Iran Archives
Battling The Sadrists In Iraq
By Lt Col P
Bonhomme Richard makes some good points in the post immediately below, about the week's fighting in Iraq. There is yet more to be said.
If the ISF are standing fast in Baghdad and Basra-- whether they need help or not-- that is an enormous step forward for them. As imperfect as it may be, the duly elected government of Iraq has to stand firm and be seen to stand firm for the rule of law and its own primacy. It cannot tolerate a competitor state-within-a-state. And that is what the Sadrists represent: the ugly alternative to the slow, slogging but real progress that country has made in the last five years.
An Iraq where Sadr dominates, or at the least is free to do whatever his fat ass pleases, is not in our vital interests. The Sunnis won't tolerate it, and the Kurds won't like it either. Iran stands to profit most from a Sadr victory of any magnitude.
Up til now, Sadr has lost every major contest of arms. If there is no political will simply to do away with him-- boy, don't we wish we'd done it back in 2003-- the next best thing is to slap him down every time he gets uppity. Let's hope the government of Iraq doesn't go wobbly on us, and doesn't let him get away with anything.
"Iran says God protects nuclear program"
By Charlie
I hope Allah’s air defenses are better than the ones the Iranians got from Russia …
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran 's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Sunday that God would punish Iranians if they do not support the country's disputed nuclear program, state radio reported.
And we think we can negotiate with them...What a bizarre world we live in…
A Lovely Development In Syria
By Lt Col P
One of the benefits of being an early is riser is seeing the occasional live report in the wee hours. I just saw the lovely Reena Ninan deliver some lovely news from the Levant-- to wit, the particularly vile heathen known as Imad Mughniyeh has assumed room temperature. In about a thousand pieces. And not a moment too soon.
It's a pity he won't be ascending the golden stairs, because he'd find that the streets are guarded by United States Marines. I suppose he'll just have to make do below decks, as it were. Waaay below decks.
Gaza Roundup
By Charlie
Terror! International Intrigue! War! Read my Gaza roundup below the fold!
Read More »
An Alternate view of the Hormuz Incident?
By Charlie
TEHRAN, Jan 10 (Reuters) - Iran released a video on Thursday which it said showed its boats did not threaten U.S. navy vessels in the Gulf, countering Washington's account of the event which President George W. Bush called "a provocative act".The video, aired by Iran's Press TV satellite station, gave a completely different version of Sunday's incident in the Strait of Hormuz compared with one released earlier this week by the U.S. Department of Defense.
The video showed an Iranian naval officer in a small craft speaking via radio to a ship which could not be clearly identified.
"Coalition warship 73 this (is an) Iranian navy patrol boat," the officer said in accented English.
"This is coalition warship 73. I read you loud and clear," the person replied in what seemed to be an American accent.
You have to hand it to the Iranians, they have good media people. They got this story into the news cycle quickly, and they are targeting US audiences. They assume (correctly in my view) that enough people distrust the US military to create reasonable doubt over the Pentagon report. Therefore, the next time the Iranians pull this stunt and get shot up, they can accuse the US of an act of war or an international incident, and seek to embarrass America on the world stage.
Let's Help Iran Remember the Good Times
By Bull Nav
It was way back during me & LTCOL P's cadetship.
Ronald Reagan was the President. The US was escorting re-flagged tankers in the Persian Gulf.
OPERATION PRAYING MANTIS.
And yes, it was a RETALIATORY action.
IRGCN Trys to Lose Some Small Boats
By Bull Nav
Over the weekend, there was some excitement in the Straits of Hormuz according to CNN:
CNN) -- The U.S. military reported Monday on a "significant" confrontation involving five Iranian Revolutionary Guard boats that "harassed and provoked" three U.S. naval ships in international waters over the weekend.
U.S. military officials said the incident occurred early Sunday morning in the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow shipping channel leading in and out of the Persian Gulf.
The five Iranian ships made "threatening" moves -- in one case coming within 200 yards of a U.S. ship, the U.S. officials said.
In one radio transmission, the Iranians told the U.S. Navy: "I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes," the U.S. military officials told CNN.
It sounds like the un-named US Warships maintained extraordinary fire discipline.
When the U.S. ships heard that radio transmission, they took up their gun positions and officers were "in the process" of giving the order to fire when the Iranians abruptly turned away, the U.S. officials said.
The SOH transit is usually a high-stress, very well-planned event. Everyone is usually on their toes and ready to go.
It will be interesting to see what comes of this, especially since the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps took over Persian Gulf naval responsibilities for Iran.
Fox News has it, too.
Also, Galrahn and Spook86 have posted on this incident.
Students Protest, Nothing Changes
By Charlie
In another sign of the ever-just-out-of-reach Iranian democratic revolution:
TEHRAN, Iran - Hundreds of Iranian students angry over a crackdown on activists protested Sunday at Tehran University, the second such demonstration in less than a week, witnesses and state radio said.One witness, Mehdi Arabshahi, said the campus protest lasted more than two hours as dozens of students chanted slogans against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's hardline administration.
"Students chanted against policies by Ahmadinejad's administration, which is imposing pressures on the universities and detaining activists," Arabshahi said.
Another witness, Abbas Kazemi, said the protesters also chanted anti-war slogans aimed at the United States and Israel.
Good for them! It is interesting that similar protests by university students occurred in Venezuela. Authoritarian regimes that are riding perpetual “revolutions” don’t seem to be very popular among the younger generations.
Police stand behind their shields during a students' protest against constitutional reform in Caracas October 23, 2007.
Iran’s hardline government may not be popular, but Saddam wasn’t popular either. Regimes that maintain high-end internal security forces, wide informer networks, and secret/religious police don’t need to be popular to stay in power. I doubt the ability of these student protestors to do anything other than give Ahmedinejad another excuse to say that his regime is under constant attack from the West.
…and the anti-US/Israel stuff: thrown in for street cred. I think that actually may be in the Roberts Rules of Order for Middle East Protests.
“call to order… Read the minutes of the last meeting… death to America.. death to Israel… Mr. Chairman I move that we carry around large signs and chant loudly in the middle of the street…”
Israel to Invade Gaza?
By Charlie
The IDF has been conducting small scale actions around Gaza since it withdrew in 2005, and following the kidnapping incidents that led to the 2006 war. Here’s the latest:
JERUSALEM - Israel's army has completed plans for a large offensive in the Gaza Strip and is only waiting for government approval, the military chief said Wednesday, shortly after two Palestinian militants were killed by Israeli tank fire in the coastal area.Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi said that until he receives the go-ahead for a broad operation, Israel would continue with its policy of airstrikes and brief ground incursions to halt Palestinian rocket attacks.
The Gaza incursions have been militarily frustrating for Israel. Hamas fighters are imbedded in the civilian populace in Gaza, and use the civilian infrastructure to facilitate their indirect fire attacks into Israel. Recall that in 2006, the purpose of the Israeli incursion into Lebanon was to halt the firing of rockets by Hezbollah into northern Israel. Even after the armored strike into Hezbollah-run southern Lebanon, the IDF withdrew following disastrous info-war counterpunches by Hezbollah. After the 2006 fighting ended, Hezbollah remained in southern Lebanon, still retaining the ability to fire rockets. This was all despite UNSCR 1701 which called for the disarmament of Hezbollah.
Why does Hezbollah matter this time? Because the same tactics used by Hezbollah will likely be used by Hamas if the IDF invades Gaza. Indirect fire against Israeli civilian and soft targets, and then Hamas fighters withdraw into their civilian areas. Any attacks by Israel on Gaza will be construed as warcrimes by the Arab media, and any civilian casualties will be broadcast and trumpeted as evidence of Israel’s brutality. Gaza’s Hamas militants will ignore all of the laws of armed conflict, and Israel will be held to he highest possible standard. In 2006, the IDF culminated without achieving many of its strategic objectives, and since Hezbollah was still on the battlefield after the dust settled, it was portrayed as a victor by the Arab media.
This type of warfare seems to be on the rise, and in the information age we live in, the infowar side of warfare, cannot be ignored. Also different this time is the possibility of intervention by Syria or Iran in the conflict. If Israel suffers another stalemate or defeat like it did in 2006- it may be viewed as weak enough to strike at by Iran or its other enemies.
Iran Stopped Work on Nukes?
By Charlie
WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.The conclusions of the new assessment are likely to reshape the final year of the Bush administration, which has made halting Iran’s nuclear program a cornerstone of its foreign policy.
If the report is correct, it is good news. HOWEVER, Iran continues to pursue civilian nuclear power programs, which could easily be construed as dual-use technology. When Iran gets its civilian nuclear plants on line, how long will it be until they test their first weapon?
Also, the report indicated that Iran did have a covert weapons program –against its stated agreements- but shut it down in 2003. So Iran lied once, and now has stopped lying, allegedly.
The US has consistently underestimated the development of nuclear weapons in foreign countries (Pakistan’s bomb was missed). Trusting Ahmedinijad at this point, seems like a risky move.
Diplomacy Fails, Iranian Nuke Research Continues
By Charlie
LONDON - An 18-month attempt to persuade Iran to mothball uranium enrichment collapsed Friday after a senior European Union envoy failed to dent Tehran's resolve to expand the technology, despite the threat of new U.N. sanctions.The meeting had been considered a last chance for Iran to give in to pressure from the five permanent U.N. Security Council nations and at least freeze — if not dismantle — its enrichment program before the end of the month, ahead of a new effort by the five nations to find common language on a third set of U.N. sanctions.
…EU's Javier Solana: "After five hours of meetings, I expected more, and therefore I am disappointed,"
Wow, five hours. I know I expected the EU to be able to talk Iran out of their nukes in five hours.
The EU doesn’t seem to be approaching this with too much urgency. Too bad for them, they’re in missile range.
Yawn
By John
Iran to Fire '11,000' Rockets at US Bases if Attacked-
Iran warned on Saturday it would fire off 11,000 rockets at enemy bases within the space of a minute if the United States launched military action against the Islamic republic."In the first minute of an invasion by the enemy, 11,000 rockets and cannons would be fired at enemy bases," said a brigadier general in the elite Revolutionary Guards, Mahmoud Chaharbaghi.
"This volume and speed of firing would continue," added Chaharbaghi, who is commander of artillery and missiles of the Guards' ground forces, according to the semi-official Fars news agency.
The United States has never ruled out attacking Iran to end its defiance over the controversial Iranian nuclear programme, which the US alleges is aimed at making nuclear weapons but Iran insists is entirely peaceful.
Unless of course the first thing to go is the Iranian C2 node which disseminates war orders to its rocket forces. Second to go is its backup. And so it goes.
Hell, with PGMs being what they are, we could do that with one F-16. These are the types of scenarios that make the US Air Force giggle with glee.
I've made my stance against attacking Iran pretty clear. But it's hard to not to point out when these guys are being total numbnuts. Back in 91, Saddam made similar threats. That was until the air war started and he found himself completely cut off from his front line troops within minutes. By the time he could get the orders out to his Scud units, most of them had been already been greased. The rest flew at Israel in a lame attempt to break up the coalition.
That was 16 years ago.
Before the B2 Spirit came along.
So make the Air Force's day, Iran. God knows they need it.
What to do, What to Do
By John
WASHINGTON - While military action against Iran is a last resort, the U.S. has the resources to attack if needed despite the strains of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the top U.S. military officer said Thursday.
Navy Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the focus now is on diplomacy to stem Iran's nuclear ambitions and its support for insurgents in Iraq.But, he told reporters, "there is more than enough reserve to respond (militarily) if that, in fact, is what the national leadership wanted to do."
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons could set of an arms race in the Middle East. "The risk of an accident or a miscalculation or of those weapons or materials falling into the hands of terrorists seem to me to be substantially increased," he said.
I think alot of folks have simmered on the "bomb Iran" talk recently, and I can't help but to agree with the chill. Mainly because the Iranians are ducking fumb and we're constantly overestimating them.
I've worked with nukes and I know what goes into making a functional bomb. It ain't easy. Iran is still shopping for flour and eggs, don't think they've even started to bake the cake. And that doesn't even touch the immense technological hurdle in shrinking a bomb so that it can be mated to a proper delivery system, whether that be a Shahab-III or one of their crappy ass new fighters that would get shot down before it got to within 300 miles of its target.
Iran is ripe for another revolution. Absolutely ripe. The bulk of their population was born after the '79 revolution, there are mass protests weekly, and the Mullahs are desperately trying to drum up nationalistic fervor to ward off a potential coup. Why give it to them? I'd rather patiently work these clowns from the inside instead of bombing their shitty, backwards nuclear program that'd reunite Persia against the West.
In the end, we all want the same thing. Mullahs out, democracy in. The debate is in how we do it. Fostering internal revolution seems the most effective way to get what we want, bombing is too short term and can't change governments. And invasion? That's just not going to happen folks.
We've got some time on this. I say we use it.
Blast from the Past
By John
Boy, how's that for timing? I was just making fun of this flying Gremlin the other day...
Iran shows off
Iran unveiled on Thursday a new home-grown fighter jet amid growing tensions with the United States, saying the plane could "blind the eyes" of its enemies.State television showed pictures of two "Saegheh" (Thunder) fighters -- said by Iran to be similar to the American F-18 -- taking off in tandem and then landing for a ceremony at Tehran's Mehrabad airport.
"This fighter plane has been researched, designed and built with indigenous means and this new generation of fighter plane is entering industrial production," Defence Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said, according to the state-run IRNA news agency.
"Our forces like a thunderbolt will blind the eyes of the enemies of our land," he added. "And in the battlefield of defending our land, just like a thunderbolt, they will set ablaze the enemies' camp."
He went on to say that the Saegeh could defeat the F-18 in dogfights, out maneuver the F-22, and merge with other Saegehs to form Voltron.
So what's with the stupid thunderbolt talk? Mostafa sounds like an Iroquois Medicine Man. No doubt the Saegeh's radar will spot enemies with the eyes of hawk, and strike with the strength of bear. PR note to Tehran, if you're going to show off your crappy new military equipment, leave the Dances with Wolves talk at home.
Anyway, Mostafa's awful proud of this thing, considering the fact that Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer shot down like, five of them while riding the highway to the danger zone in 1986.
Oh, but that was before Iran added the second stabilizer.
Well played, Tehran. Well played.
Hotel Tango: F-18 (and one time F-5) driver Lex, who asks:
So this is the aircraft the Iranian Air Force Chief of Staff intends to use to “punish” Israel if that country attacks their nuclear program? Slap a dihedral tail on a forty year old airframe, paint it up like a Blue Angel and call that progress?
To save my life, I can't find the link..... but I'd point out that these are the same jokers who used a Blue Angels photo on the Iranian Air Force website. At least they've stepped up their fakery, y'know?
President Bush to Act on Iran?
By John
Not the double secret sanctions definition of "act," either.
The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned.The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo."
The White House claims that Iran, whose influence in the Middle East has increased significantly over the last six years, is intent on building a nuclear weapon and is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The vice-president, Dick Cheney, has long favoured upping the threat of military action against Iran. He is being resisted by the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the defence secretary, Robert Gates.
I'm calling shenanigans here. This Guardian guy crafted a whole story from some insider's gut feeling.
Bush doesn't trust a Dem to launch an air campaign in response to some rogue dictator snubbing UN sanctions? Are you serious?
Desert Fox, Deliberate Force anyone? That's what Democrats do.
I'm not making a statement in favor of military action against the Iranians or against it. Just pointing out that this story is sensationalist, and should be treated with the same regard as you treat National Enquirer headlines in the supermarket checkout.
Iran's Fancy New Centrifuges
By John
Suck, according to Jeffrey Lewis at Arms Control Wonk.
If you happened to hear my interview with the Pundit Review on WRKO Boston, I mentioned that Iran's shoddy centrifuges was the biggest obstacle in their quest for weapons grade fissible material. So when I read that Iran had purchased 3,000 new pieces for their centrifuge collection, I was a bit perturbed.
Luckily, Jeff was there to bring me back down to Earth:
So, in case you missed it … some members of the news media are freaking out, reporting Ahmadinejad’s claim that Iran is enriching uranium “on an industrial scale,” repeating Larijani’s claim that Iran is running UF6 [uranium hexafluoride] though 3,000 centrifuges,” and parroting the usual pundits' warnings that the end of the world is just around the corner… Repent!Seriously people, you should just write it on a placard and wander the streets ringing a bell.
As far as I can tell, the technical people have said two things:
Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Director Gholamreza Aqazadeh said “With the entry into the stage of mass-production of centrifuges and the start of nuclear fuel production on an industrial scale and with several years of efforts and hopes bearing fruit, the (nuclear) project has entered a new stage.”
AEOI’s Mohammad Saiedi declined to say how many centrifuges Iran had, explaining “We enter the industrial stage after passing the pilot stage. ... Our pilot stage included two cascades of 164 centrifuges; we passed the stage and entered the industrial level.”
As I read these statements, the Iranians are confirming what was reported the other day … that Iran has installed additional 164-machine cascades—maybe more than 1,000 centrifuges in total—at the Fuel Enrichment Plant at Natanz.
Three things worth keeping in mind, before you sell that nice little townhouse on Logan Circle and relocate to Montana:
-1,000 P1 centrifuges (assuming 2 kg SWU per machine) operating continuously require 23-29 months to enrich enough uranium for a bomb; 3,000 P1 centrifuges would take 8-10 months. Either way, we’ve still got time, probably two years assuming the centrifuges can operate continuously.
-Iran still does not operate its centrifuges continuously. Based on Iran’s past consumption of UF6, Iran feeds gas into its centrifuges only about 20 percent of the time, suggesting the machines are either breaking down or that Iran cannot use its own UF6 as feedstock.
-There is no evidence that Iran can mass produce the components of 3,000 centrifuges. The Iranians can claim mass production, but I want to see the evidence that Iran can mass produce ball bearings and maraging steel bellows for the P1. Diplomats have been saying Iran imported enough components for about 1,000 to 2,000 centrifuges. So, my guess is that Iran can make today’s announcement with what they bought from AQ Khan; they may run into problems when they try to push past that number.
All of this is to suggest that today’s announcement seems like a stunt.
Like I said over at Townhall last week, there's a big difference between being strong and pretending that you are strong. Iran is a pretender.
Hotel Tango: Shachtman
Hey Look
By John
I've got another column up over at Townhall.com. One where I use lots of important sounding military phrases and words like "paradigm."
I wanted to title it "IRAN IS TEH SUXOR!!!!!" but Mary Katharine wouldn't let me. She also spell-checked the hell out of it....did you guys know there was an "h" in dinghy? Seriously.
Britain Warned about the 3/23 Kidnapping?
By Charlie
The warning came after the US received credible information that Iranian-backed extremists were plotting attacks on Western targets.
American intelligence analysts told their British counterparts that the arrest of the five Iranians would have a direct impact on southern Iraq. Crucially, they warned that there was evidence that Iran intended to step up attacks in the border area and around Basra, where British forces are based.
A security source said: "The intelligence was passed to the UK and was generally disseminated. The intelligence that led to the arrests showed that Iran was financing and facilitating operations on the border and in the South.
If there’s one thing Iran knows how to do, its take hostages. However, the world’s a different place than it was in 1979 –and we have 130,000 troops parked next door. These days, the capture of troops-as-hostages is usually a casus belli (see Israel last summer with the initiation of a hot war with Hamas and Hizballah.)
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Despite their domestic wobbly-ness, I expect the Brits to play hardball on this. We should play hardball too.
I also expect the anti-war crowd to forward the following premises: (1) the captured sailors were on a secret mission to attack Iran, which was only acting in self-defense when it graciously subdued them. (2) We should just do a hostage trade with the Iranians, trading captured Iranians in Iraq back to the Islamic republic.
Iranian Official Alive and In U.S. Hands?
By Lt Col P
According to this report, yes.
Rumors have been swirling since his disappearance-- was he whacked, was he snatched, or did he just jump ship?
Fox News has it. (Note to Fox, get Rudi Bakhtiar to cover this, assisted by Reena Nainan. PLEASE.)
This is very interesting, if that report proves correct. And if it isn't correct, the mystery persists.
Too Late to Stop Iran Bomb
By John
Iran will be able to develop enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear bomb and there is little that can be done to prevent it, an internal European Union document has concluded.
"Little that can be done?" Au contraire, mes amis...
Read More »
Well....Duh
By John
Pentagon Planning for Strike on Iran:
US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according to informed sources in Washington.
The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office.Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, are urging Mr Bush to open a new front against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans. The sources said Mr Bush had not yet made a decision. The Bush administration insists the military build-up is not offensive but aimed at containing Iran and forcing it to make diplomatic concessions. The aim is to persuade Tehran to curb its suspect nuclear weapons programme and abandon ambitions for regional expansion.
I love this byline: Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced.
Translated: Lying liars!!
Course we call it 'military deception' in the service. Just sayin'...
Although I'm not too terribly sure that The Guardian has this right. My understanding is that we've said we have no plans to attack Iran at the present. What I have heard is plenty of "all options are on the table" chatter. And the Pentagon plans for everything (like invading Canada!), just because we plan for a contingency doesn't mean it's going to happen. Otherwise we would have conquered the moon years ago (why else would the Marines need a 'space plane')?
I'm not too sure why The Guardian is so skeptical of our 'diplomatic pressure' line. Carrier battle groups send a very strong message, which is why we responded to Chinese chest-thumping by sending two of 'em sailing around Taiwan back in the 1990s.
And if you were wondering, yes... I'm ignoring the not-so-subtle "Bushco is a lying killing killer warmonger!!" narrative. One, it's The Guardian....two, aren't we all used to it by now?
What Kind of Help?
By John
It's an important question to ask, you know.
North Korea helping Iran with Nuclear Testing
North Korea is helping Iran to prepare an underground nuclear test similar to the one Pyongyang carried out last year. Under the terms of a new understanding between the two countries, the North Koreans have agreed to share all the data and information they received from their successful test last October with Teheran's nuclear scientists.
Successful is a rather loose term, I think. Data on a bomb whose effectiveness was suspect doesn't worry me. Physical help, such as supplying the Iranians with weapons grade uranium, does.
The Iranians already have a detailed schematic on how to make a bomb. Knowledge isn't really an issue, they received a virtual how-to from Pakistani nuclear scientist AQ Khan over a decade ago. The fly in Iran's radioactive ointment is the material. Enriching U-235 or U-238 to the 90% requisite for the bomb is, for lack of better words, a giant pain in the ass. It's one of the primary reasons that the world's nuclear club is so small.
So if North Korea is providing logistical support to Iran's nuclear weapons program, worry. If they're just exchanging notebooks, I'm not as concerned. Figure Israel is going to put a stop to this program well before the Iranians get close anyway, so I suppose that Kim Jong Il is just speeding up the inevitable.
How Iran Attacks
By Slab
I got my January issue of the Marine Corps Gazette yesterday, and opened it up this morning to find that one of my Brother Rats, Capt John A. Tempone '01, wrote one of the articles featured within. John is studying at the Defense Language Institute (DLI) to become a Foreign Area Officer (FAO). It's been nearly four years since I've seen or heard from John, so I'm glad to see he's doing well.
John's article, whose title I borrowed for this entry, is a nice synopsis of the threat posed by Iran. With Iraq embroiled in an insurgency that the Iranians have every interest in perpetuating, they have quickly become the dominant threat in the region. The article doesn't advocate pre-emptive or offensive action, John only seeks to point out the history and capabilities of the Iranian threat, in order to encourage commanders to safeguard against attacks by Iranian-backed terrorists.
Although war is by no means inevitable, forward deployed military leaders must be prepared for an escalation of force in the CentCom AOR. A military confrontation with Iran is not likely to be a conventional battle akin to Operation Desert Storm, with large set piece armor and infantry engagements. Rather, it will be a continuation of what has been an ongoing "cold war," characterized by asymmetrical tactics (i.e., terrorist attacks against the U.S. and her allies in the region) and proxy warfare in Iraq. The likeliness of this course of action is based on the Iranian military's current capabilities and historical analysis of Iranian force employment.
Read all of it here: How Iran Attacks - A look at an adversary in the global war on terrorism
Israel to Employ TACNUKES?
By John
Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran --
ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources. The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb. Under the plans, conventional laser-guided bombs would open “tunnels” into the targets. “Mini-nukes” would then immediately be fired into a plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce the risk of radioactive fallout.
“As soon as the green light is given, it will be one mission, one strike and the Iranian nuclear project will be demolished,” said one of the sources.
Militarily feasible. Although having studied Israeli military history, I can't help but to wonder if this is some sort of subterfuge aimed at pressuring the US. "Do you really want nuclear war in the Middle East? You can do it conventionally, or we can do it atomically. Your call." Israel isn't America, where government officials and journalists shoot craps with classified programs to achieve political ends. Corrupt? Maybe. Stupid? Definitely not. That's why this leak's got "calculated" written all over it.
On the other hand, tactical nuclear weapons used in a bunker busting capacity would have a negligible impact on infastructure outside Iran's nuclear facilities. The fact that Israel would be risking pilots to do a job that one of their Jericho IRBMs could easily handle indicates that Israel is interested in minimizing collateral damage. Fallout would be minimal, particularly if they hit the Mullahs before they are able to sustain a fission reaction at one of their test facilities.
This isn't the Cold War. There's no threat of nuclear escalation, where the bulk of the civilized world was held at risk by a far-reaching, hard-hitting nuclear arsenal. There's no strategic scenario here with an endstate of zero. In this ballgame, Israel hits Iran hard, and Iran -due to the limits of its power- reacts either economically or asymmetrically.
In short, Israel could make this work.
Iran's New Year's Resolutions
By Lt Col P
... Do not bode well for us, or the rest of the world for that matter. See this article on NRO, Iran Sobered Us Up on New Year’s: A message of nuclear proportions.
Folks, just because they're nucking futs doesn't mean we can dismiss them. They bear watching.
Check Aim
By John
Iran: Israel will end like USSR
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has told a conference in Tehran questioning the Holocaust that Israel's days are numbered. "Just as the USSR disappeared, soon the Zionist regime will disappear," he said to the applause of the participants.
With a swelling youth population that hates his guts, a sputtering economy (despite Iran's vast oil wealth), and hundreds of thousands of coalition forces enveloping his border, you'd think Ahmmy would be more worried about himself.....
The Plot Thickens
By John
Ah yes...
Israeli-US plot behind pope's remarks: Iran hardline press
Iranian hardline newspapers said there were signs of an Israeli-US plot behind remarks by Pope Benedict XVI that linked Islam to violence and created a wave of anger across the Muslim world.
The daily Jomhuri Islami said Israel and the United States -- the Islamic republic's two arch-enemies -- could have dictated the comments to distract attention from the resistance of the Shiite militant group Hezbollah to Israel's offensive on Lebanon."The reality is that if we do not consider Pope Benedict XVI to be ignorant of Islam, then his remarks against Islam are a dictat that the Zionists and the Americans have written (for him) and have submitted to him."
Indeed. My reaction:
Read More »
Iran's President to Speak at the UN
By John
I couldn't think of a more appropriate venue....
Diplomats at the United Nations were sent into disarray yesterday when President Ahmadinejad of Iran declared that he intended to attend the General Assembly of the world body on September 19 and to debate his country's nuclear program with President Bush, who is due to address the Assembly that day.
Although, I digress....I think I've heard this story before.
Read More »
Iran's New Fighter
By John
Iran Deploys Locally Manufactured Warplane (AP) -
Iran deployed its first locally-manufactured fighter bomber plane on Wednesday during large-scale military exercises, state-run television reported. "The bomber Saegheh or lightening is similar to (the American) F-18 but more powerful. It was designed, optimised and improved by Iranian experts," the report said.
Better than the superbug eh? Alright, sounds interesting...let's have a look.
WTF? Is that an old F-5 with twin canted vertical stabilizers? Iran expects us to break a sweat over this jalopy?
It’s the classic “pig wearing a rolex” thing: It may look good on him, but he can’t do a damn thing with it, and it won’t save his life come harvest time.
I'd be hesitant to compare this aviation abortion to a "rolex," or to concede that it looks good. She's got a face that only her Iranian mother could love. Plus calling a Vietnam era fighter with upgraded stabilizers "new" is a bit of a stretch.
But, even if this fighter could accomplish all the wonderful things that the Iranians say it can, Lex is right...they wouldn't have a clue what to do with it. The Iranian's have no idea how to apply modern technology on the battlefield.
Not that this piece of crap is modern....
Hotel Tango to Will Collier @ Vodkapundit.
**Update** Murdoc has more, with pics.
Israel Prepares for War, Again
By John
Israel has appointed a top general to oversee a war against Iran, prompting speculation that it is preparing for possible military action against Tehran's nuclear program. Maj. Gen. Elyezer Shkedy, Israel's air force chief, will be overall commander for the "Iran front," military sources told the London Sunday Telegraph.
Calling it the Iran "front" is accurate, as action against Iran would simply be a different battlefield in Israel's current war in southern Lebanon. Lebanon is to Normandy as Tehran is to Berlin, if you want the World War II/SAT comparison to engaging the same enemy on different fields of battle.
Such is the tragic reality of being a "one bomb state," where one nuclear bomb can negate your ability to continue as a functioning nation. Law of the jungle applies in the Middle East, kill or be killed.
The Israelis are being understandably tight lipped on their plans. But their appointment of an Air Force commander indicates that airpower will be a primary actor in any Iranian theater.
Expect 5-6 primary targets, with roughly 5 major aimpoints per targets. Iran has certain "must-hit facilities," which will be defended by Iran's newly acquired, state of the art Russian surface to air missiles and the Iranian Air Force.
One small comfort, however. Iran demonstrated during their war with Iraq that they lacked an understanding of their own technology. Their tactics, which are based on old Soviet doctrinal "mass of force" principles, are obsolete. And the one strategy that has paid off for the Iranians -asymmetric, low intensity conflict- is useless against an air assault.
Make no mistake, such a campaign will cost Israeli lives. But I have no doubt that if the IAF undertakes this dangerous mission, they will be successful.
Jerusalem Post: Iran Planning Nuclear "Surprise"
By John
A senior official in Teheran said Wednesday that in the next few days, a "surprise" was expected regarding Iran's nuclear program, Al-Jazeera reported.
Yawn. The only thing that would be a "surprise" is if the UN managed to cease Iran's uranium enrichment program.
You guys can believe Al-Jazeera all you want, cooler heads are prevailing here at OPFOR.
Israel Can Go the Distance
By John
Israel has purchased 25 $84 million F-15I (I for Israel) Ra'am, a special version of the U.S. F-15E long-range interdiction bomber. It also is buying 102 of another long-range tactical jet, the $45 million F-16I Sufa. About 60 have been delivered.
The Jewish state also is buying 500 U.S. BLU-109 "bunker buster" bombs that could penetrate the concrete protection around some of Iran's underground facilities, such as the uranium enrichment site at Natanz. The final piece of the enterprise is a fleet of B-707 air-to-air refuelers that could nurse strike aircraft as they made the 900-mile-plus trip inside Iran, dropped their bombs and returned to Israel.
"They have the capability to strike Iran," said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney, a former fighter pilot who has trained with Israelis. "It would be limited, though. They could do 30 to 40 'aim points' in the array. I'm not worried about them hitting the targets. They will suffer losses, but they are capable of doing it."
You don't buy airborne refuelers unless your intention is to project force outside the normal range of your fighters. 30 to 40 aim points sounds about right; I'd be curious to see the strike package that Israel assembles for the mission. As Operation Dawn proved in 1967, the Israelis won't hestitate to send their entire fighter fleet if that is what they feel is necessary to accomplish the mission.
Now the question is airspace. What Arab nation are they going to have to fly over to strike the Persians?
He's Baa-ack!
By Charlie
Our favorite reporter since Geraldo Rivera, Seymore Hersh, reports the following:
The military’s problem with the President’s Iran policy
That's right, folks, the military -who (this week) are being portrayed as the noble warriors with the courage to speak truth to power. We'll see how long this will play out, until the media template reverses back to the military as a) un-educated redneck morons from the south with no hope of social mobility who join military and become cannon fodder becasue society at large has failed them -or, b) a relentless machine of sadistic torturers who crush the lesser peoples of the world under their jackboots as they spread America's evil imperialism across the globe. But Hersh has inside sources in the Pentagon (conveiniently without name and/or rank to attach to their comments).
Sayeth Hersh:
Inside the Pentagon, senior commanders have increasingly challenged the President’s plans, according to active-duty and retired officers and officials. The generals and admirals have told the Administration that the bombing campaign will probably not succeed in destroying Iran’s nuclear program. They have also warned that an attack could lead to serious economic, political, and military consequences for the United States.
...
A senior military official told me, “Even if we knew where the Iranian enriched uranium was—and we don’t—we don’t know where world opinion would stand. The issue is whether it’s a clear and present danger. If you’re a military planner, you try to weigh options. What is the capability of the Iranian response, and the likelihood of a punitive response—like cutting off oil shipments? What would that cost us?” Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his senior aides “really think they can do this on the cheap, and they underestimate the capability of the adversary,” he said.
...
A retired four-star general, who ran a major command, said, “The system is starting to sense the end of the road, and they don’t want to be condemned by history. They want to be able to say, ‘We stood up.’ ”
Read More »
Charlie Foxtrot
By John
Nonaligned Nations Prepare to Back Iran:
VIENNA, Austria - Western countries pushed Tuesday for broad support on the need for Iran to freeze uranium enrichment, but nonaligned countries backed Tehran, saying all countries have the right to pursue a nuclear program for civilian use. A statement drawn up by the 16-nation nonaligned bloc at the board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency "reaffirmed the basic and inalienable right" of all countries to develop, produce and use atomic energy "for peaceful purposes, without any discrimination and in conformity with their respective legal obligations."
In related news, Israel has been awful quiet recently.....
US sweetens the pot for Iran
By Charlie
In a move that will surely be mocked and laughed at by the mullahs, diplomats have offered Iran trade deals to give up their nukes. Think it will work?
VIENNA (AFP) - The United States has offered to lift some of its trade sanctions against Iran as part of a package of benefits the EU will deliver to get Tehran to guarantee it will not make nuclear weapons, diplomats told AFP.The United States is proposing "lifting sanctions partially, not only waiving sanctions but actually lifting them," in an agreement to be worked out in multilateral talks that would start once Iran suspended uranium enrichment, said a senior Western diplomat, who requested anonymity.
Washington, which considers Iran a sponsor of terrorism and now fears it is covertly developing nuclear weapons, has since the mid-1990's banned most US trade and investment with the Islamic Republic.
Lifting sanctions would allow sales to Iran of things like agricultural technology and commercial planes to replace the country's dilapidated fleet.
US officials have said they want to keep the details of the proposal secret in order to avoid the appearance of threatening Iran.
Well, what a relief that this is still a "secret" proposal. Meanwhile, the Iranians seem to be hinting that they will brandish the economic weapon in a slightly different manner:
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, supreme leader of the world's fourth-largest oil exporter, said on Sunday that if the United States makes a "wrong move" toward Iran, energy flows in the region would be endangered.
The futility of negotiations is getting clearer each day...
Take a deep breath –things can get much, much worse in the MidEast
By Charlie
The US has had some recent setbacks in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the problems in these two countries don’t hold a candle to the forces roiling against the entire region of the middle east. Terrorism, extremism, poor governance, WMD proliferation, genocide, ethnic cleansing, violence, civilian deaths, and oil politics affect all countries in the region –not just the ones with US troops in them. These forces could split the Arab/Muslim world apart just as easily as Iraq and Afghanistan could collapse on us. Folks, things could get way worse.
Read More »
Aggressive Negotiations
By John
Here's today's feet up, slippers on, pipe puffing, evening reading on Iran. Steve Schippert:
Reading media reaction, whether as reportage or editorial, to yesterday’s statement by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the United States is open to direct talks with Iran on the nuclear crisis is largely disappointing. Nearly every report or editorial places an inappropriate emphasis upon the offer to Iran of direct talks without understanding – or at least properly explaining to news consumers – the profound significance of the prerequisite condition of the cessation of all enrichment activities.The enrichment cessation demand – decidedly not a policy shift, reversal or concession – is mentioned by each, but readily discarded and supplanted by lengthy conversation and coverage of what direct talks with Iran may mean. This misplaced focus on ends rather than means puts the proverbial cart clearly and ill-advisedly before the horse.
Let us be clear: The enrichment cessation demand has never been nor will it become a negotiable point for the Bush Administration.
Let us also be clear: Tehran has made it unmistakable that enrichment is their right and that enrichment has never been nor will it become a negotiable point.
I'm so proud of Steve. The reason he's been writing so eloquently recently means he probably sat down and read that copy of Hooked on Phonics that I sent him last month
Sitting at the Table With Iran?
By Charlie
WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States said Wednesday it would join in face-to-face talks with Iran over its disputed nuclear program if Tehran first agreed to put challenged atomic activities on hold, a shift in tactics meant to offer the Iranians a last chance to avoid punishing sanctions.Iran dismissed the offer as "a propaganda move."
Before leaving for meetings in Europe on Iran, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that while the U.S. was willing to join talks between European nations and Iran, it was also helping to prepare a package of sanctions that Tehran could face should it decline the new offer.
"We're prepared to go either way," she said
Look, we’ve covered this fairly thoroughly. Bottom Line Up Front:
-Iran won’t stop (verifiably) enriching uranium, therefore, the offer of the US participating in the talks is a diplomatic-based exercise, not a reality-based one.
-The EU-3 came to this conclusion 3 years ago, and is not prepared to either impose sanctions or lend their support to a military campaign.
-Russia and China will stick together. Until one of them can be peeled off to the West’s side, no sanctions will ever be imposed on Iran.
Therefore, working off of the “give a mouse a piece of cheese” model, the next move by the international community/Iran will be pressure on the US to engage in bilateral talks. This, of course, smacks of unilateralism.
But, hey… 2003 and OIF-1 was 3 years ago. I’m sure the world community would be fine with us engaging Iran in a good old-fashioned discussion like Southern and Southern (West Asian) gentlemen.
Read More »
Iran: Why Diplomacy (alone) Won't Work
By Charlie
Iran’s current situation, stringing out multilateral talks until it can get nukes, seems to be working out wonderfully. Is there any way out of this impending train-wreck of international policy? Multilateralism has worked in the past, but Iran seems to have mastered the game of brinkmanship. Can anything be done? I say no, unless we change some perceptions.
Read More »
Iran Burning
By Charlie
Earlier this month, a cartoon was published in Iran. It poked fun at ethnic Azeris, who, following the current MidEast rational action SOP, started burning stuff.
The protests have spread.
Like basketball victories that turn into smash-and-grab riots, other groups in Iran have risen up in "solidarity" with the Azeris -for their own purposes. Meanwhile, in: Azerbaijan:
A peaceful demonstration by Azeris in the Iranian city of Tabriz and the subsequent violent crackdown on the protestors by Iranian law-enforcement agencies has resulted in public outrage in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan. Politicians, non-governmental organizations, and the general public have condemned the Iranian government for the bloodshed, which they attribute to the chauvinism and brutality of the Tehran regime.
Back in Tehran, the mullahs are- of course- blaming America!
TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran's supreme leader said Sunday the United States would fail to provoke ethnic strife in the Islamic republic after several days of protests over a cartoon that insulted the country's largest minority.Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also said in a speech broadcast by state-run television that "trying to provoke ethnic and religious unrest is the last desperate shot by enemies."
While this is probably not America's fault, it has revealed a glaring weakness in the Iranian regime. Stay tuned.
More on the Missile Defense for Europe
By Charlie
AP:
TEL AVIV, Israel -Iran test-fired a long-range missile, Israeli defense officials said Wednesday, as President Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed concern over Iran's nuclear program in Washington.The defense officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to reporters, said the missile was a Shihab-3 with a range of 900 miles, the same type of missile that has been test-fired several times in the past.
Olmert mentioned Iranian missiles of that range at a news conference in Washington after meeting with Bush, noting that it would give Iran the ability to strike any point in Europe as well as
Israel. He said it is not to late to stop the Iranian program.
Possible range of Iran's current strategic missile forces:
Current NATO countries:
Iran’s missiles are being taken as an emerging threat by serious nations across the globe. NATO countries are wise to the threat, but I fear for Europe. Centers of regional power like Paris, Brussels, Istanbul, and other areas outside of US defensive range remain vulnerable to the Iranians. As long as this regime remains in place, they will continue to research and improve their missile technology.
My take is that it should be an American responsibility to protect our forward deployed troops protected from missile threats. This extends to our allies that are aiding us in accomplishing our mission abroad. This (should) stop, however, with it becoming an American responsibility to shield Europe (or whoever else in the world) from all missile threats. As long as the EU thinks they can “negotiate” with Iranians who overtly mock the diplomatic proceedings- yet laughably participate to draw out the timeline enabling them to achieve their nuclear goals – the Europeans should be comfortable with the fact that they are increasingly coming into the range of the very weapons they are at the table to talk about. If the EU puts their infinite faith in the diplomatic process, let them back that up by keeping their soft underbellies vulnerable.
That being said, huzzah for theatre missile defense! May it be deployed successfully everywhere.
***Update***
How silly of me to not consider perpetual attention-grubbing Russia! John mentioned it below, but I think the obvious reason for the Missile Defense in Europe is to counter Iran, and to a lesser extent, Syria. However, Russia, like the drunk girl at the party who thinks that everyone is talking to her, wants to be popular so bad.
So Sayeth Pravda:
Russia’s Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said in April of the current year that Russia had a right to take all necessary measures to safeguard Russia’s national security in the event Russia sees a threat near its borders. Furthermore, if the USA deploys its anti-missile base in Poland or even in Great Britain, it endangers Russia’s Plesetsk space port.
Because its all about you, right? More below.
Read More »
I Laughed So Hard I Nearly Cried
By Maj P
I’m about halfway through Guests of the Ayatollah, Mark Bowden’s excellent book on the Iran hostage crisis. Being old enough to remember the event fairly well, I nevertheless knew very little detail about it. I strongly recommend the book, but be warned: it will make your blood boil.
So many things stand out, but there is one section that should make readers, Marines in particular, laugh out loud. Beginning on page 319, there is a great passage on how the Marine guards tormented their captors as only Marines can: by being deliberately and gleefully offensive.
Two Marines “kept up a constant torrent of verbal abuse.” Another Marine “had begun substituting the word ‘Khomeini’ for every foul word in the English language, and his fellow Marines adopted it with relish. When they needed to use the toilet, they would tell the guard, ‘I need to take a Khomeini.’”
“When the two Marines found a stack of the guards’ plates and eating utensils piled in the bathroom they urinated on them. One night they wrapped a butter knife in a rag [why is this so classically Marine?] and took turns poking it at the exposed wires of their lamp. It shorted out the electricity… They waited for the guards to replace the fuse and get the lights back on and then did it again.”
“When the guards installed a camera in the bathroom, after catching on that their captives were leaving notes for each other there, the Marines made a point of putting on lewd shows before it, offending their guards’ Islamic sensibilities so badly that they gave up and took it down.” Priceless!
Those are only a few humorous excerpts in an otherwise sobering book. Go read the whole thing.
I Laughed So Hard I Nearly Cried
By Maj P
I’m about halfway through Guests of the Ayatollah, Mark Bowden’s excellent book on the Iran hostage crisis. Being old enough to remember the event fairly well, I nevertheless knew very little detail about it. I strongly recommend the book, but be warned: it will make your blood boil.
So many things stand out, but there is one section that should make readers, Marines in particular, laugh out loud. Beginning on page 319, there is a great passage on how the Marine guards tormented their captors as only Marines can: by being deliberately and gleefully offensive.
Two Marines “kept up a constant torrent of verbal abuse.” Another Marine “had begun substituting the word ‘Khomeini’ for every foul word in the English language, and his fellow Marines adopted it with relish. When they needed to use the toilet, they would tell the guard, ‘I need to take a Khomeini.’”
“When the two Marines found a stack of the guards’ plates and eating utensils piled in the bathroom they urinated on them. One night they wrapped a butter knife in a rag [why is this so classically Marine?] and took turns poking it at the exposed wires of their lamp. It shorted out the electricity… They waited for the guards to replace the fuse and get the lights back on and then did it again.”
“When the guards installed a camera in the bathroom, after catching on that their captives were leaving notes for each other there, the Marines made a point of putting on lewd shows before it, offending their guards’ Islamic sensibilities so badly that they gave up and took it down.” Priceless!
Those are only a few humorous excerpts in an otherwise sobering book. Go read the whole thing.
The Fall of Scott Ritter
By John
Check out the former UNSCOM inspector's rant about Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons:
The problems that plague Washington DC on the issue of Iran are the same problems that haunt America overall regarding Iraq -- no clear understanding of why we as a nation are doing what we are doing where we are doing it, and absolutely no system of accountability for those who are implicated, directly through their actions or indirectly through abrogation of duties and responsibilities, in embroiling America in such senseless conflict. There seems to be, especially among the so-called "anti-war" crowd, a tendency to blame the "system" for all that ails us, with a specific trend to isolate particular nodes of economic and/or political power for special indictment.In this light, the current war in Iraq and the real possibility of war with Iran becomes the responsibility of "Big Oil," the "Neo Cons," the "Military Industrial Complex," and more recently, the "Israeli Lobby." There are more names one can add to the list; everyone, it seems, is to blame. Congress, while not getting a pass, does get special dispensation in so far that we can understand why the elected representatives of the people abrogate the trust and confidence we place in them by noting that they have fallen under the ever expanding control of "special interests," namely the aforementioned power nodes that are to blame for everything. Likewise, since these power nodes also control the mainstream media, one can begin to understand why it is that the pro-war message trumps the anti-war message every step of the way.
How far you've fallen Scott, this is real looney tunes stuff. Blaming ambiguous organizations like the Israeli lobby and Big Oil is a one-way ticket to fringe town, population you bro. And what's with the love-affair with quotation marks?
What's interesting about this column is that Ritter manages to blame every American organization short of the YMCA for the west vs. Iran spat, but doesn't hold the Mullahocracy the least bit accountable. Instead you get some trivial rehasing of old Jewish conspiracies under the vaguely worded (but important sounding!) power nodes.
Ritter used to be a respected guy. Why he'd drag his own name through the mud by writing junior high editorials like this is beyond me. Odd.
If you can stomach it, read the whole thing. I didn't even touch his rant on how greed is built into American DNA...
Yeah, That's a Good Strategy
By John
Iran Mocks European Nuclear Incentives
Iran's president mocked a package of incentives to suspend uranium enrichment, saying Wednesday they were like giving up gold for chocolate — defiance that appeared certain to complicate U.S. efforts to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions. "Do you think you are dealing with a 4-year-old child to whom you can give some walnuts and chocolates and get gold from him?" President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad asked derisively.
Man, I wish Saddam had made it this easy....
Sun Tzu vs. Iran
By Charlie
Tonight, I am in the mood for Chinese food. That being said, I’ll serve up some Sun-Tzu-inspired strategic commentary on the Iran crisis for the noble readership of the blog.
Read More »
Navy Keeping a Close Eye on the Gulf
By Charlie
OPFOR's ever-vigilant Navy PAO sent me a link to this NPR story:
Coalition Forces Watch Over Iraq's Oil PlatformsIn the southern waters off Iraq, the patrol ship USS Whirlwind keeps a constant vigil over two offshore oil-transfer platforms that are indispensable to Iraq. Some sailors call them the crown jewels.
The oil platforms bear the scars of a turbulent history: bullet holes and other damage from the Iran-Iraq war and also from the first Gulf War.
U.S. naval personnel work together with Iraqi marines to protect the oil platforms. On the al-Bashrah oil terminal, known as ABOT, the Iraqis live in a large building at one end called the White House, which has sleeping quarters and a mess hall. At the other end of the platform, the Americans live in converted cargo containers, piled three high.
These guys are doing some tough work. There aren't many stories about all the work the Navy is doing to train the Iraqi Navy, probably because the Bahgdad hotels most reporters file their balcony dispatches from aren't within eyesight of the coastline. Here's a bonus link on the USS Ogden "the Navy's oldest active amphibious ship, is currently serving as the Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB) for the multinational maritime coalition operating in the North Persian Gulf., that is also working to train Iraqi sailors and Marines."
This graf caught me at the end of the piece:
In addition to protecting the terminals from terrorists and suicide bombers, the forces also have their eyes on the Iranian navy, which often intrudes several hundred yards into Iraqi waters.Captain Pat Roane of the USS Lake Champlain says that coalition forces regularly have to tell the Iranian navy to back off.
Really? Hmmm...
The Circle of Life (at the UN Security Council)
By Charlie
I think the logic here makes sense, although it might make your head explode...
My Immediate Reaction to the Text of Iranian President Ahmacrazyguy's Letter to Bush:
By Charlie
AP:
"Liberalism and Western-style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity,Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the Liberal democratic systems."
DR. EVIL: Your freedom has caused more pain and suffering in the world than any plan I ever dreamed of. Face it, freedom failed.
Gulf War III
By John
Iran, Qatar Leaders Argue Over Gulf Name
An old dispute got a new airing this week, when the Iranian president and the emir of Qatar got into it over the name of the body of water that separates Iran from the Arabian peninsula.
Geographers have traditionally called it the Persian Gulf — after ancient Persia which is now called Iran. The Arabs would prefer to call it the Arabian Gulf.State-run Tehran radio reported Wednesday that the dispute broke out a day earlier during a ceremony marking the departure of the Qatari emir, Sheik Hamad bin-Khalifa al-Thani.
The emir, seeking diplomatic goodwill, said he hoped Iran's national soccer team would bring pride to all the "Arabic Persian Gulf" region during the 2006 World Cup in Germany.
Not missing a beat, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad shot back:
"I believe you called it the Persian Gulf when you studied in school."
I, for one, support dubbing the gulf whichever name pisses off the Iranians the most.
How about the Gulf of Tel Aviv?
Iranian President Ahmadenijad has a Website
By Charlie
I think this might be real, and it is just bizarre. Would Hitler have had a website? Would Stalin have blogged? Would Pol Pot have a Myspace page?
The world we live in is getting stranger and stranger...
**John Says** The "email the president" feature is the best. I just fired one off to A-dawg a minute ago, wanted to know who did that lovely floral display in the foreground of his picture. I told him it really brings out the green aura around his head.
Arming the Crazy Islamist Genocide-Mongerers
By Charlie
Well, when it rains it pours: Iran says "to hell with the NPT:"
Iran's supreme mullah leader said today in a meeting with the Sudanese president that Iran was ready to share its nuclear technology with other countries."Iran's nuclear capability is one example of various scientific capabilities in the country. The Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to transfer the experience, knowledge and technology of its scientists," said the supreme religious leader, mullah Ali Khamenei, to President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, IRNA news agency reported.
Perhaps they'll be helping Bin Laden and Zarqawi out with their exit strategy...
What Iran Could Learn from Israel’s Nuclear Weapons Program?
By Charlie
I’ve been reading Israel and the Bomb by Avner Cohen, a fairly dense history of the Israeli nuclear program. What initially jumped out at me was the luck, circumstances, coincidences, and political tactics that led Israel to acquire nuclear weapons. Cohen describes the Israeli nuclear program as “opaque,” because its existence and capability has never been directly stated or addressed. Iran, if it truly wants to acquire nuclear weaponry, would do well to emulate Israel’s pursuit of nuclear weaponry instead of the blustering path it is taking now.
Read More »
The Ruskies, Iran, ADA, Etc...
By Charlie
Russia toughens opposition to Iran sanctions
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Hardening its opposition to sanctions against Iran, Russia said on Friday the UN Security Council should only consider such measures if it had proof the Islamic Republic was trying to build nuclear weapons.
The council is awaiting a report on April 28 from the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on whether Tehran is meeting its demands for a halt to uranium enrichment and answers to queries about its nuclear program.The United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to weigh sanctions if, as widely expected, IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei concludes Iran has not met U.N. demands.
But Russia made clear it would not view such non-compliance on its own as warranting punitive steps against Tehran.
"We will only be able to talk about sanctions after we have concrete facts confirming that Iran is not exclusively involved in peaceful nuclear activities," Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said, Itar-Tass news agency reported.
Iran insists on a legal right to enrich uranium for civilian nuclear energy and denies any secret bomb-building agenda. The IAEA has found no hard evidence Iran is after atomic weaponry.
But Iran has covered up parts of its nuclear program in the past, and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has heightened world concern by saying Israel should be "wiped off the map."
Senior cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Emami Kashani told Friday prayer worshippers ElBaradei and the IAEA had singled out Iran's quest for technology, while ignoring a nuclear-armed Israel.
"Israel has got nuclear warheads and it is proliferating them constantly and you do not ask them why," Kashani said.
He also accused the Security Council of failing to live up to its name. "You are establishing security for the wolves and predators rather than for the sheep," the cleric declared.
Iran had said an IAEA team led by Olli Heinonen, deputy director-general for nuclear safeguards, would arrive on Friday, but diplomats said they had been told Heinonen would not go.
A Vienna-based EU diplomat said Iran had not responded to requests for more cooperation. There was no point in Heinonen going to Tehran "if he's just going to get stonewalled."
…
Russia rejected on Friday a U.S. call for it to scrap a planned missile sale to Iran, a day after rebuffing Washington's suggestion that it halt work on Iran's first atomic power plant."There are no circumstances which would get in the way of us carrying out our commitments in the field of military cooperation with Iran," Nikolai Spassky, deputy head of Russia's National Security Council, was quoted by Tass as saying.
Looks like those Tor-1s are going to get sold after all.
If Russia had sided with us on this issue, China probably would have as well –not wanting to appear to be the lone world power standing behind Tehran. Now it seems that China has an excuse to side with Russia, and the WMD evidence must be found and presented (by the US or the West, but certainly no onus will be on Iran to prove it has no WMD program…) in order for any action to be legitimate according to them.
Read More »
Russians Sell ADA to Iran
By Charlie
Russia will deliver air defense systems to Iran - top general RIA Novosti 19/04/2006 20:19MOSCOW, April 19 (RIA Novosti) - The chief of the General Staff said Wednesday that Russia would honor its commitments on supplying military equipment to Iran. "We discussed supplies of military equipment to Iran, including the Tor M1, in the framework of bilateral cooperation, but it does not fall into the category of strategic weapons," Army General Yury Baluyevsky said after talks in Moscow with NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe General James Jones.
"And I can assure you it will be delivered under the control of the relevant organizations," he said.
At the end of 2005, Russia concluded a $700-million contract on the delivery of 29 Tor M1 air defense systems to Iran.The Tor-M1 is a fifth-generation integrated mobile air defense system designed for operation at medium, low and very low altitudes against fixed/rotary wing aircraft, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicle), guided missiles and other high-precision weapons.
Despite strong criticism from the United States, Russia has maintained that the systems could be used only to protect Iran's air space.
The Tor M1 is also known as the SA-15 GAUNTLET. Here are some specs:
Read More »
Militarization of the Shia Crescent
By Charlie
BEIRUT, LEBANON - Rising tension between the West and Iran is coinciding with the emergence of a loose anti-Western alliance -Israel now dubs it an "axis of terror" - spanning the Middle East, presenting a new challenge to the US's regional ambitions. Centered on Iran, this alignment has hardened in recent months, analysts say, with Tehran shoring up old alliances and strengthening ties with countries ( Syria and Iraq) and with groups (Hizbullah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad) that share its hostility toward Israel and the US."The alliance that is emerging in this part of the world is a creation of Iran," says Sami Moubayed, a Syrian political analyst. "It wants to bolster its position by allying itself with countries or groups that can temporarily enhance its regional role and influence."
On Tuesday, Israel's UN envoy Dan Gillerman dubbed this alliance the "new axis of terror" following a suicide bombing claimed by the Iranian-funded Islamic Jihad in Tel Aviv the previous day that killed nine Israelis.
"A dark cloud is looming above our region, and it is metastasizing as a result of the statements and actions by leaders of Iran, Syria, and the newly elected government of Palestinian Authority," Mr. Gillerman said.
The alliance, which is ad hoc and tactical rather than a formalized strategic pact, includes Syria and groups such as Lebanon's Hizbullah, the Iran-backed militant Shiite organization, radical Palestinian organizations such as Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command as well as some Iraqi allies.
So far the strategy appears to be working in their favor. Hizbullah has become one of the most influential players in Lebanon and looks set to retain its military wing for the foreseeable future.
Iran has rarely appeared more resolute, boasting of its success in uranium enrichment and expressing near daily defiance toward the US. Damascus is gaining confidence with a slackening of international pressure lately amid concerns that a collapse of Syria's Baathist regime could trigger Iraq-style instability.
"The Syrians are very supportive of Iran and very supportive of Hamas and Hizbullah," says Mr. Moubayed. "Almost everybody in Syria is praising [Syrian President Bashar] al-Assad's alliance with Iran as a very smart move. Many are saying that the alliance with [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad was not political suicide after all."
Iran is the driving force behind the alliance, its strategic position in the region enhanced by the US-led effort to oust Tehran's Taliban enemy Afghanistan to the east and its Baathist foe in Iraq to the west.
This type of “axis” will become more and more frequent as the world order re-shuffles itself. Instead of an old, diplomatically sealed alliance between nation-states, this new axis is comprised of under-the-table agreements, tribal and cultural oaths of allegiance, and realpolitik interest-based alignment. The militarized Shia crescent is assembling in front of our very eyes at a surprisingly fast pace. We already know all of the players on the scene: Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Jazeera, the Saudis, and the fledgling Iraqi democracy. What we don’t know are the goals and intent of this organization that is struggling to enter the world scene. If the Shia Crescent Axis materializes, what will be its goal? Regional hegemony with Iran as the guiding power would be my guess, as well as control of natural resources, and most importantly, respect from the rest of the Arab, and Western world. How would they go about achieving this goal, though?
Read More »
