tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post3919288637113305400..comments2023-12-16T16:50:25.810-08:00Comments on The Heart of the Matter: War with IranBarry Eislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-80031567453631620292007-03-01T09:22:00.000-08:002007-03-01T09:22:00.000-08:00Jason, good to hear from you! I'd love to drop yo...Jason, good to hear from you! I'd love to drop you a line, but you didn't mention your email address...Barry Eislerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-8956491371477476012007-01-28T07:02:00.000-08:002007-01-28T07:02:00.000-08:00I'm starting to think that war with Iran is an ind...I'm starting to think that war with Iran is an indirect attack at China, by messing with the price of oil it can take out China and make more open to US/corporate financial invasion/dominance. Think of how effect oil price hikes were at democratising (through need for change) the old Soviet Bloc countries. It's a bit of an off the wall idea but war with Iran would have many benefits for western regimes and their palls so who knows.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-9029892531261010342007-01-25T21:40:00.000-08:002007-01-25T21:40:00.000-08:00"Congress obviously has to ..."
Any time I hear t..."Congress obviously has to ..."<br /><br />Any time I hear that kind of language my eyebrows raise. No one has to do anything but live or die. The rest is all choice.<br /><br />I've never been a cynical person, but the language coming out of the White House makes me distrust the present administration to the point where I don't believe anything they say.<br /><br />So nothing would surprise me at this point. (Other than George W ordering a complete withdrawal tomorrow.)<br /><br />Focusing blame takes energy away from taking action. It's a sneaky stall tactic. And 2008 is a long time away so I hope they don't go there.Debra Parmleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14341226311309495262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-840370217389162912007-01-25T08:03:00.000-08:002007-01-25T08:03:00.000-08:00MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia has completed a contract...MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia has completed a contract to deliver its TOR-M1 anti-aircraft missile systems to Iran, Itar-Tass news agency quoted Sergei Chemezov, head of state arms exporter Rosoboronexport as saying on Tuesday. <br /><br />"(Russia) fully completed delivery to Iran of the TOR-M1 missile complexes at the end of December 2006," Tass quoted Chemezov as saying. The deal to supply the missiles has angered the United States and Israel.<br />http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070123/ts_nm/russia_iran_missiles_dcOblivious to oblivionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05813667715718784531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-11938968154037592172007-01-19T11:55:00.000-08:002007-01-19T11:55:00.000-08:00Well, let's hope we're all wrong...Well, let's hope we're all wrong...Barry Eislerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-88175316980261444862007-01-18T14:30:00.000-08:002007-01-18T14:30:00.000-08:00And the Executive pissing matches continue.
If th...And the Executive pissing matches continue.<br /><br />If the President wants to send troops somewhere he can do it through an Executive Order. If the Congress wants to slap him for it, they need to get together, vote on it and hope they have the votes necessary to overcome his almost inevitable veto.<br /><br />In some cases, it can be used to win the political cage match. Theodore Roosevelt did that during his second term with the Great White Fleet, wanting to send the U.S Navy on a circumnavigation of the globe when Congress didn't want to fund it.<br /><br />He sent them, anyway, and told Congress that they had enough money to get halfway 'round. If they wanted to see the fleet come back, they'd better cough up the cash.<br /><br />Bush has, in essence, done the same thing. The troops are over there. They can't just shut off the money spigot. Aside from the reality that an army marches, either to or from a war, on the paychecks of taxpayers, it's not popular to be labeled as not supporting the troops. Cutting off the funds would do more harm than good to soldiers who are already dealing with insufficient support and the new Democratic majority is hesitant to lose the goodwill of the people when they have such a narrow majority.<br /><br />If the administration is pushing for a fight with Iran, which I suspect will happen whether it's planned or not (much as with the Chinese, but that's another discussion), I think your scenario may very well be how it will play out. The Bush administration doesn't need a strong excuse to go in there, it just needs one plausible enough to suck us in and force Congress to play along.<br /><br />As to the point if it was going to happen it would have happened already via Afghanistan, I disagree. They're still doing the diplomatic cha-cha right now. There needs to be a build-up in Iraq, first, possibly a smaller, more quiet build-up in Afghanistan. <br /><br />Then the U.S. moves in from both the east and west with ground troops while the Stennis and the Eisenhower handle air strikes from the Persian Gulf.<br /><br />This is provided that the Israelis don't drop bunker busters on Iranian targets first, of course, which would get us in there even faster.Stephen Blackmoorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01241134280141088631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-56032948859047819302007-01-16T20:42:00.000-08:002007-01-16T20:42:00.000-08:00Bush, Cheney and co derive a lot of their money fr...Bush, Cheney and co derive a lot of their money from oil and weapons. To them, there would be nothing better than starting a regional war in the Middle East. It would require large quantities of arms purchases and will force up the price of oil. They must be licking their chomps already.<br /><br />Plus, when the Saudi's get involved and start buying arms, the flow of oil money from the U.S. to the Saudi's will finally reverse.<br /><br />They could kick start a huge regional war, loose a few troops, and then pull out once all cylinders are firing. They'll be watching from the sidelines.<br /><br />But I'm one of the sceptical ones.<br /><br />Barry, its great that your blogging again. And I look forward to John Rain's next adventure!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-20403579885725396802007-01-15T19:57:00.000-08:002007-01-15T19:57:00.000-08:00A grim and all-too-plausible scenario, Barry.
S...A grim and all-too-plausible scenario, Barry. <br /><br />Still, I'm not sure that at this point - even with their best efforts to whip up anti-Iranian sentiment - the administration can count on the sort of wartime support that was there after The Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin incidents. Unfortunately, I also think that the viability of spreading the war to Iran is wholly dependent on whether Congress actually fulfills its duties and has the spine to say "enough." Given the track record of recent legislatures, that's a calculus that Mr. Bush may already figure is in his favor...<br /><br />Best<br />Paul<br /><a href="http://sensen-no-sen.blogspot.com/">Sensen No Sen</a>PBIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05643553811799195520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-63729678523419767012007-01-15T15:03:00.000-08:002007-01-15T15:03:00.000-08:00The administration has the casus belli it needs to...The administration has the casus belli it needs to attack Iran. We launch air strikes at Iranian nuclear and command and control facilities. Think adding 20,000 troops to the war is "doubling down?" Try war with Iran, instead.<br /><br />Well, hopefully not. Iran has tended to fight proxy wars utilizing Hezbollah and other forces, for instance their skirmishes in Beirut against Israel.<br /><br />On the other hand, if you want a worst case scenario situation, China and France line up behind Iran because of their need for Iranian oil; Russia trades with Iran, so they provide lukewarm support or proxy support to Iran and the whole thing blows up into World War III.<br /><br />This game is starting to seem like it has pretty high stakes.Mark Terryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09410424046477699059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-3617565131449353112007-01-15T13:19:00.000-08:002007-01-15T13:19:00.000-08:00That American troops would pursue Irainians into I...That American troops would pursue Irainians into Iran is not a given. After all, we could do that from Afghanistan, and have not. As a (non-)surprise, Iran has "meddled" :-) there, as well.<br /><br />Not that I necessarily disagree with your main premise, that certain less-that-savory elements are politically preparing to attack Iran (I agree), but that the how portion perhaps assumes facts not in evidence.<br /><br />It seems more likely that there will be some effort to push Iran into attacking us in Iraq, or elsewhere, in such a way that it paints us in a much more non-agressive light. After all, pursuing them into their own country sounds a lot like we "started it", which, whether we did or not, is not socially acceptable.<br /><br />Maybe an embassy bombing? An attack on an FOB/FB? A homeland attack uncovered, a plot foiled? WMDs have already been used...maybe we will discover Iran has/had plans to/is in the proccess of invading a neighboring "peacefull" country that we must rush to the defense of through some long-obscured treaty, ala 1991?<br /><br />These are just my thoughts. Glad to see you blogging more!!aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12885463688090226606noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-27928269148692139602007-01-14T21:06:00.000-08:002007-01-14T21:06:00.000-08:00I had to laugh when he said mistakes surrounding t...I had to laugh when he said mistakes <i>surrounding</i> the war left Iraq more unstable. That almost seems to say that since we were actually <i>in</i> the war and not <i>surrounding</i> it, we're not culpable. <br /><br />Bush used 9/11 to sidestep into Iraq, so why not? It's not all that different of a move, and, from his point of view, is probably even an improved one.<br /><br />"Has" to? I'm starting to feel like we've got a Mad King George of our own ...Spy Scribblerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14299551957327543491noreply@blogger.com