Amir Taheri in Arab News details why it feels so much like 1938 these days:
Incredible though it may sound there are signs that Tehran may be preparing for a military confrontation with the United States, and has convinced itself that it could win.The first sign came last June with the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president of the Islamic Republic, an event that completed the conquest of all levers of power by the most radical elements of the establishment.
Since then the revolutionary factions have conducted a little publicized purge of the military, the security, the civil service, and state-owned corporations and media.
The most significant purges have affected the military high command.
Among those replaced are the defense minister, the commander-in-chief of the regular army and his four deputies, 11 senior commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and five commanders of the paramilitary Mobilization of the Dispossessed. Some of the purged officers have been “parked” in a mysterious new organ called “The Defense Guidance Commission” attached to the office of the “Supreme Guide” Ayatollah Ali Khamenehi.
The minister of intelligence and security and the minister of the interior, who controls the police and the gendarmerie, have also been replaced.
Another sign that Tehran may be preparing for war is the appointment of military officers to posts normally held by civilians, such as governors, mayors and directors of major public corporations.
But, perhaps, the surest sign yet is the military build up under way in the five provinces bordering Iraq. The region, with a population of 20 millions, has been put under the control of the IRGC which has also taken over units of the regular army, including the 88th Division, and the border police. Iran is estimated to have 250,000 troops in the area, its biggest military build-up since the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988.
Read it all.
And have a look at Ahmadinajad's speeches yesterday (at the UN)and the day before. Proclaiming a "right" to the nuclear fuel cycle and another "right" to share this with other Muslim countries. Neither is included in the NPT but what should that matter?
Will the West at least bring this to the Security Council (where it'll be stonewalled by the Chinese and the Russians anyway)? If the West can't at least manage that...
I personally don't think that President Bush has the stomach for any more fights( not good news ), especially a showdown with Iran and I think Iran knows that. I think they are using the U.S as an excuse to make the fundamentalist hold on the country total and consolidate the power of the military and Revolutionary Guard over the people. Reports of pro- western sentiment will mean nothing now, if it ever did.
It gets worse, unfortunately:
http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/09/bush-iran-has-right-to-civilian.html
Bush: Iran has right to civilian nuclear program
President George W. Bush on Tuesday said Iran had a right to a civilian nuclear program if it did not gain expertise or materials to build an atomic weapon. The United States is concerned that Iran's nuclear program is aimed at producing weapons, and Bush said he would be "speaking candidly about Iran" with Chinese President Hu Jintao and Russian President Vladimir Putin, who are gathering in New York for the United Nations General Assembly. "It is very important for the world to understand that Iran with a nuclear weapon will be incredibly destabilizing," Bush said at a news conference with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. "And therefore we must work together to prevent them from having the wherewithal to develop a nuclear weapon." The United States last month explicitly accepted for the first time that Iran could develop civilian nuclear programs, backing an EU proposal to allow Tehran to pursue atomic power in exchange for giving up fuel work.
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3667
Iran military says Katrina showed U.S. could be turned into “war zone”
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have been following closely the way the United States government has been handling Hurricane Katrina, and drawing strategic conclusions from it. In remarks that appeared on Ansar-e Hezbollah website on Sunday, a top official of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) said the devastating hurricane had exposed America’s vulnerabilities. “If the U.S. attacks Iran, each of America’s states will face a crisis the size of Katrina”, he said, referring to the massive hurricane which hit the southern coast of the United States. “The smallest mistake by America in this regard will result in every single state in that country turning into a disaster zone”. “How could the White House, which is impotent in the face of a storm and a natural disaster, enter a military conflict with the powerful Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly with the precious experience that we gained in the eight-year war with Iraq?” he said. Jazayeri said the hurricane havoc showed that “contrary to public perception, the strength of America’s leadership is like a balloon, which can easily burst”. Turning his attention to the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, Jazayeri said, “Now is the time to tell the world public opinion about those events and the weaknesses of the White House’s response”.
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/09/11/wiran11.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/09/11/ixworld.html
UN inspectors 'powerless to stop atom bomb plans in Iran'
The former head of the United Nations inspection team that is investigating Iran's nuclear programme has called on the Security Council to give it greater powers so it can determine whether Teheran is trying to build an atomic bomb. "It is reaching the point where it is beyond critical," Dr Goldschmidt told The Sunday Telegraph. "Our experience with Libya shows that it is almost impossible for the agency to decide whether a country's nuclear intentions are peaceful or otherwise," Dr Goldschmidt said. "If the Libyans had not admitted [that they were trying to build an atomic bomb] we would not have been able to prove it."
Bloody Hell! where does one begin...
"Incredible though it may sound" Why is it incredible Mr. Taheri? The Mullahs aren't stupid. In fact, I'd say they are scared shitless and realize what is in store for them.
"The first sign came last June" Ok, we'll just ignore all the patriotic propoganda that significantly increased after 9/11. We'll ignore the officially sanctioned signup of 10K suicide bombers reported here in June 2004.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/002140.php
In reality, the mad mullahs have been preparing for the upcoming battle for a very long time and have done everything in their power to prepare their military and people.
Fjordman,
I thinks it's hallarious that the mad mullahs are relying on reports from our biased MSM to plan their strategic counter attack. Thanks for the report, it's made my day. But on a serious note, our Homeland security would be wise to have a plan to pre-empt the mass suicide bombing wave promised by the mad mullahs. I'm not sure how one would do this without it being a very ugly, non-PC security operation involving the roundup of thousands of people before we commence hostilities with Iran.
I do believe that our moral weakness has created a house of cards that could easily come tumbling down, as evidenced by Katrina.
Does anyone see the ignorance and purposeful blindness as judgement?
(Isa 44:18) Such people do not comprehend and cannot understand, for He has shut their eyes so they cannot see, and their minds so they cannot understand.
(Isa 44:20) He feeds on ashes. His deceived mind has led him astray, and he cannot deliver himself, or say, "Isn't there a lie in my right hand?"
Looking for a dhimmi-free zone.
I imagine the Iranians are looking at events in Iraq and drawing a conclusion: We don't have the troops for a land war with Iran and probably after Iraq, we won't have the appetite.
The tragedy of the Bush Administration is that by squandering our limited resources on the idiocy of Iraq, they have effectively limited us to Iraq. I say this because I assume that if we had the troops available, we'd use them in Iraq, to do the little things, like, oh, secure the borders, keep villages and towns we've won, etc. But we don't. We can barely keep our troops in proper gear.
I don't think we are, but we are looking more and more like the Soviet Union at the end. Rather sorry, right?
Katrina showed the Iranians that we are very limited and very disorganized. Of course, were we run by a goverment devoted to governing rather than feathering their nests, none of this would be the case. But it is. You have to work with the government you have, right?
The peril of the Iranian situation is this: We could destroy them from the air, but if they think about a land war and fantastize they can survive an air attack, they will become bolder, so the situation will become self-fulfilling. If we were perceived as strong, they would not dare to tempt us.
I think they will attempt an nuclear warhead mounted missile launch on Israel within three years; probably soon, as they will have convinced themselves they can do it.
The mobilisation of Iranian troops on the Iraq border was an obvious move. They fully expect the "Civil War" they have instigated, encouraged & invested in in Iraq to come to fruition.
They will manufacture the scenario whereby Iranian troops will engage of Iraqi territory to "protect" the Shia from "aggression".
Question is, when the Iranian Divisions move on to Iraqi sovereign territory, what will the Coalition of the willing do?
The Iranians are banking on the Coalition not engaging them, & leaving them to afford the protection to the South. This will undoubtably be backed up by some cobbled together UN resolution.
We must look at Iran's confidence of late, their swagger, their threats.
It would not surprise me in the least if Iran had manufactured the whole Iraq invasion - with this final & predicted scene being the end game of a very well played game.
"Defense Guidance Commission"?
Looks like a iranian euphemism for "Missile Command".
I'm not comfortable with this.
Albion, I think your analysis is correct.
NAZI Germany invaded Poland on the pretext of an offensive provocation instigated by a Polish unit. Of course, this was a lie, and in the end the lie was such small stuff, that it was ignored. Iran could create a similar pretext, however, to enter the civil war, and protect the Shi'ites, as you point out.
The question then is the Coalition response. If the Coalition stands down, then Iran effectively dominates the battlefield, and will work its will. At the least it will consolidate its positions vis-a-vis the coalition forces, preparing for an engagement with them. They will have shorter supply lines, and a numerical advantage which can be exploited even in the fact of superior technology. If the coalition acts, it will have to decide whose side to be on. This will be the dilemma. Either be the dhimmi and follow the Iranians to protect "majority rule" or betray the Iraqi Shi'ites and side with the Sunni's, who are our main current enemies.
A withdrawal of coalition forces leaves the country to the Shi'ites, dominated by Iran, which will liquidate all former "collaborators" with the infidels.
Meanwhile, Russia and China are trying to decide how to divide up and conquer the muslim world that threatens both of them in the South. But only after the muslims have reduced the USA to a manageable size.
The US miltary taking on Iran--if it attacks-- should be NO PROBLEM.
Yes, Iraq was a much smaller Islamic fish to fry than Iran could have been and it clearly did drain us of important capital and patience on the homefront.
But WW2 dragged on for seven years and we managed to win it anyway. If the mullah apes want a war with us we can still make them rue the day they ever contemplated such a thing!
In the words of Margaret Thatcher: "Now is the time for strength and resolution."
Let's fry the bastards.
Iran's Preparation For War With The USA
This is typical of all dictatorships as it is the
only way for them to stay in power is to paint someone else as the "bogeyman".
They aren't that stupid as they have seen what the
American Military power did to Saddam - twice.
And the second time they only used 150,000 troops.