See here and here

How? I am unclear on some of this but I think Iran is now surrounded by unfriendly neighbors. I remember reading we have developed some formal security arrangments with Caspian Sea countries. Countries to the west are Afghanistan and Iran. Countries to the east are Turkey and Iraq. To the south is the Persian Gulf. A naval blockade would work but I am not sure whether Iran exports via pipeline (through Turkey perhaps?) Obviously we have the opportunity to deal with that through diplomatic efforts.

What about the inevitable rise in oil prices – why would our “allies” go along with that? Iran exports 2.2 million barrels a day. We have a strategic oil reserve of 670 million and rising, enough to completely replace lost Iranian exports for a year if necessary.

What if Iran declares war? Iran’s has no offensive capability. I suppose they could launch strikes against military assets in the Persian Gulf but our counterstrikes would take care of that pretty quickly. We can basically sit and watch the Iranian economy grind to a halt, create unrest in the streets.

Would the Iranians take to the streets to protest U.S. economic aggression or would they protest there own government’s nuclear program? I don’t know but I think the latter. Some have suggested that the Iranian people have a certain affection for their nuclear weapons program. I would like to see the evidence for that. Also this provides a good opportunity for covert operations to funnel dissension in our direction. (God I hope those covert operatives exist by now…)

Finally there is the big Kahuna himself – GW. I think the man has a proven track record of not flinching from nasty solutions. The world might hate him but they shouldn’t doubt his resolve and an oil embargo is a much more pleasant alternative than a military action.

Good round-up of options and their serious short-comings.

As for containment: if Iran was your typical “rational” player we could assume that the cold-war type of containment (threaten massive nuclear retaliation for any attack by Iran) would work quite well. But we are not working with a rational player or at least we can’t assume we are. The Iranian governments sponsorship of terrorism is well known. Of any state, including the NoKos, they are the most likely to sponsor and supply large scale, possibly nuclear, terrorist attacks in the U.S. Presumably they would use a lack of evidence to deny involvement. It seems possible that one approach might be to warn Iran that a nuclear attack on our soil would automatically trigger a disproportionate nuclear attack on Iran by the U.S. – shoot first ask questions later. I don’t like this option either but maybe it is the least worst of all.

Meanwhile we can support the dissidents in Iran as Ledeen has very vocally advocated (not military action by the U.S.). But I think the Iranian secret police and affiliated thugs are much more powerful than most people think.

The Ayatollah asks that of his subjects, not himself.

Maybe that’s their real objective.

The short version?

Iran is next.

I think the mad mullahs used the phrase “vomit the Zionist entity from the region” for what they would do if they had a nuclear weapon.

And then they said they would get a bomb if they damn well felt like it. And then they said they would not.. would.. would not.. whatever.

There you have it.. they will or will not get the bomb and if they do they will nuke Israel but nobody has the right to interfere with them and diplomacy works when dealing with religious fanatics. usually.

make sense?

It’s not only feasible, it’s crucial – bringing back the draft is absolutely the best way I can think of for us to lose the entire War on Terror.

If our fearless leaders had only raised the enlistment caps two years ago, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But we can, and I believe we must, raise the caps in the very near future. And we’ll need to retask some of the guys babysitting Iraq (which makes sense, since knocking over the mullahs will dry up the backing for some of the “insurgents”) and Europe.

Because something even worse than an attack on Israel is in the offing. If the mullahs get nuclear invulnerability, they’ll decide that they can stage repeated conventional terrorist attacks with impunity, right here in the Great Satan as well as in the lesser Satans. And unless we’re ready to lose a city, we won’t really be able to do jack about it. You can also kiss a free Iraq goodbye; the place will be flooded with “insurgents” faster than you can say “North Vietnam” and we (and they) will be completely screwed.

Time is running out.

To the best of my recollection, Iran has clearly, repeatedly, and publicly stated it will use its nuclear weapons, once obtained, to destroy Israel.

Every thinking person knows that Israel is, in effect, the front line in the “War on Terror.”

So either the Mad Mullahs are blowing smoke (in which case how does one take seriously any of their proclamations?), or they are quite serious.

If the latter, how can one possbly justify allowing them to attain nuclear status?

Do our options become any easier once they have the bomb?

Just asking.

Jamie Irons