powered by FreeFind

Can't Find It? Search Our Site

The HInzSight Report - Citizen Journalism In Action

Got A Story To Report? Tell Us About It

John McCain, we need your help.

Buy A McCain - Send Help Bumpersticker, T-Shirt, Hat or Mug

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

    Are You Ready for War...Again?

The invasion of Iran will be difficult and cost many lives. This is not a war that can be won with cruise missiles and bombs. Iran has planned their assent to nuclear power carefully. Before they began to make it known what their desires were, made sure that the fruits of their labors would be well protected.

They have just completed an entire underground command and control center in the north of Tehran, complete with all the things necessary to withstand a prolonged attack. It has been likened to an entire underground village.

They have also buried the majority of their manufacturing capacity in deep caverns under the city of Isfahan, which makes bombing them, even with deep penetration ordinance, nearly impossible.

That means that the only way to "take out" their capability, would be to do it with "boots on the ground", often the preferred method to military commanders anyway. Although not popular with civilians, troops on the ground is the only way to "win" a war, simply bombing the begeezes out of the enemy will not do the trick.

Now that they consider themselves ready to face the world, they have begun to boast about their capabilities. They have chosen to use war games this week to reveal several new missile technologies
to the world. Weather or not this is news to western intelligence we'll probably never know, as that would show our ability to gather that information. However, I suspect our intelligence knew all about them long before Iran showcased them to the world.

With the successful completion of their latest war games, they are furthering their defiance of western opinion by making this statement.

This is an extremely strong statement:

"The missile command of the Guards' naval force ... via positioning various types of surface-to-sea missiles, is able, while defending the coastlines and islands, to confront any extra-territorial invasion," the official Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Safavi as saying.

It is contained in the article referenced below.

TEHRAN, Iran - A top Iranian military official said Tuesday the country can now defend itself against any invasion originating from outside the region — a clear reference to the United States — as it tested a second new radar-avoiding missile.

The new surface-to-sea missile is equipped with remote-control and searching systems, state-run television reported. It said the new missile, called Kowsar after the name of a river in paradise, was a medium-range weapon that Iran had the capability to mass-produce.

It also asserted that the Kowsar's guidance system could not be scrambled, and it had been designed to sink ships.

Read The Full Story


If you thought the opposition of the Iraqi war was loud, wait until you hear the noise from this one. We have learned greatly from the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and we will not make the errors we did there again.

We must proceed with this war, and others to come if the loss of lives we have sustained in Afghanistan and Iraq have any meaning at all, and they certainly do mean everything. The loss of lives, American and others, is all that stands between freedom and anarchy.

As so eloquently put by an unknown to me author, "Our sons and daughters must die in war, so that others may have life and dwell in peace, happiness and freedom."

Gordon Taylor
Team Member

2 Comments:

Blogger Tokyo Tom said...
 
Blogger HinzSight Team said...
 

Gordon and Dave, thanks for your new site. I'm having some technical difficulties discussing these issues with you elsewhere, so I'm glad your making yourselves available here.

It sounds like we're going into Iran come hell or high water. Is that your conclusion as well?

This seems like a huge strategic mistake to me, for gains that I'm afraid I don't understand well, but let's put that aside and focus on what the war might look like and imply.

1. Do you think this will only be a very limited and brief strike - by air with some special forces on the ground - against suspected nuclear facilities? Will there be other targets, such as civilian and religious leadership?

Or will this be a more extensive engagement, along the lines of OPLAN 1002-04 - the "Khuzestan Gambit", that will take long-term control over Khuzestan (which is Shiite Arab, adjoins Iraq and produces 90% of Iran's oil), in order to put an economic strangehold on Iran's abilities to finance nukes and to wage war?

2. Besides issues as to intelligence (making sure we know what sites to target), are we essentially ready to go at any time?

3. Will we have enough troops to execute a long-term plan without a draft?

4. What will be the effect on oil prices and cargo insurance of any attack? Can we ensure that Iran will not be able to mine the strait, or sink or scuttle any vessels there?

Can we protect the BTC pipeline for a missile attack or sabotage?

5. How will the Iraqi Shias react, to either a limited strike or occupation of Khuzestan? Does an attack on Iran help or hinder our efforts in Iraq?

6. How do we think an attack on Iran (under either scenario) will play in the Muslim world? How will it help with the "Long War" against terroism that has now replaced the GWOT? How about our relations with Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia?

7. How will the attack affect the stability of Pakistan? Musharraf has had numerous suicide attempts by Islamic fundamentalists, they have been major nuclear proliferators, as you have noted and they have a number of nuclear missiles.

8. How will an attack on Iraq play in Russia and China? Will we see more joint military training and weapons sales between them? How will this affect our program with Russia to secure their stockpiles of nuclear materials?

9. Given Sey Hersch's piece, it seem that the military is extremely reluctant to use tactical nukes. Is this an option that the Administration is pushing? Do you favor it?

10. On the legal side, what does the Administration need to do to finish its case? Does the Administration need Congressional authorization? Sounds like we are ready for a terrorist attack, if that happens first - according to ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi in the American Conservative:

"The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections."

I appreciate your thoughts.

Regards,

TT

Hi Tom. If you've read what Gordon has written about Ahmadinejad you know that he believes he has been appointed by Mohammed to bring about the end of the western world. He doesn't fear the US, he believes he is destined to defeat us and set up a world Islamic theocracy.

Gordon is really the Iran expert, but here goes. I believe it will be a series of airstrikes to damage as much of the nuclear infastructure as we can. Hopefully, the airstrikes will take out as much of the political leadership as possible, as well as major military targets.

Some of the targets will require covert operations, boots on the ground, and I think we will handle it.

Best case, if we can surgically remove the nuclear threat, weaken their military and decapitate their leadership, then pull back--hopefully then the Iranian people will do what we have hoped all along that they would do, and rise up and take back control of their government.

Dave Hinz

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

sitemap