the opinionist

Have the stars sufficiently lined up for a U.S. attack on Iran’s insidious nuclear program? Iran’s continued disregard for the United Nations; increased domestic civil and political within Iran; a moderate Arab world united against a growing Shia sphere of influence; and renewed efforts for a Saudi-backed peace accord with Israel. These perfect storm conditions could potentially trigger the United States into military action against Iran. Might such an attack be feasible, justified, and delivered with wholly acceptable consequences?

Iranian President Ahmadinejad continues to reject ever-tightening U.N. sanctions and has even upped the ante by forcibly arresting fifteen British sailors from Iraqi territorial waters. The U.S.’s national security interests in Iraq and the entire Middle East region continue to be threatened and derailed by Iran directly and indirectly through support for the Shia insurgency and via heavy-handed political pressure on neighboring Arab states.

Moderate Arab nations throughout the Middle East are eager for a stable alternative to the increasingly draconian Tehran-based Shia mindset and Saudi-backed peace talks with Israel could potentially solve the Palestinian headache that has long hung over the entire region.

Iran has alienated itself almost entirely and its biggest supporter – Russia – has stepped back from a previously unwavering supportive and has even gone so far as join the growing chorus of nations seeking the suspension of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program.

As is discussed repetitively by the media, a ground assault on Iran is practically impossible. The U.S.’s resources are stretched way beyond capacity due with no thanks to the Bush Administration’s inept mismanagement of the Iraqi conflict. Luckily the U.S. continues to enjoy substantial air power throughout the Middle East with bases and strategically placed aircraft carriers. Iran’s defenses against a U.S. air attack are weak at best – despite the recent purchase and installation of Russian anti-aircraft ‘Tor systems.’

The biggest challenge for the U.S., it appears, is in correctly targeting the nuclear facilities, skillfully hidden across Iran in underground bunkers. The U.S. Intelligence services have proven to be woefully and there is legitimate concern that Iran’s nuclear facilities are too well hidden to be seriously affected by a fragmented half-hearted air attack.
If the U.S. does decide to attack Iran by air – it will almost certainly need to use nuclear-tipped bunker-busting bombs. This certainly does up the ante and would set an unappetizing aggressive precedence for the world community to try and swallow. Tough call!

On February 27th 2007, Vice Admiral John McConnell, the Director of U.S. National Intelligence testified before the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services. During the Committee Q&A, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked McConnell if Iran would use a nuclear weapon, if developed, against Israel. McConnell replied, “They’ve stated that they would consider that Israel shouldn’t exist, should be wiped off the map. I don’t know that I would conclude that they would use it in a prescribed period of time, but that risk would be there.”

Retired General and vigorous Clinton poodle, Wesley Clark, said the United States could attack Iran unless it suspended its plans for nuclear weapons. In a seminar in the Qatari capital of Doha, reported by the Gulf Times newspaper, Clark warned Iran not to underestimate U.S. military capabilities. “If a military option is necessary, we could penetrate Iran’s air space in no time,” Clark said.

Russia’s response is a gamble. Putin has become increasingly vocal against U.S.’s ‘unipolar’ stance on the world stage and has accused the Bush administration of repeatedly stepping over the boundaries of acceptable international diplomacy and civility. That said Russia has made efforts to distance its relations with Iran in recent weeks under the pretense of Iranian business problems. The biggest challenge is to understand what Putin might do if the U.S. attacked Iran unilaterally without prior Russian consultation.

What is startling is Senator Hillary Clinton’s positively hawkish stance on Iran. Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly admonished the White House for its lack of progress in ceasing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. This would be all the more credible if it weren’t for her husband, President Bill Clinton, and his incompetent decision to hand classified blueprints for nuclear weapons development to the Iranians in February of 2000, just months before the end of his term. Under a CIA-sponsored, Clinton-approved intelligence scheme dubbed ‘Operation Merlin’, Iranian representatives were given subtlety-flawed nuclear in the mistaken belief that Iranian scientists would become bogged down by layers of failure. Unfortunately friendly Russian nuclear scientists chanced to review and fix the document flaws and consequently promoted the ‘Dummies Guide Nukes.’
At a pro-Israel rally in New York City today, Senator Clinton continued her hawkish stance by reaffirming Israel’s right to not only exist but thoroughly defend itself against the those Middle East neighbors seeking its demise, Iran included. Perhaps Hillary might consider the optimum time for military action against Iran but might not want to consult her husband.

Posted on March 26th, 2007 under Ahmadinejad, Bill Clinton, CIA, Hillary Clinton, Iran, McConnell, Project Merlin, Putin, Russia, Wesley Clark, israel •  Email This Post • RSS 2.0 feed • Leave a response, or trackback