Concerns About Military Action Against Iran
Ref: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm
In the May 1, 2006 issue of The Cepia Club Strategy Gazette, the feature article in that newsletter (our inaugural issue) stated an either/or propostion in addressing Iran's nuclear capability R D. (http://www.cepiaclub.com/Stratgaz/Gazette1a1.htm ). The stance the article took was Iran should have basically two choices: normalize its relations with the United States, or face military action to stop it from developing such capability. It is still our belief that any such capability even in a peaceful context gives Iran the option to weaponize its research. It is also still our belief that Iran is a revisionist state that seeks to upset international order and assert dominance in the Persian Gulf. As a radical state with a history of terrorism, the West under the guise of NATO can never let Iran develop nuclear weapons. The risks of Iran being an irresponsible and irrational nuclear power are too great, based on Iran's international behavior.
The context of "normalized" relations with the United States was stated in our newsletter as requiring a US initiative: a security and cooperation conference for the Indian Ocean Area involving all the countries in Africa and Asia surrounding the Indian Ocean, and to include the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council and several others with dominant economic interests in regional peace, for example Japan. The idea of the Indian Ocean Area Conference on Security and Cooperation was further refined in Vol. 1, No. 4 (http://www.cepiaclub.com/Stratgaz/Gazette1a4.htm) of the Strategy Gazette in the article "Libertarian Internationalism." Only the US can lead such an effort to bring stability and peace to this most volatile region of the globe.
In Vol. 1, No. 1, The Cepia Club, as mentioned, put forth the idea that if there is to be military action against Iran, it should be directed at crippling Iran's oil industry--temporarily and selectively with strikes at storage and transport choke points and to involve a tight blockade. It is still believed by the Club that such a campaign would have similar effects as the attacks on Germany's oil industries in World War II: It would immediately leave Iran with no military option to resist conventionally or interfere with US operations in Iraq. The accompanying effect of such targeted strikes on Iran's oil choke points is that it will weaken Iran's government and most likely lead to the overthrow of Iran's theocratic system with a persistent Allied effort over the course of 4-6 months. The people would vote with their cars and light bulbs. We have no doubt that this course of action would have more permanent effect on changing Iran's behavior by destroying the government's credibilty than attacking Iran's nuclear facilities directly.
Such a plan to attack Iran's oil-based economy might have made a difference in the spring and summer of 2006. There would have been an element of surprise. Now, however, it looks increasingly certain that there will be military air strikes on Iran, perhaps by June of 2007. Corporate interest will not allow the US and its allies to in anyway damage Iran's oil facilities for fear of economic consequences with the international oil markets being disrupted. From the available public information on such sites as www.globalsecurity.org (see reference link above), the air strikes will target Iran's nuclear research and development facilities. As we implied in May 2006, such targets are "hardened," being underground. There is also the uncertainty of destroying them completely without the use of tactical, low-yeild nuclear weapons. And there is the even greater risk that intelligence has not identified all the possible, even the most important, facilities. All of these risk, when calculated, especially in crossing a nuclear threshold, make for disaster for the entire world.
Furthermore, in even contemplating air strikes at this stage, Iran is much more prepared, inside its own country with active and passive measures of military and civil defense, but it has no doubt prepared a world-wide network of terrorist cells and agents to unleash on its enemies. We can not be so gullible as to think that Iran has not infiltrated the United States with such terror weapons and personnel. (This brings the importance of southern US border security in clearer focus).
The Cepia Club stands by its statements in May 2006. Now, the time for that passed, mostly due to the Israel-Lebanon War in July-August 2006. The only hope for solving this issue is the alternative method we have set forth: Libertarian Internationalism as a new world-wide political paradigm. The LI proposal is inherent in the idea of an Indian Ocean Security and Cooperation Conference. Time is running out for the world before insanity pushed by events out of control bring the world to the brink of a true catastrophe of near holocaust proportions.
In the May 1, 2006 issue of The Cepia Club Strategy Gazette, the feature article in that newsletter (our inaugural issue) stated an either/or propostion in addressing Iran's nuclear capability R D. (http://www.cepiaclub.com/Stratgaz/Gazette1a1.htm ). The stance the article took was Iran should have basically two choices: normalize its relations with the United States, or face military action to stop it from developing such capability. It is still our belief that any such capability even in a peaceful context gives Iran the option to weaponize its research. It is also still our belief that Iran is a revisionist state that seeks to upset international order and assert dominance in the Persian Gulf. As a radical state with a history of terrorism, the West under the guise of NATO can never let Iran develop nuclear weapons. The risks of Iran being an irresponsible and irrational nuclear power are too great, based on Iran's international behavior.
The context of "normalized" relations with the United States was stated in our newsletter as requiring a US initiative: a security and cooperation conference for the Indian Ocean Area involving all the countries in Africa and Asia surrounding the Indian Ocean, and to include the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council and several others with dominant economic interests in regional peace, for example Japan. The idea of the Indian Ocean Area Conference on Security and Cooperation was further refined in Vol. 1, No. 4 (http://www.cepiaclub.com/Stratgaz/Gazette1a4.htm) of the Strategy Gazette in the article "Libertarian Internationalism." Only the US can lead such an effort to bring stability and peace to this most volatile region of the globe.
In Vol. 1, No. 1, The Cepia Club, as mentioned, put forth the idea that if there is to be military action against Iran, it should be directed at crippling Iran's oil industry--temporarily and selectively with strikes at storage and transport choke points and to involve a tight blockade. It is still believed by the Club that such a campaign would have similar effects as the attacks on Germany's oil industries in World War II: It would immediately leave Iran with no military option to resist conventionally or interfere with US operations in Iraq. The accompanying effect of such targeted strikes on Iran's oil choke points is that it will weaken Iran's government and most likely lead to the overthrow of Iran's theocratic system with a persistent Allied effort over the course of 4-6 months. The people would vote with their cars and light bulbs. We have no doubt that this course of action would have more permanent effect on changing Iran's behavior by destroying the government's credibilty than attacking Iran's nuclear facilities directly.
Such a plan to attack Iran's oil-based economy might have made a difference in the spring and summer of 2006. There would have been an element of surprise. Now, however, it looks increasingly certain that there will be military air strikes on Iran, perhaps by June of 2007. Corporate interest will not allow the US and its allies to in anyway damage Iran's oil facilities for fear of economic consequences with the international oil markets being disrupted. From the available public information on such sites as www.globalsecurity.org (see reference link above), the air strikes will target Iran's nuclear research and development facilities. As we implied in May 2006, such targets are "hardened," being underground. There is also the uncertainty of destroying them completely without the use of tactical, low-yeild nuclear weapons. And there is the even greater risk that intelligence has not identified all the possible, even the most important, facilities. All of these risk, when calculated, especially in crossing a nuclear threshold, make for disaster for the entire world.
Furthermore, in even contemplating air strikes at this stage, Iran is much more prepared, inside its own country with active and passive measures of military and civil defense, but it has no doubt prepared a world-wide network of terrorist cells and agents to unleash on its enemies. We can not be so gullible as to think that Iran has not infiltrated the United States with such terror weapons and personnel. (This brings the importance of southern US border security in clearer focus).
The Cepia Club stands by its statements in May 2006. Now, the time for that passed, mostly due to the Israel-Lebanon War in July-August 2006. The only hope for solving this issue is the alternative method we have set forth: Libertarian Internationalism as a new world-wide political paradigm. The LI proposal is inherent in the idea of an Indian Ocean Security and Cooperation Conference. Time is running out for the world before insanity pushed by events out of control bring the world to the brink of a true catastrophe of near holocaust proportions.
powered by performancing firefox
posted by Scipio Cepicanus @ 2:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home