War with Iran? The Media Sure Hopes So…

Before continuing, I would recommend everyone get an actual MILITARY bearing on what we are talking about….check the article out here:

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/archive/story.asp?STORY_ID=167

The aforementioned article is written by Col. John M. Collins, and gives a wonderful ‘soldier on the ground’ view of what challenges would face our military should we engage Iran.

Intelligence in Action

In case you missed it, an article in ‘The New Yorker’ has been gaining attention this week…

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh

The article is from Sy Hersh, a Pulitzer that has seemingly been around forever (and remember, yesterday’s Democrat is usually tomorrow’s Republican.) At first look I will say the info appears on the level. The primary problem I have is twofold:

1 > Is this really news? We have been using counterintelligence against Iran since the hostage crisis of the late 70’s, and

2 > Is it so shocking that we would be acting in the best interests of our allies and ourselves???

It seems the uneducated (or naïve) that do not study history and international foreign relations like to paint war with a broad brush….OOOOOHHHH…ALL WAR BAD…NO WAR NO WAR! MAKE LOVE NOT WAR! PEACE AT ALL COSTS. Ugh….try to sound like someone that is aware the world is a rough place, and so long as power and ambition are part of human nature war is unfortunately always going to be a reality. That being said….

Does the US always need to go to war? Obviously not. Case in point is North Korea….WOW! DIPLOMACY WORKS SO LONG AS IT IS TWO WAY!! North Korea sat at the table, bargained and agreed. Again, their country still has an oppressed population, but we can do nothing about it because we don’t have any sort of removal of government treaty or pact with their government. What many people forget is that WE HAD EXACTLY THAT WITH IRAQ. How many people out there think we just decided to pick on Iraq? From some of the anti-war geniuses I’ve seen, it appears to be the far left MoveON.org take that we just arbitrarily acted. Two items:

1 > The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Go research this. For those that like detail: http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/iraq/libact103198.pdf
…and for those that like Cliff’s Notes…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act

2. Iraq had clearly violated terms of peace from the 1991 Gulf War Accord.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect2.html

When you stop reinforcing your treaties, pacts and alliances, YOU VOID THEM ALL. The fact is Clinton spoke tough and never did anything meaningful (lobbing a few cruise missiles does not count.) When an organization declares war (or Jihad) on you and starts attacking your homeland (’93 WTC, 98 Embassies, 00 Cole) you better do something before something bigger happens (9/11.)

With all this being said, diplomacy is the route we have taken with Iran, and it is a model of diplomacy where Iran will not compromise and back down. There is no given treaty with Iran, however we DO have an alliance with Israel, and here is a list of statements the leader of Iran has stated about our ally:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

Now, I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but it sounds like he may have a ‘less than stellar’ opinion of Israel. But that is just me.

So what should the US do?

Well, if you have read all the links up until now, you probably have a good idea of where we currently stand on Iran. History tells us that Israel MUST strike first for self-preservation. They did it in 1981 with Iraq and they just hit Syria last year because of Ba’ath Party threats against them. Iran is a ground war geographical nightmare….it would be like fighting a 4-front war in some ways, though I believe Col. Collins’ article does not emphasize the air superiority we could add to Israel’s forces. In my opinion we are working with Israeli’s intelligence community to measure the extent of nuclear capabilities of Iran, and at the appropriate time (most likely before November) Israel will hit Iran’s nuclear targets. I do NOT believe we will take part in that action outside of aerial strikes UNLESS IRAN TRIES TO COUNTERATTACK ISRAEL. I feel if they do this Iran’s leader will also attack our bases in Iraq. Is Ahmadinejad going to do this? Well, Syria felt Israel wouldn’t hit them, and the only time Syria knew what happened was AFTER Israel was done hitting their targets (Israel’s aircraft has some fantastic electronic warfare capabilities….courtesy of the engineers of the USA.) So my feeling is strikes on Iran will go much the same way, and once Iran’s air power is completely neutralized, I feel that invitation to the chair of diplomacy will look more appealing.

I will say I feel for the people of Iran. Their leader does not represent the whole as many of these folks are of Persian descent and I pray they have the sense to move away from potential targets since many of these despotic rulers tend to build centrifuges next to orphanages. Let’s all hope cool heads prevail, but in the end alliances exist for a reason…mutual benefit of protection for your people.

Now, What Does my Title Mean?

Does the media REALLY hope for war with Iran? Of course they do. Since when does the media NOT want war, carnage, bad news, ‘If it BLEEDS it LEADS’ mentality. It’s unfortunate but true, but always remember: News Producers will always seek body count, while it is the anchors job to feign concern and fake condemnation of the perpetrators. Without them, these news people would pretty much be out of a job.