Diplomacy will fail, and plans are being made now
The twerp's letter contains embedded within it, the call to Islam in a murky way. Of course for those who have been compelled by the hideous march of events since 2001 to become educated about such things (in my case by sunni/ibahdi arabs from Oman) this event makes "kosher", the jihad, when the call to Islam is refused. Bin Laden did this, but despite his money and the protection of Afghanistan, he was not the govt, as the mullahs are and the twerp is.
The moment B-2's appear in the sky over Natanz, or F-15 Strike Eagles with the Star of David there is going to be a jihad, a REAL JIHAD, and it is going to be executed. The plans for asymetric warfare have been made. Perhaps we have been infliltrated now. Certainly nations in the middle east have been, including the eastern province of KSA where the oil is, where Abqaiq and Ras Tanura are.
What's the best way to attack, achieve our purpose and disrupt the enemy?
1) Israel disembowels Hizbollah .. by air and and land with the IDF, a massive invasion occurs the instant the katyushahs fly over the northern border. Syria will blanch and cower. The Bekaa is laid waste. No sanctuary occurs. If the syrians allow Hizbollah to cross, the Israelis should follow and END IT. Hizbollah cannot defeat the IDF
2) Decapitation along with destruction of known targets in Iran by US forces. If diplomacy drags on, we should be removing US forces from combat positions in Iraq and moving them closer to the Iranian border (this is the single benefit I can think of to the prolonged process going on). These forces should be used as conquering forces, not occupation troops. Our aim should be to confirm on the ground the obliteration of the nuclear enrichment cycle and removal of the mullah's entire power structure. The Iranians should be made to understand they MUST take control and get rid of the remnant themselves. If we have to arm the mullah's opposition while doing this, fine. But let's be sure we have a true conquering force available, not 75,000 guys at the pointy end of the spear. Our use of technological advantage should be lavish. AND....we should be ready at any time to respond to attacks made specifically against american civilians, with the full retaliatory force of the USA. We should send an absolutely spine chiling message to the mullahs about this today. Very quietly.
At the end of this, our purpose in complete destruction of those who would use religious reasons to create racism based on religion, endless hate based on it and war should be SEEN to have been our cause. There MUST be no doubt of this in Riyadh and Mecca, and they must be made to feel this fear that we might do this to the utter end in their innermost selves. They must be made to wonder if they have been abandoned or that God is in our favor. They must wonder this at Al Azhar, at King Abdul Aziz U's School of Islamic Studies, and it must penetrate the pakistani hate madrassahs living on the Saudi purse of venom, and they must be saying it live on Al Jazeerah's hate shows of racist delight.
They must ask at the end, if the Kharjarite, Tamiyya, Qutb, Wahab path has lead them away from the Message, and that in this path have lost hold of the Rope.
Only then can there be a victory, and ironically can Islam be saved.
If this is not being said in the quiet counsel of the White House, then George Bush and his advisors have not understood the real nature of what is around them. That is hard to say aloud, but has it been recognized in private?
“Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster” Guess Who?
Categories
Iran1 TrackBack
TrackBack URL: http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/mt-tb.cgi/3021
Ze'evi, speaking at a Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies conference in Tel Aviv University, said that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinijad has been overheard promising the "end of history in two or three years." Ze'evi recommended that the Iranian t... Read More
Hey guys... I've met a few Arabs myself. It seems the point of their religion is to spread peace, therefore we cannot discriminate against them as a religion. I agree that a few have done some horrible things, but what about the majority? This isn't a time when we can decide we'll just wipe em out and start over. Epaminondas has got the right idea.
Also, I'd like to know why there is controversy about the religion of those we fight. Because I just skimmed the conversation before. And I want to know.
Thanx guys.
--Legions
"The oppossite of war isn;t peace, it's creation!"--RENT
Sorry, schmoe but I find this growing historically incorrect on the facts.
1) In 1933 plans for Rainbow Orange were made which were used almost UNCHANGED to defeat Japan. Does this mean ww2 was contrived? Some people still believe so. In 1861 Winfield Scott's Anaconda plan was yanked out of a draw, so can the red herring crap.
2) Want any number of quotes from Israeli generals, Shin Bet, ex-Mossad about Iran?
I personally don't know a single jewish person who does NOT recognize the deadly serious nature of Iran.
Iran is not deterrable
Did you bother to google the sect I mentioned? I doubt it.
Have you even HEARD of Hassan Abbassi before, or know his significance?
And WTF is this:
"This is an unrelated power grab, much like Iran would be, and it is benefitting a tiny minority at the expense of almost everyone."
What tiny minority would possible benefit from this? And how...
LET'S SEE IT IN BLACK AND WHITE
I tell you that Pakistan and the US both created weapons in a small fraction of the time that certain wishful thinking useful idiots (as Felix D would say) wish for, and can refer you to the FAS articles on this, but you wouldn't look. In fact you ignore my factual comment completey, yet in every coment I have made I have specifically rebutted yours.
I believe you engaged in wishful thinking.
I have been speaking with gulf arabs almost every single day for 5 years and I am telling you the way it is. You are naieve. It's not the way I want it or like, but I OBSERVE what is.
"Iraq is ONE CAMPAIGN in this war"
This is one line I don't fall for. Plans for invasion of Iraq long predate the "WOT". Regime change was on the table before al Qaeda was on the radar screen.
This is an unrelated power grab, much like Iran would be, and it is benefitting a tiny minority at the expense of almost everyone.
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/714500.html
You see here, despite the most inflammatory rhetoric possible from Iran, Israel is able to take a reasoned and rational - and more importantly, cautious - approach. There is no crisis. Iran is a menace and we must keep our guns pointed at them just in case, but in no way does this require an immediate assault.
This is not a cycle. That is the fallacious underpinning of that logic.
Iraq is ONE CAMPAIGN in this war, like the Phillipines was one campaign in WW2. Not a war in and of itself. This war exists outside of Iraq, before Iraq, after Iraq. This war is here and UNAVOIDABLE. Pretentions otherwise are futile.
England could have taken NO COURSE in 1934 which woul dhave avoided war. NONE. Their choice was to delay and in doing so along with France, caused the deaths of 45 million, rather than slughtering the Germans in 1936.
Bad now worse later.
"This is all aside from the hell Iran's unconventional forces will be able to unleash in both Iraq and around the world." ..BAD NOW, WORSE LATER.
Choose.
That's the only one you have.
Honestly, its hard to believe that you guys can watch this Iraq War unfold, and fail to realize the downside of US involvement - whether we're talking Iraq-style invasion or hypothetical air strikes - and how that factors into the international terrorist situation we're seeing today.
Its like you're in a hole, and your decision is to keep digging. An entirely new course, less reliant on aggression and imposing of will, is necessary if we want to end this cycle.
This is all aside from the hell Iran's unconventional forces will be able to unleash in both Iraq and around the world. Its just a pitifully bad idea in my book.
I will leave you in this discussion with the words of US Grant ... "I am tired of hearing all about Bobbie Lee will do this and Bobbie Lee will do that, and seeing everyone worried about what he will do...let him be worried about what we will do" ...and let them, and let them worry about what we will do next, and next after that.
This war is already underway. It really began with the takeover of the embassy, but we didn't see El Sayid Nosair, or Rahman, or Khobar, the embassies or any of the other things for what they were until 2001. There is an enemy, and they must be made to worry every minute of every day about what we are going to do.
This is still a war in the same old way, even if some tactics are different. THe target as it has been since the first 'people's' war from 1861-1865 is the enemy's will. THAT is why we must be seen to trample them utterly ..so that Qaradawi says on Al Jazeerah ..'God IS punishing us since he allows the americans to do such things'. They must be in fear for Mecca
That IS your metric for victory
Sure, the realist understands that something has to be done about Mullahfied Iran. The realist also understands that almost no one is willing to do it. The cunning Iranians can see through the wusses, both the U.S. and Euro variety. These Western "liberals," even when they happen to sense the need for real force, will wait for the "enforcer of last resort" to do it for them, while warning of the consequences. That way, they get to keep their "ethical" hands clean, avoiding condemnation by the (mostly thug) world, and, when anything goes wrong with the enforcer's plan (as it always does,) they get to go "nyaa, nyaa, didn't we warn about rash action"?
All this must be obvious. One thing I wonder about: what happens when a U.S. strike or action--of whatever category, even "diplomatically limited" ---rockets oil to $200/barrel, threatening to fulfill the jihadi dream of crippling the U.S. economy?
Sure, the realist understands that something has to be done about Mullahfied Iran. The realist also understands that almost no one is willing to do it. The cunning Iranians can see through the wusses, both the U.S. and Euro variety. These Western "liberals," even when they happen to sense the need for real force, will wait for the "enforcer of last resort" to do it for them, while warning of the consequences. That way, they get to keep their "ethical" hands clean, avoiding condemnation by the (mostly thug) world, and, when anything goes wrong with the enforcer's plan (as it always does,) they get to go "nyaa, nyaa, didn't we warn about rash action"?
All this must be obvious. One thing I wonder about: what happens when a U.S. strike or action--of whatever category, even "diplomatically limited" ---rockets oil to $200/barrel, threatening to fulfill the jihadi dream of crippling the U.S. economy?
1) In 1944 using that technology it took the US 10 months to produce enough U235 for a bomb, using UF6 diffusion, WAY slower and more power consumptive than P-2 centrifuges. It took Pakistan 3 years to go from centrifuges to a STOCKPILE of weapons via cold testing they were certain worked (which they proved many years later with testing), therefore I believe empirically STRATFOR completely and tragically in error, and I believe history is on my side.
2)To hell with reconstruction, this is not about that.
3) Can we...this won't be about land forces. And if american civilians become the purposeful targets, frankly I believe it won't be about conventional weapons.
4) Iran is NOT an arab nation
5) We are in the hole, and we have about 18 months MAX to get out of it. The only thing WORSE than doing this, is them with a nuclear weapon. Don't forget, this isn't about them having a weapon, it's about them solving all the engineering problems in the cycle. And all that is true ONLY if they have no hidden plutonium cycle going on.
I believe NOTHING will deter these people from getting a nuke, and nothing will deter them from using them.
You seem to agree with the first part of that statement but not the second. You are betting OUR existance on their intentions.
We KNOW this..they have Russian SSN6 ballistic missiles. We know that this can reach everywhere in Europe and did carry russian nukes. Therefore they have city destruction projection the day they have a weapon. I believe that will be about end of summer next year at the latest. That's historically the right time frame.
My solution is to put together some of the institutions and mechanisms necessary to take care of problems like this, then do it if absolutely necessary.
First off, America is an "antibody" in arab societies, and these efforts can only happen under an international banner, and not a fake one like this admin. tried to present. Our reputation is toxic at this point, damaging any effort by nature of our involvement.
Second, the pre-planning has to be exquisite, involving not just military but reconstruction and development experts from around the world. We are very good at destruction, but not as good at rebuilding.
And last, I hate to say it but the situation in Iran is just not desperate enough at this point. You read Stratfor, you understand that, rhetoric aside, they are most likely years away from being able to project nuclear power. If it comes to brass tacks, and we have no choice, then go ahead with aforementioned mission. But we should not consider destruction until it is necessary.
And last but not least, I think people get so caught up in "should we", they forget to ask "can we". This would be a massive undertaking, at at time that our govt. budget is being sustained by foreign borrowing. We are digging ourselves quite a hole here.
Schmoe, they have been saying this since 1979. Every single leader has said what they are saying now.
We either have bad now or worse later, culminating in "kill the lot" ..later. My position is that there is simply NO WAY to avoid this.
NONE.
Take a look at the religious sect (within Shia) which Ahmadinejad, and Hassan Abbassi have belonged to all their lives. The Hojatieh.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20065
Who would believed Pol Pot? Who would have believed the Hutu and Tutsi? Who would have believed Reynhard Heydrich? Who would have believed Nov 9, 1938 before it happened? Who would have believed Stalin would starve millions of Ukranians (who produced the mass of food for the USSR)? Who would have believed millions of Armenians marched to their death, or tens of millions of Indians slaughtered as polytheists?
None of it is credible and all of it happened.
We are obliged ..COMPELLED.. to do these people the respect of taking them at their word. Khomeini was a deadly serious guy, and they are only saying what he said, the great imam.
What's your solution?
US does not have the mechanisms to execute a mission like this without causing more problems than we began with. I thought this was amply displayed in Iraq.
We are setting up 50 years of asymmetric war, which we have proven we have no answer for. Taking Iran's unhinged rhetoric seriously is a huge mistake. They may be crazy, but assuming they are suicidal enough to destroy their nation to get a shot at Israel.....too much.
Found that out in line at Tours, did you?
;)
Those who will 'reform' it, will be unrecognizable to sunnis and khomeinists, and be apostates ...
They are probably americans.
They are the only hope.
BTW, Islam cannot be saved. It is INHERENTLY evil and beyond redemption as their 1400 year history aptly demonstrates.
"Fear is the beginning of wisdom" --W.T. Sherman
My personal favorite. And, as they are utterly lackig in wisdom I say give them am ample dose of fear. The time for dawdling is over.