Who Will Attack Iran?

Pages: 1 2

Barring unforeseen and unlikely circumstances—the bite of economic sanctions, another popular revolt, a change of heart on the part of the mullahs, a weakening of Western and especially Israeli resolve—it is at least imaginable that Iran will be attacked before the American election in November of this year. The on again, off again talks between the Iranian leadership and the P5 + 1 nations, aimed at arriving at a modus vivendi, are clearly nothing more than a reciprocal stalling tactic. The West wishes to defer military intervention, China and Russia wish to prevent it, while Iran continues to enrich uranium, add centrifuges to its nuclear facilities, and steadily progresses toward the acquisition of a thermonuclear weapon.

Further, given its declared purpose to incinerate the Jewish state, its possession of advanced delivery systems, and the belief of its leaders in the radical, Twelver version of Shi’a theology which envisions the return of the “Hidden Imam” in a millenarian conflagration, the bruited American policy of “containment” is doomed to failure. In a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on March 3, 2012, President Obama rejected the principle of  containment of a nuclear-armed Iran, but did not rule out containment of a nuclear-capable Iran—a sly distinction that does not inspire confidence. Who is to judge precisely when capability morphs into capacity?

Joseph Puder, who heads the Philadelphia-based Interfaith Taskforce, puts little credence in Obama’s putative resolution. In an article titled “Obama, Like Carter, Will Not Act Against Iran,” Puder writes: “Obama much like Jimmy Carter is proving to the Iranians and to the Islamic world in general, that America is on the decline, and lacks the will to fight for its global security interests. The Obama administration has already invoked containment of a nuclear Iran as a default option for the U.S.” The fact is that Iran cannot be “contained.” A nuclear Iran is a game-changer, both politically and militarily, able to exert its will at the world’s expense by threatening nuclear blackmail. At the very least, it will change the face of the Middle East for the worst, as if things were not already bad enough.

The odds are, then, despite the current round of talks and the evident desire to avoid or delay military action, that Iran will not be allowed to “go nuclear” and will be attacked before the year is out. The only question that remains open is: by whom? Certainly not the feckless and appeasing European nations. As everybody knows, the only two candidates adequate to the task are the U.S. and Israel.

With respect to the U.S., the signals are mixed. On the one hand, we are witnessing the gradual buildup of American naval forces in the Persian Gulf; on the other, the obvious reluctance of the president to confront an Iranian enemy with whom he has whimsically committed to unconditional dialogue. As for Israel, which is in the immediate line of fire, there is little maneuvering room. It cannot afford to tolerate a nuclear Iran sworn to its destruction and only nine ballistic minutes away.

Pages: 1 2

  • JohnWV

    Iran is only Israel's current fixation. America's entire electoral system has been corrupted by Netanyahu's Israel, AIPAC, Israel Firsters and ingenious distribution of enormous amounts of Jewish money. Our representative democracy is nearly defeated and the destruction of America as we know it well underway. Termination of the criminal treachery and treason demands immediate priority. The Government of the United States must again serve American interests, not the Jewish state's relentless pursuit of invulnerability, territorial conquest and apartheid supremacist empire in, and beyond, the Mideast.

    • stern23

      Careful mate. We control the world, you know. We control the media as well as the American government, and the Internet and even your mind! So what you think you're thinking is not really you thinking! We told you to say that so that we could pretend we had enemies, but we're too powerful.

      Just thought you'd like to know.

      • http://www.facebook.com/mensch.keymelon Mensch Keymelon

        So stern23, is this your personal "Jewhad" agains poor paranoid JohnWV???

        • stern23

          No, Mensch with no sense of humour, this is my personal attempt to demonstrate just how idiotic JohnWV’s thinking is. You couldn’t see that?

  • JohnWV

    However did we get it all so backwards? As a signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty, Iran has an internationally recognized right to develop and implement nuclear technology. Israel rejected the NPT and has no such right. Yet, the Jewish state has ICBM nukes and openly threatens Iran; actually campaigns for war against Iran. Israel, not Iran, should be sanctioned and forced to reveal its nuclear machinations to IAEA inspection. However did we get it all so backwards?

    • ★FALCON★

      They don't have a right to develop a nuclear bomb and threaten their neighbors. And it's known that they are developing a bomb because FLAME has stolen the files that outline the triggering device.

      You might try to educate yourself so you don't look so foolish.

      • http://www.facebook.com/mensch.keymelon Mensch Keymelon

        Please provide a source or a link to your "proof" on this information FLAME is purported to have stolen. It would have to be gold standard proof, because no one trusts anything Israel or the US Intelligence community says…they have both been caught spying and lying too many times.

        • stern23

          See, definition of "spying" is not really to let on to what you know. So if the US and Israel are "caught lying", as you claim, they must be doing something right.

          Tell me, is this your full time occupation? Or do you have something to do with your life other than post truly inane comments?

  • Asher

    The World remains in Limbo until we have leaders who will committ to doing what is necessary to stop Iran.

  • PaulRevereNow

    If I were a betting man, I wouldn’t bet that “Obama will act to rescue a potentially sinking candidacy,” by attacking Iran. First, Obama has done NOTHING to prepare the U.S. for what could well be the beginning of World War III–he hasn’t done squat to prepare us for an EMP attack. The Iranians have obliquely referred to “a world without the United States.” An EMP attack would achieve that goal, and very quickly. (All they would have to do would be to launch a war-head carrying missile from a ship off of our east coast, and explode it in the atmosphere; it would fry our electrical grid) Second, Obama has gutted our military–reducing the Navy from 588 ships under Pres. Bush, to 283 currently; and badly demoralized our Army and Marine Corps. Third, does he even have the personal capability to lead the United States in time of war? He might, but I doubt it. Look at the way he ordered the killing of Bin Laden.

    He did it in such a way, that if the hit had failed, the blame would have been cast on the Admiral in charge of the operation; not on Obama.. Netanyahu knows that Obama is an amateur; and Israel is better off attacking Iran first; not waiting for the U.S. to do it, or for U.S. support. Very good article, though.

    • flowerknife_us

      The U.S. does not really have a Navy anymore. We have Carrier Battle Groups with their support and replenishment ships.

      The Marines were not landed in combat during the first gulf war. So the Clinton Administration decommissioned. sold scrapped or stored the Marines ability to ever land such a force again. Budget surplus. The ability to land heavy equipment directly ashore went with the Tank landing ships.

      Granted that any such enterprise of that size is fraught with risks given the capabilities of current anti- ship missile. The lack of having it is far different than not.

      Just how many international water transit choke points can one lose before some force of size needs to be landed to retake control? We would be hard pressed to even re-take the Panama Canal if it fell under organized hostile forces.

  • mic

    without a full scal invasion de US and Israel will have not other choice than to acquiesce to a nuclear iran. even the highest-military ranking of US military: " the best we can do is delay them " said

    Gen cartwright, Gen James Mattis, Adm fallon …..

    by strinking iran, israel just make it more easy for iran to build bomb by expeling the inspectors, and leaving the NPT
    even israeli military admited: they can do only very limilited damad to iranian programme, it worse not the price.

    and the U.S. will be left hard dilema, a bloody gory invasion ( return to draft needed so ) dommed to fail, or to acquiess to a nuclear iran.
    i am not afraid by a nuclear iran, pakistan is more dangerous IMO, however i dont like the idea of iran having nuclear, but what us military said is only the reality on the ground.

  • http://yahoo.com frank cohen

    iran is a terrorist state, it supports hezbollah. They are a slick nation, the main goal is to FOolL the
    west into thinking they are peaceful. I know arabs and know how they deal and think. They are very crafty,
    will smile at you while hating you inside. Iran will export those nukes in the future an d will blow it up
    somewhere in europe or america to weaken the west. Just like it happened with chernobyl, a nuclear
    explotion would devastate the west economically.