I'm sorry, but I really don't buy into Anne-Marie Slaughter's fearful, hyperbole-laden conclusion.
Now, I don't doubt for a moment Ms. Slaughter's contention that an Iranian-sponsored or -undertaken terrorist attack on U.S. soil might only anger and re-unite Americans, ensuring their support for a rapid escalation of the conflict in the Persian Gulf region. However, while I would never completely discount such a possibility, I can't believe that the Iranians are so stupid that they would simply play into George W. Bush's hands by taking a page out of Kar Rove's neocon playbook. That cartoonish scenario is completely two-dimensional in both its thinking and its staging.
Rather, a targeted but substantive Iranian military effort against selected American forces already arrayed troughout the region might very well drive home to Americans back home the utter futility of our Baghdad follies, and turn American public opinion solidly against further military efforts in South Asia -- especially should Iran find itself holding several thousand American personnel either under siege or as POWs.
Here's what I envision could unfold:
In the event of an American attack on Iran, while I would guard against such a possibility, I really don't worry so much about a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. What I do worry about is Iran's quite-substantial military forces, particularly its 1,000,000+-strong army and multi-million-strong reserve corps, and the loss of world opinion and our own subsequent diplomatic isolation.
I fear the closing of the 40-mile-wide Straits of Hormuz at the entrance to the Persian Gulf by the Iranian Navy, which will undoubtedly necessitate the undertaking of a major military operation by our own U.S. Navy to initially re-open -- and then keep open in perpetuity in the face of a hostile regional power -- that vital lifeline to both our military forces in the region and our country's (and the world's) economy.
I fear seeing half our Navy's resources perpetually bobbing up-and-down on station in the Indian Ocean a half a world away -- a further strain on our over-extended military.
I fear a limited but targeted and strong Iranian military offensive against a selected portion of our overextended and tired U.S. ground forces in either Iraq or Afghanistan, perhaps against a unit that will probably be stationed in some remote region of either country and thus vulnerable as an outlier.
I fear that in the event that this particular portion of our forces finds itself subsequently placed under siege in a region, we soon discover that our capacity to mount a relief effort somehow becomes quite problematic.
I fear that we could subsequently find Iran holding, say, 3,000 to 5,000 of our troops hostage as POWs.
Then what do we do?
At that point, I fear that we may find ourselves with few military options available other than rapidly escalating an intense air and naval campaign against Iran, with a vague hope of forcing a now-thoroughly angry Iranian people -- who will by this time have world opinion squarely in their corner -- to the negotiating table.
In that event, we will have thus come around full circle, and find ourselves forced to contend with our own presidential administration -- one which:
(a) Has heretofore shown little if any interest in negotiations with anybody over anything;
(b) Has a marked propensity to shoot first and ask questions later; and
(c) Will probably by this point in time have used this war with Iran as an excuse to invoke the provisions of Executive Order No. 51, i.e., declare a state of national emergency and suspend both our country's elections and our Constitution for the duration of said "emergency".
And
that's the nightmare scenario I fear might unfold upon us, if we don't rouse ourselves from our political doldrums and forcibly neuter this insane clown posse currently holding court in the White House, once and for all.
Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on August 8, 2007 at 2:55 PM | PERMALINK
Linear Mode
