Archive Logo.jpg

April 12, 2006

Wars, and Rumors of War.

Iranian Frogfoot

Well, I guess it's time to weigh in a little bit. (Irony joke for those who are following SWWBO's posts).

Bill posted CAPT H's link to a fascinating little sci-fi think piece in his post below - scooping Fuzzybear Lioness, too (hee!).

Over at Confederate Yankee, there's a piece up about war with Iran, called Killing Allah.

An excerpt:

When Seymour Hersh wrote in the New Yorker that the Administration is planning contingencies for possible military strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites, and that even our own nuclear options were being considered as a possible response in some scenarios, my initial response was one of "isn’t it their job to consider all options?" I did not however, actually think using nuclear weapons was a workable solution, anymore than did the generals in Hersh’s anonymously-sourced article who threatened to resign if the nuclear option wasn’t removed from the table.

Like the President, I do not desire military conflict—or in light of Iranian intrusion into Iraq, more military conflict—with Iran, and would much prefer a diplomatic settlement where no more lives need be lost. I agree with the apparent assessment of Steyn and others that the Iranian mullahcracy will not stop until they are stopped, and that stoppage, like so many things in the Islamic world, will only occur at the point of the sword.

All I had to add to the discussion was this:

Sy Hersh has done something else, probably unintentionally, but possibly not.

Because of his open stating of "The US is considering nukes." he's guaranteed we will.

Stay with me.

It doesn't matter in this context if we do or don't.

Because if we hit *any* underground facility that has radioactive material in it - it will be trotted out as proof that *we* used a nuke.

Never mind if it's the right isotopes or amount of radiation for a nuke - the geiger counters will click and the radiacmeters register... and those who are prone to believe we did it will believe we did it - and it will get reported that way.

You heard it here first. Hey, I was the first guy to predict that someone in San Francisco would quickly hatch a plan to make the USS Iowa a Gay Icon.

If this works out (I hope not, frankly) I'll have scored like a broken clock. Right twice.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at April 11, 2006 03:42 PM

I got quibbled with, in a minor way:

Posted by: Fish at April 11, 2006 11:05 PM John of Argghhh,

The usual suspects claim our use of specially de-enriched depleted uranium constituted the use of a nuclear weapon on our part, as well as claiming WP as a chemical weapon instead of an incidnary. In short, ..-. 'em. If they're going to have the same reaction no matter what we do, we shouldn't change our plans on account of their kvetching.

Posted by: Cybrludite at April 12, 2006 06:29 AM


Master Luddite - Just for the record - I didn't suggest we should take the option off the table. I just pointed out we would get blamed, regardless of what we did.

I suppose I could have added, "So we might as well" except that I, a former nuke weapons person myself, just hate the damn things six ways to Sunday.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at April 12, 2006 07:39 AM

Then comes this, from John Hindraker at Powerline:

Is Andrew Paranoid?

We wrote below about Iran's "Forces of Mohammad" military exercises, in which the Iranian military has unveiled a series of new weapons. Filmmaker Andrew Marcus emails:

As I follow the coverage of the Iranian military maneuvers, I can't help but reflect upon what Michael Ledeen wrote in NRO on February 17.
Despite this disquieting news, the overall tone of the conversation was upbeat, because the Iranians believe they see many positive developments, above all, the declaration that "it has been promised that by 8 April, we will be in a position to show the entire world that 'we are members of the club.'" This presumably refers to nuclear weapons. Against this cheery background, the assessment of the Iranian leaders continued.... http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200602170951.asp
Are we on the precipice of a horrifying new reality to be unveiled as early as this weekend? I can’t find a schedule for the "Forces of Mohammad" military exercise but if it ends on the 8th......

Paranoid in Chicago,
Andrew Marcus


I think it's reasonable to be paranoid where Iran is concerned. It's also worth noting that no one really knows how close the Mullahs are to detonating a nuclear bomb. But how can this be? It's impossible to be wrong about a totalitarian state's WMD capabilities without "lying," isn't it? Is it the liberals' position that we should act on the most optimistic assumptions about Iran's capabilities and intentions?

Silly question. They don't have a position, of course.

The last line is simply gorgeous.

Forgive me, John, for lifting the whole thing, because I *will* send them to this post on "How Dangerous is Iran?" as penance (and because it sets up the rest of this post, too...)

I have *lots* of opinions about going to war with Iran. Most of them informed by what I currently do for a living, so, in keeping with The Armorer's Rulez of Blogging, I'm keeping to myself. Instead, I'm going to offer up some stuff that's probably been all over somewhere else, but I've been so busy I haven't seen it there. I have an album of pictures of the Iranian exercise people have been talking about.

Iranian Soldier

This is a huge exercise, and staged for the benefit of the world press. Looking through the pics with a military eye I see several things. They pulled off a very complex event, which speaks well of their ability to do set-piece planning. Wars are won, of course, by the results of your seat-of-the-pants planning.

This is not the Iraqi Army of Saddam. At least the forces caught in the pictures have good, basic, soldierly discipline, evidenced in the dress, demeanor, and condition of their equipment.

I would *not* want to be their logisticians, given the polyglot of equipment they have - but the fact they are keeping their US-supplied stuff flying is testimony to their scrounging and reverse-engineering abilities - but suggests they'll have problems with their logistical endurance.

If we go to war with them, and they recall us relics like Bill, Dusty and I, we're going to be having some deja vu and *blink blink* moments.

Bill is going to feel like he's killing old friends.

I'm going to feel like it's Back To The Future III.

Dusty will feel right at home.

CDR Salamander will be testing himself against swarming Boghammers....

I do see the occasional sign of weakness however. But, this is intended for show, more than training, so the clumping and lack of camouflage on poorly built and sited positions probably shouldn't be relied on...

Iranian Exercise Album here.

I don't want to take these guys on solo. Not because we can't beat them - we can. But because it will hurt, and hurt a lot, to fight these guys Rumsfeld's Way. If we can't avoid the fight (for all the right reasons) then I'd prefer to steam-roller 'em, thank you, in a classic attrition fight, just to reduce the numbers of available fedayeen types we'd inevitably have to deal with in the aftermath. Especially when you own the air, mass has a quality all it's own...

Iranian Patrol Boat