Posted on 05/17/2019 3:29:46 AM PDT by Kaslin
Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.
"There won't be any war. ... We don't seek a war, and (the Americans) don't either. They know it's not in their interests."
The ayatollah's analysis -- a war is in neither nation's interest -- is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.
Iran's hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.
And though Iran's nuclear sites are under constant observation and regular inspection, they would be destroyed.
Tehran knows this, which is why, despite 40 years of hostility, Iran has never sought war with the "Great Satan" and does not want this war to which we seem to be edging closer every day.
What would such a war mean for the United States?
It would not bring about "regime change" or bring down Iran's government that survived eight years of ground war with Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
If we wish to impose a regime more to our liking in Tehran, we will have to do it the way we did it with Germany and Japan after 1945, or with Iraq in 2003. We would have to invade and occupy Iran.
But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms. And unlike Iraq in 2003, which is one-third the size and population of Iran, we do not have the hundreds of thousands of troops to call up and send to the Gulf.
Nor would Americans support such an invasion, as President Donald Trump knows from his 2016 campaign. Outside a few precincts, America has no enthusiasm for a new Mideast war, no stomach for any occupation of Iran.
Moreover, war with Iran would involve firefights in the Gulf that would cause at least a temporary shutdown in oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz -- and a worldwide recession.
How would that help the world? Or Trump in 2020?
How many allies would we have in such a war?
Spain has pulled its lone frigate out of John Bolton's flotilla headed for the Gulf. Britain, France and Germany are staying with the nuclear pact, continuing to trade with Iran, throwing ice water on our intelligence reports that Iran is preparing to attack us.
Turkey regards Iran as a cultural and economic partner. Russia was a de facto ally in Syria's civil war. China continues to buy Iranian oil. India just hosted Iran's foreign minister.
So, again, Cicero's question: "Cui bono?"
Who really wants this war? How did we reach this precipice?
A year ago, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a MacArthurian ultimatum, making 12 demands on the Tehran regime.
Iran must abandon all its allies in the Middle East -- Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in Gaza -- pull all forces under Iranian command out of Syria, and then disarm all its Shiite militia in Iraq.
Iran must halt all enrichment of uranium, swear never to produce plutonium, shut down its heavy water reactor, open up its military bases to inspection to prove it never had a secret nuclear program and stop testing missiles. And unless she submits, Iran will be strangled with sanctions.
Pompeo's speech at the Heritage Foundation read like the terms of some conquering Caesar dictating to some defeated tribe in Gaul, though we had yet to fight and win the war, usually a precondition for dictating terms.
Iran's response was to disregard Pompeo's demands.
And crushing U.S. sanctions were imposed, to brutal effect.
Yet, as one looks again at the places where Pompeo ordered Iran out -- Lebanon, Yemen, Gaza, Syria, Iraq -- no vital interest of ours was imperiled by any Iranian presence.
The people who have a problem with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the Israelis whose occupations spawned those movements.
As for Yemen, the Houthis overthrew a Saudi puppet.
Syria's Bashar Assad never threatened us, though we armed rebels to overthrow him. In Iraq, Iranian-backed Shiite militia helped us to defend Baghdad from the southerly advance of ISIS, which had taken Mosul.
Who wants us to plunge back into the Middle East, to fight a new and wider war than the ones we fought already this century in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen?
Answer: Pompeo and Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the Sunni kings, princes, emirs, sultans and the other assorted Jeffersonian democrats on the south shore of the Persian Gulf.
And lest we forget, the never-Trumpers and neocons in exile nursing their bruised egos, whose idea of sweet revenge is a U.S. return to the Mideast in a war with Iran, which then brings an end to the Trump presidency.
When do we invade the EU?
Israel and India are allying militarily . India knows that Iran is the secret hand behind much of the supposed Pak sponsored aggression and terrorism it has had to put up with .
As long as Pak and Iran remain in tact as they are AFG will now no peace . Take one of the two out that that equation and AFG will also settle down .
It’s time to take out the mullahocracy in Iran ,regardless of what the cowards and pinheads say or think .
It’s a deadly viper on this planet , it’s got to go .
We have the power to do it in . Use that power .
Are you, your children or grand children under arms? If not, why not?
Exactly ow are you going to contribute materially to this effort?
War is to be the last and only remaining option to failed diplomacy.
Note that I did not say we should do nothing, but having personally borne the scars of battle, and a parent of children who have done so as well. I see little value to direct engagement in any the most necessary foreign wars. If Iran can and does play by proxy, so ought we. Granted and alas, there are not many pro US entities in the region, and likely none with the will might and resolve to fix their problem, let alone ours ( even after a half century of US beneficence and largess, enough of that!).
If we must engage directly, then it ought to be with distant might. Punish the IRN govt mercilessly with remote weapons, setting foot on the ground only with the most limited and stealthy ( read SPECOPS/CIA) covert forces to direct internal actions of high payoff targets.
And if there is not immediate reonse by the people of IRN with aim towards overthrowing their masters, , then reduce the nations ability to shoot move and communicate physically, economically and morally to rubble and let IRQ/AFG etc fill the vacuum....
If anyone thinks there can be an end to these Moslem wars, they are sadly mistaken.
Meanwhile, our borders are critical, our foreign intel capabilities and economic strengths need to be restores, built and used to make the world America, whether the rest of the “civilized world likes t or not.
Wait... I read on past this and knew exactly who you were talking about... didn't even pause. Then it took me a few seconds to remember his name. THAT is a good nick.
Another war? No way for me. It took me 50 years of supporting every military action the complex could engineer to finally learn. I supported the “vital mideast oil” justification for decades. I’ll gladly suffer the consequences of not a drop of that oil being produced to avoid a war and to achieve total world domination of the oil market by the US. The Israeli military can take care of itself. As far as anyone else in the region is concerned, I couldn’t care less.
To the U.S. government, Iran's only "crime" is that they produce oil and sell it outside our dollar-denominated global exchange.
Does anyone really think it's a coincidence that the U.S. only fights wars against countries that don't use the dollar as their reserve currency ... and considers any country that bows to the U.S. dollar an "ally" -- including radical Islamic regimes like Saudi Arabia?
Thinking really hard....When was the CIA EVER effective. Really? Do know how many CIA employees there are, not including subcontractors? And what do they do, exactly? Ummm?
I just hit the “Like” button... Oh wait....
Sorry it took so long.
My day of reckoning actually came when I was still in high school -- and was being recruited to apply for an Air Force Academy nomination.
The aftermath of the U.S. embassy bombing in Beirut put an end to all that for me. The bombing itself was bad enough, but the real disgrace was when it was revealed that the suicide bomber drove his truck past a guard post where the U.S. Marines on guard duty were not permitted to have ammunition in their weapons.
That's the point when I realized that I'd be well served if I just assumed everyone in Washington is corrupt, mentally retarded, or both.
LOL. Thanks.
I agree. No war. None.
Not for the mideast.
Not our problem
get rid of our Saudi masters.
It would take 12 hours at most...
Like Afghanistan and Iraq, right?
1. He does not mention, and he should, that President Trump is against War with Iran and has repeatedly said so. This should be in such an essay, and by leaving it out it makes it seem Never-Trump-ish.
2. He writes: The people who have a problem with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the Israelis whose occupations spawned those movements. No Pat, Israel's very PRESENCE, since 1947, and Jews in the Holy Land from earlier, spawned these movements. The Muslims have ALWAYS been against the Jews since the time of Mohamhead.
[ Who Wants This War With Iran? ]
Nobody does, per se. But Iran will bring a big one eventually by attacking Israel. This is the Gog-Magog war of Ezekiel 38.
Iran’s mullahs are talking themselves into it; constantly.
Once they get functioning nuclear weapons (JCPOA ha what a joke) it will be Katy-bar-the-door, IMHO.
I am on the same boat as you. The Saudi’s can throw a million men at Iran. I don’t care where they buy them but it should not be the US military. Invading Iraq was pure stupid. Saddam was not a nice person, one of his sons was a retarded sado-masochist, psycho but Saddam controlled his Muslim trash. We invaded his country, because W said he was mean to his daddy. Yet the freaking Saudis are the true terrorists. We have problems here at home, i don’t want any more friends or family fighting for one rag head to beat up another rag head.
Asked Thursday if the U.S. was going to war with Iran, the president replied, "I hope not" — a day after he repeated a desire for dialogue, tweeting, "I'm sure that Iran will want to talk soon."
“The Fake News Washington Post, and even more Fake News New York Times, are writing stories that there is infighting with respect to my strong policy in the Middle East. There is no fighting whatsoever,” Trump tweeted Wednesday afternoon.
“Different opinions are expressed and I make a decisive and final decision – it is a very simple process. All sides, views, and policies are covered. I’m sure that Iran will want to talk soon.”
It's all described in Art of the Deal. He's using the "snarling dogs on leash" of Bolton and Pompeo to stir up some action, and then he's pulling back, hoping for some conciliatory talks with the Mullahs.
It's typical The Donald.
You first.
Nobody wanted WW I, either. But it happened, all on account of one Serbian twit shooting the Crown Prince of Austria. Things could easily spin out of control here.
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.