Bunker Busters shipped to Diego Garcia

[ASparr]

Iran is not the available SOLE supplier of oil, and the Chinese know that.

The Chinese also know that a large spike in oil prices hurts them. And hell, they're not threatened by Iran.

[Zinja]

But again, such strikes would wreak havoc on the global oil supply ....make all of the Iranian affiliated proxies go nuts,

You really over-estimate Iran's position.

The Proxies you are talking about, are not some invinsible power somewhere in space. They can be taken care of nicely, why do you think Dec 08 - Jan 09 is a source of bitterness for some people.

[citanon]

I don't discount that possibility. But again, such strikes would wreak havoc on the global oil supply (especially if you're talking about hitting major infrastructure --like pipelines),

You have to compare the limited economic damage brought by increasing oil prices with the unlimited catastrophe for nuclear proliferation. My sense is that the former will be forgotten in a couple of years while the later will have disastrous repercussions that will alter the course of history. I'd take the former any day.

make all of the Iranian affiliated proxies go nuts,

And do??? Conditions are ripe for their destruction. They might cause problems, but in the end they will get the short end of the stick.

coalesce popular support behind Dinnerjacket

Temporarily, and then he'll be left with a wrecked economy, a wrecked military, and the ignominy of defeat. Things that will contribute nothing to the regime's long term survival. His power base will crumble shortly after the conflict is over, and the Iranian leadership, if it survives, will think very very carefully about trying this crap again.

and cause severe harm to US soft power and credibility in the world.

Where as right now the entire world is taking us very seriously.

Har. Again, not the same. Iran is an established state with a fairly modern economy and infrastrucure with a large, disaffected youth population.

And Yugoslavia was not modern, did not have infrastructure, and did not have disaffected youths? Those things contributed to Milosevic's collapse. The Iranian government is more established, but that doesn't mean defeat and economic disaster would make it more popular.

Dinnerjacket and Slobo may both be nutters, but that doesn't mean what works for one, works for the other.

No, and what didn't work for one, may not necessarily work for the other either.

But let's say that however implausibly, Dinnerjacket does gain popular support and we do incur significant economic damage from the war. At the end of the day I think OOE makes the most cogent argument: does the cost of doing nothing outweigh the cost of war? On this issue I think it certainly does.

[ASparr]

You really over-estimate Iran's position.

The Proxies you are talking about, are not some invinsible power somewhere in space. They can be taken care of nicely, why do you think Dec 08 - Jan 09 is a source of bitterness for some people.

And you really underestimate their tenacity. And I never suggested that. What I said was that they'd raise cain. Possibly to the level to force another Gaza War or 2006 Lebanon War by Israel.

[citanon]

And you really underestimate their tenacity. And I never suggested that. What I said was that they'd raise cain. Possibly to the level to force another Gaza War or 2006 Lebanon War by Israel.

I wouldn't be surprised if Israel is looking for that very opportunity.

[ASparr]

You have to compare the limited economic damage brought by increasing oil prices with the unlimited catastrophe for nuclear proliferation. My sense is that the former will be forgotten in a couple of years while the later will have disastrous repercussions that will alter the course of history. I'd take the former any day.

Well, there's very little I can do about that then. I disagree obviously but c'est la vie.

And do??? Conditions are ripe for their destruction. They might cause problems, but in the end they will get the short end of the stick.

How so? Just like they were in 2006 and 08-09?

Temporarily, and then he'll be left with a wrecked economy, a wrecked military, and the ignominy of defeat. Things that will contribute nothing to the regime's long term survival. His power base will crumble shortly after the conflict is over, and the Iranian leadership, if it survives, will think very very carefully about trying this crap again.

Tell it to Kilcullen.

Beyond Bullets: Strategies for Countering Violent Extremism | Center for a New American Security

Where as right now the entire world is taking us very seriously.

being taken seriously is not the issue.

Yugoslavia was not?

Not to the same degree and again, the comparison is folly. See above

But let's say that however implausibly, Dinnerjacket does gain popular support and we do incur significant economic damage from the war. At the end of the day I think OOE makes the most cogent argument: does the cost of doing nothing outweigh the cost of war? On this issue I think it certainly does.

Not when Iran gets nukes in 2017.

[ASparr]

I wouldn't be surprised if Israel is looking for that very opportunity.

Because it always works so well.

[citanon]

The Chinese also know that a large spike in oil prices hurts them. And hell, they're not threatened by Iran.

And since they know it, they might actually feel like doing something about Iranian sanctions if they suspected we were preparing for war.

[ASparr]

And since they know it, they might actually feel like doing something about Iranian sanctions if they suspected we were preparing for war.

We've always left that option very visibly open. They aint movin.

[citanon]

Well, there's very little I can do about that then. I disagree obviously but c'est la vie.
How so? Just like they were in 2006 and 08-09?

Hamas got creamed in Gaza, and Hezbollah did not exactly fare too well from the last war. Oh, by the way, Israel has been retooling and retraining and re-strategized precisely to roll them in the next conflict. You could see the differences, in fact, in Cast Lead.

Tell it to Kilcullen.

Beyond Bullets: Strategies for Countering Violent Extremism | Center for a New American Security

He's not the one I'm talking to. If he has good points you believe in, present them.

being taken seriously is not the issue.

So I suppose effective influencing other nations is not an issue? Or do you claim that one could influence others without being taken seriously?

Not when Iran gets nukes in 2017.

That's the point. We'll hit them so hard they wont'. And if they do, another chance to pummel them again.

[citanon]

We've always left that option very visibly open. They aint movin.

Why do you think they aren't? Perhaps it could be that they don't take us seriously?

[ASparr]

Why do you think they aren't? Perhaps it could be that they don't take us seriously?

Because Russia still stands in our way for sanctions and nobody would believe us if we started hamming an attack up whilst simultaneously slipping the paper under their noses.

[ASparr]

Hamas got creamed in Gaza, and Hezbollah did not exactly fare too well from the last war. Oh, by the way, Israel has been retooling and retraining and re-strategized precisely to roll them in the next conflict. You could see the differences, in fact, in Cast Lead.

yes. But as any student of insurgencies and history can tell you, a temporary military victory is never truly solidified until a political solution backs it up. yeah, hamas got creamed in the war. Nobody expected they wouldn't.

He's not the one I'm talking to. If he has good points you believe in, present them.

I have. I am now pointing you in his direction in the hope you'll actually believe them when he says it.

So I suppose effective influencing other nations is not an issue? Or do you claim that one could influence others without being taken seriously?

I'm not talking about interactions between nations. I'm talking about our perception in the arab world by the arab people.

That's the point. We'll hit them so hard they wont'. And if they do, another chance to pummel them again.

You cant without destroying significant portions of their economy and infrastructure. And then, you're just going to give the illegitimate government more legitimacy while we look like fools celebrating a 3 year victory.

[citanon]

He's not the one I'm talking to. If he has good points you believe in, present them.

Actually I'll save you the trouble:

From his paper:

Contain the Iranian regime by driving a wedge • between the regime and the people. Initiatives to bomb Iran in order to disrupt progress toward a nuclear device are extremely unlikely to succeed. Via the “9/11 effect” such activities would most likely consolidate the people on nationalistic grounds behind the regime, however unpopular, and might buy the regime an extra ten years in power. Instead, in order to contain Iran during the consolidation phase, the United States should make the regime a series of diplomatic offers that it could not accept, but which the Iranian people would see as extremely positive, thus driving a wedge between the regime and its people. Such a move would force the regime to expend significant “bandwidth” in internal control and repressive activities that would limit its resources for external disruption, while further weakening its grasp. These diplomatic offers could include access to a substantial number of light water nuclear reactors without
| 57
the capacity for fuel rod reprocessing, major fuel import and trading concessions, removal from the “axis of evil” list, opening of diplomatic relations with the United States, relaxation of visa restrictions, a large-scale educational exchange program and, potentially, a presidential visit to Tehran. This set of offers, if made publicly, would be extremely unlikely to be accepted by the regime, but their non-acceptance would probably create widespread dissatisfaction with the regime among the Iranian people.

I'm sorry but this passage makes Killcullen sound like a grade A wanker (maybe he's done other impressive work).

One does not need to be a genius to ask George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and the Republicans in Congress how long the 9/11 effect lasted, and how well it worked, and this while the country that was still doing well economically and where the government enjoyed far higher levels of support before 9/11.

Now imaging Bush's popularity if people believed the War actually wrecked the economy. Oh wait, just look at the poll numbers.

[ASparr]

I'm sorry but this passage makes Killcullen sound like a grade A wanker (maybe he's done other impressive work).

One does not need to be a genius to ask George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and the Republicans in Congress how long the 9/11 effect lasted, and how well it worked, and this while the country that was still doing well economically and where the government enjoyed far higher levels of support before 9/11.

If the same thing happened in Iran Dinnerjacket would be toast.

Actually, he's one of the most impressive analysts I've seen today. Google him, why don't ya?