate action at some point in time. One thing I do not doubt at all: we are getting tons of intel - it just needs vetting and I believe we have contacts there to do that.

Posted by .com 2004-07-19 9:12:09 PM|| 2004-07-19 9:12:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 DPA, I'm not convinced that the average muslim is more devout than the average Christian, etc. It's just that their religion involves required DAILY rituals while Christian services are required only WEEKLY.

Posted by Tibor 2004-07-19 9:19:00 PM|| 2004-07-19 9:19:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Tibor, thats what I'm hoping too. Do good and free a muslim.

Wonder if contact has been made to Iranians ready for the fight.

Posted by Lucky 2004-07-19 9:29:13 PM|| 2004-07-19 9:29:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 You want my take on things?

Keep your eyes on that reactor.

If it gets destroyed, there will be more than one type of fallout spreading over Iran.

And to be sure, the Israelis are going to have to be very creative: they cannot overfly Iraq on the way in or out.

Unless they are hiding an operational aircraft carrier someplace, put a pin in the reactor location on the map, draw 3 sets of circles: smaller ones are the 2-way max laden range of an F-16 and then an F-15. Largest ones are 1-way range circles. In between is an irregular outline -bascially max-range from the reactor to the border, and then out from there (i.e. flying in to do the strike and ejecting just across the border).

Now examine the areas where there exist sufficiently isolated areas where a temporary airfield could be set up by commandos. Commandos who arrive via a commercial cargo plane and parachutes, and depart as soon as the F-15/16 lands, refuels, and takes off again.

Now look at the approach routes availabe from those areas. See which ones provide the best ingress, least opportunity to be picked up by *anyone's* on radars.

And if its a one-way trip, you dont need to worry about egress.

This is what's going to happen, unless Israel has some MRBM's that can reach that reactor, which I have not seen anything saying they do.

Faced with Mullahs with nukes and long range missles (from N Korea probably), there comes a time you ask your pilots to give their lives to save their nation.

Question left as an exercise to the readers (and the Mullahs): Remember Chernobyl?

Posted by OldSpook 2004-07-19 10:47:21 PM|| 2004-07-19 10:47:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 OS - Excellent. And if Bush is re-elected or it happens before November, then it will definitely be a 2-way trip with refueling available. He's got the stones and hasn't wimped on any real threat, despite all the boo-birds who want everything nuked yesterday and blame him for not doing so.

The F16I's that were commented upon just a couple of days ago - word was that they had the range. This page says they can hit "well within" Iran - 500 mile range.

So maybe none of the Israelis will have to take such drastic chances as E&E on foot. But I still believe Bush would be there for them, if needed. Skeery would pontificate and roll-over for a UN butt-probe.

Posted by .com 2004-07-19 10:59:21 PM|| 2004-07-19 10:59:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Old Spook, If I were going to set up the Op, I would look top pay dollars for a one night air strip rental in one of the Stan's and then arrange to ditch the aircraft in the GOO for submarine pick-up.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-07-19 11:01:52 PM|| 2004-07-19 11:01:52 PM|| Front Page Top

00:55 Anonymous8833
00:48 Anonymous1126
01:57 TanyaFromVegas
16:36 Frank G
16:09 Anonymous5876
16:03 Anonymous5876
11:37 Lucky
10:51 danking70
08:37 Aris Katsaris
08:17 Frank G
01:41 Super Hose
01:23 Lucky
01:22 Bomb-a-rama
01:20 Edward Yee
00:40 trailing wife
00:26 trailing wife
00:14 Super Hose
00:02 .com
00:00 .com
23:58 Bomb-a-rama
23:56 Super Hose
23:54 Rafael
23:53 Stephen
23:53 John