2006 02 02
By Douglas Herman | rense.com
Somewhere in the recesses of the Pentagon, US and Israeli military generals have been given the task of war-gamming a likely attack on Iran. A predicable response to any US/Israeli attack is an Iranian counter-attack. Has anyone in the Pentagon calculated the possibility that Iran already possesses a nuclear device? Or maybe two?
Rather than make a nuclear weapon, suppose Iran simply bought some surplus nukes from Russia or China years ago? Why bother with the trouble of creating your own nukes when you can more easily buy one?
What would be the Persian translation of Fatman and Little Boy? Or better yet, what would be the likely target-or targets-of Iranian nuclear counter-attacks? Are Tel Aviv and the Green Zone that expendable, or even Tehran?
After I wrote Day One - The War With Iran I received a large number of responses from Rense readers. Many thought my First Day scenario too tame.
Patrick Hedemark wrote:
"While it is a harrowing read, I believe it is a very mild rendition of what we are going to witness. This coming attack on Iran is going to eventually result in conflict with Russia, China and Korea. It is unavoidable.
"First off, Iran is NOT going to be caught unawares. Your depiction of their response is far more tepid than what they have been preparing for nearly one year now. If we can destroy 20 % of their missile inventory we would be lucky at best. We will lose most if not all our shipping in the Gulf. We will lose nearly all the available tarmac in the Gulf as well. They have the capacity to rain hell down on our boys in Iraq--and they will.
"They will ORDER an offensive in Iraq by the Shia that is most probably already preplanned and prearranged. Our forces are cut off there by a minimum of 500 miles from the coast. They will need to navigate this 500 miles with more than 300,000 armed Shia in the south. It will be anything but easy."
Another respondent wrote:
"An interesting hypothesis. But one that I feel underestimates the effectiveness of the Iranian missile defensive shield," said Neil Turner. "From what I have been told, Iran has in place a very effective Ukrainian missile defence system. This is the same one that the Serbs used to shoot down a stealth bomber during the Kosovo/Serb conflict. The Serbs had but one battery, the Iranians have many."
"The point to keep in mind is that every US/Israeli attack since WWII has been against militarily weak and ill-equipped nations," added Hugh Joseph. "Iraq, for example, had already been weakened by the first Gulf war, bombed relentlessly by Clinton, and starved by UN sanctions before the invasion of 2003 could begin. Iran is strong, heavily armed and spoiling for a fight. The course and outcome of this conflict will be entirely unpredictable, except for higher prices all around, the collapse of the stock market, imposition of martial law on the US and the price of gold going to the Moon."
In my scenario, Day One: The War With Iran, I envisioned a limited counter strike from Iran, using their conventional weapons, but an enormous, worldwide blowback at the gas pumps. Call it the Katrina Effect at hyper-speed, lasting not weeks but months or years, where the price of gasoline skyrockets and eventually becomes scarce. Would most Americans approve? Right up to the end of the first day.
Former Reagan Treasury Secretary, Paul Craig Roberts, observed: "A LATimes/ Bloomberg poll, finds that 57 percent of the respondents 'favor military intervention if Iran's government pursues a program that could enable it to build nuclear arms.' Of these same respondents, 53 percent believe it was not worth going to war against IraqOne wonders if Americans ever think of the consequences of the rash actions they favor."
Muddled Americans, more concerned with the literary fabrications of a second rate writer than the outright lies of top Republicans and Democrat policymakers, might be excused for thinking that the current dozen casualties a day is a small price to pay for gas. Bomb Iran? Sure, just keep that gas coming and we'll believe whatever lies you tell us about the Middle East. Meanwhile the little white lies of fictionalized memoirs captures all of our outrage.
Richard Falk, writing for The Nation, (Storm Clouds Over Iran) observed:
"The United States and Israel, with the cooperation of some European countries, have been stoking a climate of fear to justify a military attack on Iran's nuclear facilities."
The Neocons used this exact same blueprint, based on outright lies and fabrications, to justify an attack on Iraq. Predictably, they've recycled the same plan to justify an attack on Iran.
But suppose the hardliners in Iran refuse to roll over for the US hardliners? Suppose several other countries with a vested interest in Iran refuse to comply? China especially, with her huge need for oil, but also Pakistan and India; suppose they balk at the clever yet transparent schemes of the US?
Let us "war game" then through the first few days and weeks of the probable war with Iran. What can we expect?
US/Israel warplanes and guided missiles attack Iran installations. Iran counter-attacks. Oil shipments in the Persian Gulf cease altogether. Gas prices rise. Iran retaliates against the US and Israel. Israel and the US strike back. Military and civilian casualties rise. China attacks Taiwan while we're occupied with Iran. Shiites revolt in Iraq. US troops retaliate. Casualties rise. Gas prices rise higher. Iran loses her entire air force and navy in less than a week while Washington stop-losses all US servicemen. Enlistments drop. The draft is reinstated. Gas prices continue to rise. Exxon-Mobil reports record-setting profits for the third quarter in a row. 2008 Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John McCain clamor for more US troops in the Middle East (but where are these troops to come from?). Another US Navy ship is sunk. Another alleged Iranian nuke site is bombed. Two small cities in Israel are struck by Iranian missiles. Four major cities in Iran are saturation-bombed. Halliburton is awarded future rebuilding contracts in Iran. US military bases suffer devastating attacks from Iranian missiles and Shia and Sunni guerillas in Iraq. Entire divisions of US-trained Iraq guards desert, with their equiptment. Gas prices continue to rise. Gas rationing begins.
Are we beginning to see a pattern here?
You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, or an advanced degree from a war college to foresee any outcome to an ill-advised military attack on a well-armed foe. And the Neocon war planners, most of whom never went to war or within a mile of a military academy, are nothing if not transparent, predictable and disastrous.
Former US Marine Drew Raines wrote:
"I've read your books, and you have been right on point from day one. This latest is not only astounding, but I ask, what are we to do? What real Leader do we have on a national scale to promote? There is a remnant of Vietnam Marines who feel in their hearts an internal war is brewing before our eyes. Again, what are we to do?"
Let the Neocons know that WE know exactly what they are planning. Forewarned is forearmed. The more people who know and understand the Neocon plan beforehand, the less likely they are to carry it out. After all, Pulitzer prize-winning author Seymour Hersh and former US Marine Scot Ritter proclaimed loudly, last June, that the Neocons planned a preemptive attack against Iran, and the Neocons backed down.
If they backed down once they may back down again.
Former USAF veteran and amateur historian Douglas Herman writes regularly for Rense and is the author of the provocative suspense novel, The Guns Of Dallas
Article from: http://www.rense.com/general69/warfg.htm
Related: Iran 'has 1 month' to avoid UN Security Council action
Iran Incapable of Building Nuclear Bomb — Russian Expert
Iran's Nuclear Plans Pose `Immediate Concern,' Negroponte Says
U.N. Dilemma: Threatening Iran Could Motivate Republic Further
IAEA Officials Consider Resolution on Iran
Tehran Gives World Leaders A History Lesson