Persian Fire - Chris Floyd - Empire Burlesque

[dutchdemocrat]

So now we know: Next time the fire will come in Iran. The blow will be delivered by proxy, but that will not spare the true perpetrator from the firestorm of blowback and unintended consequences that will follow. Even now, the gruesome deaths of many innocent people in many lands are growing in futurity's womb.

The Rubicon of the new war was crossed on Oct. 27. Oddly enough for this renewal of the ancient enmity between the heirs of Athens and Persia, the decisive event occurred on the edge of the Arctic Circle, at the Plesetsk Cosmodrome, where a Russian rocket lifted an Iranian spy satellite, the Sinah-1, into orbit. This launch, scarcely noticed at the time, has accelerated the inevitable strike on Iran's nuclear facilities: Israel is now readying an attack for no later than the end of March, The Sunday Times reports.

The order, from embattled Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, puts Israel's special forces at the "highest stage of readiness" for the strike. While Iran's plan to begin enriching uranium -- which will give it the capability of building a nuclear bomb -- is the precipitating factor, the budding Iranian space program is a "point of no return" for Sharon, and that is what is driving the actual timing of the strike. The Sinah-1 is just the first of several Iranian satellites set for Russian launches in the coming months.

Thus the Iranians will soon have a satellite network in place to give them early warning of an Israeli attack, although it will still be a pale echo of the far more powerful Israeli and American space spies that can track the slightest movement of a Tehran mullah's beard. What's more, late last month Russia signed a $1 billion contract to sell Iran an advanced defense system that can destroy guided missiles and laser-guided bombs, the Sunday Times reports. This too will be ready in the next few months.

There is of course another "precipitating factor": the Israeli elections on Mar. 28. Sharon, who has left the Likud Party to form his own cult-of-personality party, faces a fractious electorate, with his former comrades guaranteeing an attack on Iran's nuclear sites if Sharon is too "weak" to do it before the vote. He may well decide to rally the nation -- and stave off this lunge from the right -- with a blow against Tehran. Such a move would doubtless be popular at home; everyone agrees that Iran cannot be allowed to have the kind of nuclear weapons that Israel itself possesses in such bristling abundance.

The move will be popular in Washington as well. Only a fool would believe that the fools in the Bush Regime have abandoned their bloody-minded ambitions for "full-spectrum dominance" in the Middle East, just because Iraq has turned to goo in their hands. To these schemers, Iraq has always been merely a stepping-stone toward the "far enemy," Iran. Indeed, they used Saddam himself for years as a useful stick to bash the Iranians, until he stepped out of line with his attack on the Bush family's longtime business partners, the Kuwaiti royals. Murder, torture and military aggression are always welcome in the service of Washington's power elites, but defiance is not allowed.

SNIP

http://www.chris-floyd.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=345&Itemid=1

[dutchdemocrat]

1. What is the solution?

The real question, of course, is “what can the United States do about it?”
Air attacks have huge problems. Iran has a widely-dispersed nuclear program. There are at least 23 cities (plus uranium mines) in this program. However, targeting does not just involve the nuclear program. Iran also has a huge missile program.

There are 40 cities or islands involved with Iran’s missile program, which also would need to be hit – so as to limit or preferably eliminate delivery options for the Iranians. This means at least 63 sites have to be hit in order to guarantee a major disruption to the Iranian nuclear program and its delivery system.

Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But...
By Ray McGovern

'This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous.'
(Short pause)

'And having said that, all options are on the table.'

Even the White House stenographers felt obliged to note the result: '(Laughter).'

(The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin on George Bush's February 22 press conference)

For a host of good reasons -- the huge and draining commitment of U.S. forces to Iraq and Iran's ability to stir the Iraqi pot to boiling, for starters -- the notion that the Bush administration would mount a preemptive air attack on Iran seems insane. And still more insane if the objective includes overthrowing Iran's government again, as in 1953 -- this time under the rubric of regime change.

But Bush administration policy toward the Middle East is being run by men -- yes, only men -- who were routinely referred to in high circles in Washington during the 1980s as the crazies. I can attest to that personally, but one need not take my word for it.

According to James Naughtie, author of The Accidental American: Tony Blair and the Presidency, former Secretary of State Colin Powell added an old soldier's adjective to the crazies sobriquet in referring to the same officials. Powell, who was military aide to Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger in the early eighties, was overheard calling them the f---ing crazies during a phone call with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw before the war in Iraq. At the time, Powell was reportedly deeply concerned over their determination to attack -- with or without UN approval. Small wonder that they got rid of Powell after the election, as soon as they had no more use for him.

China and Russia are arming Iran to the teeth. This is not going to be easy.

The Shahab-3 / Zelzal-3 an Iranian derivative of of Russian, North Korean and Chinese technology was recently upgraded to increase its range to 2,000km (1,250 miles), making it capable of travelling beyond Iran's borders and well into Europe.

Iran supports talks on uranium enrichment in Russia - official
Russia to continue export of anti-aircraft missile systems
Russia, Iran remain committed to Bushehr nuclear plant - official
Iran approves Russian participation in gas pipeline project
Lavrov sees good prospects for Russian-Chinese interaction
US refuses to give Iran security guarantee
Iran offers US nuclear plant bid
Iran seeks to sign key oil deal with China by Jan
China's needs charge into global affairs
China Reiterates Position on Iran's Nuclear Issue

30 August 2005
Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najar says Iran's main military objectives are the development of its air defenses and ballistic missiles, therefore Iran will continue expanding its missile industry to meet the needs of the military. One of the major projects pursued by this ministry concerns the manufacturing of deterrent weapons, and the manufacturing of Shahab-3 Missile is in this connection, and this will not be halted. Najar adds.
Iran Defense Minister: Non-Peaceful use of Nuke Technology Religiously Forbidden, Mehr, 30 August 2005, in FBIS Document IAP20050830011035; Iran's new Defense Minister Reiterates Right to Nuclear, Missile Technology, Iranian Student News Agency, 30 August 2005, in FBIS Document IAP20050830011034.

27 June 2005
The United States claims China has provided Iran with weapons of mass destruction components and technical expertise. Items include dual-use missile components, raw materials, and chemical weapons related equipment.
--China Supplies Arms to Iran, Sudan, Middle East Newsline, 27 June 2005.
2 February 2005

Ukrainian Parliament member Hrihory Omelchenko claims that 12 Kh-55 air-to-ground missiles were exported between 1999 and 2001, half to Iran and half to China. These cruise missiles boast a highly accurate guidance system and a range of up to 3,000 km, putting Israel within striking distance of Iran. A former Ukrainian secret police (SBU) officer, Omelchenko says the SBU prevented an attempt to export 14 KH-55s last year and accused former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma of covering up the illicit arms sale.
--Tom Warner, Ukraine 'Sold Cruise Missiles to Iran, China', Financial Times, 3 February 2005.
28 January 2005

Two anti-ship missiles identified as the JJ/TL-6B, JJ/TL-10A and KJ/TL-10B, and designed by China for Iran, were displayed at the China Air Show in November 2004. Knowledgeable sources affirm that the missiles are identical to Iran’s Nasr and Kosar, also known as the TL-6 and TL-10. Jane’s Defense Weekly states that the FL-8 and FL-9 also represent previous designations for these missiles.
––“China Reported to Start Marketing of Missiles Designed for Iran,” Middle East Newsline, 28 January 2005.
18 January 2005

The United States has imposed penalties against eight Chinese companies for assisting Iran’s ballistic missile program. Although the nature of the technology exported has been kept classified, U.S. officials have referred to several of the penalized companies in the past as “serial proliferators.” The companies affected include China Great Wall Industry Corporation and China North Industry Corporation (Norinco), both of which are closely related to the Chinese military. Another, the China Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC), ranks as one of China’s largest military aircraft producers.
––David E. Sanger, “U.S. Punishes 8 Chinese Firms for Aiding Iran,” New York Times, 18 January 2005.

Who originally gave the Iranians the technology? This is where part of the paradox lies. The other sits in the US backing of Iraq in its use of horrific chemical weapons in the with Iran - something rarely mentioned in the US media due to the fact that the US are slated as the source of the materials and technology used by Hussein the development of these weapons.

1960s
While the United States is supplying a research reactor, it also sells Iran many hot cells.
—David Albright, An Iranian Bomb?, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (Washington, DC), January 1995, http://www.bullatomsci.org, accessed 7 July 2002; David Albright and Mark Hibbs, Spotlight Shifts to Iran, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March 1992, pp. 9-11.
11 February 1961

The US Department of State disagrees with the Joint Chiefs of Staff's suggestion to place nuclear weapons in Iran as part of US policy toward Iran.
—George A. Morgan, Iran- The Current Internal Political Situation in Iran, Secret Internal Paper, 11 February 1988, in Digital National Security Archive, http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com



24 November 1983

The International Medical Seminar in Tehran issues a final statement recommending that Iran make required arrangements for the establishment of a permanent commission to survey the damages caused by chemical and biological bombardment of Iranian cities and military zones in close cooperation with international institutes concerned. It also called on the United Nations and the International Red Cross organization to dispatch fact-finding committees to Iran in order to investigate the results of Iraqi chemical attacks and make the world know about their findings.
—Iraqi Use of Chemical Weapons Condemned, IRNA in English, 25 November 1983, reported in British Broadcasting Corporation,BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 28 November 1983, Part 4, p. A1.