It would be easy to see our government’s conflict with Iran as the ultimate “damned-if-you-damned-if-you-don’t” scenario. This Administration has so much invested in the premise that Iran has restarted its nuclear program with bad intentions that it simply cannot afford to consider any other possibility. So much energy and propaganda has been poured into painting Iran as a rogue state willing to thumb it’s nose at the civilized word that Our Glorious and Benevolent has painted himself into a corner. So much rhetoric has been devoted to portraying Iran as a belligerent and intractable enemy that no other possibility has been left room to germinate.
With all of the bellicose saber-rattling emanating from Our Glorious and Benevolent and his neocon apologists, at some point something’s going to have to give. Either we’re going to go to war with Iran, or there are going to be a lot of Right-wing zealots out there who are going to look as if they’re all talk and no action. But should we even be considering going to war if it’s primarily to satisfy someone’s testosterone-fueled view of our role in the world? How many young Americans will have to die in yet another senseless war in order to assuage fragile Neo-conservative egos?
It sure is easier when someone else is going to be doing the fighting and dying, isn’t it??
[S]uperpowers don’t always get to choose their enemies or the timing of their confrontations. The fact that all sides would risk losing so much in armed conflict doesn’t mean they won’t stumble into one anyway.
So what would it look like? Interviews with dozens of experts and government officials in Washington, Tehran and elsewhere in the Middle East paint a sobering picture: Military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities would have a decent chance of succeeding, but at a staggering cost.
And therein lies the excruciating calculus facing the U.S. and its allies: Is the cost of confronting Iran greater than the dangers of living with a nuclear Iran? And can anything short of war persuade Tehran’s fundamentalist regime to give up its dangerous game?
And are we prepared for the parish status will we have forced upon us if we go ahead with a war against Iran? If this truly is the World War III that so many Neo-conservatives believe it is, then why is Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader so willing to go it alone?
No one is talking about a ground invasion of Iran. Too many U.S. troops are tied down elsewhere to make it possible, and besides, it isn’t necessary. If the U.S. goal is simply to stunt Iran’s nuclear program, it can be done better and more safely by air.
An attack limited to Iran’s nuclear facilities would nonetheless require a massive campaign. Experts say that Iran has between 18 and 30 nuclear-related facilities. The sites are dispersed around the country — some in the open, some cloaked in the guise of conventional factories, some buried deep underground.
A U.S. strike would have a lasting impression on Iran’s rulers. U.S. officials believe that a campaign of several days could set back Iran’s nuclear program by two to three years. Hit hard enough, some believe, Iranians might develop second thoughts about their government’s designs as a regional nuclear power.
Of course, hit hard enough, and Iran just might increase it’s back-channel support and funding of shadowy terrorist groups who would be only too happy to carry Tehran’s water in return for a sizable infusion of cash and materiel? Are we REALLY prepared for the unforeseen consequences of attacking a country that has historically been more than willing to support terror if it serves their purpose and if they can maintain plausible deniability? And what planning has been done to anticipate and deflect what surely will be a response on several unconventional fronts? Judging by the clusterf—k next door in Iraq, I would hazard a guess that Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader has been so focused on Iran’s nuclear program that there has been little if any thought given to the fallout from initiating war with Iran.
What would a war with Iran look like? I’m not a military analyst, and I don’t have access to classified intelligence. What I do know is that the war in Iraq looks NOTHING like what planners anticipated. That being the case, wouldn’t it stand to reason that a war against Iran would unfold not exactly as anticipated?
I have little doubt that going to war with Iran would be a complete and total cluterf—k of the first order. More young Americans will die in a senseless exercise in attempting to extend American hegemony throughout the Middle East…and America will ultimately be no safer from the threat of terrorism. In fact, we may even end up worse off in that department. Is this what we want? Is this what we think we deserve? I don’t know about you, but I think…
WE DESERVE BETTER.