THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA

An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume X, Issue # 203, August 17, 2008
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
Home Page   Main Menu   Recent Articles   Site Map   Website Index   Issues & Controversies
  Cyberland University   Political Science, Philosophy, & History: Lectures   U.S. Constitution
  American Constitutional Law   American Constitutional System   American Political System
  Conservatism, Liberalism, & Radicalism   How America Goes to War
  World War IV: Islamist Terror War Against the U.S.A. & the West

THE IRAN SCENARIOS
By Alan Caruba

ISRAEL & IRAN:  WILL ISRAEL TAKE MILITARY ACTION AGAINST IRANIAN FACILITIES REFINING FISSIONABLE MATERIALS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS? WHAT WOULD BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF SUCH ACTION? A CONSIDERATION OF THE DIFFERENT POSSIBLE SCENARIOS
FULL STORY:   These days you can read as many different scenarios regarding the likelihood that Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities as there are experts putting them forth. History, past and present, may have already written the script.

In a recent interview with Der Spiegel, Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert asked, “Why do you need to enrich uranium if you don’t have the facilities that can make use of this uranium for civilian purposes?” Iran does have such plants, but both have been in various stages of construction and delay since 1992 and neither has ever produced a watt of electricity.

The August, 2008, edition of Energy Tribune takes on the question of an Israeli military action against Iranian facilities refining fissionable materials for the development of nuclear weapons. John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, is quoted saying that Israel has “a window” in which to conduct the strike. It would be between “the day after the November 4 U.S. election and closes with the swearing-in of George W. Bush’s successor on January 20, 2009.”

On August 10, 2008, the Jerusalem Post quoted U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice saying:

    “We don’t say yes or no to Israeli military operations. Israel is a sovereign country.”

The U.S. election in November, 2008, could have a tremendous effect on whether Israel acts or not. Senator John McCain's support of Israel is not in doubt. An Obama administration would be filled with officials whose antipathy to Israel is well known.

Iran’s Islamic Revolution began in 1979, when the revolutionists took U.S. diplomats hostage and held them for 444 days. They were returned the same day Ronald Wilson Reagan was sworn into office. When Saddam Hussein declared war on Iran in 1980, he had the understandable backing of the United States, but the war ground to a stalemate in 1988, after costing Iraq and Iran hundreds of thousands of casualties.

The experience left Iran’s leaders in a cautious mood. Militarily, Iran has remained a provocateur, not an active belligerent. The Iranians have preferred to fight proxy wars with Israel via their support for Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, and Hamas, based in Gaza. Even their involvement in Iraq has been through proxies. There would appear to be limits to the courage of the Mullahs that rule Iran with an iron hand.

Militarily, Iran would prove to be an extremely difficult nation to invade or conquer. Thus, an Israeli strike would be limited to destroying or at least significantly delaying Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. At issue is when Iran would be capable of manufacturing and delivering its own nukes.

The next question to be answered is what benefit Iran’s leaders would perceive in their launching a nuclear attack on Israel? Any use of nuclear weapons by any nation would come with a huge price. Iran is already a pariah nation, despite its oil.

Since 1979, the Iran government has deemed the U.S.A. the Big Satan and Israel the Little Satan. When people spend nearly thirty years shouting “Death to America” and “Death to Israel,” history teaches that it is folly to ignore them or to suggest reasons to believe that it’s just bluster.

Writing in the August issue of Energy Tribune, Michael J. Economides and Peter C. Glover bluntly say:

    “We see no reason to change our opinion that an Israeli or Western air-strike is the only realistic way to prevent Iran’s ideologically-driven extremist regime.”

These two experts on energy and geopolitics estimate that $55.00 of the price per barrel of imported oil represents “geopolitical tensions, fear, and resulting speculation.” Put another way, the United States of America is sending billions to oil-producing Middle Eastern nations (and other oil producing nations) as the price we pay for the threat that Iran is presumed to pose. That threat would escalate, if it gained nuclear weapons.

History since the end of World War II, however, offers another scenario. Despite the nuclear capability of the former Soviet Union and later Red China, the U.S.A. and other nations preferred a patient containment policy which reduced the potential of a major war. As we are witnessing in Georgia (Gruzia), the Russian quest for power is never static and always subject to change.

An Israeli attack, if followed by the collapse of the Iranian regime, would likely result in a relatively brief disruption in the flow of oil from the Middle East. The opening of the Strait of Harmuz would become an international priority, but the U.S.A. would not likely to be seriously affected, since it imports much of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Central and South America. The disruption in the flow of Middle Eastern oil would surely increase the growing demands for the U.S. Congress to open up to oil drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) in Alaska and to authorize off-shore oil exploration under the Atlantic and Pacific continental shelves of North America.

Israel put an end to Saddam Hussein’s ambitions when it destroyed the Osirak reactor in 1981, and reduced the Syrian threat in destroying a Syrian nuclear facility in September, 2007. However, Olmert will be gone as Israel’s Prime Minister by the end of September, 2008.

A new government, even one led by Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu, is not likely to take on the huge risks involved in an attack on Iran without explicit reassurances of U.S. approval and possible involvement. The problem for Israel is that such an attack would trigger war by a heavily rearmed Hezbollah based in Lebanon and a Gaza-based Hamas.

The irony is that all of Iran’s Arab neighbors would love to see Iran removed as an obstacle to peace in the region. Moreover, Iran represents Shiite Islam, whereas other Muslim nations, with the exception of Iraq, are parts of the majority Sunni sect. No love loss there.

Speculation will exist as long as the Ayatollahs and the crazed Mamoud Amadinejad remain in power. In the end, like the sudden invasion of Georgia (Gruzia), the issue will be resolved by action, not talk.


LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran

Israel & the Arabs -- The Israeli-Arab Conflict

American Foreign Policy -- The Middle East

Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three    Page Two    Page One

International Politics & World Disorder:
War & Peace in the Real World

   Page Two    Page One

Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.

Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization

Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies

U.S. National Security Strategy



Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly commentary, "Warning Signs," posted on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center, which is located at www.anxietycenter.com.

Caruba has a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com.

Caruba’s new book, Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy, has been published by Merril Press.


© Alan Caruba 2008


Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com




Return to Top of Page

Go to the WEBSITE INDEX

Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies


Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles


Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume X, 2008


Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights


Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage

CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION




LINKS TO PARTICULAR ISSUES & SUBJECT MATTER CATEGORIES
TREATED IN THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, U.S.A.:

Africa: Black Africa * Africa: North Africa * American Government 1
American Government 2 * American Government 3 * American Government 4
American Government 5 * American Politics * Anglosphere * Arabs
Arms Control & WMD * Aztlan Separatists * Big Government
Black Africa * Bureaucracy * Canada * China * Civil Liberties * Communism
Congress, U.S. * Conservative Groups * Conservative vs. Liberal
Constitutional Law * Counterterrorism * Criminal Justice * Disloyalty * Economy
Education * Elections, U.S. * Eminent Domain * Energy & Environment
English-Speaking World * Ethnicity & Race * Europe * Europe: Jews
Family Values * Far East * Fiscal Policy, U.S. * Foreign Aid, U.S. * Foreign Policy, U.S.
France * Hispanic Separatism * Hispanic Treason * Human Health * Immigration
Infrastructure, U.S. * Intelligence, U.S. * Iran * Iraq * Islamic North Africa
Islamic Threat * Islamism * Israeli vs. Arabs * Jews & Anti-Semitism
Jihad & Jihadism * Jihad Manifesto I * Jihad Manifesto II * Judges, U.S. Federal
Judicial Appointments * Judiciary, American * Latin America * Latino Separatism
Latino Treason * Lebanon * Leftists/Liberals * Legal Issues
Local Government, U.S. * Marriage & Family * Media Political Bias
Middle East: Arabs * Middle East: Iran * Middle East: Iraq * Middle East: Israel
Middle East: Lebanon * Middle East: Syria * Middle East: Tunisia
Middle East: Turkey * Militant Islam * Military Defense * Military Justice
Military Weaponry * Modern Welfare State * Morality & Decency
National Identity * National Security * Natural Resources * News Media Bias
North Africa * Patriot Act, USA * Patriotism * Political Culture * Political Ideologies
Political Parties * Political Philosophy * Politics, American * Presidency, U.S.
Private Property * Property Rights * Public Assistance * Radical Islam
Religion & America * Rogue States & WMD * Russia * Science & Ethics
Sedition & Treason * Senate, U.S. * Social Welfare Policy * South Africa
State Government, U.S. * Subsaharan Africa * Subversion * Syria * Terrorism 1
Terrorism 2 * Treason & Sedition * Tunisia * Turkey * Ukraine
UnAmerican Activity * UN & Its Agencies * USA Patriot Act * U.S. Foreign Aid
U.S. Infrastructure * U.S. Intelligence * U.S. Senate * War & Peace
Welfare Policy * WMD & Arms Control


This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics, civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.



POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS

POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE

Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.

Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs, International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests, Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy

INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z




THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA

An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis

Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor

Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic, Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues


Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity