Friday, April 21, 2006

What Is Iran Going to Do with George Bush?

“Wait him out,” according to an opinion piece in the Telegraph. And the author, Amir Taheri, is quite specific about the steps Iran will take to maneuver around the (insert favorite appellation here) current President.

First, the current advantages of Islam over the infidel:

  • Islam has the demographic advantage in its available numbers of young men ready to do battle.
  • Lots of them can’t wait to be martyrs for the cause while the infidels’ young men simply want to have fun.
  • Islam has most of the world’s oil reserves.
  • the only country capable of standing up to Islamofacism is the U.S., and it is the most hated nation on earth (if you don’t count the Zionist entity).

However, according to Hassan Abasssi, supposedly Iran’s Dr. Kissinger, George Bush is an aberration since every President since Truman has cut and run when the rubber hit the road.

Therefore all Iran has to do is wait him out. 2008 just isn’t that far away.

Meanwhile, of course, that gives the mullahs the time they need to continue developing its nuclear arsenal. By 2008, when America reverts to its more normal ostrich policies, Iran will be ready to ride.

Here’s the author’s predictions for the short term:

The Iranian plan is simple: playing the diplomatic game for another two years until Bush becomes a “lame-duck”, unable to take military action against the mullahs, while continuing to develop nuclear weapons.

Within 12 days, Iran will announce its “suspension” of uranium building, which will win accolades from the idiots on Turtle Bay. Everyone from Jack Straw to the IAEA will pat Iran on the back. “Talk to the hand” will be the response to anyone uncouth enough to discuss sanctions against such obvious Iranian sincerity. This, in turn, will head off any move against Iran at the G-8 summit in July. And thrown in for good measure, the Iranian parliament will sign off on some taqiyya promise or other to stop production of anything even resembling radioactive materials.

Those are short-term goals and easily verifiable.

Meanwhile, says Taheri, Iran will continue to consolidate an impressive base of allies:

While waiting Bush out, the Islamic Republic is intent on doing all it can to consolidate its gains in the region. Regime changes in Kabul and Baghdad have altered the status quo in the Middle East. While Bush is determined to create a Middle East that is democratic and pro-Western, Ahmadinejad is equally determined that the region should remain Islamic but pro-Iranian. Iran is now the strongest presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, after the US. It has turned Syria and Lebanon into its outer defences, which means that, for the first time since the 7th century, Iran is militarily present on the coast of the Mediterranean. In a massive political jamboree in Teheran last week, Ahmadinejad also assumed control of the “Jerusalem Cause”, which includes annihilating Israel “in one storm”, while launching a take-over bid for the cash-starved Hamas government in the West Bank and Gaza.

Ahmadinejad has also reactivated Iran’s network of Shia organisations in Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen, while resuming contact with Sunni fundamentalist groups in Turkey, Egypt, Algeria and Morocco. From childhood, Shia boys are told to cultivate two qualities. The first is entezar, the capacity patiently to wait for the Imam to return. The second istaajil, the actions needed to hasten the return. For the Imam’s return will coincide with an apocalyptic battle between the forces of evil and righteousness, with evil ultimately routed. If the infidel loses its nuclear advantage, it could be worn down in a long, low-intensity war at the end of which surrender to Islam would appear the least bad of options…[emphases added]

All they need to do is wait for George Bush to go away. It’s just a matter of time.

Hat tip: M. Rudkin


Dr. Schmenghs said...

Hopefully no one has to do anything to severe, but the Iranians are going Mach1 into a brickwall.
If it goes to the war phase, it will be a war the likes the world has yet to see.
Kamakaze warriors all over the battlefeild, and the US would have to stop this pussyfooting around civilians, and really open up a can of whoopass.
The US dropped the BOMB on Japan because the soldier casualties were so high, Iran is a big place, and each soldier would diffently fight to the death.
If we go to war with Iran, you might just see the US(how stupid this sounds I know)drop out and retreat, unless we are even more totally stupid and drop a nuke of ours on them.
Challanging times ahead
PS- please don't vote for a liberal dem. for the Pres. in 2008.If one gets in, China will become the next superpower and America will became 2nd in line, the Islamic Nations will build up too. A liberal will have a smile on their face because they have agenda's not morales, and will give the superiority of this great country called America away.

Pax Federatica said...

All they need to do is wait for George Bush to go away. It’s just a matter of time.

"Or so they believe" really should have been appended to that statement. If the GOP keeps the White House, or even if Hilary wins it, methinks Tehran might be in for a rude awakening.

Fellow Peacekeeper said...

George Bush ir our great white hope?

Jeez, then we really are all f***ed.

But seriously, the game of brinksmanship the Iranians have played has been really quite proficient. They have played a poor hand rather well, as opposed to the US who have succeeded in giving away many trumps for little gain. The same can be said for Sudan and North Korea, so far their outright duplicitous and maddog foreign policies respectively have worked like a charm, while the US squabbles with its real long term allies in Europe.

Scott said...

Yes that was a brilliant analysis
by Mr. Taheri. Mark Steyn in the
City Journal posts an equally
compelling article with a corollary
that ought to worry Mr. Taheri.

That is, Iran's ability to kill, at
great distance, those who threaten
the regime.

It is my suspicion thought that the
Israelis will neither be fooled or
dissuaded by any 'counterfeit' deal
the Iranians offer. Again Steyn's
article lays out the reasons why.

I have cogitated on occasion on how
it might be possible for Israel to
pull this off. As capable as the
Israeli Air Force is the mission
requirements are daunting even for
the US.

Some say that a preliminary attack
on Iranian air defense positions is
necessary to prevent aircraft and,
more importantly, pilot loss over
Iran but this eliminates tactical
surprise and increases the number
of sorties necessary to carry out
the operation.

Others point out that the targets
are themselves hardened to the
point that even the heaviest bunker
busting bombs in the US inventory
might not be able to penetrate them
without sustained attack.

These tactical an operational needs
for even a US strike have made some
suggest using USN sub Tridents as
the vehicle to attack key nuclear
sites in Iran. Using a depressed
trajectory, non ballistic flight
plan and shorn of nuclear warheads,
the argument is that the missiles
would be over their targets before
the Iranians were aware an attack
was underway and the hypersonic
velocity of the warhead would have
sufficient kinetic energy to get to
where it had to destroy the hardest
bunker complex. Sounds good but I'm
not a Trident expert.

Obviously Israel does not have any
Tridents or the numbers of aircraft
the US would have available to it
were it to do the job. What it does
have is an obvious need and the
cunning to find another way.

I don't want to get into too much
detail as to how I think they might
accomplish the task but would note
that 9/11 shows the way. I don't
suggest suicide bombers but there
are other ways for civil airliners
to get where they need to go.

bioqubit said...

The U.S. is fully expecting a military confrontation with Iran. Moreover, Israel is not without "assets", including the several hundred bunker busters we recently sold them, plus...this one is rich...the billion dollar sub the Germans built for Israel which runs on fuel cells. I would like to see Iranian, excuse me, Russian or Chinese, sonar pick that one up.

No, the issue remains political. The Iranians will not be so stupid as to create a precipitating event such as a surprise raid or some other nonsense - like the Japanese did. Instead, their strategy is more like a boa constrictor. The quiet, slow, methodical, tightening of muscles around their targets, until they can't breathe anymore. Driving a wedge between the U.S. and Israel in some areas is not out of the question - and don't think they aren't working on more than a few approaches.

So long as the Europeans can be kept placated by whatever means (and boy do they make it easy), we will be presented with an increasingly difficult set of options. I am just not sure our best and brightest in foreign policy see how sophisticated the Iranian strategy is. We may be doing all kinds of really cool quasi-insurgency stuff in different parts of Iran that neither you nor I will ever hear about, but that doesn't take away from the progress the Iranians are making against us on a broader geopolitical stage.

I really don't know how this will play out, but it needs to play out violently, unfortunately. Maybe a naval blockade can do the trick. I'm just not sure. The Iranians need to know that their calculus is all wrong. What drives me nuts is how we are letting them play a winning hand for such a long time. Why is this not nipped in the bud? What far greater dire circumstances await us with knocking Iran's bomb program back 20-30 years?

And on that subject, someone has to explain to me what is so damn smart about building nuclear development facilities in huge underground facilities. When you dig underground, you create a facility with a limited number of access points for entry and exit, and for utilities to service the bomb the hell out of these access points, effectively sealing off the facility underground. What is the big advantage? I don't get it.

Later, satellite photos show them digging new tunnels, you bomb them again, and again, until they figure it out.

What am I missing?

bordergal said...

Has anyone discussed the possibility of an EMP attack on Iran?

sirius_sir said...

Taheri's analysis is interesting and puts Ahmadinejad's rantings in a useful perspective. I've thought for some time now that the regime is setting the world up for a more conciliatory phase which could insulate Iran from sanctions or military action. I had thought the regime might even at some point sacrifice Ahmadinejad on the alter of world opinion in order to secure blessing.

It could be that Ahmadinejad's rhetoric serves another purpose, too. Perhaps it is so provocative because it is meant to provoke. Maybe the mullahs' calculation is that an attack on Iran by either the US or Israel (or, in their dreams, both) would rally even the most dissident members of the population into full support mode. I'm wondering if this ploy isn't meant to address the possibility that the ruling elite's hold on Iran is far more tenuous than we suppose.

It's worrisome that Iran is projecting power and influence in the ME through its Shia network, all the while strengthening its position with Sunni fundamentalists and Hamas. The mullahs have decided to oppose the US through its proxy forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. My question is: Why are we not taking the fight to them as well? What prevents us from mining the deep vein of domestic discontent to apply internal pressure against the Iranian ruling elites?

Perhaps the time has come to counter insurgency with insurgency.

Scott said...

bioqubit, the problem with bombing
is that Israel only gets one bite
at the apple and the US,at least in
the present political climate, is
not going to be able to get the UN
to authorize something like we had
with Iraq where US planes are given
carte blanche to patrol the skies
over Iran conducting strikes if and
as we see the need for them. So we
too will only get a few days to
carry out whatever attack we wish
before the situation goes critical.

We also face the problem of Russia
arming the hell out of Iran with
virtually anything they want. If
the Iranians have no real air force
they do have lots of Russian SAM
systems and taking them out would
require hundreds of sorties from
US Navy and Air Force jets. Iran
has a 3 Kilo class subs and these
are equipped with Russian cruise
missiles and they have Chinese made
surface to surface missiles that
can also put at risk carriers that
venture too close to Iran. Who
knows they might even have Iranian
versions of Kaitans-human torpedos.
They claim 55,000 Iranians have
volunteered to be suicide bombers
and 1000 have completed 'training'.

I'm not saying they are 10feet tall
but they aren't midgets either. A
lucky hit on a US carrier or a wave
of suicide bombings in Europe or
the US is within their power. They
are a lot more dangerous than Iraq
ever was.

If you want the regime to fall the
best way for that to happen is to
let Israel do the deed on Iran's
nuclear program. It will infuriate
them of course but it will also be
so humiliating I can't imagine the
regime surviving. We then might be
able to get back to where we were
with Iran pre Jimmy Carter. I think
we stand a much better chance of
seeing a secular democratic Iran
than we will with any Arab state if
we can get rid of the Ayatollahs
without too much bad blood between
the US and the Iranian people.

bioqubit said...


all good points. The one possible exception though may be that Israel can get more than one bite of the apple.

Russia's role is the most troubling because they would keep on re-arming Iran. Wouldn't this be a form of aggression against Israel and the U.S.?

The other part I don't get is what does Russia really get out of all this other than some money? In the end, Iran loses, and Russia loses another customer. I would think they would be wiser to push Iran out bomb development rather than this wink-and-a-nod crap. Iran is more of a competitor than an ally.

There needs to be more evidence that the Iranian government is unraveling. Yeah, and we are STILL waiting.

That's just me...

Oengus said...

I am not optimistic.

If he's going to go that route, the Prez had better play very hardball diplomacy. For example, one step would be to threaten to pull out from and completely defund the UN unless it imposes serious and effective sanctions against Iran. Otherwise, what good is it? It's just another feckless "League of Nations", good for nothing.

But, alas, anything of the sort is very unlikely to happen. Instead, Ahmadinejad will continue to bully and to bluff, and the Loony Mullahs will finally get their knukes…lots of knukes with the means to deliver them, whether by missile or by "martyr".

When that happens, the world will be a whole new ball game. Feel sorry for your children.

geoffgo said...

RE: Iran's splodeydopes

40,000-55,000 ready to be martyrs

If the Iranians have infiltrated the US (and Iraq & Afganistan) with homicide bombers, I would suggest this is provocation and a reasonable justification to use nukes. That's what they are for.

I'm beginning to believe we need to up-the-stakes in the process of "brinksmanship", like telling the mullahs they need to give inspectors full access to their programs, by say May 15th. And allow destruction of all the components involved in illicit enrichment. Otherwise, we will level Teheran on July 1, 2006.

And, any suicide bombings of US or allied interests will cause another Iranian city to disappear, without warning.

What, we're gonna sit back and allow suicide bombings by these delusional Islamokazis?

Ray said...

It doesn't matter much anyway. The powers that be are ramping up their islamojudaiofascist political rhetoric because they know that their time of power is almost up. Just wait all the BS out and see what happens on or about December 21st, 2012 (when the world will change forever...). That's what I'm waiting for.