Will the Bush admin Israel bomb IRAN?

[General Duke]

Is Iran Still an Option?

 

Charles Peña

A question I'm often asked is whether military action against Iran is still an option for the Bush administration. The short answer is "yes." Last week, when a reporter raised the issue of "a spate of recent stories about possible military action against Iran before the end of the year" President Bush responded that "the first option for the United States is to solve this problem diplomatically" but that "all options are on the table."

 

Yet many people (many of whom did not believe that the United States could or would invade Iraq) share an utter disbelief that the United States is in any position use military force against Iran. After all, even if one is willing to believe that we are making progress, there are still some 140,000 U.S. soldiers deployed in Iraq – which has put a great strain on the U.S. military (particularly the Army and Marine Corps, as well as the National Guard and reserves). And things appear to be taking a turn for the worse in Afghanistan (earlier this week a suicide bomber killed 41 people in an attack on the Indian embassy). So if our hands our tied in Iraq and Afghanistan, how could we possibly do anything in Iran?

 

To begin, it is important to remember that advocates for military action against Iran – both inside and outside of the administration – do not necessarily adhere to the same logic and reality that the rest of us do. As Ron Suskind wrote in an October 2004 New York Times Magazine article:

 

"The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'"

 

Moreover, military action does not necessarily mean a ground invasion. If the primary target is Iran's nuclear program, then the U.S. Air Force and Navy (both not strained by the deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan) could conduct air strikes. The number of targets and requisite aimpoints to destroy those targets ranges from a very few (perhaps just the uranium enrichment facility at Natanz which is key to the Iranians ability to produce highly enriched uranium that could be used in nuclear weapon) to – according to retired Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner – as many as 24 nuclear-related facilities consisting of 400 aimpoints. But whether the number is small or large, it is well within the capability of the U.S. Air Force and Navy that orchestrated the complex air strikes for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

 

And while the target of air strikes might be Iran's nuclear program, the nuclear issue is not the only rationale for taking action. The administration has taken almost every opportunity to link Iran to the violence in Iraq. More importantly, Iran has been blamed for the deaths of U.S. troops in Iraq – largely by claims that the Iranians are responsible for supplying parts and expertise to build improvised explosive devices (IEDs) used in roadside bombings that have killed American soldiers. (According to Gardiner, the Bush administration believes in seven key truths in making its case against Iran: Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction, Iran is ignoring the international community, Iran supports Hezbollah and terrorism, Iran is increasingly inserting itself in Iraq and beginning to be involved in Afghanistan, the people of Iran want a regime change, sanctions are not going to work, and you cannot negotiate with these people.)

 

Finally, there is the Israeli "wild card" to consider. According to Shaul Mofaz, a former Israeli defense minister who is now a deputy prime minister, "If Iran continues with its program for developing nuclear weapons, we will attack." Mofaz's comments were made shortly after an Israeli military exercise that had all the makings of a rehearsal for bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. Gardiner believes otherwise: "The signal I received is that Israel does NOT have the capability to effectively attack Iran's nuclear facilities." Even if Gardiner's military assessment is correct, it is important to understand that the Israeli government's worldview is different. Iran – particularly a nuclear-capable Iran – is seen as a mortal threat to Israel (which is only reinforced by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's inflammatory rhetoric). Survival of the Jewish state may trump all other considerations – including skyrocketing the price of oil past $200 a barrel. And in a classic case of the tail wagging the dog, Israeli insistence on taking military action against Iran could cause the United States to do its bidding – particularly if Gardiner's assessment of Israel's military capabilities is correct.

 

So with less than four months to go until the presidential election, an October surprise is still very much within the realm of possibility.

[General Duke]

US holds navy exercise after Iran comments on Gulf

 

REUTERS

Reuters North American News Service

 

Jul 07, 2008 08:59 EST

 

DUBAI, July 7 (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy said on Monday it was carrying out an exercise in the Gulf, days after vowing that Iran will not be allowed to block the waterway which carries crude from the world's largest oil-exporting region.

 

"The aim of Exercise Stake Net is to practise the tactics and procedures of protecting maritime infrastructure such as gas and oil installations," Commodore Peter Hudson said in a U.S. Fifth Fleet statement.

 

The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards said in remarks published late last month that Tehran would impose controls on shipping in the Gulf and the strategic Strait of Hormuz if it was attacked.

 

Speculation about a possible attack on Iran because of its nuclear programme has risen since a report last month said Israel had practised such a strike.

 

Vice-Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, the commander of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, said last week the United States would not allow Iran to block the Gulf.

 

Fear of an escalation in the standoff between the West and Iran, the world's fourth largest oil producer, has helped propel oil prices over $140 a barrel.

 

Two U.S. vessels were taking part in the exercise alongside a British warship and one from Bahrain, a Gulf Arab ally which hosts the Fifth Fleet. "Stake Net seeks to help ensure a lawful maritime order as well as improve relationships between regional partners," the fleet's statement said.

 

Western powers say they fear Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under cover of a civilian nuclear programme. Tehran says the work aims to generate electricity.

 

A cargo ship hired by the U.S. military fired warning shots at two unidentified boats which approached it in the Gulf in April. In January, the United States said five small Iranian speedboats aggressively approached three U.S. Navy ships in the Strait of Hormuz and a radio message was transmitted, warning they could explode.

 

Iran said its boats were simply trying to identify the U.S. vessels and military experts have since said the warning may have come from an independent radio operator. (Reporting by Inal Ersan, editing by Mark Trevelyan)

 

Source: Reuters North

[General Duke]

 

The tests drew sharp American criticism and came a day after the Iranians had threatened to retaliate against Israel and the United States if attacked.

 

State-run media said the missiles were long- and medium-range weapons, and included the Shahab-3, which Tehran maintains is able to hit targets up to 1,250 miles away from its firing position. Parts of western Iran are within 650 miles of Tel Aviv.

 

The tests, shown on Iranian television, coincide with increasingly tense exchanges with the West over Tehran’s nuclear program, which Iran says is for civilian purposes but which many Western governments suspect is aimed at building nuclear weapons. Iran’s military display came just a day after the United States and the Czech Republic signed an accord to allow the Pentagon to deploy part of its contentious antiballistic missile shield, which Washington maintains is designed to protect in part against Iranian missiles.

 

At the same time, United States and British warships have been conducting naval maneuvers in the Persian Gulf — apparently within range of the launch site of the missiles tested on Wednesday.

 

The Israelis — whose air force last month practiced what American intelligence officials called a rehearsal for a possible strike on Iranian nuclear facilities — said they did not want war with Iran. But Mark Regev, a spokesman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said, “The Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of grave concern to the entire international community.”

 

The missile tests drew a sharp response from the United States. Gordon D. Johndroe, the deputy White House press secretary, said in a statement at the Group of 8 meeting in Japan that Iran’s development of ballistic missiles was a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions.

 

“The Iranian regime only furthers the isolation of the Iranian people from the international community when it engages in this sort of activity,” Mr. Johndroe said.

 

He urged Iran to “refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world,” and said, “The Iranians should stop the development of ballistic missiles which could be used as a delivery vehicle for a potential nuclear weapon immediately.”

 

Energy traders reacted to the news by bidding up oil prices, which had been falling in recent days. The most-watched oil price benchmark — light, low-sulfur crude for delivery next month — rose more than $2 a barrel in early electronic trading, though by late morning in New York the gain had been pared somewhat.

 

In the United States, the main presidential contenders took the missile tests as an opportunity to demand measures to restrain Iran.

 

The presumptive Republican candidate, John McCain, said the tests “demonstrate the need for effective missile defense now and in future, and this includes missile defense in Europe as is planned with the Czech Republic and Poland.” His Democrat challenger, Barack Obama, said on NBC’s “Today” show that the tests showed a need for stronger restraints and incentives to head off “rising tensions that could lead into real problems.”

 

Iran’s Arabic-language Al-Alam television said the missiles, fired from an undisclosed location in the Iranian desert, included a “Shahab-3 with a conventional warhead weighing one ton and a 2,000-kilometer range,” about 1,250 miles. Cairo, Athens, Istanbul, New Delhi and the whole of the Arabian peninsula are within that distance of Iranian territory.

 

Iranian television showed what appeared to be two Shahabs lifting off within seconds of one another in a salvo firing.

 

“That’s surprising,” Charles P. Vick, an expert on the Iranian rocket program at GlobalSecurity.org, a research group in Alexandria, Va., said in a telephone interview. “Historically, it’s always been single launches.”

 

Mr. Vick added, however, that the Shahab display might be less formidable than Iran had claimed. The missile’s conic warhead appeared to resemble an older Shahab model with a range of about 1,500 kilometers, or 900 miles, rather than the newest one.

 

The Iranians fired their first Shahab a decade ago, Mr. Vick said, and are now replacing all models with a more advanced missile that burns solid propellants, which are considered better for quick launchings.

 

In a sense, he said, Wednesday’s Shahab firings seemed to be simply a way for the Iranians to clear out old inventory. The biggest missile that the Iranians apparently fired — known as the 3a model — is no longer in production, Mr. Vick said.

 

The Shahab-3a predates the atomic jitters that arose with the debut of the Shahab-3b in August 2004. The 3b’s distinctive nosecone — known as triconic and made up of three distinct shapes— is viewed by Western experts as ideal for carrying a nuclear warhead.

 

The Shahab-3b, Mr. Vick said, is apparently the delivery vehicle intended for the nuclear warhead that, according to a National Intelligence Estimate issued last November, the Iranians worked on until late 2003.

 

The other missiles in Wednesday’s tests were identified as the Zelzal, with a range of 250 miles, and the Fateh, with a range of 110 miles, Agence France-Presse reported. Iranian television showed what was said to be the Shahab-3 missile rising amid clouds of dust from the desert launch site.

 

Hossein Salami, a commander of the Revolutionary Guards, was quoted as saying: “The aim of these war games is to show we are ready to defend the integrity of the Iranian nation.”

 

“Our missiles are ready for shooting at any place and any time, quickly and with accuracy. The enemy must not repeat its mistakes. The enemy targets are under surveillance,” he said.

 

The missile tests followed remarks on Tuesday by a senior Iranian official warning the United States and Israel against attacking Iran.

 

“In case that they commit such foolishness, Tel Aviv and the U.S. fleet in the Persian Gulf would be the first targets to burst into flames receiving Iran’s crushing response,” said the official, Ali Shirazi, a representative of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader.

 

Like the missile tests, the bellicose language seemed part of an effort by Iran to couple offers of negotiation with warnings of military preparedness.

 

Negotiations between Iran and the West are scheduled to resume this month and Iranian officials have sounded mounting alarms about speculation that the United States or Israel could attack Tehran’s nuclear facilities. On a European tour last month, President Bush repeated Washington’s warning that no options had been ruled out.

 

Last weekend, Iran signaled that it would not comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions requiring it to stop enriching uranium. During his European visit, Mr. Bush won pledges from some European leaders to tighten sanctions against Iran.

 

But Iran’s foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said his country was prepared to open comprehensive negotiations with the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and the six world powers — the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China — that have proposed a set of incentives to resolve the impasse over its nuclear program.

Alan Cowell reported from Paris and William J. Broad reported from New York. Myra Noveck contributed reporting from Jerusalem and Sheryl Gay Stolberg from Rusutsu, Japan.