Sunday, June 26, 2005

Ready The Wagons! Tehran Ho!

More or less right on schedule, BushCo. is setting the stage for a future invasion of Iran.

First, is Rumsfeld's comment that the Iraqis could be fighting the insurgency for years to come. There's two points of interest here - first he refers to Iraqi security forces, not American military; second, he is implying that American involvement in Iraq will wind up.

Second, we have Rumsfeld apparently involved in some kind of negotiations with the leaders of the insurgency. (Hmmm...I see - perhaps the BushCo. is finally recognizing that they can no more bring peace to Iraq than I can stop the Bow River from flowing.)

Third, we have Rumsfeld (Who elected him president??) slamming recent elections in Iran. In that same article, the American position on the elections is echoed by Israel, along with a resurrection of ongoing charges of a "nuclear weapons program" in Iran.

Looking back at the run-up to invading Iraq, we had BushCo repeatedly accusing Saddam Hussein of having "WMDs" - as well as the capability to deliver them. Hmmm...even if Iran has a nuclear weapons program, we should be at least a little cynical about the constant harping about the topic in the last six months or so.

Add to this, the fact that the Pentagon has been rebuilding old Soviet-era bases in Afghanistan (surely you hadn't forgotten the Americans also have troops there???), with two of the bases suspiciously close to the Iranian border - certainly within strike range for short range craft to sneak in below radar tracking capability.

Of course, people will raise the point that US forces are already over stretched, and demoralized. I doubt that BushCo. care about this - their backers, fervent militarists beyond doubt will begin applying pressure to Congress and the Senate to renew the US Military Draft. Yes, it will be a low morale army, but it will have the raw manpower to add one more front to the growing American Empire.

Why would BushCo want to invade Iran? I can think of several reasons - Republican egos are still smarting from the beating they took in 1979; Control over Iran gives the Americans the effective ability to render null and void major resource and technology deals between Iran and China. The last point is the home front - where a third war may well not play well at all.

A third war is going to send more American youth back in pine boxes - not something that will play well. In one sense, the Republicans may be preparing to commit political hari-kari - lose the next election by prosecuting a war that many Americans will not want. But, once started will be virtually impossible for a Democrat to pull out of - America likes to believe itself invincible, and any president that calls that into question will pay the price at the next election - paving the way for another Republican victory. (Quite likely, actually, especially with the Democrats in something of a shambles lately)


Anonymous said...

If what you're predicting comes true, with the Yanks invading Iran with a conscript army, it will be Vietnam all over again.

1. Vietnam: fanatical communist guerrellas and army.

2. Iran: fanatical Islamic fundamentalist army and after an invasion, fanatical Islamic fundamentalist guerellas.

So basically the same foe in both cases.

In terms of the US:

1. Vietnam: conscript army fights for survival in war the population doesn't want.

2. Iran: conscript army likely to fight for survival in a war the population won't want after the first coffin comes home.

So it will drag on for years, successive Republican and Democratic administrations not having the intestinal fortitude to stop the senseless slaughter.



Grog said...

I didn't say that this was an optimistic view, did I?

The optimist in me might hope differently, but BushCo hasn't exactly given much reason for optimism of late...

Anonymous said...

For an expanded view on how such a war may start: Check out the editorial on the site.

The Bungle Lord