Swift Sword

The Iranians also have the capability to use proxies in Lebanon and Israel and I beleive that the same types of forces have been used in South America against an Israeli embassy and Jewish civic center. The Iranians are in a good position to disrupt American interests to a certain extent if they deem it neccessary.

Another important factor to consider is the growing dependence of the Iraqi economy on Iranain imports. When people talk about the growing number of cell phones, regrigerators, televisions, etc. in Iraqi households as a metric of American success, they often ignore the fact that much of this stuff is coming from Iran along with a good deal of food.

Disrupting the increasing economic ties with Iran would run contrary to the precepts outlined in the National Security Council's own "Iraq National Strategy" document.

__________________
Pharoh was pimp but now he is dead. What are you going to do today?

Monk

This would be a mistake, a big one. Given the current mood in Lebanon. The lebanese people have had a very hard fought democratic election and got the government they want. Anything that destabilises this, including the hezbollah would not be seen in a favouroble light.

__________________
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those others that have been tried from time to time. "

"Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed."

Sir Winston Churchill

Monk

The ideal Iran invasion mode would be from Iraq. Anything else, such as through land from Afghanistan or through sea wont meet with much success.

Swift Sword

Monk,

I would tend to agree with your assesment in general and topogarphy as well as current US dispositions would seem to favor it.

The problem I see with using Iraq as a jumping off point has two concerns:

1. Agents of Iranian influence in Eastern Iraq might pose a threat to the logistics tail. I have heard that the Iranians could have as many as 6,000 agents inside of Iraq (though these types of numbers should probably taken with a grain of salt) not including sympathizers and proxies. Anybody got any best guesses as to the dimensions and potential impact of such a threat?

2. If the Iraqi government allowed it even if it did not participate militarily, they would still be a passive combatant with whatever consequences come with that. I would think that this would also be the case if they were to allow an IAF strike force overflight as part of a preemptory campaign.

Turkey and Azerbaijan have been proposed in some scenarios I am aware of but I suspect that those governments would be wary of any such operation.

Swift Sword

Hi Monk,

You are correct, IMO.

I only put it on the table because the Iranians have a history in Lebanon and doubtlessly have some sort of presence or liason, I would imagine.

Too, there is always deniability: with the people of Lebanon fed up with foreign influences, their anger and attention is currently focused on Syria. I would think that it would be within the realm of prudent, reasonable speculation that someone might mount some sort of operation and try to have Syria take the fall. I will defer to the judgement of others with more knowledge of the situation as to the likelihood of such an occurrence.

Monk

The question is not whether the US or Israel can or cannot mount a campaign from Iraq, the point is that they cannot mount one from Afghanistan or the sea.



Turkey - Not a good idea since eastern turkey which borders Iran is very Islamic and again defence of your supply lines.
Azerbaijan - Russian Influence, they wont like their already fragile oil economy to come under attack.