Iran is the spoiler

By Ted Belman

In my recent article US M.E, policy needs a reset, I pointed out that US policy has been bested by Iran in all theatres including Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and that Iran is quickly extending its hegemony. I concluded,

    Not a pretty picture. Continuing the same policies will not avail. Doubling down is not the answer. A reset is needed.

    The US must debate whether it needs to be engaged in the Middle East or not. It has the option of withdrawing entirely and relying on the oil market to supply it with oil. In the worse case scenario if the ME cuts off oil supply to the US, it would be an act of war and the US would be justified in invading Saudi Arabia and occupying the oil fields. It should expel all Arab workers from the area so that there would be no insurgency and then bring in American workers. This could be problematic as it is rumored that the Saudis could blow up the oil fields and leave them contaminated.

    If it prefers to retain a power base in the Middle East it could redesign its relationship with Israel and Kurdistan. Both can defend themselves with unequivocal American support. This support could go so far as to allow Israel to annex the territories, Gaza included, and expel the Arabs. It could allow the Kurds to fight to include parts of Turkey, Syria and Iran where the Kurds are in a large majority thereby, enlarging the country to the point where it has a population of close to 30 million.

    As preposterous as these suggestions are, what are the alternatives?

In Caroline Glick’s recent column Dusk in Iraq she amplifies my assessment and asks,

    And so, despite the US investment of more than a trillion dollars in Iraq, and despite the more than 4,400 US servicemen and women who lost their lives in the country, the future of Iraq remains uncertain at best. Certainly a coherent, moderate, US-allied and democratic Iraq remains an elusive goal.

She quotes Stratfor’s George Freidman who wrote,

    Thus, the United States has nothing but unpleasant choices in Iraq. It can stay in perpetuity and remain vulnerable to violence.

    It can withdraw and hand the region over to Iran. It can go to war with yet another Islamic country. Or it can negotiate with a government that it despises – and which despises it right back.”

Iran is the spoiler in all American plans for each theater and including the “peace process”. Both the Bush and the Obama administrations have understood this but were unwilling to deal with Iran in a meaningful way. Thus their policies were doomed to fail.

Glick concludes by recommending that the US “overthrow the regime in Iran.” and that includes stopping her from getting the bomb.

August 21, 2010 | 9 Comments »

Leave a Reply

9 Comments / 9 Comments

  3. Logicom. You are so wrong about Rongrand who is simply critical of anybody who doesn’t support Israel. But what bothers me more is that you have descended to name calling to strengthen you opinion. Put a stop to it.

    You obviously are a die hard democrat and Obama supporter. As such today you are in the minority and Rongrand represents the majority opinion.

    I think that you are the one in denial.

  4. Rongrand: I hate those who are in denial as to the America’s lack of support of Israel. Where in the name of heaven did you get that bilge. Israel is totally supporting Israel and you know that is a FACT.

    You want your country back (as if it is solely your country)? Have you been asleep? America was sold to Saudi interests by Bush/Cheney. Their closest associates were the Bin-ladens and the Oil Magnets of Saudi Arabia.

    In just a few years, the Bush gang came this close to destroying America. And you want to get back to those good old days.

    Rongrand, you are a shameful wretch.

  5. Rongrand: good try, you are trying the old diversion trick, diverting attention from yourself on to me.

    IT won’t work!!!. You will not be demonizing Israel, America, Israel’s leadership, America’s President without some response. Why don’t you move to a third world country if you find everything so very bad here. You keep bellyaching all the time.

    how about a little positive expression for the good life you are leading. Show a little appreciation rather then negating everything.

  6. Rongrand, you never fail to criticize Israel, its institutions and leadership. You are obviously a biased b—–d Jew hater with an axe to grind. If you are not bad mouthing Israel, you are doing the same for America. You remind me of a bowel movement.

    Well that certainly doesn’t make sense. I have no idea what your trying to say.

    1. I have criticized the Israeli government for tying the hands of the IDF during the last military engagement in both Lebanon and Gaza. I also have criticized Israel for listening too much to the obama administration.
    I don’t believe anyone has characterized me being a Jew hater.

    2. As an American, yes I criticize our government, mainly this president and his administration, the liberal and left of our country for their actions. As a strong conservative I don’t believe in big government and it’s attempt to destroy the Republic. I also criticize this president and his administration for not supporting Israel, our only true and trusted friend and ally in the Me and most of all as most Americans I want my country back.

    You better come in from left field it’s raining out there and you look dumb standing there.

  7. Rongrand:

    Laura BB is a political coward who will delay an attack until it’s too late ( if it isn’t already too late) then spin his decision hoping the gullible public and his own coalition constituents buy the spin.

    Rongrand, you never fail to criticize Israel, its institutions and leadership. You are obviously a biased b—–d Jew hater with an axe to grind. If you are not bad mouthing Israel, you are doing the same for America. You remind me of a bowel movement.

  8. I would tend to agree with Avner Cohen-Iran most likely will never announce that it has fashioned a bomb. They can go the Israeli route which is essentially to say nothing and omit testing.

    My fear is not a conventional nuclear attack by missile or aircraft. The most logical and most difficult to protect against is a terrorist nuclear infiltration.

    You can steal a bomb, buy one , build one. And building one is the most difficult route especially since the other two options are readily available.

    Moving radioactive material around is much easier than might be imagined . Pack it in a lead cylinder and ship it in a container full of bagged Kitty Litter.No detection system will find it. Considering, as one expert does, that a bomb the size of a tennis ball can “make Manhattan disappear,” and you grasp the difficulty of monitoring the material.

  9. One possibly effective way of dealing with Iran, is to deal in no uncertain manner with Iran’s proxies – Hezbollah, Hamas, and Syria – thus leaving Iran essentially isolated… Not the end of the story by any means, but…

    I actually thought that this was the original plan for OIF, because from a strategic standpoint, in an alliance with Israel, the US and Israel could have accomplished this goal in an extended (and very determined) pincer movement, leaving Iraq with the potential for some form of “democracy” (perhaps).

    But they didn’t, and 4000+ Americans died for essentially nothing.

    But then I didn’t go to a military academy… so what do I know?