Article

2003-10-19 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by .com 2003-10-19 12:43:05 AM|| || Front Page|| [11130 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 A straight forward and even analysis. Syria is the next logical target. Iran has chosen Syria as it's focus of force projection. Remove Syria, and we free up Israel's northern border, and almost completely isolate Iran. And given recent events, we have every reason to . perceive Syria as the beligerent it truly is. Also, take out Syria, you get Lebanon as a two-fer. Do it!!!!

Posted by Rex Mundi 2003-10-19 1:45:48 AM|| 2003-10-19 1:45:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Just a brain-blip while reading this, and with my mind on other-but-related things:

It seems to me that the US response to places like Syria and Iran will at some point happen, but there's perhaps some measure of hesitation until "the time is right."

I imagine that the US command would like to confront a Syria or Iran in the same way that it confronted Iraq during this war - with good psyops, warning the cannon-fodder away by pointing out the "freedom option" versus fighting for a tyranny that's dead in either case.

Once Iraq has excercised its first democratic election, the strength of the US position there increases geometrically - and calls against troops fighting for "this mullah or that tyrant" in psyops softening-up are made significantly more powerful.

I wonder whether I'm making any strategic sense or not :)

-Vic

Posted by Vic 2003-10-19 1:50:42 AM|| 2003-10-19 1:50:42 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Rex Mundi,

Why go through the trouble of isolating Iran. Let's just take them out and the sooner the better. I have a feeling they are closer to nukes than we know considering these previously unknown facilities keep popping up. The last thing we need is a surprise coming from Iran Pakistani style.

Posted by Damn_Proud_American 2003-10-19 2:50:26 AM|| 2003-10-19 2:50:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 My 2.5 cents:

Fair and accurate analysis - especially regards the parts I don't particulary want to hear. Truth just is - and this rings true.

Syria or Iran: I choose Iran - for 3 reasons:

1) Time. We don't have much time to stop the Black Hats before they can truly claim to have deliverable nukes. They have far too much money and willing mercenary asshat help - Paki, Russki, NorK, and probably several Euro campanies below the state level. France, for instance, is making all the wrong noises - again (yesterday's De Villepin interview) - and it makes me wonder, again.

2) Funding. Money. Mullah Moolahâ¢. Iran and Saudi Arabia are the primary funding sources for all forms of terror and Islamofascism - even if often at cross-purposes. As we've seen with AlQ - if you cut off the cash, it's damned hard to pull off attacks, not that they won't manage it eventually. But certainly not as frequently or easily as with the big bucks - it takes a helluvalot of fertilizer to equal a few Kg of Semtex and the logistics are a shitload harder to manage, for example. Also, the majority of the Paleo assholes don't give 2 shits about the so-called Palestinian people. Hamas, Hezbollah, IzJihad, AlAqsa, (insert flavor of the week), and especially ARAFAT AND THE ENTIRE PAL AUTHORITY ZOO of sycophants are mercenary motherfuckers. Period. Stop the cash and you'll find a reduction in ~~fighters~~ cannon fodder, in nitwits willing to blow themselves up, and Pal support - no more bonus checks for those who send their children off to be splodeydopes. Not to mention fewer and poorer arms and munitions. Taking Iran out of the equation will have visible and significant results everywhere. Cut off Mullah Moolahâ¢ and SyrLeb is a pussy, as the same equation exists there regards mercs. I believe you can do what you will with it after cutting off the cash.

3) The Iranian population will provide 99% of the "boots on the ground" needed if we will tip the Mullacracy over and provide targeted support. Not to try to get detail-deep into specifics (cuz I'm not qualified to do so), but in an overview of possibilities I believe that Iran is ripe for a decapitation: of the Rev Guard, the Rev Council, and at least the top couple of layers of Black Hats. The way I see it, it will take Air Force, SpecOps, limited Army Air, and Navy-delivered standoff weapons such as TLAMs. I believe that if the CIA (remember Woolsey's recent comments regards Iran) has the contacts to organize and coordinate the remaining leaders of the abortive anti-Mullah revolution, then a remote-control decap strike can work. Think about SpecOps arming the citizenry from strategic captures, AF & Army Air assets both giving total air superiority and taking out pro-Mullah forces which move to engage the new base occupiers. With air supporting them, they can deny a LOT of materiel as well as fixed defensive postions from the Mullahs, providing SpecOps can deliver. You know the Pentagon has some plans available that follow this line of thought - unless I'm all wet. Barring that, which is certainly a possibility, I am worried that the TLAM, et al, stocks have not yet been replenished. I have seen what the US forces can do with proper support from the Prez, so I believe they can handle this. Puhleeze tell me where and how this view is wrong if you have contradictory facts. SpecOps and weapons stocks are, I believe, the key. Obviously the AF and Naval assets are currently more or less available. If this pans out, we supply the new No-Shit Democratic Republic of Iran with arms material, intelligence, and air support until they are producing the cash to buy it and train non-Mullah forces.

Posted by .com 2003-10-19 4:09:32 AM|| 2003-10-19 4:09:32 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Doh!

4) AlQ lives and operates from there - with Mullah support and funding. Obviously, this puts us squarely on-track to knock out more terror-enabling cash to Asia groups, too, such as JI - since it has been established that they get funding from the AlQ asshats.

Iran. It's a win-win-win-win call - if it can be pulled off soon. Very soon.

Posted by .com 2003-10-19 4:15:22 AM|| 2003-10-19 4:15:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Doh-II!

5) Stop the Mullahs in their efforts to destabilize Iraq by funding asshats of all flavors - especially Al Sadr and his insane ilk.

That's a 5-win call... at least. I'm sure you smart folks will come up with more. Sorry for multiple hits.

Posted by .com 2003-10-19 4:54:41 AM|| 2003-10-19 4:54:41 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Friedman misses one of the key reasons for the Iraq operation: to acquire the human assets needed to prosecute the campaign against terror. The new Iraqi Army, police and intelligence services, now under American direction, represent a quantum leap in US capability. It would have taken us decades to train an equivalent number of Americans, pitch perfect in language and indisguishable from the locals. The US has also sunk its roots deep into the Shi'a and the Kurds. The countries in the region used to fear Iraq under Saddam Hussein; they will have more reason to fear an Iraq backed by US military capability.

Both the Syrians and Iranians really only had one shot to neutralize the US: 'guerilla war'. But by Friedman's own estimate, this has failed. The big question is what the US, having absored their worst blow, is going to dish out in return. It is unlikely to be a conventional military campaign; the blow will far more likely leapfrog over the conventional defenses of the Syrian and Iranian states and go straight for their leaders. A giant putsch, if you will. Recently, the US military has not fought any two successive campaigns in the same way. Whatever happens won't be expected.

Posted by wretchard 2003-10-19 7:13:21 AM|| [www.belmontclub.blogspot.com] 2003-10-19 7:13:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Actually, there's a LOT missing from this analysis. There's far too much I don't know about what's going on in Iraq to make all the corrections, but a few quick thoughts:

1. We now have 24-hour control of approximately 85% of Iraq. We have a nutcase in Najef stirring up trouble there and in Baghdad, but not enough to really destabilize the area. We have an influx of foreign fighters entering Iraq, and getting whacked by US and the new Iraqi forces. The Iraqis are getting valuable experience, under supervision of their trainers, in handling the situation, and they're being successful, which builds their morale. Both the Iraqis and the US Administration have said we'll be in Iraq "for quite a while". From all this, I see (a) the US gaining bases in Iraq that can be used for attacks against "hostile elements in the area", meaning Syria, Iran, and whatever other group of hotheaded idiots that might pop up; (b) the establishment of an open, honest, mostly-democratic government in the Middle East, one that provides the necessities to its people, and one friendly to the United States; and (c) destabilization of the dictatorships and "kingdoms" (actually nothing more than large tribal groups) in the area. This will, by its very nature, undermine the powers of the turbantops, and increase their isolation from the people.

The United States has already done one of its most effective acts against the Syrian government - cut off the oil. That, alone, will make any Syrian government action against the United States forces, or Isreal, virtually impossible. Our actions in Iraq have also loosened the turbantop's hold on the people of Jordan. The Saudis know we know they're complicit in funding most of the Jihadi activities anywhere, and are sweating bullets, afraid of US intervention in Soodiland. Even the Egyptians and the Pakistanis are beginning to understand that a US force in Iraq will change the entire nature of the Middle East, and are acting accordingly. We will soon also have a strategic base to monitor Russia's continuing slow slide back into totalitarianism.

Add the final coup de grace - our actions are upsetting France and Germany, and playing havoc with the French economy. Chirac knows his days are numbered: he cannot continue to have any power after Iraq tells him to shove his multi-billion dollar lein, and to return the illegal bank accounts of Saddam and associates. France's economic implosion will be the final straw for a single European government, and return the EU to a loose association of states working together to ease tariff and visa restrictions. The Euro may survive, but the European Union will be significantly changed.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-10-19 10:20:46 AM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2003-10-19 10:20:46 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 I don't understand why Americans are surprised with the need to readjust or tune a strategy. It happens in football every weekend at halftime.

Iran would be a target to strike against weapons poliferation. Syria/Lebanon would be a strike to end the out of control Palestinian situation.

Posted by Super Hose 2003-10-19 1:11:29 PM|| 2003-10-19 1:11:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Fair Use - Consider this article an arbitrary sample of the quality analysis you can receive from StratFor. Click the title to go to their site and see for yourself the breadth of content. Multiple levels of subscription are available

LOL.... Borderline . Tell me about the Encyclopedia Britannica? Is it any good?

Posted by Shipman 2003-10-19 1:20:14 PM|| 2003-10-19 1:20:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 I aims ta please... I thunk it was good enough for discussion and all that rot - as far as it went... methinks OP wanted more! ;-)

Re: Encyclopedia Britannica
Honest / Open question? Assuming so: I have no experience with it mineownself.

Posted by .com 2003-10-19 1:35:53 PM|| 2003-10-19 1:35:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Whoa - the war in Iraq isn't going well?

Earth to Stratfor -- The war in Iraq ENDED in March. What we have here is a turbulent POST-WAR situation. And you think that isn't going well? Check out these articles from Life Magazine that ran in 1946!

http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page01.htm
http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page02.htm

Posted by Norman Rogers 2003-10-19 6:52:27 PM|| 2003-10-19 6:52:27 PM|| Front Page Top

09:41 B
01:11 Anonymous
00:26 Gasse Katze
00:26 Gasse Katze
00:00 Bomb-a-rama
23:31 Eddie Blake
23:15 R. McLeod
23:08 R. McLeod
23:01 NotMikeMoore
22:36 NotMikeMoore
22:21 NotMikeMoore
21:56 Paul Moloney
21:16 B
20:54 B
20:51 Steve White
20:44 Mike Kozlowski
20:38 B
20:34 Super Hose
20:29 Super Hose
20:24 Super Hose
20:19 Super Hose
20:14 Super Hose
19:48 Charles
19:46 Charles