Energy: U.S. Strike on Iran Could Result in Asymmetric Blowback
July 17th, 2007I’ve been trying to think about some of the possible repercussions of a U.S. strike on Iran. All the usual ones came to mind: economic collapse, panic in the energy markets, possible nuclear war etc. But I came up with a different scenario. I haven’t seen this mentioned anywhere.
I thought that an attack on Iran would give every America-hating insurgent, in every energy producing country, a GO SIGNAL.
Think about it.
Russia. Mexico. Nigeria. Saudi Arabia.
Some of the biggest energy exporters face extremely serious asymmetric warfare threats. (See: Above Ground Factors.)
This is just a guess, but when the United States / Israel attacks Iran, insurgents everywhere might see that as an opportunity to deliver a kill shot to the United States via the energy vector. If the U.S. is stupid enough to shoot itself in the foot like this, lots of energy infrastructure bombers, if they’re smart, would seize that opportunity to magnify America’s problems.
Hugo Chavez might simply refuse to send oil to the U.S. in sympathy with everyone else who hates the U.S., and in solidarity with Iran, which is an ally of Venezuela.
Oh yeah, there’s probably a thousand other weird ways it could go, none of them good.
I’ve seen idiot executives in corporations behave like the Bush administration. They interpret a 2% chance of success as a sure thing. Meanwhile, those of us involved with the actual operations of the enterprise brace for impact, or simply run away before the rusty calliope starts throwing pipes. Psychopaths don’t listen to reason.
If I know these things, sitting here in my underwear, I’m damn sure that analysts somewhere are trying to tell these bozos, “If you try to fire the gimp out of the cannon at such a steep angle, it could knock the main pole out from under the big top.”
Cheney would respond with something like, “Never mind all of that negative, defeatist talk. Let’s focus on that 2% chance of success some more.”
At this point, some puffed up general would begin a presentation on nuclear weapons.
Big biz protects the oil. Ever notice, nobody EVER suggests sanctions against oil production, sales, or export.
The Iranian nuke problem would be solved quick if we stopped all of their oil exports, but that option is never even considered.
Since we are the biggest customer of many of those nations, they wouldn’t want to cut us off, either. We might just find a way to live without their oil.
That would be bad for Big Biz.
A shortage of oil might enable oil companies to double or triple the price of gas.
That raises the question of whether Americans would stand for it.
Kevin,
Your post reflects my thoughts on Cheney, Iran, EGGS-Zaxtly. Which brings me back to my main premise that Dick Cheney is the Manchurian Candidate. But the question is – where forth comes his programming? Certainly Big Oil, but sheesh. Sources I can’t even remember have written for this past year that indeed, if we do invade/bomb/whatever we do to those the U.S wants to govern/control, the world is oh so weary of our military/economic control ventures. Knocking the big poles from under the big tent? No problem. I think there is a tacit plan in place were the U.S. to invade/bomb Iran: play the debt/oil card. Seems its the only way to bring the out of control Manchurian program to its knees. Of course the rest of us won’t be living like Dick and Ken Lay (who is not dead) and the rest of his programmers. We won’t be fly fishing in the far North with provisions flown in from WHEREVER. We’ll be effing scraping food, money, energy sources from wherever we can get them. Another option: the U.S. government is overtaken by its military. Not as in martial law, but as in overthrow. A mighty force there shat on again and again for DICK’s DICTUM’s. There comes a time… we’ll get there in the U.S. probably sooner than later.
That makes since and it even seems likely; I can imagine a dumping of dollars at the same time. As for whether “Americans would stand for it†what would they do? Put ‘piss-on Chavez’ stickers on their parked cars?
Don’t you think the US is already hated enough.
Those inclined aren’t sitting on the fence wondering if the US is truly evil or just naughty
@Eileen
The Big Dick is not a Manchurian Candidate. He’s one of Them. He is way too deep into Their pockets… and They are way to deep into his. Cheney is a conspirator in the military-industrial-media complex. Reagan was the Manchurian Candidate.
Well, there it all is. B1-B Lancers in Iraq, with tactical nukes from Germany. 3 carrier strike groups in the Gulf, and a full squadron of UAVs deployed in theatre. I think all the peices are in place for World War III. Here is a quick sketch of what is about to happen. Carrier air groups suppress costal missle sites, and scud hunt to protect Dubai harbor and the Suadi oil infastructure. Sink the Iranian navy and keep the straights of Hormuz open. The UAVs begin a direct approach to Tehran, as air defence systems come on-line they are pounced by land based air and cruise missles. When the corridor to Tehran is established, the B1s make thier attacks on Command and Control sites, and decapitate the government. ( with nukes, to get the bunkers, or at least to take them out of play ). With central command in chaos, and defences swamped and degraded, the B2s roll in for strikes on all the “nuclear weapon plants” scattered around the country. Nukes for underground emplacements, conventional bombs for everyone else. When the dust settles, and the flight crews are back at base enjoying a beer in a Islamofacist free world, the population of Iran will rise up and sweep the wreckage of thier previous state into the dustbin of history, declare a new nation founded on freedom and liberty, and begin the long and glorious process of establishing a western style democracy.
In Iraq, the warring factions will see this display of frightful American power and resolve as a warning of what is in store for them, if they continue thier wicked ways. Cease-fire and disarmament will quickly ensue. Chavez and his gang of happy murderers will also take pause, seeing mushroom clouds and vast slaughter whenever they close thier eyes. Normalization of relations between our two nations will follow apace.
Russia and China will see a stark choice, total military effort versus a triumphant US, or accepting the whole of the middle east passing into the american sphere of control. They will falter, debate, stall, and then finally, driven by hard logic, withdraw from the field and live to fight another day.
A new world order will come into view, and we, all americans, shall take our rightful place as lords of this earth.
(I get goose-bumps this thinking about it. Glory, victory, peace and plenty. Ah – what a vibrant time to be alive!)
Of course, none of this will happen. We will whack Iran and the greatest military and economic debacle in the history of the world will quickly ensue.I think, however, Cheney and Bush would rather risk it all, and all of us, for one last grab at world energy dominion.
Oh, a post-srcipt.
This mess will get underway after those snarling, hateful, Isamic monsters launch some sort of terror attack on the US mainland. Bastards. When the hammer falls it is only because they were aking for it. Good thing we have just the right package of forces over there to deal with them. What a lucky break.
I am SO sick of people (read: Giuliani and his barely intelligent enough to say his name followers) who continue to claim Iran is a nuclear threat. Let’s look at the facts:
-Iran has 100kg of uranium. It has so far not been enriched to weapons grade.
-To make the SMALLEST nuke bomb possible (hardly the best strategy if you’re out to create a nuclear arsenal) you need 64kg of highly enriched uranium (which Iran currently doesn’t have.)
-Assuming they DO enrich the uranium that they actually have, they have enough to make ONE of the SMALLEST nuke bombs known to man.
-Since Iran hasn’t made nukes before, they have little of the technology, infrastructure, or R&D necessary to make nukes.
-EVEN IF Iran can produce that one nuke by spending a massive amount of money that it doesn’t have (thanks to the brilliant [that’s meant in the most sarcastic manner possible] idea of Western nations to enact sanctions on Iran) to enrich the uranium, build the infrastructure, develop/buy the technology, and do the R&D, they will still have to test it as no nation has ever successfully built a nuke that works on the first try (see: N. Korea.)
Oh, wait I forgot one:
-They all quote people like Ahmadinejad without understanding that those people are nothing but mere figureheads in the government who neither have power NOR reflect the beliefs of Iranians. The one man who actually HAS the power to execute a nuke weapons program, their Supreme Leader Hojjat al-Islam (NOT an Ayatollah as our media erroneously loves to report) Khamenei, issued a fatwa making it illegal AND against Islam to produce, stockpile, or use nuclear weapons.
I have yet to find one of Giuliani’s squawking supporters who can give me a plausible scenario wherein Iran actually obtains nuclear weapons.
I’m GREATLY saddened and disappointed by the fact that so many American people would rather blow up a ton of innocent people in Iran for some asinine political point rather than acknowledge the truth of the situation.
“A new world order will come into view, and we, all americans, shall take our rightful place as lords of this earth.”
For something to be parody it has to have at least a tinge of absurdity. Unfortunately, nothing in your description even exaggerates the magical thinking of the lunatics now in power, so I’ll take it as mere sarcasm.
I’ve always considered Bush to be sort of a Greg Stillson figure, without the intellect. It’s sure beginning to look like our Stillson may finally get his chance for glory.
Actually, I think Cheney is the “Angela Lansbury-Meryl Streep” of the bunch…the Manchurian Candidate’s handler. Interestingly enough, I am not sure Bush is the Manchurian Candidate. But then again he might be. Now, if Cheney is the Manchurian Candidate, who is his handler? One thing is for sure it’s probably not his mother.
Kevin,
I read what you said and the comments that followed but no one seems to have mentioned the scenario I’ll lay out next. This was part of a letter I wrote to the analysts at Stratfor, a US think tank, back January 3rd of this year:
————–
Dear Analysts,
Something I haven’t seen you folks touch on, or any one else for that matter, is the possible connectivity between trying to rein in Iran and/or North Korea’s nuclear ambitions and the consequences which might ensue from such an action, i.e., dirty bombs.
If the US or Israel, for example, bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities to prevent them from gaining the ability to generate nuclear power and create nuclear weapons, they very well might exact their revenge by distributing radioactive materials suitable for dirty bombs to the various Islamic militant groups. Similar logic might follow from a bombing of North Korea’s facilities.
I scanned your article
http://samadhisoft.com/stratfor-reports-area/tactical-implications-of-the-smoky-bomb-threat/
and noted the emphasis on smoke bombs, inhalation and mortality. I think that focus largely misses the point. A dirty bomb set off in a major American city releasing measurable radioactivity would be a disaster of the first order not because anyone died immediately or because of the physical damage. It would be a disaster because people, not understanding the science of radioactivity, would flee the area in panic and would be very unlikely to return anytime soon. This could shutdown a major metropolitan area like Manhattan or downtown Chicago indefinitely. And, while the government authorities might claim that they could ‘clean’ the area, one look at the millions of nooks and crannies in a complex downtown area would convince the skeptical otherwise.
Perhaps, years in the future, after a number of bombs have been set off and people have seen the follow-on consequences in hind-sight, they might act in better accord with the actualities of radiation science and the real levels of danger. But, given the tremendous fear-factor surrounding radiation, it is very unlikely the public will do anything other than err wildly on the side of caution for now.
So, several bombs, set off in Washington, D.C., Manhattan, Downtowns like Los Angeles and Chicago, could virtually bring the US economy to a standstill as those areas would be shut down indefinitely and the various dependent systems (financial, transport, etc.) struggled to reform around their gaping absences. Katrina would look like a picnic.
And, finally, dirty bombs as I’m envisioning them here do not need to be exotic or high-tech. Just radioactive material dispersed by high explosives in a central area. Human fear and misinformation will do the rest.
If the militants haven’t done this so far, I think it is only because they are having problems acquiring sufficient materials – so far.
——————–
The implication I was suggesting is let’s not give Iran a sufficient reason to loosen its controls on its nuclear material. By the same logic, it is in our best interests to keep Pakistan under Musharrif on its feet because if it is allowed to succumb to Muslim Fundamentalism, the same dispersal would probably follow. I have a friend in NATO in Europe and he contends that the lessening stability in Pakistan just now is the flash point to watch.
Why wouldn’t the Iraq invasion have been the catalyst you describe? Perhaps because the world gave the U.S. the benefit of the doubt, hoping they would be in and out quick, even though it was obvious they were going to be there for the long term?
When you say 2% of success, who would that be for? Us or them? Their success is our failure. They want the world to be a dangerous place, or at least to be plausibly perceived as a dangerous place. That way, we’ll need them, the “strongmen.” They are sick of governing citizens; they want to rule vassals.
It can’t just be a tactical bombing campaign (nuke or otherwise), but the start of a full-fledged effort at regime change and balkanization of Iran by the West (under Bernard Lewis’ map designs). However, China and Russia must be factored into the response equation. Russia’s already pissed off enough at the UK/US over diplomatic and military shenanigans, and China is salivating at the thought of taking back Taiwan while the US is distracted. China, Russia and India do not want an appropriation of Iranian oil and gas, which is the ultimate goal of such operations anyway. The dollar will collapse as global reserve currency, martial law will be declared in the US, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) will become a military pact. Pakistan will fall to extremists, thereby jeopardizing the whole operation (let alone Afghanistan). India will freak over that and mobilize militarily. The Western Elite are clearly burning the village in order to save it.
Don’t overlook another entirely likely possibility: Bush engages Iran; America implodes of its own accord, led by political activists who feel they have nothing to lose.
Pelopponesian war? Just scratch out Athens and write US. Then, cross through Sparta and write China. But I think we have some more time before history repeats itself.
Most people assume that the world hates the US, but that’s only true to a certain degree. I would say people universally resent the United States (which is natural considering we’re similar to an empire), but a vague, distant dislike and fear is not motivation for an attack. Arabs will cheer when Americans die, call us the Great Satan and say all manner of things they have been religiously and socially brainwashed to say, but the bottom line is they’re far more interested in their own lives (and killing each other in power struggles) than destroying ours. Anti-American foreigners are a lot like Cindy Sheehan, they’ll bitch and moan all day about US atrocity (and accomplish nothing), but they aren’t about to undertake the inconvenience of legitimate resistance. I personally deeply distrust the current system, and I have radical views on revamping our government. But life is pretty easy right now, and I’m not ready to give it up to fight the system.
You might say, “Well, what about Iraqi insurgents who attack US troops?”
I think those acts are still in concert with my point. Iraqis may be attacking Americans, but they fight for their own lives and country- not out of a desire to harm America.
Ask yourself this, why haven’t Muslims done more damage to the US on our soil? When you think about it, an attack on the US is frighteningly easy. You don’t need a nuke, airplane, small pox or explosive footwear to cause havoc. Terrorists could do something as simple as throw a few lit cigarettes into some dry brush during the summer months out west to start a chain of forest fires. The attack would be almost 100% untraceable, require almost no intelligence, training or cost, and would have potential for billions of dollars in damage and incalculable damage in ensuing panic. Yet, we see nothing like this. Why? The vigilance and competence of the NSA? Ha, people give US government employees WAY too much credit (Most people I meet with any kind of government job are a slightly elitist, mostly lazy and completely clueless). The terror threats we see are crazy ‘movie-plot-threats’. They seek to cause panic and destruction by *gasp* blowing up their shoes, or they plot to destroy JFK airport by causing a chain explosion of fuel containers. . . which is almost impossible because the tanks are sealed off from each other. I don’t think this is the work of Al Queada or zealous Muslim’s pushed against the wall by oh-so-evil America. These attempts are fantasies of men who have long lost their grasp on reality.
I believe that if Al Queada and similar groups actually had the goal of harming the US, we would see a lot more blood. These groups are much more concerned with their local affairs. I read a very interesting Stratfor article which seems to agree with this take. The author believed that 9/11 wasn’t about hurting America as much as it was about provoking a response. Bin Laden’s goal was to force the US to retaliate in the Middle East. He hoped that US invasion would be the Reichstag that would force angry Arabs to revolt against their local, corrupt governments and establish a new fundamentalist theocracy. Which isn’t a bad conclusion. Kevin and other readers appear to have similar thoughts- a massive reaction against the US for a pending attack on Iran.
It didn’t happen in Afghanistan, and it didn’t happen in Iraq, though. Anti-US sentiment is high, but actual resistance is low. Those who do take up arms against the US and Iraqi government often kill fellow Iraqis, and that makes their movement very unpopular with the locals. Bin Laden’s plan may have actually hurt his chance at seeing a renewed imperial caliphate.
Anti-US sentiment is strong, and I am certain that it will grow with another invasion. However, the problem is too distant and abstract to motivate people (normal people with jobs, families, bills and television on which they place on a much higher priority) to any kind of action.
I’ve heard a rumor circulating that an event is set to occur this Friday July 20 which will affect or change the US forever…what it is I don’t know…
“I personally deeply distrust the current system, and I have radical views on revamping our government. But life is pretty easy right now, and I’m not ready to give it up to fight the system.”
I feel the same way. Anyway, most of the bootlickers in this country enjoy their servitude so I don’t see anything to fight about. However, this doesn’t mean I will go gently into that good night. I won’t kneel down for my executioner.
“You might say, “Well, what about Iraqi insurgents who attack US troops?—
We could end these attacks easily and rather cheaply, if we really wanted. All we’d have to do is wire Iraq for cable TV and keep the country well stocked with television sets. Big wide screen plasma jobs would do the trick. The only hard part would be keeping everyone’s electricity on 24/7. Who is gonna be out planting roadside bombs while “Survivor” is on? People only cause trouble in countries where there is nothing good to watch on TV.
i simply present this:
http://rense.com/general77/clamp.htm
as information. (references a document removed from iraq with domestic concerns considered serious and the (some?) supporting attatched units.)
the contract for KBR to build a variety of facilities to deal with large crowds in a controlled setting is well established. other suggestions of the use of domestic force and detention have been made elsewhere.
BG… That wouldn’t be another Steorn announcement, would it?