What if Bush Iraqs Iran?
cross-posted at Firedoglake
Looking at the civil war in Iraq, it's hard to imagine what would (will) happen
if (when) George W. Bush turns his talents on Iran. If we think we've got problems
now — and we do — going into Iran would make the bombs bursting in Baghdad
seem like firecrackers at a football game.
Sam
Gardiner has put together a fascinating and chilling report talking about
what will happen once Bush and the Republicans turn their military sights and
lack of planning on Iran. According to his official bio, Gardiner is a “retired
U.S. Air Force colonel who has taught strategy and military operations at the
National War College, Air War College, and Naval War College”. He also
did some war gaming
on Iran, which James Fallows covered for the Atlantic Monthly. I covered Gardiner's report in the second half of my radio show yesterday.
In a new report for the Century Foundation, Gardiner lays out what's going
to happen and how it will unfold, which I outline in the rest of this post.
No, that's not exactly right, because it's already unfolding. But it's not like
Iraq, with Wolfowitz and Perle filling Georgie's little head full of delusions
of being greeted as the liberator of Iraq. This time the delusions are straight
from Dubya.
…And on top of all of those pressures–pressure from Israel, pressure from
those worried about a nuclear Iran, Iran in Iraq, and Iran in the war on terrorism–is
another decisive piece of the puzzle: President George W. Bush. The argument
takes several forms: the president is said to see himself as being like Winston
Churchill, and to believe that the world will only appreciate him after he
leaves office; he talks about the Middle East in messianic terms; he is said
to have told those close to him that he has got to attack Iran because even
if a Republican succeeds him in the White House, he will not have the same
freedom of action that Bush enjoys. Most recently, someone high in the administration
told a reporter that the president believes that he is the only one who can
“do the right thing” with respect to Iran. One thing is clear: a
major source of the pressure for a military strike emanates from the very
man who will ultimately make the decision over whether to authorize such a
strike–the president. And these various accounts of his motivations and rationales
have in common that the president will not allow does-not-make-sense arguments
to stand in the way of a good idea.The End of the “Summer of Diplomacy” – Assessing Military Options
on Iran (pdf),
by Sam Gardiner, Colonel, USAF (Ret.) (h/t)
The first important tactic, according to Gardiner, is to stay “below the
CNN Line”. It was the advice given to the Air Component Commander, General
Mike Mosley, during the classified secret air strikes that took place in Iraq
in July 2002. You remember, it was right after Bush came home from Europe to
say, “I have no war plans on my desk.”
As for what happens when we decide to go above the CNN line, it starts with
sanctions. But we all know these won't work, so the next step will be obvious
and meant to look as if the Bush administration tried their best to follow a
diplomatic path. When sanctions don't work, air strikes are to follow. Here
are the targets, as Gardiner sees them: nuclear facilities; military air bases;
air defense command and control; terrorist training camps; chemical facilities;
medium-range ballistic missiles; 23rd Command Division; Gulf-threatening assets:
submarines, anti-ship missiles, naval ships, small boats. He goes on talking
about follow-on strikes.
Oh, and it will be an American operation. But you likely already figured that
one out.
As Gardiner stipulates, not even the experts know how Iran will react. But
you can sure make educated guesses at some of the consequences of Bush striking
Iran. Gardiner does just that and none of it's good, because there are no good
military options on this one.
The Iranians would likely look to target Israel as a response to a U.S. strike,
using Hezbollah as the primary vehicle for retaliation. …Moqtada al-Sadr has said publicly that if the United States were to attack
Iran, he would target U.S. forces in Iraq.Iran could channel more individuals and weapons into Iraq. …
Moqtada al-Sadr controls the large Facilities Protection Service forces in
Iraq. Some estimates put this force as large as 140,000. … read
on …
There is a lot at stake right now, but the trouble is, according to Gardiner,
the game has already begun. I wonder how many people in Congress know?
Comments are closed.