Posted on 04/12/2006 5:27:36 PM PDT by kellynla
This is a partial transcript of "Special Report With Brit Hume" from Jan. 18, 2006, that has been edited for clarity.
BRIT HUME, HOST: So, what if Iran defies the rest of the world or much of it and continues its nuclear program? Israel says it won’t tolerate that, and the Bush administration is suggesting it wouldn’t either. So, is there a military answer?
To answer the question, we turn to Fox News military analyst, retired Air Force General Tom McInerney, who thinks there is a possible military option. Welcome, sir.
LT. GEN. TOM MCINERNEY, USAF, (RET): Thanks, Brit.
HUME: So, what would it be?
MCINERNEY: Well, it would be with airpower, and what we would do is attack the nuclear facilities. They’re in primarily 12 different locations, although there are some others that were just recently disclosed. And we would need about 200 to 250 aircraft to do it, plus cruise missiles, about 200 cruise missiles.
HUME: Just looking at a map of this now. They appear to have nuclear financial statements scattered all around the country. This is a little different, I think it’s fair to say, than the case with Iraq a quarter century ago where they had a nuclear reactor and some facilities in a place called Osirak and Israel said they weren’t going to let Saddam Hussein’s government get nuclear power or nuclear weapons. And they went in and bombed the place to the expressed, at least, horror of the rest of the world. I’m sure there was some quiet winking going on. And Iraq’s nuclear program may never have been the same.
MCINERNEY: That’s correct.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
He was also interviewed by Hugh Hewitt during that show's first hour this evening. I bet there'll be a transcript posted by radioblogger
Do we have a credible plan to finish a war with Iran, the real thing?
As far as I know we don't have the support of the Mid-East governments for a military strike against Iran.
I think Air Force generals have an ancient habit of saying that everything can be solved by air power.
Maybe so. But a better scenario has been laid out. Go in with ground forces as well as air, destroy all the nuclear facilities, and destroy the regime and the parts of the Iranian military that support it. As I understand it, the Mullahs have their own army of fanatics, in addition to the regular military.
Whether we'll do that, I don't know. It would take political will, and it would be strongly opposed by the usual suspects. At best, bombing the facilities would postpone the problem for a few years. A skillful invasion would solve it. In this case we would not occupy the country but leave after a short stay and let the Iranians sort it out. The resulting government could not be worse than what they have now.
"Go in with ground forces"
I am a big fan of never saying never but in this case;
I doubt if we would evvvvvvver go into Iran with grunts.
That assumes a successful coup will be launched at the same time. I think we need to be prepared for the possibility that Iran becomes a belligerent as result of these attacks. And if so, we should be prepared to win such a war. I have heard it stated many times this would not be logistically easy to accomplish.
"As far as I know we don't have the support of the Mid-East governments for a military strike against Iran."
If you lived next door to Iran would you want them to have a Nuke? LOL
No, probably not. In fact, if the media and the Democrats manage to stir up enough trouble, we may just end up doing nothing at all.
No way. Iran has "elite" forces, like Saddam's "elite" Republican Guard. Just ask the MSM. Plus, no force has occupied Iran since Alexander the Great; therefore, it's impossible. Again, just ask the MSM.
I am going to say yes. The Pentagon draws up contingencies for practically everything. Lets hope they can keep them under wraps before some schmuck at The New Yorker magazine or other irresponsible MSM outlet blabs it to the world. My guess is they take out the nuclear facilities, then issue a strong warning: "Take any retaliatory action, and you will be hit hard." Then if Iran does try something, the regimes infrastructure might be taken out, while at the same time we empower Iranian resistance elements to move in and take control.
Agree with you 99%, except unfortunately they could have a worse government if not done right. They could become a true Taliban/ Al Queda nation, whereas now there are some more moderate forces that do not want to fight the U.S. But in essence I agree with your plan. A potentially very bad result would be to attack these guys from the air, leave the hardliners in power, and Iran starts doing everything in its power to get back at us.
We need to take out the nuclear facilities, but that isn't going to be the end of it.
They will respond, probably with waves of troops in civvies sent across the border into Iraq, to attack our soldiers there. We will likely find ourselves up against militia who are really regular Iranian army.
We will have to be prepared for very hot combat there. If they massed troops for an invasion we could deal with it from the air, but if they send them across as waves of civilians it will be hard to stop them.
So we had better be prepared.
They will probably try to buy a nuke from Russian mafia, and try to smuggle it into the US and Israel. They will inevitably attack us or subject us to nuclear blackmail even if we don't do this, so this is not an argument against attacking them. But it is something we have to understand and prepare for.
That being the case, we have to end this government. There is no end game that leaves the radicals in power. This calls for a decapitation strike, and since a Noriega-style grab isn't practical, that means targeted airstrikes, repeat as necessary, until the back of the radical power base is broken. The mullahs, the Revolutionary Guard, the president and his inner circle, must be pushed from power with no way back.
As a part of all this we will probably close the Straits of Hormuz to Iranian traffic. With no way to get their oil to market, they will be bankrupt in a month. But bankrupt alone isn't enough to bring down this government. For that we need more direct action. We need to target the ruling factions.
Or fight our way out of a squeeze play, say, between Syria and Iran.
i dont think you ever will
They dont have the military capability to do any such thing. with their military centered in Tehran, they would have to both mobilize then move their military literally hundreds of miles just to get to the border of Iraq then also navigate the Zagros mountains.
Any threat to our ships could be carried out at this time by current enemy assailants so the potential of Iranian attackers is no big deal.
If you wish to throw in the potential of Iran giving nuclear material to terrorists, there is no reason not to believe that they don't already have it. Fortunately they don't have the reactor facilities to develop it........
Exactly so. Iran has been a festering sore ever since Jimmy Carter arranged to depose the Shah and install Ayatollah Khomeini. There can be no peace in the world until the regime is removed.
The problem is that the Democrats are still hoping to win power by opposing any kind of war effort, and Bush may not have the political will to do what needs to be done. He did it once, but it's not clear whether he will do it again. He certainly hasn't gotten many thanks for Iraq.
I believe that was the plan with Iraq. Didn't quite work out that way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.