Three Reasons Not to Bomb Iran—Yet

commentary magazine ^ | May 2006 | Edward N. Luttwak

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I know of no reputable expert in the United States or in Europe who trusts the constantly repeated promise of Iran’s rulers that their nuclear program will be entirely peaceful and is meant only to produce electricity. The question is what to do about this. Faced with the alarming prospect of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons, some policy experts favor immediate preventive action, while others, of equal standing, invite us to accept what they consider to be inevitable in any case. The former call for the bombing of Iran’s nuclear installations before they can produce actual weapons. The latter, to the contrary, urge a diplomatic understanding with Iran’s rulers in order to attain a stable relationship of mutual deterrence.

Neither position seems adequately to recognize essential Iranian realities or American strategic priorities. To treat Iran as nothing more than a set of possible bombing targets cannot possibly be the right approach. Still more questionable is the illogical belief that a regime that feels free to attack American interests in spite of its present military inferiority would somehow become more restrained if it could rely on the protective shield of nuclear weapons.

In contemplating preventive action, the technical issue may be quickly disposed of. Some observers, noting that Iran’s nuclear installations consist of hundreds of buildings at several different sites, including a number that are recessed in the ground with fortified roofs, have contended that even a prolonged air campaign might not succeed in destroying all of them.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Hat tip to the TCS Daily blog..

[MNJohnnie]

Do nothing and hope for the best is not a "Strategy". More nonsenical Neo Isolationist dogma. Would of thought that 9-11 woke them up to the fact they cannot hide from this foe.

[TexasGus]

the best reason to not attack iran is that our best bunker busters are still on the designing table and assembly lines. if we can make 'em conventional (ie nifty jelly explosives) and penetrate, look out hate mongering knuckleheads.</p>

[OkieDoke]

Here are at least 3 reasons why Iran should be bombed:
Iran's chief `screwball' has stated that Israel should be destroyed;
Israel wants to take out the only things that might be able to destroy them (imagine two bombs going off about the same time, downtown Tel Aviv and Haifa); and,
they've done it before (Iraq) and can do it again, and they should do it before Iran can retaliate.
We all know that the only reason Iran wants nuclear weapons is to destroy Israel, and then hurt us. Finally, it's "payback".
If gas goes up to $10.00 @ gallon, well, maybe our domestic screwballs will finally agree to doing what we should have been doing 30 years ago: drilling where we have oil and building nuclear power plants. (The *French* have them, I mean, c'mon)

[appleharvey]

Three Reasons Not to Bomb Iran—Yet

I wouldn't wait too long though. If (God forbid), we have President Hillary, She and Bill will sell them the technology to deliver a nuclear payload to any American city.

[HockeyPop]

"It is the only country in the world with two governments, and the only country in the world that has now had six elections since the first election of President Khatami. [It is] the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections: two for President; two for the parliament, the Majlis; two for the mayoralities.

In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70% of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own. " ~~Bill Clinton, Interviewed by Charley Rose, Davos, Switzerland (1995)

[MNJohnnie]

Cool. Thanks for the insight. Got to love Freepers. Always someone "in the know" about a topic. Thanks TG!

[Marine_Uncle]

I decided to download the document for more carefull reading. Well not to be smug. But as one reads this author's section on the centrifuges one will now realize I was not inventing things that where not verifiably true. It is very difficult to maintain a large cascade system even under the best conditions. And if one does not use high quality specially designed units as is mentioned in the article chances are they will not last long. One requires well requlated power sources that are of an un-interuptable type. You just don't push some button and expect the stuff to operate on it's own.
Modern gas extraction systems such as is required to extract the U235 istotope from the Uranium hexafloride gas are expensive units to maintain. So if anything I feel a bit vindicated in what I have written on a number of posts where people where just going nutzo.
And if it turns out to be true that the Bugarians sold them some 150 thousand units. OK. Of what type where they sold. How efficient will these units be, what is their MTBF etc..
As some of us know. Often the Arab world and in this case the Persians are sold stuff that we in the states would consider a bucket of bolts. Real junk.
To maintain a huge gas extraction plant they are going to have to spend years perfecting the system. It just does not come to be from having a few plumbers connect a unit together in a given geometric form, (serial groups in parallel). It is very involved. And everthing must be of a high order quality and reliabilty wise. And I do not think Iran is anywhere near the point where they will have any sytsem in place that could in the near future even produce enough of 3.5% enriched fuel for packing into fuel rods for commercial electrical generation. It taint the simple to do.

[JasonC]

A million a day at $70 each for two years buys a lot of anything. You are whistling past a graveyard. We are bluffing, they know it, they are going to get nuclear weapons and we are all just going to watch.

And you want to know why? Because leftist numbskulls can't admit anything even decent happened on somebody else's watch, and have gutted our options in a snit over an unambiguous victory.

For which there will be hell to pay. And it won't remotely be the first time.

[Marine_Uncle]

If we do not destroy most of their facilities and promise them we shall by internal spies and sat photos keep watch as to when the next bombing will be required, yes, they could eventually construct low yield nuclear weapons. The issue is how long will it take. Much of the BS coming out is misleading the public. To many don't have even a slight clue as how difficult it will be to contruct and operate large scale gas centrifuge systems capable of producing an adequate amount of fission grade uranium. Some do not think they even have the facilities yet, to properly grind then chemically treat the raw uruanium ore that eventually is made into yellowcake. They have been seeking yellowcake elsewhere to get them started. That is how they suposedly have produced some 90 tons of uranium hexafloride gas so far.
In short they are not anywhere as advanced as many of these very short of detailed news reports indicate. They go for some buzz words and for the sensational. And they mislead people. I hope you are aware much of what they have claimed they developed is BS. They have purchased equipment from Pakistan and elsewhere. They are not capable of manufacturing their own equipment at this point. They don't have the machinary and expertise. And as I had made comment elsewhere, they probably bought a bunch of low grade centrifuges that will not last long. These things are difficult to design with the best materials available let along trying to make them in some 40 year old converted plant say in Bulgaria or elsewhere, using substandard machining techniques and materials. And it is not just the centrifuges. One must automate the whole system with computerized pumping systems, check valves, most likey rather sophisticated orifice controllers, and various gas monitoring sensors etc.. Like I say this is a major thing for any more advance country with all the equipment and know how to do, let along what these folks have available in talent and resources. I do hope you get an idea of what I am trying to communicate. Let me put it this way. Don't expect a bunch of eager cavemen to design a modern jet engine and have it run without failing for say two years of on time.

[matt1234]

Three Reasons Not to Bomb Iran—Yet

1. The Tin Man hasn't got a brain.
2. The Scarecrow doesn't have a heart.
3. The Lion doesn't have the "noive."

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!!"

[The_Reader_David]

Luttwak has a keen sense of grand strategy, and shouldn't be dismissed lightly. He's hardly an isolationist--he was very much a supporter of aggressive strategy in the close of the Cold War.

His point is that the Iranian clerical regime has inherent instabilities which should be exploited, that there is time to do so, and that even is a bombing
campaign or invasion proves necessary, the extra time can be used to optimize its long-term strategic effect.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

This juat in:

Iran Claims It's Testing a New Centrifuge (P2)

[MNJohnnie]

Read the last few paragraphs. His plan can be summed up as : Wait and hope the Iranians do the job for us. It the same old do nothing until the problem either becomes unmanageable or goes away "realist" dogma of the Neo Isolationists. This dogma died on 9-11-01. Unfortunately the purveyors of this mythology cling to it's corpse.

Doesn't work. Not one authoritarian regime has ever fell without outside pressure being brought to bear. Also, he vastly underestimates just what goodies the US Air force and Navy have in their bags. He may of been good in his day, he's out of touch now.

[MNJohnnie]

Thanks Ernest for the posting. Great stuff. Don't agree with it but good to have your assumptions challenged by thinking people like Mr Luttwak and David the Reader. :-)

[tomahawk]

North Korea did it.

The Iranians are much smarter and have a lot more money.

They will do it unless we bomb their program to pieces.

[Ichneumon]

I hope you are aware much of what they have claimed they developed is BS. They have purchased equipment from Pakistan and elsewhere. They are not capable of manufacturing their own equipment at this point. They don't have the machinary and expertise. And as I had made comment elsewhere, they probably bought a bunch of low grade centrifuges that will not last long. These things are difficult to design with the best materials available let along trying to make them in some 40 year old converted plant say in Bulgaria or elsewhere, using substandard machining techniques and materials. And it is not just the centrifuges. One must automate the whole system with computerized pumping systems, check valves, most likey rather sophisticated orifice controllers, and various gas monitoring sensors etc..

There are many reasons to doubt your comforting analysis. While I don't downplay the technical hurdles involved, let's keep in mind that the US pulled this off in the EARLY NINETEEN FORTIES while having to create all the techniques and technologies from scratch, and did it in a few short years.

Compared to today, the 1940's were almost the dark ages when it came to electronics, manufacturing, etc. The freaking transistor hadn't even been invented yet, for pete's sake, and flathead engines were the height of production automobile engineering. The Manhattan Project's centrifuges did just fine in a very short timeframe despite the primitive technology of the day, and a conspicuous lack of "computerized pumping systems" which you incorrectly say "one must automate the whole system with".

To think that a large country today with a crapload of money at its disposal, 60 years of nuclear know-how developed by multiple countries willing to share it with them, and 21st-century off-the-shelf high-tech gear available to incorporate into the system, couldn't manage to at least match the Manhattan Project's results in the modern day, is just whistling past the graveyard.

[tomahawk]

We're supposed to wait for a flash of light and mushroom cloud apparently, we're absolutely terrified of having to fight, I mean, we've lost 2,600 soliders in a 3-year war, how many more losses can we take?

Say goodbye to millions of Americans within several years in nuke strikes if we do not go in and destroy this Iranian nuke program now, while we still can.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Manhattan Project's centrifuges

I don't think that technology was even available at that time....I believe we used a gas diffusion technique....