Iran Is Vietnam -- On Steroids


Recommended Posts

One way to think of the Vietnam War, which went on and on and on--for thirty years if you consider the French involvement--is as a momentum play that petered out leaving the communists as the winners. What pushed that momentum, as far as the United States was concerned, was the Cold War and regret by the Democrats, or blame the Democrats, over "losing" China and the domino theory and fear of country after country going communist and going communist forever. There was also its proxy war nature. You can't fight China and Russia so fight in Vietnam, something like Korea. That's history. Stick it with a fork; it's done.

Just as the US used to fight communism now it fights oil. Oil has replaced communism as its mortal threat. If the US doesn't control it, it controls the US. That is why today Saudi oil is being used to attack US oil--that is, the de facto sovereignty of this country. This has happened before, most notably in 1973. The stupid US response then was gas rationing instead of using the power of free pricing to regulate supply at the pump. (This approach is residual in any complaint about gas price gouging if prices spike using law and regulation to spike spikes.) The stupid US response today is oil wars. Natural price rationing could still do the job, but that's a no, no. The stupidity of the first Gulf War (1991) was caused by the stupidity of US foreign policy toward Iraq in 1990 which Iraq took as a green light to invade Kuwait. From there it all got stupider. Wars for oil and wars with oil (as a weapon) are slowing crystallizing out into not any war bigger than Korea or Vietnam--knock on wood--but a much more dangerous war with Iran.

The United States is going to war with Iran. First it will let Iran deal with ISIS. The war, of course, is already going on, just below the surface. Obama's bias toward Iran will be replaced by the next President's bias toward Saudi Arabia, which is the American default bias. It will take him or her 2 - 3 years to gin up support to take out Iran. It will be hard for several reasons including topography. It hasn't much vulnerability to armor. The only wild card is the SOB ruler of Iran is going to die soon. What that will mean is anyone's guess.

(Oh, yes. Israel. So important for being essentially tangential. It's afraid of the bomb. Why it isn't afraid of Pakistan's bombs is something of an open question. Jews are too concentrated in Israel in what is a glorified modern version [fantasy] of the Warsaw Ghetto [reality]. It works because it's such a great place for a Jew to be. A blasting cap stuck into the explosive of Armageddon.)

This is all ironic for it would have been so comparatively easy to have somewhat peacefully effected regime change in 2009 except the US--Obama--would not back up the Iranians who were trying to do it with ostensible democratic means, so their efforts collapsed. In any case, the US has to do its thing to Iran while it can, before it gets the bomb. It is already a threat to the major Saudi oil fields with its conventional rockets. Throw in protecting Israel for lagniappe if for no other reason than to keep Israel from using its nukes.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Surprise!!

The Iranians serial lying continues unabated.

(Reuters) - Britain has informed a United Nations sanctions panel of an active Iranian nuclear procurement network linked to two blacklisted firms, according to a confidential report by the panel seen by Reuters.

The existence of such a network could add to Western concerns over whether Tehran can be trusted to adhere to a nuclear deal due by June 30 in which it would agree to restrict sensitive nuclear work in exchange for sanctions relief.

Hmm, ya think that this should add to "Western concerns...?"

Is this administration that stupid?

Or, is it much darker than stupidity?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/30/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN0NL09220150430

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you say. We haven't lost 60,000 troops in Iran yet.

And you're waiting?

--Brant

I don't think of how big a war is in terms of Americans KIA

President Lincoln in 1861: "700,000 Americans haven't been lost yet."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now