Article

2007-01-24 Home Front: WoT

The Logic Of US Deployments Points To Iran (spacewar.com)

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 3dc 2007-01-24 13:09|| || Front Page|| [11132 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Makes sense to me. Bombing campaign sometime before the Ides of March, maybe.

Posted by Jonathan">Jonathan 2007-01-24 13:38|| 2007-01-24 13:38|| Front Page Top

#2 It would be nice.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-24 13:53|| 2007-01-24 13:53|| Front Page Top

#3 Or we could save a lot of time and effort and risk to lives of free men and women with a simple declaration: If you attempt to develop nuclear weapons technology without our permission, or we suspect of so doing, we will use nuclear weapons preemptively to prevent you.

Of course, this is not going to happen. Though for the life of me I cannot understand why not. What on earth is the logic of allowing our sworn enemies - blood-thirsty barbarians from the Dark Ages - use our own weapons against us? What people in history would have tolerated this farce? Or is that going to be a question left to some future historian pondering this time after the long centuries of the next islamic Dark Age.

Posted by Excalibur 2007-01-24 14:04|| 2007-01-24 14:04|| Front Page Top

#4 How can we make such a conditional statement, Excalibur, when we're certain that they are working to develop nuclear weapons? Such a statement might have worked when the information first got out, but now the only thing we could say is, "Because we believe you are attempting to develop... bombing has commenced."

Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-24 14:18|| 2007-01-24 14:18|| Front Page Top

#5 Dubya does that with our Congress, the media and the dhims? Sheeeee-yah!

Posted by Brett 2007-01-24 14:41|| 2007-01-24 14:41|| Front Page Top

#6 Look up Dcline and Fall, Caliburn

Posted by gromgoru 2007-01-24 14:46|| 2007-01-24 14:46|| Front Page Top

#7 "The logic of the new force deployments President George W. Bush has approved for the Middle East appeared geared towards launching an air strike against Iran or deterring Iranian retaliation rather than preparing for a major change in U.S. strategy to win the war in Iraq."

Id say the latter. As some have pointed out its not just the force totals that are changing but the mission. In that we are going after the Mahdi army, to the extent it gets in the way of stabilizing baghdad. To put the hurt on Sadr, we have to be in a position to deter Iran from trying anything, and thats what this is about, I think.

As to the numbers, SW is omitting the US troops already in Baghdad, and the Iraqi troops. And that we may not try to clear and hold the entire city. Certainly not with US troops alone. IIUC, that is.

Posted by liberalhawk 2007-01-24 15:32|| 2007-01-24 15:32|| Front Page Top

#8 We have spent 50 years cultivating the idea that nuclear weapons are too horrible to use, when in fact that is not true. However, with the Soviet Union and the UNSC, we created a diplomatic regime based on that idea.

The diplomatic effort was to create international protocols so vicious that nobody would start a limited nuclear war, even via proxy. That nobody could use just a single nuke and walk away from it.

So we reach the position that the US will use nuclear weapons against no one but another major power, or in response to chemical or nuclear attack. We feel confident that our conventional forces can so brutally punish anyone else that the use of nukes would be counterproductive.

That being said, I may brag a bit by predicting some time ago what the US would have to do to fight Iran, namely first create extensive layered anti-missile systems over perhaps a 270 degree front against Iran.

Next, which I predict if and when we come to blows, will be both that we destroy their nuclear assets from the air, and hopefully, that we reduce their military and Revolutionary Guard units.

This latter is my final prediction, that though we may reduce Iran's nuclear capability by air power alone, we must go a step further than we did with Saddam's Iraq, in creating no-fly zones in the North and South. We must partition Iran, so that it again becomes just Persia.

Only by doing so will Persia be denied the money and resources to rebuild. Otherwise, we will have to screw around with them for a decade like we did with Saddam, and eventually have to have a second Iranian war.

As an added bonus to partitioning, we will create a very friendly nation of greater Kurdistan, a very friendly nation of greater Iraq, including its new Iranian territory of Khuzestan, and raise Musharaff of Pakistan by enlarging that state.

All of whom will form a strong core of American friendship in the region, despite what Persia thinks.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-01-24 17:51|| 2007-01-24 17:51|| Front Page Top

#9 DR. FEELGOOD, or HOW I LEARNED TO WORRY BY NOT USING THE BOMB. Dubya knows that the ME + NORTH KOREA-TAIWAN, etc now Africa are part of one conflict = battle, iff only becuz the Radics want it that way.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-01-24 23:32|| 2007-01-24 23:32|| Front Page Top

23:59 Joe of the Jungle
23:33 USN, ret.
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:23 OldSpook
23:22 OldSpook
23:21 JosephMendiola
23:17 USN, ret.
23:15 JosephMendiola
23:10 Anonymoose
23:05 trailing wife
23:02 Anonymoose
23:01 Jackal
23:00 trailing wife
22:58 Jackal
22:58 USN, ret.
22:58 trailing wife
22:54 Old Patriot
22:54 3dc
22:51 USN, ret.
22:43 Kos
22:43 Pappy
22:39 Pappy
22:35 Rob Crawford
22:27 Mike N.