Today was a depressing seminar where guest lecturers discussed Iran, Ahmadinejad and the Bush Doctrine. As I walked out a woman kept eerily repeating in a sing-song manner “The war is coming… the war is coming”.
I was surprised to hear from all four Iranian Studies professors (from universities across Europe and the U.S.) that there was a general consensus in academia that U.S. military air strikes across Iran is the most likely outcome and might occur around this time next year as a response to the opening of the Russian-made Bushehr power plant. Obviously once the fuel is delivered in March, 2007 strikes on the plant itself cannot occur without fallout similar in size to Chernobyl, so strikes would hit other targets to get the message across. However, this is a zero-sum game because Iran would certainly respond, their first tactic would likely be blocking oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz (where 90% of Gulf oil shipments pass through) causing global prices to soar.
If I were Iran I think I’d feel quite surrounded too. This isn’t even close to a complete map of all the U.S. strategic bases that are close to Iran.
I wish instead of making threats to one another the two countries could have real discussions and debates. Diplomacy can’t work if you aren’t even contact with each other.
8







October 21st, 2006 at 10:54 am
Actually, from what I’ve been able to gather, the map may be wrong. From what I’ve been able to gather, the US has left Saudi Arabia (with the exception of about 250 personel in Ryhad). This is one of the reasons why we laugh at Bush for “being tough on terror” because it was one of Osama’s demands. We do have bases in Qutar, UAE, Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey. I know Bush had campaigned to get bases in Turkmenistan, Kazakistan, Azerbaijan, and Armenia, however, I think he was told no. This occured on his asian tour last year.
However, yes, I too have posted in the past about how surrounded Iran is. I find it interesting that Iran endorsed Bush in the 2004 elections primarily because Bush had taken out most of Iran’s enemies, primarily the Taliban and Saddam Hussien.
If the info which you posted about the arrival of fuel is correct, if somebody does something, it would probably be Israel before that point, as it would fall into the same pattern of behavior establised with Israel destroying Iraq’s nuke reactor in 1983. It sounds to me that action before March 2007 would result in a limited war between the US and Iran, but action after March 2007 would plunge the mideast into all out war.
Given choices between limited war and all out war, I’d choose limited war. However, we need to make sure that we consider peaceful alternatives as well. If the United States, EU, and Russia could somehow ensure that Iran would not pursue nuclear weapons, yet somehow give them a thriving light-water nuke program strong enough to satisfy Iranian nationalism, I think that is the only solution.
Unfortunately, US credibility is shot to hell, and I don’t think people trust Russia. This is the time for the EU to become a diplomatic superpower. US position in the world is waning. If Europe would just look out the window, I think they’ll find that the sun is shining on them and it is warm.
October 20th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Why can’t we all just get along? I’m so sick of “mine is bigger than yours”. I feel like I’m at a high school football game. Does anyone care about human life any more. NO it’s all about power & money. Who ever has the biggest bomb & craziest leader will rule the world. It’s not about the welfare of the people. There is enough money, oil, water & food for every one on this planet to live comfortably. We don’t care about people, we care about things!
October 20th, 2006 at 2:06 am
Fanatical fruitcakes? Sounds like the Bush administration. Bush kept reading a children’s book after receiving intelligence that the country was being attacked, he can’t pronounce “nuclear,” and he doesn’t know the will of the people from a hole in his head which Chaney could provide; Ashcroft had a weird fixation with Lady Justice; Carl Rove, also known as “The Boy Genius,” leaked the identity of Valerie Plame to Robert Novak; Chaney shot is buddy in the face then tried to cover it up; and he encouraged Bush to invade Iraq to please his Halliburton pals knowing full well there were no WMDs; Rumsfeld single-handedly ended the Geneva Convention by condoning torture overseas; and like Chaney, Rumsfeld has personally profited from the wars our soldiers are dying in; Michael Brown did a bang-up-job with Hurricane Katrina; Bolton is serving as the Ambassador to the UN and he’s on record as saying the UN should be dispended; Before he quit in shame, George Tenet couldn’t find the moon let alone WMDs and terrorists with illegal wiretaps and search & seizures. Mission Accomplished men.
October 19th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
The Iranian leadership is a bunch of fanatical fruitcakes. I don’t really know what talk would do.
I’d love to see it resolved without shots being fired, but I don’t know if that’s possible.
I also wonder that Russia and China will do if Iran is attacked?
October 19th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
Talk, yeah. We need to sit down between the two leaders and talk. Debate? No–that could escalate to World War 3 and beyond.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:12 am
I beg to differ. If the Dems take over Congress, there’s no reason to think it won’t happen, especially since any Democratic candidate for President in 2008 will have to have some credibility on the issue of terrorism and national security. What better way to get it than to be part of the Democratic majority that voted in favor of authorizing President Bush to prevent the imminent emergence of a nuclear Iran?
October 19th, 2006 at 2:53 am
If the Dems take over congress, it won’t happen. Until Iran nukes somebody.
October 18th, 2006 at 10:47 pm
If the Dems take over congress, it won’t happen. Otherwise, we’re looking at another conflict.