[This analysis was written for the Unz Review]
In the past few days, the Internet has been flooded with a frankly silly rumor about the US soliciting Australia’s assistance in preparing an attack on Iran. Needless to say, that report does not explain what capabilities Australia would possess which the USA would lack, but never-mind that. Still, the report was picked up in too many places (see here, here and here ) to be ignored. In one of these reports, Eric Margolis has described what such a US attack could look like. It is worth quoting him in full:
Outline of a possible AngloZionist attack on Iran
The US and Israel will surely avoid a massive, costly land campaign again Iran, a vast, mountainous nation that was willing to suffer a million battle casualties in its eight-year war with Iraq that started in 1980. This gruesome war was instigated by the US, Britain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to overthrow Iran’s new popular Islamic government.
The Pentagon has planned a high-intensity air war against Iran that Israel and the Saudis might very well join. The plan calls for over 2,300 air strikes against Iranian strategic targets: airfields and naval bases, arms and petroleum, oil and lubricant depots, telecommunication nodes, radar, factories, military headquarters, ports, waterworks, airports, missile bases and units of the Revolutionary Guards.
Iran’s air defenses range from feeble to non-existent. Decades of US-led military and commercial embargos against Iran have left it as decrepit and enfeebled as was Iraq when the US invaded in 2003. The gun barrels of Iran’s 70’s vintage tanks are warped and can’t shoot straight, its old British and Soviet AA missiles are mostly unusable, and its ancient MiG and Chinese fighters ready for the museum, notably its antique US-built F-14 Tomcats, Chinese copies of obsolete MiG-21’s, and a handful of barely working F-4 Phantoms of Vietnam War vintage.
Air combat command is no better. Everything electronic that Iran has will be fried or blown up in the first hours of a US attack. Iran’s little navy will be sunk in the opening attacks. Its oil industry may be destroyed or partially preserved depending on US post-war plans for Iran.
The only way Tehran can riposte is by staging isolated commando attacks on US installations in the Mideast of no decisive value, and, of course, blocking the narrow Strait of Hormuz that carries two-thirds of Mideast oil exports. The US Navy, based nearby in Bahrain, has been practicing for decades to combat this threat.
There is a lot of interesting material in this description and I think that it is worth looking into it segment by segment.
First, I can only agree with Margolis that neither the USA nor Israel want a ground war against Iran: the country is too big, the Iranians too well prepared and the size of the force needed for such a campaign way beyond what the Empire can currently muster.
Second, Margolis is absolutely correct when he says that Iran does not have the means to stop a determined AngloZionist (missiles and aircraft) attack. Iran does have some modern air-defense capabilities, and the attackers will sustain a number of losses, but at this point, the size disparity is so huge that the AngloZionists will achieve air superiority fairly soon and that will give them an opportunity to bomb whatever they want to bomb (more about that later).
[Sidebar: assessing Iranian air defenses is not just a matter of counting missiles and launchers, however, and there is much more to this. According to one Russian source Iran has 4 long range anti-aircraft missile S-300PMU-2 systems (with 48Н6Е2 Mach 6,6 interceptor missiles), 29 military anti-aircraft self-propelled missile complexes Tor-M1, some fairly advanced anti-aircraft missile complexes like the Bavar-373, a passive electronically scanned array radar (whose illumination and guidance system almost certainly includes modern Chinese electronics) and an impressive number of radar systems early warning radar of the Russian, Chinese and Iranian manufacture. This category includes systems like the high-potential long-range radar detection and target designation Najm-802 radar (has 5120 receiving and transmitting modules, operates in the decimeter S-range and is designed to detect ballistic targets and small elements of high-precision weapons), the Russian meter radar “Nebo-SVU” advanced early warning and control system with a fixed-array radar, as well as a meter range early warning radar of the type “Ghadir” . Most importantly, these radars are all integrated into the network-centric missile defense system of Iran. For example, the “Ghadir” radar is able to detect not only the tactical fighters of the USAF, the KSA and Israel, but also ballistic missiles immediately after launch (at a distance of about 1100 km). As a result, the presence of Iranian radio engineering units of multi-band radar detection facilities in the Western direction (the Persian Gulf) will allow the Iranians to prepare a flexible echeloned air defense to defend against high-intensity missile strikes. And yet, no matter how much the Iranians have improved their air defenses, the sheer number of of missiles (including the new advanced AGM-158 JASSM (Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile) low observable standoff air-launched cruise missile delivered by B-1B bombers) means that the Iranian defenses will inevitably be overwhelmed by any massive attack.]
I therefore also agree with Margolis that the Iranian oil industry cannot be protected from a determined US/Israeli attack. In fact, the entire Iranian infrastructure is vulnerable to attack.
Margolis’ final paragraph, however, makes it sound like Iran does not have credible retaliatory options and that I very much disagree with.
Example one: Iranian capabilities in the Strait of Hormuz
For one thing, the issue of the Strait of Hormuz is much more complicated than just “the US Navy has practiced for years to combat this threat“. The reality is that Iran has a very wide range of options to make shipping through this strait practically impossible. These options range from underwater mines, to fast craft attacks, to anti-shipping missiles, to coastal artillery strikes, etc.
[Sidebar: Therein also lies a big danger: the Israelis and or the US could very easily organize a false flag attack on any ship in the Strait of Hormuz, then accuse Iran, there would be the usual “highly likely” buzzword from all the AngloZionst intelligence agencies and, voilà, the Empire would have a pretext to attack Iran.]
In fact, the mere fact of issuing a threat to shipping through this narrow body of water might well deter insurances from providing coverage to any ships and that might stop the shipping all by itself. Should that not be enough, Iran can always lay even a limited amount of mines, and that will be enough (please keep in mind that while the USN could try to engage in mineclearing operations, to do so right off the coast of Iran would expose USN minesweepers to an extreme danger of attack).
Margolis does mention this issue when he writes:
While Iran may be able to interdict some oil exports from the Arab states and cause maritime insurance rates to skyrocket, it’s unlikely to be able to block the bulk of oil exports unless it attacks the main oil terminals in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf with ground troops. During the Iran-Iraq war, neither side was able to fully interdict the other’s oil exports.
However, I believe that grossly under-estimates the Iranian capabilities in this context. Let’s take one example, the Iranian submarine force.
The Iranian submarine force is a highly specialized one. According to the 2018 Edition of the IISS’s Military Balance, the Iranians currently have 21 submarines deployed:
- 3 Taregh-class diesel-electric submarine (Russian Kilo-class Project-877EKM)
- 1 Fateh-class coastal submarine
- 16 Ghadir-class midget submarines
- 1 Nahand-class midget submarine
When most people hear “diesel-electric,” they think of old diesel trucks, and are not impressed, especially when these are contrasted with putatively “advanced” nuclear attack submarines. This is, however, a very mistaken opinion because submarines can only to be assessed in the environment they are designed to operate in. Naval geography is typically roughly divided into three types: blue water (open ocean), green water (continental shelves) and brown water (coastal regions). Nuclear attack submarines are only superior in the blue water environment where autonomy, speed, diving depth, weapon storage capacity, advanced sonars, etc. are crucial. In comparison, while diesel-electric submarines are slower, need to resurface to recharge their batteries and are typically smaller and with fewer weapons onboard, they are also much better suited for green water operations. In shallow brown water, midget submarines reign, if only because nuclear attack submarines were never designed to operate in such an environment. Now take a quick look at the kind of environment the Strait of Hormuz constitutes:
Notice the interesting combination of very shallow and shallow depth typical of brown water and then the green water type of environment when going further into the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. With this in mind, let’s see what kind of submarine force Iran has acquired/developed:
For brown water operations (Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz) Iran has a relatively large and capable fleet of midget submarines. For green water operations (the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea), Iran has three formidable Taregh/Kilo-class submarines (which are even capable of limited blue water operations, though with much less autonomy, speed, armament or sonar than a nuclear attack submarine). Just like “diesel-electric”, the term “midget” submarine makes it sound that we are talking about a toy or, at best, some primitive third world hack which, at best, could be used to smuggle drugs. In reality, however, the Iranian “midgets” can carry the same heavyweight torpedoes (533 mm) as the Kilos, only in smaller quantities. This also means that they can carry the same missiles and mines. In fact, I would argue that Iranian Ghadir-class “midget” submarines represent a much more formidable threat in the Persian Gulf than even the most advanced nuclear attack submarines could.
[Sidebar: the USA has stopped producing diesel-electric submarines many years ago because it believed that being a hegemonic power with a typical (aircraft carrier-centric) blue water navy it had no need for green or brown water capabilities. Other countries (such as Russia, Germany, Sweden and others) actively pursued a diesel-electric submarine program (including so-called “air-independent propulsion” – AIP – ones) because they correctly understood that these submarines are much cheaper while being also much better suited for coastal defensive operations. Ditching diesel-electric submarines was yet another major mistake by US force planners; see this article on this topic. The new Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and the Zumwalt-class guided missile destroyer were supposed to partially palliate to this lack of green and brown capabilities, but both turned out to be a disaster]
Ghadir-class submarine
The Russian Kilo-class submarines are some of the most silent yet heavily armed submarines ever built, and they could potentially represent a major threat to any US naval operations against Iran. However, we can be pretty sure that the USN tracks them 24/7 and that the Kilos would become a prime target (whether in port or at sea) at the very beginning of any AngloZionist attack. But would the USN also be capable of keeping track of the much smaller (and numerous) Iranian midget submarines? Your guess is as good as mine, but I personally very much doubt that, if only because these relatively small subs are very easy to hide. Just take a look at this photo of a Ghadir-class submarine and imagine how easy it would be to hide them or, alternatively, create decoy looking just like the real thing. Yet this midget submarine’s torpedoes could sink any vessel in the Persian Gulf with a single torpedo.
While the US definitely has a lot of very capable reconnaissance and intelligence capabilities available to try to locate and then destroy these threats, we also know that the Iranians have had decades to prepare for this scenario and that they are truly masters at what is called maskirovka in Russian military terminology: a combination of camouflage, concealment, deception, and misdirection. In fact, the Iranians are the ones who trained Hezbollah in Lebanon in this art and we all know what happened to the Israelis when they confidently waltzed into southern Lebanon only to find out that for all their reconnaissance/intelligence capabilities they were unable to deal with even a relatively primitive (technologically speaking) Hezbollah missile capability. For all the patriotic flag-waving, the truth is that if the Iranians decide to block the Strait of Hormuz the only option left for the US will be to land a force on the Iranian shore and engage in a limited but still extremely dangerous offensive land-attack operation. At this point, whether this counter-attack is successful or not will be irrelevant, as there will be so much combat activity in this narrow bottleneck that nobody will even consider to bring ships through it.
I also believe that Margolis is wrong when he writes that all Iran could do would be to stage “isolated commando attacks on US installations in the Mideast of no decisive value“. One very real Iranian option would be to strike US targets (of which there are plenty in the Middle-East) with various missiles. Furthermore, Iran can also launch missiles at US allies (Israel or the KSA) and interests (Saudi oil fields).
Example two: Iranian missile capabilities
I would not trust everything the CSIS writes (they are a very biased source, to put it mildly), but on this page, they posted a pretty good summary of the current Iranian missile capability:
On the same page, CSIS also offers a more detailed list of current and developed Iranian missiles:
(You can also check on this Wikipedia page to compare with the CSIS info on Iranian missiles)
The big question is not whether Iran has capable missiles, but how many exactly are deployed. Nobody really knows this because the Iranians are deliberately being very vague, and for obvious and very good reasons. However, judging by the example of Hezbollah, we can be pretty sure that the Iranians also have these missiles in large enough numbers to represent a very credible deterrent capability. I would even argue that such a missile force not only represents a capable deterrent capability, but also a very useful war-fighting one. Can you imagine what would happen if US bases (especially airbases and naval facilities) in the region came under periodic Iranian missile attacks? Judging by the Israeli experience during the First Gulf War or, for that matter, the recent Saudi experience with the Houthi missiles, we can be pretty sure that the US Patriots will be useless to defend against Iranian missiles.
Oh sure, just like the US did during the First Gulf War, and the Israelis did in 2006, the AngloZionists will start a massive hunt for Iranian missile sites, but judging by all the recent wars, these hunts will not be successful enough and the Iranians will be able to sustain missile strikes for quite a long time. Just imagine what one missile strike, say, every 2-3 days on a US base in the region would do to operations or morale!
Reality check: the US is vulnerable throughout the entire Middle-East
Above I only listed two specific capabilities (subs and missiles), but the same type of analysis could be made with Iranian small speedboat swarms, electronic warfare capabilities or even cyber-warfare. But the most formidable asset the Iranians have is a very sophisticated and educated population which has had decades to prepare for an attack by the “Great Satan” and which have clearly developed an array of asymmetrical options to defend themselves and their country against the (probably inevitable) AngloZionist attack.
You have probably seen at least one map showing US military installations in the Middle-East (if not, see here, here or here). Truth be told, the fact that Iran is surrounded by US forces and bases presents a major threat to Iran. But the opposite is also true. All these US military facilities are targets, often very vulnerable ones. Furthermore, Iran can also use proxies/allies in the region to attack any of these targets. I highly recommend that you download this factsheet and read it while thinking of the potential of each listed facility to become the target of an Iranian attack.
The usual answer which I often hear to these arguments is that if the Iranians actually dared to use missiles or strike at the US bases in the region, the retaliation by the USA would be absolutely terrible. However, according to Eric Margolis, the initial and main goal of a US-Israeli attack on Iran would be to “totally destroy Iran’s infrastructure, communications and transport (including oil) crippling this important nation of 80 million and taking it back to the pre-revolutionary era“. Now let me ask you this simple question: if Margolis is correct – and I personally believe that he is – then how would that outcome be different from the “absolutely terrible” retaliation supposedly planned by the USA in case of Iranian counterattack? Put differently – if the Iranians realize that the AngloZionists want to lay waste to their country (say, like what the Israelis did to Lebanon in 2006), what further possible escalation would further deter them from counter-attacking with the means available to them?
To answer this question we need to look again at the real nature of the “Iranian problem” for the AngloZionists.
Real AngloZionist objectives for an attack on Iran
First and foremost, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Iran has any kind of military nuclear program. The fact that the Israelis have for years been screaming about this urbi et orbi does not make it true. I would also add that common sense strongly suggests that the Iranians would have absolutely no logical reason to develop any kind of nuclear weapons. I don’t have the time and space to argue this point again (I have done so many times in the past), so I will simply refer to the US National Intelligence Estimate’s conclusion that Iran had “halted its nuclear weapons program” and leave it at that.
[Sidebar: I don’t believe that the Iranians ever had a nuclear weapons program either, but that is irrelevant: even if they once had one, that would put them on par with many other countries which took some initial steps in the development of such a capability and then gave it up. The only point is that it is the official US position that there is no current military nuclear program in Iran.]
The real problem of Iran is very simple. Iran is the only country in the world which is:
- Islamic and leads the struggle against the Saudi/Daesh/ISIS/al-Qaeda/etc. ideology of takfirism and the terrorism they promote
- Openly anti-Zionist and anti-Imperialist and combines conservative religious values with progressive social policies
- Successful politically, economically and militarily and thereby threatens the monopoly of power of Israel in the region
Any one of those features by itself would already constitute a grievous case of crimethink from the point of view of the Empire and would fully deserve a reaction of absolute hatred, fear and a grim determination to eliminate the government and people which dare to support it. No wonder that by combining all three Iran is so hated by the AngloZionists.
This entire canard about some Iranian nuclear a program is just a pretext for a hate campaign and a possible attack on Iran. But in reality, the goals of the AngloZionists is not to disarm Iran, but exactly as Margolis says: to bomb this “disobedient” country and people “back to the pre-revolutionary era”.
Here is the key thing: the Iranians perfectly understand that. The obvious conclusion is this: if the purpose of an AngloZionist attack will be to bomb Iran back into the pre-revolutionary era, then why would the Iranians hold back and not offer the maximal resistance possible?
Because of the threat of a US nuclear retaliation?
US nuclear attack options – not much of an option in reality
Here again, we need to look at the context, not just assume that the use of nuclear weapons is some kind of magical panacea which immediately forces the enemy to give up the fight and to unconditionally surrender. This is far from being the truth.
First, nuclear weapons are only effective when used against a lucrative target. Just murdering civilians like what the USA did in Japan does absolutely no good if your goal is to defeat your opponent’s armed forces. If anything, nuking your opponents “value” targets will might only increase his determination to fight to the end. I have no doubt that, just as during the first Gulf War, the USA has already made a typical list of targets it would want to strike in Iran: a mix of key government buildings and installations and a number of military units and facilities. However, in most cases, those could also be destroyed by conventional (non-nuclear) weapons. Furthermore, since the Iranians have had decades to prepare for this scenario (the USA has always had Iran in its sights since the 1979 Revolution), you can be quite sure that all the peacetime facilities have been duplicated for wartime situations. Thus while many high-visibility targets will be destroyed, their wartime counterparts will immediately take over. One might think that nukes could be used to destroy deeply buried targets, and this is partially true, but some targets are buried too deep to be destroyed (even by a nuclear blast) while others are duplicated several times (say, for 1 peacetime military headquarters there would be 4, 5 or even 6 concealed and deeply buried ones). To go after each one of them would require using even more nukes and that begs the question of the political costs of such a campaign of nuclear strikes.
In political terms, the day the USA uses a nuclear weapon against any enemy it will have committed a political suicide from which the Hegemony will never recover. While a majority of US Americans might consider that “might makes right” and “screw the UN”, for the rest of the world the first use of nuclear weapons (as opposed to a retaliatory counter-strike) is an unthinkable abomination and crime, especially for an illegal act of aggression (there is no way the UNSC will authorize a US attack on Iran). Even if the White House declares that it “had to” use nukes to “protect the world” against the “nuclear armed Ayatollah”, the vast majority of the planet will react with total outrage (especially after the Iraqi WMD canard!). Furthermore, any US nuclear strike will instantly turn the Iranians from villains into victims. Why would the US decide to pay such an exorbitant political price just to use nuclear weapons on targets which would not yield any substantial advantage for the US? Under normal circumstances, I would think that this kind of unprovoked use of nuclear weapons would be quite unthinkable and illogical. However, in the current political context in the USA, there is one possibility which really frightens me.
Trump as the “disposable President” for the Neocons?
The Neocons hate Trump, but they also own him. The best example of this kind of “ownership” is the US decision to move its embassy to Jerusalem which was an incredibly stupid act, but one which the Israel Lobby demanded. The same goes for the US reneging on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or, for that matter, the current stream of threats against Iran. It appears that the Neocons have a basic strategy which goes like this: “we hate Trump and everything he represents, but we also control him; let’s use him to do all the crazy stuff no sane US President would ever do, and then let’s use the fallout of these crazy decisions and blame it all on Trump; this way we get all that we want and we get to destroy Trump in the process only to replace him with one of “our guys” when the time is right“. Again, the real goal of an attack on Iran would be to bomb Iran back into a pre-revolutionary era and to punish the Iranian people for supporting the “wrong” regime thus daring to defy the AngloZionist Empire. The Neocons could use Trump as a “disposable President” who could be blamed for the ensuing chaos and political disaster while accomplishing one of the most important political objectives of Israel: laying waste to Iran. For the Neocons, this is a win-win situation: if things go well (however unlikely that is), they can take all the credit and still control Trump like a puppet, and if things don’t go well, Iran is in ruins, Trump is blamed for a stupid and crazy war, and the Clinton gang will be poised to come back to power.
The biggest loser in such a scenario would, of course, be the people of Iran. But the US military will not fare well either. For one thing, a plan to just “lay waste” to Iran has no viable exit strategy, especially not a short-term one, while the US military has no stomach for long conflicts (Afghanistan and Iraq are bad enough). Furthermore, once the USA destroys most of what can be destroyed the initiative will be in the Iranians’ hands and time will be on their side. In 2006 the Israelis had to fold after 33 days only, how much time will the US need before having to declare victory and leave? If the war spreads to, say, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Syria, then will the US even have the option to just leave? What about the Israelis – what options will they have once missiles start hitting them (not only Iranian missiles but probably also Hezbollah missiles from Lebanon!)?
Former Mossad head Meir Dagan was fully correct when he stated that a military attack on Iran was “the stupidest thing I have ever heard”. Alas, the Neocons have never been too bright, and stupid stuff is what they mostly do. All we can hope for is that somebody in the USA will find a way to stop them and avert another immoral, bloody, useless and potentially very dangerous war.
The Saker
Hello Saker, many thanks for posting this. The following was posted on The Truthseeker website (originally appeared on Consortium News — Aug 1, 2018, and may be of interest to all:
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
**FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Intelligence on Iran Fails the Smell Test
Mr President:
As the George W. Bush administration revved up to attack Iraq 15 years ago, we could see no compelling reason for war. We decided, though, to give President Bush the benefit of the doubt on the chance he had been sandbagged by Vice President Dick Cheney and others. We chose to allow for the possibility that he actually believed the “intelligence” that Colin Powell presented to the UN as providing “irrefutable and undeniable” proof of WMD in Iraq and a “sinister nexus” between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.
To us, in VIPS it was clear, however, that the “intelligence” Powell adduced was bogus. Thus, that same afternoon (Feb. 5, 2003) we prepared and sent to President Bush a Memorandum like this one, urging him to seek counsel beyond the “circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.” — article continues, please check it out.
Thanks! As it happens, I was on that site just before I visited here. And thus, I was going to post this. Glad to see that I don’t need to do so. :)
What a shock, Netanyahu is lying, what a shock!
Imo, the American people are not behind a war with Iran. It will require another 9/11 event to sway public opinion, some kind of false flag is needed. If the US shoots first then public opinion in America will be against it.
I dont know if a war with Iran will ever start. But I remember a “sputnik news” article published some months ago about a Putin declaration on this argument. He stated that if Nato / USA will try to attack Iran, Russia will be authorized to give a complete furniture of everything they needs to defend the country, including nuclear engineering, since he stated this when Trump retired from the Iran agreement..
The only way for Putin to do something would be to join the war on zirsn’s bahslf. Giving military weapons etc. takes too much time and the war would have been long decided by then
Russia will do nothing.
Russia has always stabbed Iran in the back to kowtow and curry favour with the Zionist controlled United Snakes.
Consider the record:-
Russia refused to supply S300s Iran had paid for.
It refused to complete Bushehr, as it was contracted to do, inventing lying excuses for this.
It facilitated and endorsed US economic strangulation of Iran, on bogus WMD pretexts. Iranian children died as a result.
The Iranians would have to be crazy to expect anything from Russia or trust it in any way. There is tremendous Zionist influence in Russia as well as the US.
There is a continuity in Russian behaviour over the past 20 plus years. Russia has always endorsed and enabled US aggression and economic warfare against other countries – Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, DPRK, Iran.
If you expect anything different this time, you will be disappointed. Go off the record, actions, not hot air.
I’m not entirely sure another 9/11 would work. There’s a lot of people still skeptical about the last one, and that decreases the shock and awe effect of such a tactic by a huge amount.
Its a high-risk manuever. Yes, it can have a reward when it works like the last time. But what is the risk if it doesn’t work? If a whole nation looks at it and says “BS”, then that’s the sort of risk that can lead to a government falling. If the American nation became convinced that Trump deliberately killed Americans in a false flag, then Trump would be very lucky to even make it to a helicopter to escape. Another false-flag would be a high-risk manuever.
There already is a large body of Americans who believe – rightly, IMO – that the United States had a large hand in the destruction of the Towers. They are already culpable for nearly 3000 dead people. Most of those deceased were Americans.
They’ve done it once – and very probably more that once. Why would Deep-State be hindered from using time-tested tactics?
Congressional approval rating is at 17%.
(sounds high to me.)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx
Congress doesn’t care whether Americans approve of what they are doing. That’s been apparent for years now, and is one of the biggest reasons for policy crafted by a few billionaires, some of whom don’t even have American interests as their priority.
The next one will be a Big One, either a nuke (blame Iran) or ‘novichok’ (Iran bizarrely made novichok under OPCW supervision a few years ago, thereby setting themselves up)or a bio-weapon(blame anyone you like). Probably not New York, as there are no giant buildings requiring demolition, and too much valuable property, and precious Zionist lives at risk, so some place in ‘fly-over territory’, say Peoria or Walla Walla, might suffice.
Hey, I live in Peoria! But actually we do have our own twin towers… they are only 20 stories high though, so they would probably fall in two seconds instead of ten…if I did the math right.
‘Public opinion’ in the USA doesn’t count. Only the opinion of the Zionists, ie the Israeli apartheid regime and the Fifth Columnists like AIPAC, count. And they want blood, always have done and always will.
Well said Mulga.
30 million people marched against the Iraq war in 2003.
But the Zionists wanted war, so guess what happened.
The Yesha Council of Rabbis and Torah Sages, an influential body on the Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Right in Israel, allied to the ‘settler’ Judaic Taliban, firmly declared, in 2006, as Israel was bombing Lebanon back to the Stone Age, that under Judaic Law as outlined in the Talmud and its exegeses, killing civilians is not just permissible, but, is in fact, a mitzvah, or good deed. Similar figures have on occasions declared that killing children, even babies, is also permissible if it can be said that they would grow up to ‘oppose the Jews’. And others have declared that destroying an entire city (eg Gaza) for the ‘crimes’ of a few, is also permissible.
International Humanitarian Law against murdering civilians, or collective punishment, is rejected by these creatures, with contempt, as ‘Christian morality’, Christ being a figure they revile and imagine suffers in Hell, up to his neck in boiling faeces.
These are very influential creatures in Israeli politics, and their hate-crazed ideology clearly infects the Israeli Right. But as we see in the witch-hunt to destroy UK Labour and Corbyn under entirely fraudulent charges of ‘antisemitism’, this regime, recently having declared itself fully and legally an apartheid state, must never, under any circumstances, be criticised in the West, under pain of banishment from public life, intense vilification, and even, as in France, criminalisation for acts such as wearing a ‘Free Palestine’ T-shirt.
These are your masters, if you live anywhere in the West. They own the political circuses lock, stock and stinking barrel. They control the media, particularly sewers like the Fraudian that has led the lynch-mob to destroy UK Labour. They control the Internet and mass surveillance, and train Western police forces in techniques of liquidation of ‘tewworwists’. They control and finance much of the Islamophobia industry from the media to entertainment, like Hollywood, where Arabs, Moslems and Palestinians in particular are ALWAYS portrayed viciously, negatively and as sub-human.
However, it would be wrong and unjust, and fall right into the Zionazi Bosses’ hands to imagine that ALL Jews are monsters such as the Zionazi elites. That is what the Zionazis claim, but all surveys of opinion among Diaspora Jews shew that large minorities, perhaps even majorities in some countries and particularly among the young, reject Zionazi brutality and racism, and even Israel as it is currently led. But these millions of Jews do not exist as far as the Zionazi controlled Western media are concerned. All Jews, according to them, are little Netan-yahoos, all dedicated to the defence of Eretz Yisrael, whatever its final boundaries. A very great disaster is inevitable, for all concerned, because no Western politician seems to have the guts, or the proper concern for the true best interests of the Jews, let alone the Palestinians, Syrians, Iranians, Lebanese etc, to speak the truth, firmly, honestly and bravely. Certainly not the invertebrate Corbyn.
Morgalis likes to inflate US capabilities in the ME, you can fight the US with a twig and still win.
Thank you for this comprehensive overview. There is however, an aspect that you completely fail to mention. Iran is a pivot nation in a number of international projects, including the BRI, the EAEU and the INSTC.
As such it is a valuable nation to both Russia and China, both of whom have made significant investments in Iran in the past year or so. Iran is also an associate member of the SCO, whose main focus is on mutual security. It also has rapidly improving relations with Turkey (also the butt of US ire).
It is very difficult to accept that Russia and China would stand idly by if their friend and ally Iran was in fact attacked by the US. Are the neocons so profoundly stupid they would risk a wider war?
“Are the neocons so profoundly stupid they would risk a wider war?”
The answer is yes-they to my knowledge have never considered the consequences of their stupid actions and policies.
The neo cons are a cancer on congress and admin-congress, which is owned by AICPA and the oligarchs, adelson, browder, saban, is extremely dangerous; the only possible obstacle is trump’s veto power but that depends on his cajones and motivation, which has been wanting since day 1.
The portion of this analysis that covers a zionazi orchestrated attack on Iran is rather thorough. I would add that in the political sphere, the reactions from India, Turkey and Iraq would not be in the affirmative to such a war crime.
Turks have fairly good relations with Iran, a zionazi attack on Iran would distance turkey from nato even more.
In the last Iraq elections, Iran friendly elements won over amero-quislings. Said quislings would probably become history with an israeloamerican attack on Iran.
India and Iran have good trade relations:
India & Iran drop dollar in oil trade to bypass US sanctions – report
https://www.rt.com/business/428245-india-iran-dollar-rupee-oil/
“India will reportedly pay for Iranian oil in rupees as the two countries seek to bypass the US economic pressure on Tehran, industry officials have told the Sputnik news agency.”
The zionazis need good relations with India as part of their strategy to use India to disrupt Asian cohesion. They’ve made inroads into India, but would they be willing to sacrifice these to attack Iran?
“The Neocons hate Trump”
The analysis took a wrong turn there. The neocons do not hate trump. He is their boy. Look at the people appointed to run the trump regime, neocons. Trump himself has been a lifelong israeli likud ally, as well as Jewish mafia friend. So are his family.
What is a neocon? It is likud in the colonies. Neocons represent likud in israel’s colonies, especially in the usa colony.
Trump is literally a neocon wet dream come true. He is all they ever wanted, look at him deliver for them. He is what they tried to do with the bush, jr. regime, on steroids.
Sadly, VT, there is no counter argument to your posting. Trump is a born again Likudite. Bibi can’t match his fervor, only his insanity on this issue. He has the NY Liberal ideological basis plus the Evangelical Rapturist POV regarding Israel.
This leads sane people looking at Trump and his actions (not just words or policies) to evaluate that anything is possible and permissible against Iran in behalf of Israeli “security”.
How large an attack planned requires an accurate audit of all Tomahawk and guided bombs ( AGM-158 JASSMs). I suspect the Pentagon has close to 5000 available with Iran’s name on them.
“Trump is a born again Likudite. Bibi can’t match his fervor, only his insanity on this issue. He has the NY Liberal ideological basis plus the Evangelical Rapturist POV regarding Israel.”
It is then simply astonishing that the Tribe is willing to lay to waste its media and other capital in attempting to bring Trump down. Trump is simply far more subtle and complex than you seem to grasp. Try accounting for his very close friendship with antisemite Roy Cohn. I see Cohn not as the villain Judaic media would have us see but, like Senator Joseph McCarthy, a patriot. That means putting the core America nation before the Jews. And I even think that Trump’s father was a Jew, but no matter. Trump’s first wife, as their divorce was in the works, told Vanity Fair that Trump’s only bedside reading was the speeches of Hitler — that would be the real Hitler, the one to whom Mohandas Gandhi wrote respectful letters, not the imaginary one of the Holocaust. It is a real possibility that Trump has state-issued money in mind in place of the debt-based money of the International Jew, as the salvation for his own country’s economy — when the time is right. You know, the foundation of the economic miracle under National Socialism.
In February 2016 at the South Carolina Republican debate, Trump brought up briefly the issue of 9/11. He said they said it was the Iraqis but it was not them. It might have been the Saudis or it might have been some other country. When I am president I will release the secret documents. Before that, Trump had accused the Muslims in New Jersey of cheering on the attacks, but the upshot of his statement, as Mark Glenn of The Ugly Truth has pointed out, was that the Israelis who had actually been caught celebrating 9/11 in New Jersey became the number two trending topic on Google for a whole week. You cannot think of who Trump is or what he is trying to do in straightforward terms.
As James Jatras for one has convincingly written, Trump is consciously a wrecking ball, bringing down the empire. He is playing a very dangerous game, but I take it that the Chinese and the Russians and Kim Jong Un have briefed the Iranis, and that while they are taking the sanctions very seriously, they are probably also dealing with Trump behind the scenes. It would fit with their reputation for subtlety, tact and intelligence. This is all taking place against a background of Putin having clearly stated in a solemn public forum that any nuclear attack on an ally would be countered with a nuclear response.
Finally, a word about the Evangelical Rapturist point of view. There is a religious side to Trump, but like many men the world over, he leaves the details up to his wife. After the Obamas left, Mrs Trump had the whole place exorcised. Twice.
“Try accounting for his very close friendship with antisemite Roy Cohn.”
LOL, cohn was Jewish. Is this a machine generated troll? Serious question, since the whole comment is filled with random nonsense throughout.
The evangelicals are shifting polarity. They see globalisation as the enemy and Christian Russia as a potential ally. Interesting times. They are finally tired of imperial wars cause it’s their guys who form the backbone of the army.
@Anon Interesting if true. However, my observations of American Christian fundamentalists is that they have a very narrow view of what constitutes “Christianity”. Roman Catholics, for example, are often not considered Christian due to the primacy of the Mary figure in Catholicism. I’m not sure what they would make of Russian Orthodoxy. That religion would be completely outside their traditions and world-view.
I think the Zionazis pretty much control India under the Hindutva fascist Modi. They constitute two axes of the Islamophobic Empire, where hatred of Moslems is politically useful. In India to drive Modi’s intensely vicious sectarian regime to power, and in Israel to promote the ‘Clash of Civilizations’ that sets the West at Islam’s throat to the Zionazis’ advantage. And the Indian Diaspora in the USA is right up the Zionazis’ fundamental orifices in collaborating, at a proper subaltern level, in Silicon Valley and other high-tech enterprises. Plus Israel has provided India with expertise in mass surveillance and violent repression, not just of the various insurgencies in the countryside, but principally in Kashmir where the Israel expertise in violently repressing, murdering, torturing and intimidating a large and captive restive Moslem population has proved invaluable.
Nukes !
To use nukes of any size lays permanent waste to that area…. Pollutes water food chain and the DNA of survivors living in surrounding areas. The byproducts plus of eg Heavy metal poisoning is what is evident today in society……
One cant clean up the mess easily. and where does one place the toxic waste . Look at the dilemna Fukushima Diachi has placed the world in…. North pacific ocean dying and west coast US Canada reaping the negative s ….
Only the poorly informed will wander around inside these dead zones.
Nuking parts of iran has the potential to produce a 1000 plus year waste lands.
This is not 1945 stuff used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki….
Jelly babies are still being born there (and elsewhere where Militaries and power plants have left their highly toxic Nuke waste)
Yet we have suits in power who are considering using nukes ……
Absolutely insane !
And no one is exactly sure of what it takes to cause a nuclear winter effect. And that’s not a binary hit/miss chance. Its not a ‘we got close to nuclear winter, but fortunatly we missed” type of event. Not getting all of mankind wiped out in a complete nuclear winter still means some very lean years with much reduced food and colder temperatures. Just a shorter growing season could lead to food-supply chains breaking down. And the French kings found out how dangerous it is when the mob is hungry. And if the whole world is going through that with the knowledge that beyond a doubt that its the American’s fault, then that won’t be pretty.
One big volcano in Java noticeably dropped world temperatures for several years that followed. How many nuclear weapons explosions and fires are required to make it much worse? How much does the temperature drop world-wide if every city in Iran burns after a nuclear war? And if it is Trump making the decision upon which the world’s fate hinges, he don’t belive in any of this climate-changing type of stuff and thinks its all a scam by the environmentalists.
Why does this scenario remind me of the ‘Battle of the Somme’?
The Anglo-Zionists hit the Germans for days straight with artillery expecting this to not only destroy the infrastructure, but also the fighting capabilities of the Germans. On the first day of the Anglo-Zionist attack, the British troops were expected to simply meander up to and overrun the Germans. What actually happened is history.
I fear very much that a similar outcome will occur if an attack on Iran occurs.
The Iranians could also destroy the Kaaot platform, and flood the PG with oil. A well placed missile or Special Forces would do it. The list of asymmetrical options is quite frankly endless.
The whole point of the Syrian agression and the last Lebanon war was to suppress Iran strategic depth for Israel profit and prepare for war against Iran.
Did not work. The Anglo Zionists lost both wars.
In addition with war still ongoing in Afghanistan and Yemen.
Anglo Zionist are losing grip over ME whatever BS is uttered in MSM propaganda.
There is no way the US could attack Iran while those battle ground are still open.
If the US dare it, it is difficult to see how they will not be weakened and kicked out of Afghanistan and Yemen.
In same fashion it is difficult to see Hezbollah and Syria not targeting Israel.
Iran could take care of US warships and military bases as well as blocking the strait of Hormuz and wrecking havoc to cheikdoms water and oil infrastructure.
Adding up guerilla warefare and support for allied militant in Irak, Yemen, Afghanistan.
In such circumstance it is difficult to imagine Pas, India and Turkey remaining neutral in power reconfiguration with Afghanistan and Kurdish region.
As for Russia and China they will unfortunetaly be pulled by their hair into the conflict one way or another.
Only the most extremist Zionist have an interest in such a screen play.
The point is the US implemented a disastrous strategy in ME for 30 years.
They will pay the price of defeat for such pathetic mistakes.
No matter Trump do will change that very fact.
The US is finished in the ME.
I think probable tjat Trump try to negotiate a freeze in the current configuration. Like a new sykes picot agreement. But he have the most extremist zionists putting pressure. Another mistake cannot be dismissed.
Wait and see.
I bet they never ever had to juggle so many balls in the air at one time. Population increasing, state actors on the stage who before were nothing, weapons development changing more rapidly than you can say BOO, resources critical to Imperial Power drying up on their patch of land …… This more than 3-D chess.
Anglo-Zionist think they can do anything but that is just an illusion which this time around could backfire to a yet unknown degree.
I hate how people over simplify the outcome of a war between Iran and US. Many people assume that the Iranians do not know that the US is Israel’s mercenary. Not only are they aware, they are also aware that they cannot win a war against the US. They know Israel is the real enemy and they would definitely rain missiles on them. The war won’t last four days. Not when Israel is being hit with missiles in every hour of the day. They will simply declare that “the Iranians have learnt their lessons and next time, they will be buried for life”.
^^^ This ^^^
Spot on by Hamis.
I feel The Saker is tired of trying to convince people that Iran has no Hollywood and that US “brave men and women” won’t be able to do “cool” stuff in reality, especially when that reality is Iran.
4, Not a signatory to the BIS….
Iranians are not cowards or fools.
The war of Sacred Defense1980 -1988 saw almost the entire global community either side with Saddam or remain neutral.
Iran stood alone, yet it survived and emerged victorious.
I am confident that Iran will put an end to Western arrogance and Zionist hubris.
America is essentially, Israel’s BlackWater, but any war imposed on Iran will not end well for the aggressors.
That said, the Chinese had better wise up and start underststanding that if their much touted Belt and Road Initiative is to come to fruition, it is going to require that they start neutralizing Western aggresion that is aimed at disrupting key nodes- like Iran.
Cowards will never conquer Iran!
Comment banned by me, The Saker, under moderation rule #13
Dear Saker,
Unfortunately, I am concerned that the situation with Iran might be more serious than it seems. Some of the international students here at the university in St. Petersburg, Russia, are children of elite Persian families, and recent Iranian rial currency devaluations have hit them hard. Iranian society loves to spend money on luxury, and decreases in purchasing power are very unpleasant for them. The students say that they expect some kind of internal revolution in Iran. In my opinion, this could give an opening to pro-western powers to take control, or to create a crisis that allows for a military intervention. We’ll see soon enough.
K.
The rich “Westoxified” Northern Tehranis, have too much to loose to start a revolution. They would rather parade in Nevsky as opposed to pick up the fight with the Southern Tehrani paupers, understandably.
If there is ” internal revolution in Iran ” , it will be not because of ” decreases in purchasing power ” and “love to spend money on luxury ” .
Listen to zionist lap dog Bombeo , — https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/07/manipulating-iranian-americans-laying.html
The neocons in the US need a wider war, as their finances are not doing too well. This is an old bankers trick; when in trouble, start a war. However, analysts are warning that this old trick cannot be applied any more.
For a wider war both a target and an excuse are needed. Last year the neocons had Trump send the US Navy to the North Korean coast, hoping for regime change and positioning of US troops next to Russian and Chinese borders, where the intent was the disruption of the economic rise of the East. However, before the US Navy even arrived, North and South Korea were already engaged in covert talks. Kim did not back down, while Washington obviously came to the correct conclusion that there was no will in South Korea for a fight against the North, as both countries have the same people. Also, there is no legal or historical reason why Korea should be divided into two countries.
The focus of activities has now shifted to Iran, which is becoming a potential target for a wider war, the chief intent being the prevention of Iran’s admission into the Eurasian Economic Union.
I have to disagree with The Saker that the media became the victim of a silly rumor that the US would be soliciting Australia’s assistance for an attack against Iran. This news was broadcast about a week ago by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which stated that there was a possibility of a US attack against Iran in August, with Australia providing assistance. Yes, the US does not really need Australia for any attack, but it could use Australia, and others, to create the impression of a broad international coalition fighting Iran for what ever “democratic” reason.
I have to say that I am very surprised by this article when it comes to Iran’s defensive capabilities. The impression is that they are stronger than presented. Yes, the US certainly has no intention of launching a conventional war against Iran, as the fighting would be a repeat performance of the Italian campaign of 1943-1945, fought in a mountainous environment. It would be very slow and costly. Therefore an air campaign would be instigated, where the intent would be the destruction of Iranian infrastructure leading to regime change.
When it comes to Iran’s military, it’s weakest arm is it’s Air Force. It cannot be used for any air combat, as the planes are obsolete. However, those planes can indeed be used for air to ground and air to sea operations, launching missiles against potential targets, especially surface vessels.
Iran does indeed have sophisticated radar. When it comes to it’s missile capabilities, ground to air and ground to ground, the impression is that they are stronger than the article implies. Any air attack against Iran would almost certainly be very costly to the perpetrator of the same.
Finally, we have the political implications of any aggression against Iran. The political repercussions would be immense. Not only would the attack be condemned by Russia and China, but by Europe as well. The attack would certainly do immense damage to NATO, while Europe would be directed even more towards Russia and China. The point is that the US has fought too many wars using absurd excuses, and the rest of the world – especially Europe – does not wish to be drawn into any more, certainly not against Russia. I wonder if Washington fully understands this.
Austfailure is one of Thanatopia’s most groveling stooges, and enthusiastic collaborators in genocide. We were right there, shoulder to shoulder, with our ‘great and powerful friends’ in the genocides in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, and turned a blind eye to Uncle Sam’s pet monster, Suharto, in Indonesia, as he prosecuted genocides in 1965, then in West Papua and East Timor.
The ‘news’ that we might aid the USA in another aggression and genocide, against Iran, was greeted with undisguised enthusiasm in our filthy MSM. To kill Moslems would also please our Zionist Masters, the kissing of whose posteriors is mandatory for all politicians wishing to advance.
Quite correct Mulga!
Australia’s grovelling started with John Curtain as many of his cabinet were Irish and detested the Monarchy, and after Churchill wanted the Australian 6th Division in India and Curtain brought them home to defend Australia in New Guinea, Curtain stopped hanging onto the petticoats of Britain and grabbed the coattails of Uncle Sam.
That is why Australians fought in Korea, (the Forgotten War) and then Vietnam and of course in 1993 in Iraq and then Afghanistan.
For the 2003 invasion of Iraq, George Bush sent Heinz Kissinger to Canberra in January,where he spoke to the Prime Minister, Little Johnny Howard and his deputy in the Liberal Party, Alexander Downer, who also featured earlier this year in the MI6 false report of Putin’s interference in the 2016 elections. Then Kissinger spoke to Australia’s leader of the opposition, Kim Beazley, and all these politicians agreed to back the US.
As a reward when Kissinger returned to Washington, the Money market lifted Australia’s ratings from ‘AA’ to ‘AAA’.
The reality is that the report by the ABC should not be dismissed, Every American President who went to war from LBJ onwards has always approached Australia for assistance, and Australia has always obliged.
I have found your analysis about the Iranians not being interested in developing nuclear weapons quite convincing in the past (if I remember correctly you pointed out that Ali Khomeini himself rejected having them as “unislamic”).
However, recently Pepe Escobar has argued that Soleimani had hinted at the possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons on the black market (https://m.facebook.com/775051677/posts/10156465960331678/ ).
While there is no obvious contradiction between these statements (after all it was hinted only at the possibility), it raises some questions whether the Iranian military would in theory be prepared to acquire or use nuclear weapons, despite Khomeini’s words. Could you kindly elaborate on this?
I still believe that the statement by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that nuclear weapons are unislamic remains in force and that the Iranian never have and probably never will try to develop nukes. Furthermore, I have never seen any evidence of the existence of a nuclear black market. Finally, I don’t believe that Iran has any need for nukes. So until I actually see some evidence or some logically built argument I will continue to consider any discussion of Iranian nukes as pure propaganda.
Kind regards,
The Saker
Iran had a nuclear enrichment program for highly enriched Uranium and Heavy Water. These are precursors for nuclear weapons.
Five Iranian nuclear scientists assassinated.
Iranians identified by Korean and US services involved with North Korean nuclear weapons program.
None of these “indicators” are conclusive, but the fact that Russia could have provided all the technology necessary for Iranian nuclear energy and has stepped in to assist now that the sanctions regime forced Iran to accept Russian “assistance” to remove highly enriched Uranium and Heavy Water, it seems logical (again not conclusive) that Iran has some program that was “beyond power for electrical generation”.
Should they have had a nuclear program? Yes. It is the only deterrent to the Hegemon’s manic mission to destroy the regime.
If they didn’t have a program, they suffered from all the reaction as if they did have a program for weapons development. And may suffer a overwhelming attack anyway.
If their only deterrent now is a massive strike on Israel via Hezbollah, they need to demonstrate that capability. Yemen shows they have very little impact with missiles. Only the incompetence of the Saudi military has prolonged that agony of the Yemenis.
For instance, Iran could use their missiles on ISIS and al Nusra in Iraq and Syria. They haven’t. They use Shiite militias mostly made up of Afghan Shia. Human martyrs is the main first strike of the Iranian war doctrine. Even Soleimani speaks of Martyrdom as their strength. And what do they boast about in the Syrian war? Martyrs of Generals of the IRGC.
Well, maybe they know something the military historians don’t know, but human sacrifices as strategy is not a healthy military doctrine.
As for allies, Russia and China have huge strategic and economic and military stakes in Iranian stability.
As we saw with North Korea, they will talk, act, and involve themselves in all ways obvious and covert to protect the regime. It is not going to be a “we won’t get involved” or “we stand with Iran” choice.
Iran is far too important to allow any war or surgical strike upon it.
What they can do is what they did in North Korea. They will send clear signs that Iran is in their sphere of influence and any attack will be considered an attack on that sphere.
Does the US and Israel and the Arabs want Russia and China as enemies?
The US might, but Israel and the Arabs do not want that outcome.
There is much both superpowers can do to restrain the Hegemon and Israeli warmongers.
We just have not reached that moment.
Iran is alone, with Russia and China ready to step forward when that time arrives.
Basically, it is unthinkable that the US will blow off Russia and China and launch an attack, unafraid of the consequences. The interconnection of Iran with Russia (via EAEU) and China (via BRI and oil) is even more sensitive than Syria was in 2011-2015.
War in the ME has reached its apogee. Talk and belligerent challenges and responses are hot. But the reality is ice cold. Iran cannot be allowed to be attacked by the Hegemon.
Thus, I think the US will use MEK and insurgent proxies from ISIS and AQ to try to foment a Syria-style civil war. The US does those well in the early stages. That’s the least stressful and plays into the InfoWarfare Dominance of the West. I think that is what will happen to Iran. It keeps Russia and China on the sidelines and pursues the economic collapse Israel wants to see happen to Tehran. Everyone in the West will be happy in the Hegemon’s lair. Destroying another economy is like a video game for the CIA and Mi6. And the Mossad will be using the MEK for assassinating high value targets inside Iran. Will make for another Hollywood blockbuster.
Nobody uses nukes hence the phrase “nuke fear porn”. The Zionists would’ve been setting off “the Bomb” in myriad locations over the decades and blaming it on the nuke black market and bats**t crazy Palestinians/Iranians/Syrians/Iraqis or AlQaeda/ISIS/AlShawaddy-waddy.
Post 1945, the nuke has not been used in an act of war or “terrorism” (i.e. stated based terror). Move on from the nuke fear porn; it is a Mutually Assured Destruction scenario. You don’t get more murderin’ or crazy than the Zionists and the psychopathic neoconservatives…and yet not one Bomb went off in any false flag incident on behalf of their notorious goals. Case closed – aint no-one, no-where ever gonna use “da bomb”. Duh duh duh.
Could there be another weapon very similar to nuclear, but without the after effects?
Has anybody ever considered the ‘electro-magnetic’ scalar weapon devices that were being tested by the US and other countries including France and Japan in Western Australia from 1989 to 1995/6, and the continuation of those weapon trials by France on a Pacific Atoll.
There are reports of such a weapon being used against Japan in 1995 creating the Hangshin earthquake. Most certainly it was used on the Fukashima Nuclear reactor, no matter what Yoichi Shimatsu/Jim Stone wrote. It was also used in Bali at the Sari Club as per Captain Rodney Damon Cox ADF, and in Aceh to create the Tsunami, and again Alexander Downer had prior knowledge of the last two attacks.
Then there was the 28th of July, 1976 earthquake at Tangshan, China which some have suggested was created by Russia in regard to the Chinese aggression against Vietnam who had signed a treaty with Russia, which possibly threatened containment of China. This incident may also explain the UN treaty of the 18th May, 1977 commonly known as the “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modifications Techniques” .
Nuclear weapons may not necessarily be bombs or missiles. Nicola Tesla’s work may be the weapons of today.
caveat: normally i tend to agree with nearly everything you write.
in this case i seriously doubt russia and china will remain passive bystanders for x years before assisting iran with intelligence, weapons, ….whatever is needed to eradicate any proxy force from gaining any sort of traction.
the only rub in your assessment is each time the USA uses proxies to foment internal rebellion and war the outcome is LESS effective than the previous attempt.
the world has caught on to the game fast so each new cia iteration has a shorter lifespan before the targeted state and its allies react to crush it.
I very much doubt any Syria style proxy effort will be effective this time.
……..but they have actually DONE sweet F.A. to assist Iran in any way in the past.
If you expect them to do anything this time you are likely to be disappointed.
During GW Bush administration, a nuclear-armed cruise missile was found as cargo in an unsecured transport plane. A few months later there were several sudden resignations of high-ranking Air Force officers. At the time, the Air Force was reputed to be run by insane end-of-timers. No, I don’t think there is a black market for nukes, or IS/c.i.a. would have already used one.
This may change in the aftermath of a US/ Zionist attack on Iran. By some estimates, it only takes $10 million and a dozen qualified scientists to produce a nuclear weapon. And in the coming war, Iran if it so chose could employ radiological dirty bombs to blunt any attack.
I’m surprised the Saker has no discussion of what Russia would do if the US attacked Iran. Russia supported an arguably less important ally in Syria. But if the US attacks Iran, what would Russia do?
it’s pretty obvious Russia would help, although likely not overtly. but I think you could pretty much count on modern AA systems, antiship missiles, and all other kinds of useful gadgets mysteriously appearing in Iran, should anything like that ever happen (which I doubt it will).
Australia helping Uncle $cam militarily reminds me of that WW2 telegram: Go it, Britain! Barbados is with you.
Or of the Hobart Mercury, in 1892, and its infamous editorial entitled, ‘We Warn the Tsar’.
“If the war spreads to Iraq and Syria”. No if about it. On Day 1 Iraq, Syria and Lebanon will join Iran. And their first targets will be the 2 most prized investments by Rothschild in the ME: KSA and Israel. In other words, instead of fighting the U$ Monkey, they will hit the Zionazi Organ Grinder where it hurts: in his wallet (KSA) and in his prestige (Israel).
The whole point of the Syrian agression and the last Lebanon war was to suppress Iran strategic depth for Israel profit and prepare for war against Iran.
Did not work. The Anglo Zionists lost both wars.
In addition with war still ongoing in Afghanistan and Yemen. Not even speaking about the Irak disaster. Acknoledged by Trump himself.
Anglo Zionist are losing grip over ME whatever BS is uttered in MSM propaganda.
There is no way the US could attack Iran while those battle ground are still open.
If the US dare it, it is difficult to see how they will not be weakened and kicked out of Afghanistan and Yemen.
In same fashion it is difficult to see Hezbollah and Syria not targeting Israel.
Iran could take care of US warships and military bases as well as blocking the strait of Hormuz and wrecking havoc to cheikdoms water and oil infrastructure.
Adding up guerilla warefare and support for allied militant in Irak, Yemen, Afghanistan.
In such circumstance it is difficult to imagine Pak, India and Turkey remaining neutral in power reconfiguration with Afghanistan and Kurdish region.
As for Russia and China they will unfortunetaly be pulled by their hair into the conflict one way or another.
Only the most extremist Zionist have an interest in such a screen play.
The point is the US implemented a disastrous strategy in ME for 30 years.
They will pay the price of defeat for such pathetic mistakes.
No matter Trump do will change that very fact.
The US is finished in the ME.
I think probable tjat Trump try to negotiate a freeze in the current configuration. Like a new sykes picot agreement. But he have the most extremist zionists putting pressure. Another mistake cannot be dismissed.
Wait and see.
There’s no mention here, or rarely when this topic is discussed it seems, of Iran’s cyber-warfare capabilities. I remember the last time the neo-con cabal raised the prospect of an attack on Iran back in 2003-4. In fact I am pretty certain that on at least one occasion the theatre commander (Admiral Fallon) refused a direct order from the White House (Cheney not Bush) to attack an Iranian shore facility to provoke a ‘Gulf of Tonkin’ type incident.
Anyway, at that time, Iran’s indigenous defence industry was not particularly well developed, but they did have a wave of young mathematics and technical graduates from their excellent education system. The Iranian strategists realised that they could match the capabilities of the US in the relatively young field of cyber-warfare and quietly developed their capabilities in this area.
In the (unlikely) event of an all-out war being waged against Iran, I would expect to see all manner of electronic system malfunctions amongst the US electronics-dependent military, plus possibly a bit of havoc being unleashed back across the shining sea.
I believe you have a point there, any war on Iran will be an existential war so Iran will need not restrain any of its capabilites to hit America hard wherever it count.
And I think the only way Iran can take the war to America homeland is through cyber warfare, and they will do this especially if they feel it can influence America’s public opinion to end the war.
Yes. There was a Stanford professor some while ago who claimed some of the best electrical engineering students in the world we’re coming out of Iran.
Iranians are not Arabs. They will never lie down or make a deal because they think there is a gold painted Rolls Royce in their future when they know that the Arabs and Israelis are pushing the deal. They will fight, sacrifice, and die for their land.
They won’t do it for the mullahs but they will do it for Iran. We can’t seem to get that in the West and that is why we think little purple and green clad idiots in Albania are our ticket to unlocking Iran. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I think theSaker has underestimated the political disadvantages of using nuclear weapons on Iran.
The US used nuclear weapons on Japan on the flimsiest of excuses and got away with it as it was the most powerful country at the time.
Since the whole point of bombing Iran is to (re)establish that supremacy, any perceived political disadvantage will be easily managed. I am sure there were (and probably still are) lots of people who find US actions, including Hiroshima, loathsome but still ally with it- including Japan.
The only way for the US to maintain its hegemony is to have a repeat of Hiroshima/Nagasaki on a larger scale. Conventional bombing will not be enough.
Rather than assume that nuclear weapons will not be used it would be better to assume that they will used and plan accordingly, including in the information sphere.
Up are totally wrong. If U.S use is nuke on any country, everyone else will have to develop their own nukes for deterrence sake and that will mark the end of U.S military dominance.
I think the Sakers analasys is far more comprehensive and accurate, than the crap Margolis sprouts.
I would like to point out though:
An attack on Iran would likely thrash NATO completely as there is no taste for war in Europe, especially not on Iran. This would completely spoil any and all relations between Europe and the US.
The political outfall worldwide from an attack on Iran; alone that should be a deterrent. The US would become completely isolated.
The reaction from Russia and China is harder to judge, but Irans oil is crucial to China’s industry and an attack could well be judged as an attack on China. Furthermore Russia would not accept attacks right on its borders.
A nuclear attack I will not even contemplate, 1,5 billion Muslims would want to kill any and all American they could and could well start WWIII.
That we are discussing this at all, is just a sign that the “Silk Road” initiative scares the US immensely.
Israelies and Israel-firsters want to see Iran bombed into the stone age by the US. The Jewish hatred is so viscerally strong that the “chosen” could lose their marbles and provoke the confrontation. The results will be catastrophic for millions of people — including the citizens of the Jewish State. That would be the end of the idiotic zionist project.
Currently, alternative media accuses (deservedly) Israel of the ongoing wars in the Middle East, which have started thanks to the powerful Lobby working in cahoots with the scum of MIC profiteers. The Jewish Lebensraum has already cost millions of innocent lives, among them the thousands and thousands of children.
We do live in an interesting time.
well said, Amy
Den Lille Abe
You are correct. A war on Iran would be going too far, as there would be no excuse to wage one in the first place. Worse, Europeans would come to the conclusion that their consent to such a war would also mean their consent to a possible war against Russia. However, the question is can a war against Iran be prevented, as Wall Street is in a heap of financial trouble at home, while at the same time looking into the collapse of it’s globalist empire. We shall see.
What can the Russians do? My guess is that they may provide covert “technical assistance” (i.e. electronic warfare and military intelligence info)
How have such evil madmen been able to take control of the west, especially the U.S. All the accusations they hurl at other countries such as Russia is what they themselves are.
There’s a saying that any country’s military is still fighting the last war.
The real last war for America was World War 2.
This country for the people was the richest in the world because of an abundance of natural resources, and an agricultural region spread by a water route from the Great Lakes through the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic.
While graft was always part of the process, it became excessive over the last 50 years through the Wall Street leadership. And by that time the country was conducting war via finance by the IMF and other such institutions.
It’s disgusting. There was a generation after World War 2 that was seeing progress, not just for America, but across the globe.
And then progress stopped.
It’s Zionist control, Craig. Just look at the insanely aggressive and hate-crazed campaign to destroy Corbyn and UK Labour, based on ENTIRELY false accusations of ‘antisemitism’. And no matter how much Corbyn grovels, no matter how many old colleagues he stabs in the back for the Zionists and their Sabbat Goy Blairite stooges, still the hatred and vilification only grows and grows. Zionist control of Western polities, through straight monetary bribery, has driven all decent men and women from politics. A sane, moral, and humane human being would tell the Zionists that not only is their behaviour, particularly in regard to the eternal brutalisation of the Palestinians, and ceaseless aggression against its neighbours, Evil and morally incapable of being supported, but it is poisoning, and long has poisoned Israeli society, and MUST, in the end, create so much resistance, from people left with no choice but to fight, or die, or flee as refugees, that Israel’s own destruction will occur. But NO Western politician would dare speak such truth to Zionist power. A true friend of the Jews would also point out that Diaspora Jews, particularly the young, are growing repulsed by Israel’s racist barbarity, as they should. Netan-yahoo and the Zionist elite are the enemy of the Jews, as well as of their goy victims.
Very well said.
People criticise Corbyn for lack of backbone (and they’re probably justified), but 80% of Labour MPs are Red Tory Friends of Israel Backstabbers who have tried not once, but twice, to get rid of him.
The current campaign against him has 3 objectives:-
1. To criminalise any and all criticism of Israel.
2. To undermine the Labour Party and prevent any Corbyn government – a real possibility in view of the state of the weak and divided minority Tory government, with an unpopular and uncharismatic leader May, that could collapse at any time as a result of the Brexit fiasco alone. The Deep State, the Spooks, the City, the MSM, and all the usual suspects are terrified at the prospect.
3. To get rid of a leading anti-war figure, Corbyn, in the run up to an attack on Iran.
Precisely, Mark. I cannot decide whether Corbyn is just gutless, or is a long-term mole, rather like a UK Sanders, although better hidden until now.
Very interesting article the Saker ! …well done.
I have a few important questions….maybe the Saker or other readers more knowledgeable can answer:
1. How good or what is the quality of the Iranian missiles guidance systems ?
What kind of guidance systems are they using and how accurate are the missiles ?
If you take for example the soviet Scud missiles types A to D….accuracy will range anywhere between 3000 and 100 meters. Are the Iranian missiles any better ?
If the Iranians launch for example 10 medium range missiles on Naval Support Activity Bahrain home to U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and United States Fifth Fleet …..how accurate can they hit the individual facilities ?
or if they saturate a missile strike on for example the Air and Space operations center in Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, do they have enough accuracy and explosive power to penetrate these facilities ?
2. What are the Iranian capabilities to target Saudi, UAE or Qatari oil and gas facilities to disrupt Gulf countries oil production and economy as a retaliation ?
I have read some reports that the Americans seem to believe this is very hard to do by Iranians:
read for example:
“The Limits of an Iranian Missile Campaign against Saudi Arabian Oil” by MIT.
Are the Americans underestimating this capability ?
@Harry, if you compare that MIT paper with the Saker’s analysis you will see that their Table 2 is 9-10 years out of date in its intelligence. Saker (above) shows qualitatively more types of Iranian missiles than MIT shows (or knows?). And I bet Saker is right, Iran possesses quantitatively more missiles than U$ Military Intelligence knows. I would agree with Hamis, below, that Iran probably has enough spare capacity to rain a missile on Israel for every hour of every day the U$ chooses to wage that war. As well as enough missiles to knock out every Rothschild KSA petroleum asset listed in that MIT report. An attack on Iraq would not be the first war in the ME where the U$A lost both “blood and treasure” — but it would certainly be the first war in History where Rothschild lost money.
” Yes, the US does not really need Australia for any attack, but it could use Australia, and others, to create the impression of a broad international coalition fighting Iran for what ever “democratic” reason. ”
Exactly. It’s an old trick that is perhaps weakening losing its midas touch as all this crap is costing money.
” As well as enough missiles to knock out every Rothschild KSA petroleum asset listed in that MIT report. An attack on Iraq would not be the first war in the ME where the U$A lost both “blood and treasure” — but it would certainly be the first war in History where Rothschild lost money.”
For me that would be the winner as well as flood the Gulf with mines, suicide high seed boats, sink a few tankers in the traffic lanes etc. Bring this chaos to the Western Table and see how the guest would enjoy the meal. I bet a lot of people would wake up. But then I could be wrong, they won’t wake-up as their heads are glued to the screens.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-02/connected-matrix-americans-spend-most-their-waking-hours-staring-screen
When attempting to analyze the motives of the “neocons”, it’s important to keep in mind that there are deep conflicts of interest within the Jewish People themselves. Particularly between Diaspora Jews and what Henry Ford referred to as “International Jews” (nowadays more likely to be called Zionist Jews). Diaspora Jews, although sympathetic to Israel, have no interest in actually emigrating. Their interests are best served by promoting openness, diversity and tolerance within those societies in which they reside. They realize that their own interests are intertwined with that of their host countries and they are interested in promoting the interests of those countries just as any other citizen would be. Zionist Jews (including the operatives referred to as the “neocons”) have no such interests. Their preference is encouraging conditions which might lead to greater immigration to Israel. Thus Zionist Jews prefer to promote conflict within the Diaspora societies for that reason. These tactics were widely used during the early period of the State of Israel to encourage immigration (Aliyah) of Jews resident in the Middle-East. They also have no concern for the long term viability of the Diaspora societies. The Diaspora/Zionist divide is a spectrum of course, but there are real conflicts of interest.
Far more than any previous President, Trump is clearly an ally of the Zionists. A clue here is Trump’s connections to cults such as the Lubavitchers. These groups, largely despised by Diaspora Jews, are useful for the Zionists since they are insular and disaffected from the societies in which they reside. Trump has also received considerable support in the media from the Wall Street Journal and Fox News, owned by Rupert Murdoch, and recently from Alan Dershowitz both men highly placed operatives of the Zionists. Trump is despised by Jews in the Diaspora since he does not seek to promote a tolerant and inclusive society.
It may be more revealing to consider the battle over Trump as conflicts of interests between Jewish groups and not American Nationalist Patriots versus Zionists.
Your observations are quite correct, in my opinion. Zionism is Nazism for Jews, just as Hindutva is Nazism, or fascism if you prefer, for Hindus, Wahhabism Nazism for Moslems, Japanese Imperialism and its current revanchist resurgence under the hereditary fascist Abe is fascism for the Japanese etc. The Zionist project, in my opinion, is that primarily of the Jewish secular elite, driven by European settler arrogance, and, in the Jabotinsky-Begin-Likud-Netanyahoo tendency, by open fascism, and apartheid-style racism.
For the secular elites Israel is a convenient HQ and redoubt from which to seek profit and pillage around the world. Israel leads the world in Internet services, surveillance and methods of repression, in other high tech industries (thanks to billions EVERY year in tribute from the USA and the influx of well-educated Soviets, some even Jewish, in the 90s), but also in finance, financial crime, like binary options, pay-day lending, on-line gambling etc, and even more shady operations like sex, blood diamonds, human organ and drug trafficking, and in the production of pornography of every type.
The Zionist elite care little for ordinary Jews, let alone the goyim. Israel is the second most unequal society in the OECD, even among the Jews, and various Mafias, with tentacles in Russia and the USA, are immensely powerful. The Zionist elites see the Jewish Diaspora more or less as human shields and foot-soldiers to be mobilised whenever Israeli crimes draw opposition from Western publics, as with the BDS Movement now being banned and criminalised across the West.
To make matters worse, Israeli religious life is dominated by the Talmudic, Rabbinical, Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox, whose hatred and contempt for the goyim is matched only by their disdain for secular Jews. Indeed one such grandee of Orthodox Judaism opined some years ago that the Nazi judeocide was God’s punishment for European Jews moving to a secular life-style in the 19th and 20th centuries, after emancipation. With ‘teachers’ like that, who needs ‘antisemites’?
Yikes! Scary scenarios.
One that does not come up much: What if Iran already has a nuke or two? Maybe they got one on the sly from NK or one of the missing units from the old USSR states? There are some out in the wild apparently.
Imagine what happens if Iran is attacked and (feeling there is nothing to lose) fires a nuke tipped missile into Israel.
Not sure if I welcome or fear this scenario.
As indicated above, all suggestions of Iran already having nuclear weapons can easily be interpreted as propaganda aimed justify an attack upon it. There is no evidence whatsoever that Iran has nuclear weapons and it would not need them to inflict massive retaliatory damage on Israel by use of conventional missiles. Also the Empire’s bases and ships in the ME would also be fair game for retaliation.
If you think Trump really will attack Iran, then buy oil now.
Just the declaration of war will make the price of oil skyrocket. Effective actions such as the sinking of oil tankers or attacks on Gulf oil faciliites will make it climb even higher.
This will crash the Trump economy. It will vastly accelerate inflation. We live in a just-in-time world where everything is shipped long distances. That shipping requires oil. Everything will become more expensive. This will happen quickly upon the start of a war. The Federal Reserve is already raising interest rates because it sees inflation in the American economy. The government lies about inflation stats to keep mandatory inflation adjustments low, but even then the Fed is worried abour rising inflation. An oil shock will create a massive amount of inflation almost overnight.
Trump’s economy will be in a shambles. American voters will go to the polls in the fall in a world of gas shortages, long lines to get any gas (if lucky to get any), massive price increases in an economy where workers haven’t had a real raise in decades, and where its unlikely they’ll get one now. There will be skyrocketing unemployment as the oil shock hits. This in a divided nation where half the population already hates Trump to start with, and a fair bit of Trump’s support came because of his opposition to wars. The professional Democrats will of course love war, as they’ve been screaming for a war for the last two years. But, that doesn’t mean the American people will love this war. The Democrats are more out of touch with the people than Trump which is why they lost the last election. So, while there may well be a sort of almost unity on Capital Hill, the American people will be seething.
America always plans to fight short wars. I’m sure the Pentagon planners have a plan that says on Day one we blow this list up, on day two we blow up this second list, on day 3 we blow up this list, and on day four Iran surrenders and gives America oral sex in gratitude for the abuse. But the Pentagon plans are always wrong, as we’ve seen in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. This will not be a short war, and America is in a horrible position to fight a long war with a crashing economy and a rebellious citizenry.
And what happens if China decides to take advantage of the situation to be much more aggressive in the trade and currency wars that Trump is launching against them? What happens to the stock market and Apple’s trillion dollar market cap then?
The US does Not need any oil from the ME…think about that awhile.
Depends on whether US producers are allowed to sell their oil on world markets or not.
If not, US gets subsidised oil, and global supply for anyone who had been relying on ME oil gets even tighter, leaving Russia as the marginal supplier for everybody.
So think about that in turn; if US banning export of their own oil leads to $300 / barrel income for Russia, but allowing some US export would drop it to $200 while raising prices domestically, what will the US do?
All we can hope for is that somebody in the USA will find a way to stop them and avert another immoral, bloody, useless and potentially very dangerous war.
Good luck with that! Anybody with Any power to halt such an attack, or even speak out against it, is fully on board with such an attack taking place.
The People of the US have No Say in what our govt Does! Protest? Clubbed and shot down in the street. Vote? Hahahahahahaha. . . The System wins. Trump or Hillary-THAT’S a Choice?!?
Millions in the streets protesting the Iraq war and what did it get us? Tha Iraq war, of course! If USians don’t see it on the tube, it Didn’t happen.
Sad, but true.
I got No answers, but thanks for your Blog, Sirra!
When Bush/Cheney and their neocon advisers wanted a war with Iran in their time, it was vetoed by the US military. In the modern USA, that is the ultimate power that has the final decision in such matters.
The name ‘diesel’ submarine is rather misleading. They are the modern version of the WW2 submarines. They use diesel when on the surface. When running underwater, they are ‘electric’ submarines, running on batteries. Electric has the advantage of being very quiet. That means they are very hard to detect. The US may think they can track them before a war, but they might be surprised.
WW2 submarines were used as minelayers. Its quite possible the Iranians have a plan to use their submarines in this fashion in the Straits of Hormuze. I believe the mines are deployed through the torpedo tubes, in which case a midget sub can do this as well. The midget subs would probably carry fewer mines per mission, but in only takes one mine to get the insurance companies to react.
I would also suspect that Iran has caves/bunkers containing anti-ship missiles along their coast. That would keep minesweepers out of the area, and be very hard to destroy with air-strikes.
Iran has had 40 years to prepare for this. The US has been making these threats since the Iranian people overthrew the torturing Shah. I would think the one thing that can be counted upon is that they’ve come up with a few surprises for the Americans.
The US won’t attack Iran because it would lose.
When American journalists write about other countries it is always important to remember that all US media is CIA controlled. It is quite possible therefore that Margolis is aiding a pro-war Zionist cause within the US by bigging up the US whilst downplaying Iran’s military strength.
Is Eric Margolis an expert on the entirety of Iranian military resources?
Has he been party to the high level top secret meetings between the Iranian government and it’s security/military?
Has he been party to the top level meetings between Russia and Iran on military cooperation matters?
Has he been party to the discussions and consultations between Iran and the Shanghai Security cooperation Council which Iran is about to join?
Has Iran just recently come under threat from the US or have they been preparing for this for decades?
In short does he really know anything about the subject? I say this because we have had American journalists lecturing us on world events and how they will turn out for decades and they are almost always wrong.
Here is Margolis on President Putin –
“SENIOR EDITOR: A lot of people are criticizing Putin’s manipulation of these elections, criticizing his human rights record. But he seems rather popular. The idea that Putin will find a way to stay in power does not seem to be an unpopular notion in Russia.
ERIC MARGOLIS, REAL NEWS ANALYST: This is a very disturbing problem for people who are democrats, like myself. I’m a radical democrat, militant democrat. But I look at Putin, and all the polls show, every Russian I’ve talked to tells us that Putin is adored in Russia. He is the new symbolic figure out of Russian history, the white tsar, the good tsar who comes out of nowhere, to rescue dear Mother Russia in her moment of trouble and humiliation.
JAY: All the same language one could have used about Hitler in the early 1930s.
MARGOLIS: Yes. He wants to restore the Soviet Union. I have no doubt about that. And he wants it in a very muscular manner.
Russia has committed unspeakable crimes. Really, one could call it almost genocide in Chechnya. And it continues. Squashed the life out of this tiny little one million people.”
And on China/Russia –
“But there’s such a profound distrust between the Chinese and the Russians. They really detest each other.”
He supports the neoliberal 5th column,
“JAY: Are there any, what you could say, really democratic forces that are trying to emerge? And should the media here be covering that story?
MARGOLIS: There are democratic forces, but they probably represent no more than 8% of the intelligentsia in the big cities in Russia. There’s always been throughout Russian history a very pro-westernize minority, an elite that wants to do everything western. Now, we just saw last week—.
JAY: But pro-democratic doesn’t necessarily mean pro-western.
MARGOLIS: That’s correct. But there are in the more enlightened political figures in Russia, but they have absolutely no popular support”
https://therealnews.com/series/eric-margolis-comments-on-the-duma-elections
Margolis is no friend then, of the multipolar countries and it is fair to assume he probably dislikes Iran too.
In my humble opinion the Zionist regime in America will not attack Iran.
I believe this because I don’t think they are capable of it. In the last 12 months alone we have seen the US –
– Send 3 carrier battle groups simultaneously to terrify the North Koreans, fail to achieve this and have to sail away again.
– threaten to invade Venezuela but been unable to even attempt this,
– in 17 years of Afghan occupation, today the Taliban control half the country in yet another failure for the US, though they are now funnelling terrorists into the country and are believed to be running the very lucrative opium trade.
– fail to defeat the Syrian people and now reported to be preparing to withdraw it’s occupation forces.
Now we are expected to believe they could defeat Iran?
Martyanov makes some telling points in his book on declining US military power. (reviewed on this site)
Basically they can’t fight, a lot of their kit doesn’t work and they can’t cope with casualties.
Iran would give them lots of casualties and with 45,000 troops within missile range of Iran, the US would suffer catastrophic damage to mention just one possible retaliatory scenario.
https://www.statista.com/chart/9727/where-us-troops-are-based-in-the-middle-east/
Having thousands of planes and ships and bombs isn’t enough. The weapons need to work properly and you need to be able to have coherent governance at home that knows how to fight a war not just bomb defenceless villagers in countries like Iraq or Syria. There is no evidence that America has either of these attributes.
In Vietnam they were defeated and sent packing by a small country which had neither navy nor air force. whilst the US rained down on them more bombs than were dropped in ww2 as well as chemical weapons such as agent orange and napalm.
Yet at that time the US strutted the world with massive military resources. Some analysts have even argued that the moon landings psyop hoaxes were created in part to divert public attention away from the failures in Vietnam and to give the Americans something to feel proud of, even if it was a huge lie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4
If Iran were attacked by the US and had to fight for it’s very survival, they would attack US assets everywhere and there is no reason to believe that the war would be confined to Iranian territory. They have a population united with the government in hatred of the Zionist US regime and it’s many crimes against the country.
In all out war it would be no holds barred.
For example if Hezbollah saw it’s close ally, Iran, getting bombed, they might just level Israel. They have the missiles.
Iran also has a close relationship with Russia, it’s neighbour across the Russian controlled Caspian Sea.
Russia’s newest weapons can deny all US military forces, air or naval, access to huge swathes of the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf. (and half the Pacific)
/book-review-losing-military-supremacy-the-myopia-of-american-strategic-planning-by-andrei-martyanov/
Russia wouldn’t need to fight. The US would get, if they haven’t already got, the message and while we don’t know what exactly Russia would do, it is safe to assume they wouldn’t be sitting on their hands.
Centcom in Qatar would be a sitting duck because Qatar, since the Saudi blockade, is completely dependant on Iran for food, use of civilian airspace and is even engaged in shared gas exploration work.
They would never dare go against Iran, neither would Turkey.
The US would be completely on it’s own something the cowardly regime, with it’s permanent need for a “coalition” to hide inside could not deal with.
Yes of course America is good at blowing things up and causing massive human suffering but a war with Iran would result in Iran still standing and the US a humiliated and broken ex “superpower”
Thankfully, Saker your analysis is more believable than Margolis.
Finally I would just add one important point to your 3 reasons why Iran is “a problem” if I may.
4) The Iranian government does not permit dollar usage either inside the country or in it’s (huge and growing)trade with the world.
Global domination by the Rothschild banking cabal is an essential part of their fascist one world government agenda and countries refusing the dollar are therefore a target.
With dollar hegemony eroding and being replaced by alternatives in moves led by Russia and China, countries too powerful to bomb, this is a further reason why America is having a spasm of hysteria, not because they are strong but because they are desperate – trying to rule the world by force while daily seeing it slipping out of their control.
And all this whilst internally the country is in the midst of mental breakdown and it’s polity completely removed from reality.
Trump said he might bomb Iran this month, then said he wanted a deal. He also said not long ago that Iran was a leading promoter of terrorism. Who knows what he will say next week.
No wonder the Iranians are laughing.
https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/07/iran-we-do-not-take-american-threats-seriously/
Mr. Margolis is not an American journalist.
With respect –
“Eric S. Margolis (born 1942 or 1943)[1] is an American-born journalist and writer. For 27 years, ending in 2010,[2] he was a contributing editor to the Toronto Sun[3] chain of newspapers, writing mainly about the Middle East, South Asia and Islam. He contributes to the Huffington Post and appears frequently on Canadian television broadcasts, as well as on CNN”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Margolis_(journalist)
Completely agree with you. The Americans are cowards. They only pick a fight against small and weak countries like Grenada, Panama and sanctions-ruined Iraq. They will only fight from the air and they go ape-shit if even one of their planes gets knocked out. It’s not that simple that the neocons can easily sick Trump on Iran. The military will have a big say in this. Don’t forget that the Pentagon has war gamed many times an attack on Iran and each time the US got pummeled. Iran will use very sophisticated asymmetrical warfare against the US and Israel. Trump’s blusterous tweet directed to Iran was just that: bluster.
I pretty much agree with the article, except to point out that it doesn’t matter if the US doesn’t ‘want” a ground war in Iran. While that would be suicidal, there is no way the US can prevent Iran from putting enough ships – both commercial oil carriers and US Navy ships – in danger in the Persian Gulf without putting thousands of Marines and Army right on the shores of Iran’s very long coastline.
The last time US held a mine-clearing test in the Gulf, they couldn’t find half the dummy mines released for the test. We can be sure Iran took note of that result and have probably tripled their production of mines.
It’s doubtful the US can even deploy enough troops to control Iran’s shoreline. But if they try, they will be under continuous guerrilla attack from the Iranian Army, the IRGC, and Basij militia (which, depending on who you trust to count them, number from one million to ten million.).
This means the US will sustain losses far in excess of the few thousand it suffered during Afghanistan and Iraq. Far more body bags will come home, and they will come home for the next decade (or two) because Iran will never surrender regardless of the damage the US air campaign will do to the country.
It is a bold assumption that Russia and China will stand idly by as Iran is attacked. At the very least, they will have a plan for a US attack, and part of that plan will already involve beefing up Iran’s defenses. Russia and China have too much at stake in Iran to allow them to fall. On the other hand, they may feel that a US attack on Iran, which then morphed into a long debilitating war on the US and its interests in the ME, with Russia and China doing everything to prolong the US’s agony, is just what is needed to finish off the Empire?
Anonymous 1:
You are right-on Saker with this excellent logical article as usual. Thank you.
In all of these discussions I do have a dread of something that no one brings up: What if the empire starts another mid-east war without any justification or provocation and launches even one nuclear missal. What if Russia and China and others finally realize that they are surely to eventually be next on the receiving end of this treatment and the “mad dog” must be put down before we are all targeted? If the anti-empire nations finally realize that there is no longer a shred of morality or sanity left in the West; would they then decide the beast must be exterminated for the survival of the rest civilization? Massive preventative nuclear strike destroying 7 or 8 major cities on both American coasts say on Christmas day, New Years Eve or the 4th. of July!
Let’s hope and pray that the American people and others in the West wake up and scream enough is enough.
@dlomshek. You are right, if Uncle $cam starts firing his “nukular missals” Yanks will find Real War coming to them. Something they never dreamt of.
Isn’t that the real problem with American war planners? They always assume the “war” will always be fought “over there”, as none of them has personal experience of devastating war being waged in their own American “Homeland”.
Start a war with Iran and they, along with every American, could be in for a life-changing – or life-ending – shock.
1st and foremost, only 3 nations really know the truth about Iran’s military capabilities: Iran, Russia and China; all others must guess–including pundits like Margolis, Saker and myself.
2nd, the Outlaw US Empire will very likely lose its last remaining allies if it engages in another act of aggressive war, particularly one against the interests of those remaining allies such as an attack on Iran.
3rd, The primary policy goal of the Outlaw US Empire–to attain Full Spectrum Dominance over the planet–has failed with its total loss of the Eurasian Heartland, and the impending exit of Turkey from NATO. Also see ASEAN’s newly agreed upon Code of Conduct for the South China Sea which excludes any gain through Imperial meddling.
4th, for those looking, the writing’s on the wall for the EU to be subsumed within the rapidly rising EAEU and integrated into China’s BRI, which will firmly cement the failure to attain the Heartland. Thus, the EU will no longer have any use for its Southwest Asian beachhead in Palestine.
5th, Palestine’s own future clearly lies as a component within the EAEU–it cannot survive as an outlier, apartheid state, and it’s currently in an agitated state of internal upheaval that’s very likely to alter the current political dynamic. AND further war is definitely not in its interest, particularly one where major Palestinian cities and infrastructure will be targeted and destroyed. All of this exists for other regional US allies, too–they can also be bombed back to 1978.
6th, there must be lots of uncertainly in war planner’s minds as to Russia’s and China’s potential alliance with Iran as Putin’s loudly hinted that Iran’s underneath Russia’s nuclear umbrella, just as Estonia’s under NATO’s. This makes the dynamic of point #1 more complex as only the Iranians, Russians, and Chinese know what sort of deterrent weaponry hides beneath Iranian mountains
And 7th, Back on 25 May 2018, the US House of Representatives unanimously passed the No War on Iran amendment to the 2019 defense appropriation act, which certainly sends a very strong message to Trump regardless if its included in the final bill after its trip through the conference committee. https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/05/25/us-house-passed-amendment-blocking-war-on-iran-story-buried/
Despite decades of propaganda demonizing Iran, the majority of citizens residing within the Outlaw US Empire are against waging aggressive war on Iran–or on any other nation. That BIgLie Media suppresses such information doesn’t alter the fact of its existence. Furthermore, Trump’s recent rhetoric aimed at Iran mirrors that used against DPRK in order to produce movement on what was perceived as a frozen situation. Iran answered in kind, yet Trump says Rouhani and him will talk before year-end. The bellicosity evaporated because Trump knows another aggressive war isn’t the path to MAGA–which is his priority.
“Despite decades of propaganda demonizing Iran, the majority of citizens residing within the Outlaw US Empire are against waging aggressive war on Iran–or on any other nation.”
A majority of citizens of the Outlaw US Empire (of which I, alas, am one) were against waging war against Iraq. So what? It’s not like we live in a democracy or anything. These bastards will do what they want to do, and the will of the population has very little to do with it.
There’s always a political cost to bear as Obama determined when he backed down from directly attacking Syria in the face of global and domestic opinion. Trump has boomed and blustered while the military (Russia & US) ensure the missiles launched are ineffective.
One item was ignored by The Saker: Combat Readiness, which within the Outlaw US Empire’s forces is woeful.
Outside of Special Forces, the soldiers won’t fight.
What’s even odder is that the most expensive military in the world….the soldiers are barely even trained to fight.
The military is trying to replace most soldiers with Predator drones. Or half-ass tech.The training is I’m guessing about a decade behind the curve.
There are maybe thousands of conspiracy theories since September 11. It resonates in the population even if all of those theories were started by the CIA or NSA. There’s been no event that had a cultural demoralization like that since either the JFK assassination or Vietnam.
There might be some other reason for all this, I don’t know. But in the 1990s, the average American could at least pretend to be in the right. Instead, it’s been a series of feeling demoralized for a long time now because of the leadership.
There was supposed to be a peace dividend when the Cold War ended, and that did not even last a decade.
The “Peace Dividend” ended the moment GHW Bush uttered the phrase New World Order and launched the policy to attain Full Spectrum Dominance that’s been Outlaw US Empire’s #1 policy goal ever since.
Current Outlaw US Empire combat readiness reminds me of the USSR’s on the eve of Operation Barbarossa: Looked great on paper but failed terribly in action.
How long would the Americans be able to sustain a war on Iran, if the conflict began?
A warmonger like Margolis would probably say, “Until we all grow grey hair”, but consider the following.
If attacked, Iran could easily shut the flow of oil down the Persian Gulf, as Saker says. The repercussions would be severe.
First, the petrodollar would die. The Europeans use the dollar to get oil from the Middle East. If the flow of oil stopped, would they need to buy as many dollars? They wouldn’t. Thus the petrodollar would fold.
If the petrodollar died, the U.S. economy would crash. The status of the U.S. currency as reserve depends on the health of the petrodollar. if the latter crashed, the U.S. would no longer be able to foist its printed money on the rest of the world, and there would be serious inflation at home. If inflation soared, the whole economy would suffer.
With a crashing U.S. economy, would an extremely expensive — not to mention bloody — war on the Iranians be sustainable for long? I doubt it.
Therefore, those who think Iran would suffer more from a war should think again.
Another option for Iran could be to simply slow down the traffic through the strait of Hormuz. Not allowing shipping traffic to use Iran’s territorial waters would mean that the rate of ships passing through would go down.
Another option could be to stop traffic for “inspections”, effectively bringing traffic down to a trickle.
Whilst all of the above is unfolding, the Chinese and Russians would simply stand by in the sidelines and watch events unfold, despite having signed agreements to assist each other from external attack and invasion ??????
Incomprehensible to consider such a war against Iran, and simply discounting it’s friends and allies.
The World can simply not lives without Iranian oil..the price of the barrel will instantly skyrocket to 300+ USD.If we have a total destruction(or an almost total one),of the Iranian Oil facilities,the price will stay very high during a long time.Which will mean an economic depression(no less),the collapse of the EU and more refugees.The perfect timing would be for the neocons gang just before the Midterm.If the US goes ahead they must decide quiet soon otherwise the window wil be closed for two more years at least.
nb:Salvini the new leader of the lega/5* gov in Italy just said,he wants Italy to move her embassy in Jerusalem…another ‘fake opposition pro zio’ is born.
Which means Italy(a Nato occupied country)will follow the neocons on Iran.
France and Germany probably won’t.
Eventhough Maron who is in deep troubles with the benallagate,could take the opportunity as a deception/diversion.
But Peugeot,Renault,Total etc have a lot of interests in Iran.
Salvini is clever. Whoever curses Israel will be cursed. God himself judges Israel but he will not allow the nations to do so. History should show you how many times God delivered Israel. Salvini is on the right side concerning what it means to obey Jesus Christ’s commands. Us Orthodox Christians do seldomly read our Bible and this may destroy us. Supporting Islam is not what the son of God wants us to do.He wants us to spread the Good News wherever we are. More and more Russians do this and I hope that the Saker repents of his hatred for everything Christian.
Thank God there is only One of you.
Excellent article.
Another perspective:
– For some interests in the US the goal of a war with Iran is destruction, profit and maintaining a situation where ME is in chaos even if it means huge costs for Israel and US economy and reputation. This may be better than losing power and profit through a US exit of the ME. For Trump it could be pretext to pull back US military and focus on a new strategy that is not global domination (he’s a bankruptcy specialist who works to reduce globalist economy due to the costs it has for the US). A scorched earth tactic which creates chaos close to and weakens the EU short term.
– The Saker previously wrote that Russia has no obligation to get involved in Syria but it did in order to prevent takfiris spreading to Russia. However, to prevent the takfiris from spreading chaos in Russia itself from a conquered Iran it would require that US doesn’t win totally in Iran. There are also other Russian perspectives but Russia is likely only to act in self protection. Iran and Russia have different interests in the ME and a massive bombing campaign of Iran may not be enough to give takfiris a chance to create chaos in Russia.
– Russia might not be able to prevent a massive bombing campaign like she did in Syria. And she might not have the same need to do so. Maybe no need to step into a fight in which the US will loose even more of its imperial position/global domination.
– Russia has arguments which worked in Syria… maybe ultimately risk of nuclear war… surely they said something which had an impression on powerful people in the US.
– To me it boils down to: Are the powers in the US desperate enough? Does Trump want war/bombing campaign? Will the US military allow a war/bombing campaign? If they are willing then the question is: Will Russia say no like they did in Syria (Russia has better conventional weapons now)? …maybe the US decides that Russia knows that the US will not win in traditional sense and an Iran chaos situation may hurt EU, US and China (OBOR) more than Russia so Russia will not risk going nuclear if they actually stand to benefit.
If you are retreating like the US why not smash up what you leave behind so it can’t be used against you right away.
…one thought on Trump moving embassy to Israel. It may be deliberate to ensure that the US will not have many countries in the middle east backing a war with Iran.
PS: Part of the thinking might be to get energy for US economy from fracking and Venezuela.
Watching an old American low-budget TV movie about the Cuban Missile Crisis that someone posted a link to in the Cafe. In it, they have John F. Kennedy say “Power is not infinite. We have limits.” Can anyone picture a modern American president or high official saying that? Trump? Bolton? Haley? Sad to say it, but a guy named Mad Dog is about as close as I can get to someone who might admit that rather obvious fact that everything has limits.
Why talking to Trump is a tricky thing for Iran
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/08/03/why-talking-to-trump-is-a-tricky-thing-for-iran/
First Iraq, Then Iran: U.S. “Intelligence” Copied and Pasted Off the Internet
https://www.globalresearch.ca/first-iraq-then-iran-u-s-intelligence-copied-and-pasted-off-the-internet/5649516
Azorka1861
“Why talking to Trump is a tricky thing for Iran
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/08/03/why-talking-to-trump-is-a-tricky-thing-for-iran/
”
My take is that this article is unconsistent to say the least.
As a major and sovereign player Iran will talk to the US.
Actually Iran is sovereign. Unlike orher countries they need nobody permission.
Iran like US, China and Russia by its actions makes the reality on the ground and makes the rule of the game.
Only third rate countries apply the rules made for them by others.
Trump deals with Iran as it deals with Russia and China, with muscles. That proves by and in itself respect.
That is simply the way it works. Geopolitic is hardpolitics is not for naive or immature children.
US, China or Russia do not cease to talk.
At such level of power play.
You talk when necessary.
Not talking is only tactical.
For the moment, Iran is simply trying to milk the JCPOA at full extent by weakening the US and EU policy making process.
When the time is right talks will occur anyway.
Staring for a moment at the mention of the Austrailian story of the last few days.
Austrailia is not powerless. It has been a important part of the militarized escalation against China. Which leads to two possible thoughts.
1) Is America so desperate for some allies to go along that they’d be willing to pull forces from another theater. It is highly unlikely that NATO would provide much help for an attack on Iran. Even the British poodles have been balking at Trump’s rejection of the UNSC resolution and the Iran nuke deal. If they balk at going along with a diplomatic move, they ain’t going to war. If there is a war, its USA + Israel + KSA. KSA will bring its part of the gulf states along with it. They might drag Egypt along. Of that, Israel is the only one of significance. KSA has always been a mercenary army with expensive toys but no real troops. Yemen hasn’t really changed that impression. So, perhaps, America needs someone else along, as much as a name in a list of a coalition press release as anything.
2) Back in the Missile of April Crisis over Syria, I got the impression that China was signalling that if Russia goes to war, China goes as well. In the case of Iran, its got to be at least a scenario to consider that Russia goes to war to defend Iran and China goes to war alongside Russia. If so, then Austrailia is already an important part of the plans of fighting against China. Maybe the Americans don’t expect an attack on Iran to start a war with Russia and China, but maybe they felt like the Austrailians should get a bit of advance notice if Americans thinks they might perhaps be at war with China in a month. The most likely place for Austrailia to get involved would be South China Sea, and perhaps Austrailia needed a little time to get ships and planes ready to fight there?
If America is going to attack Iran in a month, then I’d expect the American carrier group in Japan to start moving that direction within a week or two? Perhaps Austrailia is a Plan B to cover the region with that force gone from the forces facing China?
Sure that is a multilevel chess board.
If the US is stuck in an attack against Iran in addition of Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan and Irak.
Then it would be very good opportunity for Russia and China to grab Donbass and Taiwan.
The US could do less than nothing.
US NATO can do nothing.
And certainly not attack Iran.
@Galipoli. Remember Galipoli! You Anglo-Loyal ANZACS travelled halfway round the world for a Churchillian Turkey shoot — only you found the turkies did the shooting. If you let Uncle $cam talk you into a remake of The Charge of the Ultra-Light Brigade, you will only find that the modern Iranian eagle is an even bigger, tougher and wilier bird than Turkey.
In his reply to Trump’s outrageous, ALL CAPS tweet, Iran’s General Soleimani said “…We are near you where you can’t even imagine… While it’s still just talk, the fact of the matter is that the US is probably more vulnerable on its homeland to physical attack than cyber. Cyber damage can be fixed relatively quickly, but an asymmetrical physical attack could be utterly devastating.
E.G.: 35 – 50 guys with RPGs, or even high power rifles, can reduce the US to chaos in an instant by taking down the critical choke points in the 3 regional grids that make up the national electrical grid.
35 guys if their targeting is informed by, and coordinated to the grid’s loads and capacities for maximum effect. 50 if the operation is less well planned, and they simply target all the big ones.
50 drive-by shootings, by operatives who may well have been living in the US for years isn’t a challenge to organize. The transformers that make up those choke points are, for the most part, ancient, unguarded, stressed, and effectively irreplaceable. It takes a year to make one, and typically 3-6mos to bring it on-line. Unfortunately, the US outsourced the manufacturing of these specialized items to S. Korea and Japan. Not sure that a foreign manufacturer would accept a PO from a customer who has no way to pay when it finally gets delivered. In any case, to get a low capacity grid up that could provide power on a rotating basis would take a year or more. Too little, too late.
The USA would be catapulted back to 1910, but without that pre-electric era’s local manufacture and food supply infrastructure and logistics. More critically, it had a vastly smaller population dependent on that supply, long attuned to living in a pre-electric world. Civil society would cease to exist except in pockets, with vast lawless areas in between ruled by marauding Mad Max warbands and/or no-go areas contaminated by the meltdown of America’s 100 nuclear plants.
And so the USA would effectively cease to exist, and its foreign military assets would devolve to whatever host country they happened to be located in. Managing that pile would occupy the RoW, while the USG tried desperately to hold some semblance of nationhood together. The USM would have a large role in that, and the personnel currently stationed in Europe, Japan, Korea etc would have to hitch a ride home on whatever vessels they could to defend the pockets against marauding gangs. Or join them, thus complicating things.
Cyberwarfare best serves as a distraction from operations designed to knock out the enemy’s capacity to return to the battlefield. Playing havoc with a few electrical station control systems will create some chaos, but take out the physical grid and America ain’t coming back for a long time, if ever.
Dear Americans, do not forget that your cellars are full of 10 lethal weapons for 10 inhabitants, babies and old ladies included, to kill one another.
Good luck, America
And then there is Texas where they have lots of guns.
I think you make very good points about US vulnerability vis-à-vis it’s electrical grid.
I too read general Soleimani’s statement “…We are near you where you can’t even imagine” realised he was likely hinting at Iranian ability to hit back within the US and that probably his government have been working on plans of this nature for quite some time.
Taking down the antiquated US electrical grid is all it would take to finish them, not only as a military force but also as a country altogether.
I think too this is maybe what the Russians meant when they said they could take down America with conventional weapons alone and without mass civilian casualties.
I think you are 100% right on this.
When considering the after-effects of a general failure of electric power in USA, one may wish to first inquire as to what are the functions of the power-system?
Of course there are the usual things, water pumping, sewage treatment, street lights and signals, refrigeration, transport.
In three days the stores would be empty. Everything follows from that.
But I consider that it’s worse than it seems, as one important function of the electric grid is keeping people occupied with details and flickering lights… when power is the word, the word is Power…political power and electric power are just now coupled together in USA. If electric power goes off, then political power becomes un-caged.
Sudden shocks like that can be very disagreeable.
But on happy note, the VELA affair seems to have been proved to have been an open ocean nuke test…with Iodine 131 and more… See cafe for details… This is important as it means that there’s going to be legal trouble now for them what done it, an’ everybody knows their name.
And that ties into the “options” discussion…
It is only logical that any attack on Iran would receive the response of two nukes dispatched to a couple of locations in the occupied territory of Palestine.
Why use allopathic medicines´ approach to a problem when the source can be abolished ?
It seems to me, considering Russia and China have been preparing for war, irans has been for decades , and viewing the syria process , that iran is very well equipped already with russian harware. Fully integrated and ready to go. It would be mad to leave Iran undefended and poinless to wait till it was too late. Therefore , its likely been going on for a few years now……
Id say that a missile attack , of maybe 2000 millsiles would result in a total failure as electronic methods of defense as well as iranian and russian active missile defense would result in a similar situation to trumps ‘smart missile’ attack of syria……. 3 worthless target were hit….. 70% didn’t get through…
VT offers a mix of Total BS and actual true stuff.
So? Welll….https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/08/03/france-raw-intel-on-upcoming-israeli-action/
Crazy? Sure is.
About those “options”, some may be real…others simply imaginary. I see this https://www.rt.com/news/435049-cryptic-fireball-buzzing-greenland/ and I am not deceived…that was a real world example of this: (at about 1:51 (enjoy) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OcM23Hbs5U
Anybody that thinks “fireballs” from space aim at US bases simply by chance is dreaming.
At time of posting this, I just read all the comments, and nobody has yet mentioned that the spike in energy prices woud be a major boon to Russia. The US would be enriching its main rival
Worse still for the US, the Europeans would be pressured by energy insecurity, to more closely embrace Russia in longer term deals, or sanction busting realignment. This fundamentally undermines the key US aim to divide Europe from Russia, and sanction Russia.
To top it all, Russia has been entering deals to buy the oil of many other countries, and would benefit like no other from the bonanza in prices.
Russia and China need Iran to survive and overcome any attack, and would arguably benefit from another US military failure. But this also comes with that Russian bonanza from a massive spike in energy prices, which will persist if ME infrastructure is destroyed.
And all would be without any machination or betrayal by Russia toward Iran, but rather, all gifted by US and anglozionist ineptitude.
I state these things simply because I don’t think anybody else has mentioned it yet. It is a major consequence of an attack on Iran.
We must remember Israel’s Samson Option where they state that earth is theirs and if they can’t have it no one can and to that end they say they have nukes aimed at or already in 700 of the world’s largest cities which they will detonate.
Yah, like their invincible iron dome. /sarc.
But that particular threat, if actually made, ought be shouted from the rooftops. Let humanity see the real terrorist, and unite against it.
Saker, I know Russia’s government wants good relations with Israel.
But couldn’t they provide more Pantsirs, Buks, S-300s for a layered defense?
If Iran is rubished so close to Russia’s borders, how can that be good?
Iran itself should employ its people to build better air defenses. They’ve had so much time and it’s a foregone conclusion after Iraq and the Yinon plan.
Trump tried to assasinate Venezuela’s Maduro today with an attack of exploding drones. Maduro has survived, but seven soldiers were injured.
Assasination …. now that’s taking “meddling” with elections to a whole nother level!
https://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Venezuelas-President-Nicolas-Maduro-Survives-Drone-Attack-20180804-0013.html
Former Army psy-war officers says CIA is behind attack on Maduro.
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/08/05/570309/US-CIA-Maduro-assassination-Venezuela
Bolton the Psychopath denies the US was involved.
Of course, no one has actually claimed the US was involved. The Venezuelan government said some of it traced back to Miami, but that’s not a claim that the US government was a directly involved. At least not yet.
It is a sign of guilt to rush to deny something that no one has yet charged one with, yet.
Fascinating how Bolton had to go on TV to deny this. Of course, those appearences on Sunday morning propaganda shows are arranged at least a day or a few days in advance. I wonder if Bolton was hoping to crow over some dead bodies on TV? The only thing that happened was Bolton looking and sounding very guilty on a recorded video that can be replayed at the eventual war crimes tribunal.
Iran should have no beef with Israel…goading it and the US is a sure way to end up like Iraq/Syria/Libya
Pragmatism should rule the day
As for Iran being the only antidote to Wahhabist terrorism is laughable
They are as radical as ISIS but of a different hue
Egypt should serve as an example
Signed a peace treaty w/ Israel and zero problems since…ditto for Jordan
but the topic of who is goading whom is clearly very subjective. Not least to the self-designated eternal victims, and God’s chosen people.
So remind us again, who is threatening whom with shock & awe bombing of their nation?
Israel has snipers shooting unarmed protesters who are on the far side of their border fence.
Israel is regularly bombing in Israel.
Israel supports ISIS. They shelled into Syria regularly to defend ISIS from the Syrian military, and they accept ISIS members across the border to be treated in Israeli hospitals.
Israel is a rogue nuclear nation with hundreds of nuclear bombs and a declared threat known as the Samson Option to destroy major western cities if they feel they need to do so.
Israel regularly bombs civilians in Gaza, and twice in the last decade or so has launched horrific attacks that have killed thousands of civilians
Israel is the rogue nation that regularly invades its neighbors.
Israel is the nation that just passed an apartied law declaring a portion of the population to be 2nd class citizens.
Israel is the nation that won’t declare what it thinks where its own borders are, and frequently talks about invading and siezing “Greater Israel”.
Israel regularly imprisons people on administrative declaration, sometimes for years. Israel practices torture on those it imprisons.
Israel maintains Gaza as the world’s largenst open-air prison. Israel regularly denies key supplies needed by civilians living there. Israel has just within the last week stopped peaceful boats from delivering needed supplies and has cut off all fuel at the border.
Any sane and humane nation on earth would have a “beef” with Israel.
Ahh…..
I loved reading it!
Shaker
A very interesting and informative analysis. However, I beg to differ on several facts:
1- there will not be any attack on Iran any time soon. There is no need. The sanctions are doing the job. The real goal is to destabilize Iran. Sanctions will be increasing This month and again on November 4th. Iranian currency has lost 80% of its value past few months. There are daily protests in various cities, where people are staging protests for economic hardships, lack of water and corruption which quickly turn into protests again the regime. People are fed up with 40 years of religious dictatorship ( no, Iran is not a democratic country, but a lot more democratic than Saudi Arabia).
2- in a future war, people are not going to resist the enemy as they did during Iran – Iraq war. The revolutionary/ religious zeal is gone! Not many parents want their children to die for the regime, people are Demoralised. However, any one dreaming of invading Iran will be the biggest fool. 18 million Basiji’s (paramilitary) and the fact that foreign troops roaming one’s street and killing freely will quickly turn any anti regime average civilian into a fighter for the homeland. The regime has also prepared extensively for this scenario for decades.
3- you said Iran is strong economically. This is absolutely wrong. Decades of corruption and sanctions have left average citizen in dire straits. It is going to get much, much worse in few months when the sanctions will take full effect.
I understand why you appreciate the current regime me in Iran. It is one of very few independent countries in the world, champions Palestinian cause and is vehemently anti Empire. But please understand that this regime doesn’t care about its own people. It only cares about holding to power and advancing its own revolutionary goals. The connected few are very wealthy but the vast majority of the population is struggling to make the ends meet. People are tired and now they are becoming fearless in expressing their frustration and anger with the regime. However, since there is no unifying opposition, they do not pose a serious threat to the regime at this time.
Another thing: the Empire’s military weakness is low casualty tolerance (I believe I read this in one of your articles). This means that if Iran causes muliple significant casualties to the attackers, some people in USA will demand a nuclear attack on Iran. That will be the end of both Iran and the Empire.
Interesting post, and reminds me I must watch again, the animated film, Persepolis.
The will of the general Iranian population to resist and fight, cannot be determined in advance, but I think we can all agree, that the Empire ought be resigned for stiff resistance. Not least, a single incident is capable of galvanising and uniting the defending nation, which somewhat ties the hands of the attacker; they cannot afford that incident. And it is not simply a case of bombing purely ‘military’ targets; those targets are staffed by people’s sons, brothers, fathers.
I am thinking too of the internal Serbian politics before Zato’s criminal war of aggression in 1999. The bulk of the people disliked Milosevic and state corruption, the economy was in tatters, people were exhausted and fed up. A significant minority loathed Milosevic, and he had had to contend with several popular uprisings and general strikes. But once the NATO bombings started, the country was united. Internal politics was put aside, because people were outraged and furious at the NATO aggression.
So your post is a very valid challenge, but I moot that the Serbian experience might suggest the likely outcome.
I wonder whether you have put a foot in Iran anytime, or only rely on Twitter accounts, as happens to most of the Us blogs out there, where even those wearing an Iranian nickname and pretending being of Iranian descent but US military people, or bragging about being “experts in the Middle East”, have not ever traveled there…..
What I could witness while travelling around the country not so long ago, some 4 years ago, is nothing similar to what you paint as a scenario lating decades now, but an educated, peaceful, promising young society, willing ot meet and share with foreigners, not finding anywhere the scarcity you talk about, not even with respect to water, being the famous and beautifully unique Iranian gardens an oasis of freshness and relaxation with water running everywhere, as well as in Darband hill in the very Teheran….. Iran has full of water, since it has mountains and caudalous rivers. That fake about water comes from Israel…Anyway, problems with water are to be found in summer at every Mediterranean country in Europe, especially in this year, with higuest temperatures in decades…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wy2M52pIWI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAg9oafiKqU
If there is something I would recommend the Iranian authorities to do asap is freeing women from obligatoriety to wear hijab, something quite uncomfortable for me while travelling there in summer, not to mention living that way the whole life….An obnoxious unnecesary rule….
just a few points…..there must be very good reasons why bush and obama never gave the idea of attacking Iran a second thought….if they even had given it a first thought.
that said..the most important point is that ANY attack against Iran..would be the americans ultimate attack…they are not going to hold anything back…which means Iran MUST retaliate with everything it can.
what would be the point not to?
so….is israel ready to absorb 20,000 BOMBS..40,000?..100,000???
the american people ready to accept casualties..in the thousands…day after day?
you get the point…….and while i dont expect russia to do much…….who knows what will be unleashed in the middle east…and beyond….are there sleeper cells in this country….waiting to take out america’s electrical grid?
how about a few nuclear power plants start melting down??
no…i see…war against Iran…encompassing the entire planet…..but…will that stop it from happening?
i doubt it…because i doubt anyone believes my list of consequences…..
The only point that matters is to take the war to Israel, the actual decision maker.
In the UK, during the extensive and pervasive IRA bombings, the government message was ‘Keep calm and carry on; they will never cow us!’
Until of course, the IRA started bombing the City of London (the financial district), the real seat of UK power…. where there was no ‘we will never be cowed,’ but rather, there was a prompt UK waving of the white flag, leading to the Good Friday agreements, and the legitimisation of Sinn Fein into UK politics.
That’s how I remember it, I stand to be corrected. But my message stands; ignore the mercenary and the golem, but go straight for the puppet-master. Iran should know this already.
And in response to my own post, the IRA had many years earlier, bombed the Tory party conference, in Brighton I think, where the ostensible rulers of the country, suffered severe injuries among themselves and their spouses in some cases, and still the stiff upper lip.
It was only when the City of London (the financial district mini-state, with its own Mayor and police force) came under attack, that the white flag was suddenly found.
It’s all about identifying the jugular, and true decision makers.
Any good books on the subject ?
Both Iran and Yemen after initial attack would be poor starving .Air superiority would lies with Zionist Anglo Saudi ZAS . However Yemen has managed to shut down oil transport through Red Sea despite loss of air superiority. The Iranian proxy war in Yemen has well prepared ti to stop all shipping in the Strait. The Iranian missile and drone systems are vastly superior to Yemen. Yes a ZAS attack would devastate Iran infrastructure. Iran support of Yemen is premised on proving that even without air superiority Yemen or Iran can devastate trade infrastructure of attacking parties. With ground control Iran could go nuclear within a year to three. This means that Iran long range attacks could go nuclear with a few years as ground war dragged on as it did in Yemen. Many of Iranians are unemployed eaters . Killing them would mean less mouths to feed and central control of food will keep Iranians in power with fewer mouths to feed . Nuking Iranian cities would help Iran go nuclear and reduce the food obligations of the government. If someone hits a hornets nest but does not kill all the hornets the remaining hornets are upset and look for someone to sting. The success of Houthi are proof of the foolishness of attack against Iran. If ZAS can not defeat Houthi how shall they defeat Iran?
“unemployed eaters” ….now there is a truly evil phrase.
I was anticipating reading how diesel and mini subs refuel under a total-infrastructure-bombardment situation,
Did I miss this in the article?
Or am I being a submarine in the desert?
the USA is in a similar position in the middle east as was the ottomans in the WW1 and post WW1 world.
the ottomans then as the usa empire is now over extended, bankrupt and run by mediocre tending toward outright incompetents in important political and policy making positions. this is not the recipe now as was back in 1922 to hold onto power and geopolitical gains accrued in previous decades/centuries.
the world has changed.
the american empire knows if/when they are pushed out of the middle east which is incrementally happening now they will never be able to get back… in a substantive way.
israel is irrelevant apart from bloviating press releases the MSM writes up as if they were ”facts”.
they grow weaker with each passing year and simply LACK any political traction in the emerging eur-asian world russia and china are creating.
Have you forgotten Russia, Iran’s ally?
http://realiran.org/meet-irans-female-ninja-army/
Seems like a joke, but it really isn’t…
Trump is weak and easily manipulated.
Neocons like to blame jewish malevolence on gentile incompetence. We’ve seen this 1000 times already.
Today is the day to remember and memorialize Hiroshima Day.
Today is of course the 73rd anniversary of the day in 1945 on which the United States of America became the only nation ever to use a nuclear weapon on another nation. Today is the day to remember an infamous war crime which killed tens of thousands of civilians and which destroyed a city.
The day we became Death, the destroyer of worlds.
So, perhaps a moment of rememberence for the thousands who died on this day, as well as the many other thousands who died slow, painful deaths from exposure to too much radiation. Perhaps a day to try to do something to make sure that “never again” applies to the use of nuclear weapons.
One thing that you didn’t mention was that an all out attack on Iran will be incredibly beneficial to Russia for obvious reasons (oil price and rebuilding Iran’s infrastructure). So the neocons will drastically weaken Iran short term but will vastly increase Russia’s power at the expense of the US. In other words the neocons will weaken one enemy short term but strengthen their equally other hated enemy Russia. Not a very smart move.
Oh one more thing. The still thousands of US troops in Iraq will have a very large target on them by the majority shias.
In a case of an attack by the Empire on Iran, all the Resistance has to do is target Israels nuclear infrastructure with enough missiles. After the catastrophic consequences there will be no will to go to war in israel left at all.
Iran can hit Dimona
I think Margolis would do better to look at past US aggressions and military adventures and consider the outcomes. How did they work out for the US?
Afghanistan, 2001.
17 years so far and counting. How has that gone?
Against a group of ragtag guerrillas. No air force whatever, no heavy weapons. Just brave men prepared to go on fighting indefinitely to evict any armed foreigners from their country.
They control much of the country. They will not be defeated by military means.
Iraq, 2003.
A very weak impoverished country with no air force or navy and no real army.
15 years and US forces are still there. One war has morphed into another.
Libya, 2011.
Very weak armed forces.
“We will be with you as you rebuild your democracy.” How has that worked out?
The cost to the US has been astronomical in all areas.
Military, economic, financial, political, diplomatic. It has accelerated US decline to an as yet unknown degree. It has been necessary to commit its armed forces for the best part of 20 years at a cost of $6-7 trillion to itself so far, with no end in sight. The political cost in terms of its reputation and the credibility of the US regime with its own people may in some ways have been even greater. None of its declared objectives have been achieved whatsoever.
Iran is a far more serious proposition than any of the above in terms of size, population, resources, geography, and, probably, determination to fight. It has a number of weaknesses that have been highlighted, but it is well aware of these and has done what it can to address them., Nobody knows what’s going to happen till it happens, but I would suggest a number of things that may prove to be correct.
1. Russia and China will do little to assist Iran directly. They never have before. They will sit on the side lines and see what happens (political and diplomatic rhetoric aside.)
2. US policy is controlled by Israel and domestic Zionist organisations. From their point of view, the wars in Iraq and Libya have been tremendously successful, destroying countries opposed to Zionist expansion. They would welcome the same result with regard to Iran, regardless of the costs to the US.
3. Outcomes are almost certain to be unpredictable, and not confined to targets inside Iran selected for air and missile attack. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf dictatorships are likely to be directly involved, with potentially far reaching consequences for all of them, with hostilities extending over many years. A likely result would be an extended war over a huge geographical area with obvious threats to the survival of many existing regimes in the area.
4. Such a conflict would almost certainly entail heavy loss of life and vast destruction.
5. The conflict and instability would affect some of the largest energy producers on the planet, Iran itself, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and others. The effect on the world economy could be dire and long lasting.
6. Hostilities might feature extreme brutality, with extensive use of suicide attacks on land, sea and air.
7. It should be possible for Iran to close the Straits of Hormuz if it wishes to. This is a long, rugged coastline, dominating a narrow stretch of water. It forms something of a shooting gallery for any ships which attempt to transit the area. An extensive sea, air and land campaign would be required to clear the straits, including an invasion and occupation of Iran’s southern coast. There would be a requirement to commit a large number of ground troops in Iran itself.
8. In the aftermath of any conflict, Iran is likely to take the decision to arm itself with nuclear weapons. If it so chose, it could deploy radiological dirty bombs on a large scale even without developing actual nuclear warheads.
I would suggest that the war in Lebanon in 2006 between US equipped Israel and Iranian equipped Hezbollah may provide something of a template for an future US attack on Iran, though of course this would be on a vastly greater scale. Israel enjoyed a huge military superiority, including complete command of the air and sea. 75,000 Israeli personnel with 600 tanks were ultimately committed against 4,000 Hezbollah fighters with no armour or artillery. Yet Israel achieved none of its objectives and was ultimately forced to commit large ground forces in an unsuccessful operation. It seems reasonable to scale up these outcomes in assessing the likely results of an attack on Iran.
Bad News for Trump tonight.
A Republican won a special election for the US House by 50.2 to 49.8.
The reason that this is bad news, is that this had been a safe Republican seat for a long time. Powerful Republican Congressman, Presidential Candidate, and current Governor of Ohio John Kasich had held this seat. Since the last adjustments of district lines, the Republican’s had won the seat with over 65% .
Trump was down 15% over previous years.
If that trend continues, he’s gonna get slaughtered in the fall elections. Republicans will lose their majorities in the House and the Senate. A sea change of 15% of the vote flips a lot of districts over to the Democrats.
For me, I’m disgusted with both parties, and will likely vote Libertarian. But its an interesting note that 3 months before the elections Trump seems in big trouble. He might hold on to enough to avoid impeachment. But he’ll be faced with a hostile congress that will investigate everything done in the executive branch. Considering that large parts of the government don’t want to obey his orders, about all Trump will be left in charge of will be his Twitter account, maybe.
Coming to this late but just want to add:
the Israelis and Israeli-run USA never simply concentrate on military targets. A new US (neocon) specialty and a shared US-Israeli war aim is to also destroy cultural and World Heritage sites out of sheer spite – since neither country has ever produced anything comparable; and Israel, especially, is totally incapable of producing anything comparable. (Israel never has, throughout its entire history, and never will.) Thus the destruction of world cultural patrimony gives special pleasure to Zionists: not only is the world emptied of such testimonies to human achievement and the targeted country’s population’s cultural memory and pride in its history destroyed over time, but allows the Israelis to ‘trademark’ these sites with their signature devastation. So the theory goes, according to Kissinger’s 1974 statement on the Greeks – whether an apocryphal statement or not it has been repeatedly proved correct in application. Think Ur, Palmyra…just to start. Remember the pre-planned mass theft from Baghdad’s incomparable museum on Day 1 of Shock’n’Awe.
What Henry Kissinger said about Greece in 1974:
“The Greek people are anarchic and difficult to tame. For this reason we must strike deep into their cultural roots: Perhaps then we can force them to conform. I mean, of course, to strike at their language, their religion, their cultural and historical reserves, so that we can neutralize their ability to develop, to distinguish themselves, or to prevail; thereby removing them as an obstacle to our strategically vital plans in the Balkans, the Mediterranean, and the Middle East.”
(As reported in the popular Greek magazine, Oikonomikos Tachydromos on 14 Aug. l997, Henry Kissinger, while addressing a group of Washington, D.C. businessmen in Sept.1974)
“According to one Russian source ” – that suorce is TOPWAR and there is a widespread opinion ( which i share ) that it is a jewish run website