Replies

Addendum to 2006 Passover analysis.

I have been thinking about the incident the Russians would need to stage in the fall of 2008 to tip the US elections in Hillary's direction.

While widespread violence and a breakdown of civil order in Iraq would be helpful to Hillary, what is needed in addition is an incident that kills a significant number of American troops. Believe me, I would not be posting this if I thought there was any chance at all the Russians had not thought of this already.

Because US casualties in Iraq are extremely low and the efficiency of our military forces is extremely high, the bar has been set pretty low for the definition of a significant number of American military fatalities. I believe 10 to 15 fatalities on the right day would be sufficient to tip the election in Hillary's favor --- set against the background of widespread civil disorder and an apparent failure of our policy in Iraq.

Been thinking about how the Russians would go about achieving this, the obvious answer is to threaten a target the Americans cannot ignore. Ideally, they would like to target Americans, such as in the Green zone, but this is not practical.

The answer is to target either the Iraqi Prime Minister or Sistanni. Both will have security based on Iraqi forces. I believe the Russians (or the Iranians, who I believe in this instance would share) have probably achieved some level of infiltration into all Iraqi forces--- hence, the key defensive force will be at least partially compromised at the moment of truth.

Since the Iranians are now well known to be smuggling military ordnance into Iraq at a rapid rate, and the Russians are known to be supplying Iraq with weaponry of various sorts, we can expect a new type of Russian weaponry to appear in this crucial attack.

Of course, it would be inappropriate for a Soviet helicopter (flown by Soviet volunteers) to appear on the scene. The Cold War is over and the Russians are now our friends, and allies in the war against terror, so such behavior would not be permissible. Nonetheless, considerable lethality can be obtained via machine guns, mortars, and shoulder-fired missiles, any of which it seems could be transported via an ordinary car. I suspect panel trucks driving around in Iraq would draw attention, though I don't really know the details on that.

I present addendum this with apologies to those whose sensibilities it will offend, but it seems to me that posting this might conceivably have some benefit for us.

To exit from my Ping list, just send me one request to that effect, public or private.

I can appreciate what goes behind weaving such a web. There are two many variables one must deal with in the case for me to reach a similiar conclusion.
The 2008 election period is far off in respect to how much can change in Iraq. I continue to believe the Persian influence is going to drop off once a government is put into place.
For one thing, this government cannot be viewed as supporting any given religious faction. To many players have been working toward introducing a secular form of rule. They now have check and balances that may come into play.

One has to consider, the republican runners for the POTUS and the RNC are not going to stand by in idle and allow the demos to distort what has gone down for the past five years in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan. There is so much that now can be put into simply statements, that in effect can nullify what demos may try to distort.
For all we know, we may actually end up having a small footprint in Iraq by mid 2008 range. If Iraq changes for the better in the next year, the government succeeds to really eliminate most of the remaining insurgency, and the coalition loss of life stays low, it is going to be hard for the demos to cry about there being a quagmire etc..
Sure the Russians are always playing many hands in the ME. And the dynamics of the region allow for many scenarios to develop.
One could write some optimistic scenarios based on much of the ground info we have at this point. At any rate, an interesting scenario you paint.
One thing is for certain. Many Iraqi leaders across the spectrum are saying they want nothing to do with the Persians. In fact they want them totally booted out.

Just a couple of thoughts to add and some difference of opinion.

Although the United States is always in the back of the minds of all tyrants, as a possible military adversary and to use as a bogey man to keep their subjects distracted, when the Shah was deposed the Ayatollah Khomeini had similar ambitions to Saddam, to be the biggest influence in the ME. They were immediately competitors and it was well known that Saddam was aggressively trying to get nuclear weapons. So, that was part of the early motivation of the Ayatollah.

Russia always supports anyone who is an enemy of the U.S. so they supported both Iraq and Iran but since Saddam was better established and more aggressive they backed him more. In addition, Russia had armed Saddam and we had armed the Shah so Iraq was easier for them to support and more likely to succeed. Rearming Iran was going to take time and patience.

We also now know that the Russian departed Iraq only after the war began and after the WMD were spirited out of the country. Now Iran seems their best choice in the ME.

As far as the present situation at home I disagree some. I think the Democrats are concentrating heavily on 2006 and 2008. They are still smarting over the impeachment of Slick and are determined to get revenge by impeaching Bush. To even try they need control of the House and they need it as a run up to 2008. Their culture of corruption strategy is backfiring because of their own malfeasance so they will try everything else they can.

As they have been doing since Bush took office they will continue to block him everywhere and to create issues on which to discredit and impeach him.

The reason for Iran's seemingly irrational actions, as well as those of Chavez, is to try to force Bush into a move that can be roundly condemned by the left/Democrats. The agitation of the illegals is another but separate issue with the same goal. They are also hoping to make a big stink over any meaningful immigration reform to pander to illegals for their illegal votes. Multiple accusations from many different directions will be mounted against Bush in order to defeat the Republicans.

We are still too strong militarily for Russia, China, and the Muslims to take on in battle. Therefore, a takeover by the Democrats is the next best thing, probably even better as they are all in the same camp, as you say. Bush will oppose them. The Democrats will cooperate with them.