War-Gaming The Mullahs: The U.S. weighs the price of a pre-emptive strike

[gp]

War-Gaming The Mullahs
The U.S. weighs the price of a pre-emptive strike

By John Barry and Dan Ephron
Newsweek

Sept. 27 issue - Unprepared as anyone is for a showdown with Iran, the threat seems to keep growing. Many defense experts in Israel, the United States and elsewhere believe that Tehran has been taking advantage of loopholes in the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and is now within a year of mastering key weapons-production technology. They can't prove it, of course, and Iran's leaders deny any intention of developing the bomb. Nevertheless, last week U.S. and Israeli officials were talking of possible military action—even though some believe it's already too late to keep Iran from going nuclear (if it chooses). "We have to start accepting that Iran will probably have the bomb," says one senior Israeli source. There's only one solution, he says: "Look at ways to make sure it's not the mullahs who have their finger on the trigger."

<snip>

But America certainly could do it—and has given the idea some serious thought. "The U.S. capability to make a mess of Iran's nuclear infrastructure is formidable," says veteran Mideast analyst Geoffrey Kemp. "The question is, what then?" NEWSWEEK has learned that the CIA and DIA have war-gamed the likely consequences of a U.S. pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. No one liked the outcome. As an Air Force source tells it, "The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating."


Full Article

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6039135/site/newsweek

[Owlet]

1. This scares the snot out of me

Those 200,000 or so Iranian troops on manuevers on Iraq's northern border are there for just that purpose: to escalate any conflict generated by an Israeli/American strike against their nuclear facilities by invading Iraq.

What worries me is that this bunch of delusional fanatics in the White House and DoD will simply ignore the professionals' advice again and launch Woolsey's WWIV. ( http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=14826 )

[bemildred]

7. That is what those troops are there for.

And that is the main worry.

I wonder if it will ever dawn on these loons that all of
their public threats have been counter-productive in bringing
about change in Iraq?

[EnfantTerrible]

2. Of course they are gaming...

what I find interesting in the piece is the blurb about Brazil. I haven't heard anything about that before.

I don't doubt for a minute that the Shrub and co. are actually trying to convince themselves that they can win a war in Iran as well... of course Israel is helping them make their desicion.

[Swamp Rat]

4. I didn't find anything about Brazil in that article.

?

[EnfantTerrible]

5. Here you go...

<snip>

"And arms-control specialists are increasingly alarmed by Brazil's efforts to do precisely what Iran is doing: use centrifuge cascades to enrich uranium—with a couple of key differences. Unlike Iran, Brazil has never signed the NPT's Additional Protocol, which gives expanded inspection rights to the International Atomic Energy Agency. And unlike Iran, Brazil is not letting the IAEA examine its centrifuges. If the Brazilians go through with their program, it's likely to wreck the landmark 1967 treaty that made South America a nuclear-free zone. But the White House has shown scant concern about the risk."

[Swamp Rat]

6. Sorry, I clicked on Owlet's link in post #1 by accident.

As for Brasil, I am behind them all the way. After this election, I may be moving there permenantly. Eu adoro e gosto do Brasil!

[mitchtv]

13. Brazil knows that SA will be pushed around next

Argentina will follow immediatey

[xchrom]

3. didn't stop them in iraq, and i doubt that israel

is deterred by the idea the situation would escalate -- few have proven themselves more eager to fight a war to get what they want.
i think there are very powerful forces at play spoiling for this fight.
regardless of things are going in iraq.

[VirginiaDem]

8. Israel can't take the sites out by themselves

this time. The sites are spread out to fifteen different places and the Iranians are looking for them, much more so than the Iraqis were when the Israelis took out their reactor. To do this "right", they need the U.S.

I'd love to see what some of those escalation scenarios look like. Do they involve the Israelis retaliating against Iranian retaliation with nukes; do they involve U.S. troops on the ground in Iran? Anything that involves U.S. troops on the ground in Iran is a non-starter that will be listened to, I would expect. Not even the dumbass neocons in the admin think we have the troop cabilities for that.

[htuttle]

9. The escalation scenarios probably include...

...a quarter million Iranian troops, well fed and well equipped, pouring into Iraq, a few dozen silkworm anti-ship missiles rocketing toward anything we have in the Persian Gulf, and we'd actually have to fight an air force for the first time in 50 years, I think (if you don't count Gulf War I's almost non-existent 'air war').

Plus, the Badr Brigades, Iran's proxy forces already in Iraq, would certainly join in. They are far better equpped and trained than Sadr's gang. There's bound to be a general Shia uprising at the same time as well.

Plus, there has to be a 'where the hell did they get that' factor taken into account. At least I'd hope they'd consider it. Iran has been threatened by the US since 1980. If don't you think they have their own 'war games' (and surprises) against us, you'd be naive.

So, it's good to hear that the 'planners' at the Pentagon can see the folly of something like that -- unless they get overruled by the White House again...

on edit:
Does anyone else remember Iran signing some sort of mutual defense treaty with India in 2002? Anyone else know what that involved?

[mitchtv]

12. HAHA ,it sounds like Isreal is ready to fight

to the last American.

[mistertrickster]

10. Here's the October surprise, my friends--look no further

A couple of clean strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, and Team Bush is flying high again.

WMD's in Iraq long forgotton--"our pResident keeps us safe from rag-heads" <sarcasm> is all you need to know in the red-states . . .

[pfitz59]

11. Experts in Israel, US and,.....uh,...elsewhere....

"US must guarantee Israeli security!" Repeat endlessly in the ears of every DC hotshot..... We are being gamed once again, by the right-wingers in Tel Aviv...and DC...

[Deere_John]

14. They must think the election is already in the bag....

....if they're letting this kind of stuff circulate anywhere outside of Bush family meetings.

[kayell]

15. They do seem to believe they have eveything under their control

Look at my sig line for their plans for the US. They are getting so blatant now that they must believe nothing can stop them.

We MUST stop them though. There is no other option, for us or for the world.

[bemildred]

16. Actually, this is nothing new.

We have been threatening to "take action" against Iran for
quite a while now, well over a year I've been hearing various
State Dept. blowhards making such threats. Israel will mouth
off now & then too, but they are less credible. It's just
Iran's turn this week, it was Syria's turn last week.