Stratfor: attacking Iran is a no-win solution

5 Comments / 5 Comments

1. Shalom Personal Rep 1,

   Unfortunately, the Larry Houle article is not accurate.

   The US does need PR China.

   Military US actions against Iran, besides militay matters, can:

   – skyrocket the global cost of oil.

   and

   – place the US dollar at risk.

   For any US actions, there is always some sort of quid pro quo retalitory actions against the US.

   America’s greatest danger is not oil supplies. It is funding the medical care bills. All this is related.

   Kol tuv,

2. IT’S ALL ABOUT IRAN

   By,
   Larry Houle
   www. irandemocracy.net
   intermedusa@yahoo.com

   A DRAMATIC NEW APPROACH TO IRANIAN SANCTIONS

   We need to deal with Iran now otherwise the US could be left at one minute to midnight with no other option but to attack Iran. The longer the US waits to impose a meaningful sanction regime against Iran, the greater the necessity of military action will become – with all the potential disastrous political and economic consequences for both parties.

   The Iranian Sanction Agreement negotiated by the Security Council is an absolute joke. The US is allowing these countries to delay and obstruct sanctions against Iran.

   THE REALITY IS THE US DOES NOT NEED CHINA OR RUSSIA TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN. THE US CAN IMPOSE DEVASTATING RECIPROCAL SANCTIONS

   The United States with or without EU support immediately imposes economic and political sanctions against Iran. The sanction regime is divided into 4 parts – Defcom 1 to Defcom 4 with each phase commencing every 30 days and staying in effect until the crisis is resolved. Within the space of 4 months Iran will be under total world wide devastating economic sanctions. ANY INDIVIDUAL, CORPORATION, COUNTRY THAT DISOBEYS ANY PART OF THE SANCTION REGIME – THEN THE TOTALITY OF THE ENTIRE SANCTION REGIME IMMEDIATELY APPLIES TO THEM. If China refuses – then all trade with China is immediately terminated and all ships carrying Chinese goods are not allowed to unload at US ports. All banking relationship are immediately terminated for China and all Chinese companies etc.

   DEFCON 1 SANCTIONS

   Under Defcon 1 sanctions Iran is immediately hit with the following measures:

   1. The cutting off of all military and nuclear technology, materials, training, building including the Bushehr nuclear power plant being built by the Russians.

   2. The suspension of all flights – both private and commercial aircraft in or out of Iran.

   3. The worldwide banning of all Iranian passports.

   4. Severing all banking relationships between all Iranian Government agencies/officials/organizations, banks, companies, front companies with the entire world banking community.

   5. The freezing of all Iranian assets throughout the world including all assets of Iranian Government, Iranian companies, front companies, government officials/organizations.

   DEFCON 2

   In 30 days, if Iran refuses to stop all uranium enrichment and sit down at the table in good faith then the imposition of the following Defcon 2 Sanctions:

   1. The immediate stoppage of all forms of transportation coming in or out of Iran including, buses, automobiles, boats. Only oil tankers would be exempt.

   2. Cutting off of all satellite signals, phone lines, internet connections, electricity etc.

   3. The complete closure of all border crossings to Iran.

   4. The complete shutting down of all economic activity/trade with the outside world except for the importation of gasoline into Iran and the export of oil and gas out of Iran.

   DEFCON 3

   Thirty days after the imposition of Defcon 2 sanctions, the start of Defcon 3:

   1. The importation of gasoline into Iran to be ceased by all countries, companies and individuals.

   DEFCON 4

   120 days after the start of the first sanction regime – Defcon 4 – the stoppage of all payments for Iranian oil and gas exports – NOT THE STOPPAGE OF THE EXPORT OF IRANIAN OIL AND GAS. JUST THE PAYMENTS FOR THESE PRODUCTS.

   Iran can export oil and gas to China etc but the Chinese and other countries can not send money or any other financial instruments to Iran. In short – the oil/gas flows out but no money flows in. If Iran decides to stop the export of oil to certain countries but not to others like China, then under this sanction regime all countries including China must help the affected country or countries. In short, share the pain of oil shortages. If any country refuses to cooperate then the totality of these sanctions will be imposed immediately on them.

3. Friedman analysis, is more disturbing about what he does not say or gloss over lightly. For America to remain the primary economic and military Superpower in the next 20-30 years,She will need to make a conscious decisionto be assertive in all fields, economically, diplomatically , and Most of all militarily.
   Friedman nixes the use of nukes against Iran, with a short curt brush over that American would not want to be the first nation to use nukes since WW11? Sure, but: What better way to change the THE WHOLE MIND SET OF THE WORLD WITH ONE SINGLE ACT!
   If a nuke attack on all the sites known in Iran, are successful America might by this act just create enough confusion and protest in Iran to allow regime change.(Positive) it would send a message to all other wanabi, nuke countries the America is serious in not allowing this to happen. It would send a strong mesage to the Russians and Chinese that America will go to extreme acts to defend its own country and foreign interests. It will tell Americas friends (theirs not necessarily ours)That America will use its might to protect her friends and vital interests.Except for Israel today I do not see anyone in the world really fearful of America but I submit that Americas continued World position as the supreme superpower depends on Having a credible fear factor.
   Any temp shortfall of oil production ensuing from such an attack can be made up from existing other producers and At that point nobody will say no to America, maybe not even the environmental Lobby in America might give in to American exploration of its reserves. It might bury the Democrats chances of gaining the White house and even congress ,might change majorities as a result. The Arabs will shut their mouths, they will like good little boys then do as they are told and not the other way around.

   Seeing a determined America might and Here I say might temper long term anti American and Western policies of Russia and China, at least they will have to take into consideration An America that will not just go quietly into the sunset or implode from within giving them a clear field.

   While I admit that there are many pitfalls to my thinking and much can either go wrong or not attain desired results I ask what is a better alternative that not only will get the immediate desired results but is very cheap to produce. And has built into it a lot of added value!
   Saving American serviceman’s lives should be the Major reason given for using Nukes against Iran. Most Americans at least will buy into this explanation.

4. Friedman’s analysis is a rationale for doing little or nothing about Iran’s agenda for nuclear and political power in the region and its agenda to cause as many problems as it can for the big and little Satan.

   One point of interest that Freidman touched on is that:

   “The United States could indeed inflict heavy economic hardship, but history suggests that this is more likely to tighten the people’s identification with the government — not the other way around. In most circumstances, air campaigns have solidified the regime’s control over the population, allowing it to justify extreme security measures and generating a condition of intense psychological resistance. In no case has a campaign led to an uprising against the regime. Moreover, a meaningful campaign against economic infrastructure would take some 4 million barrels per day off of the global oil market at a time when oil prices already are closing in on $100 a barrel. Such a campaign is more likely to drive a wedge between the American people and the American government than between the Iranians and their government.”

   There has been much written about the Iranian mullocracy not enjoying popular support and indeed claims are made by various experts that the majority of Iranians do not support their government and would prefer it gone. It has been suggested that Iranian dissidents and the majority of Iranians they speak for who want the mullocracy gone are too weak to even begin a popular uprising to unseat the mullocracy and force a regime change.

   If Friedman is right that an American effort that attacks Iran’s oil refineries and infrastructure (sparing mass casulaties) that would grind Iran to a halt internally would see the majority of Iranians band together with their government against America, then the expert claims that the majority of Iranians do not support their mullocracy and want to see it gone, are highly suspect.

   If Western wishful thinking experts have very badly misjudged what the majority of Iranians think and in fact that Iranian majority does support its government and the mullocracy’s anti-Western and anti-Israel agendas, then the case is made all the greater to treat Iran and all of Iran as the enemy that must be defeated.

   To do that, America could destroy much of Iran’s military and civil infrastructure as well as its refining capacity. To be sure, Iran may seek to respond in an asymmetrical fashion, but that probably can be contained and controlled better then American troops invading Iran like they did in Iraq and be exposed to an enemy that cannot be distinguished from ordinary civilians.

   Nothwithstanding Friedman’s treatise on doing nothing about Iran, it seems logical for America to severely cripple Iran’s ability to function day to day which would then focus most of the Iranian government’s resources and efforts at just trying to deliver essential goods, services and power to their people.

   Just how long does one think that the majority of Iranians are going to let their hatreds of America and Israel sustain them throughout that dark period, before they realize banding together to destroy America and Israel is not in the cards and things would go a lot easier for them if they got rid of the mullocracy and installed a government that was not threatening against America, Israel and the West.

   History also shows just how generous America and the West can be to those defeated in battle, who have any desire for more war forced out of them and who have established governments that thereafter will play ball with the West.

   Iranians should read and think long and hard about that.

5. It is true – if you tackle the Iranian challenge with both hands tied behind your back trying to win the hearts and minds of terrorists as was the case in Iraq, it is definitely a no-win proposition. If, however, we have clear directives, objectives and goals to wipe out their military and nuclear facilities without putting troops on the ground (with boldly painted targets on their backs as in Iraq), then it is a winnable war.

   When Israel took out the nascent Syrian nuclear reactor recently, the Syrians were shamed and caught red-handed and said and did very little. Similarly, when Israel took out the Iraqi nuclear facility many years ago (to the anger of a self-righteous the world) the Iraqis never did start up another full-scale attempt to do the same.

   The lesson is: if we mean what we say and conduct ourselves accordingly with a professional and comprehensive military plan that has a beginning and an end, they will cower and bend. If we approach them as wimps afraid of what our own liberal media will say and listen to cowards who think that Islamofascists have a right to nukes, then it will all end in disaster.