Minority of One blog
The day after we attack Iran
- See the Northern LightsNature’s Light Show 100 miles High. See the Northern Lights in Person. www.travelalberta.us/northernlights
- 91
Barack Obama and Mitt Romney
are agreed on one thing: If Iran refuses to give up its apparent
pursuit of nuclear weapons, at some point we will have no choice but to
intervene with military force. The discussion, to the extent there has
been one, is just about where that point lies. But an attack on Iran
would not be the end of matter. It would just be the start.
So says retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni, who stopped by the Tribune last week to talk about what might happen after U.S. and/or Israeli planes carry out a preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear sites. The question he wants to ask those in charge, he says, is: "Do you understand what you're getting into?" As head of Central Command, which covers the Middle East, he gave questions of that kind a lot of thought.
An American president might have in mind a brief campaign that would cripple the Iranians. But the Iranians have the option to strike back in all sorts of ways. "What if they lob a missile into Fifth Fleet headquarters?" he asks. "Or we have another 9/11?" He advises, "Don't think it's necessarily limited."
Zinni notes that Iran
has mobile missiles -- which it could use to hit Israel, Europe or U.S.
bases in the region. It could send suicide boats to fire cruise
missiles at our Navy ships. They could lay mines in the Persian Gulf,
which would disrupt shipping and send oil prices through the roof.
If Iran escalates, he says, the president needs to know he will respond. In an expanded war, we might find ourselves forced to try to bring down the Iranian regime. For that, ground forces may be unavoidable. Can he envision using 100,000 troops to march on Tehran? "You'd have to plan for it," he warns -- not assume it will happen, but be ready for the possibility.
There's always the chance that an attack on Iran would be quick, successful and conclusive, as our politicians seem to believe. But if history suggests anything, it's that we shouldn't go to war unless we've considered the worst that can happen. Because it may.
end quote from:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/chi-after-the-attack-on-iran-20121029,0,6163790.column
I think I agree with retired Marine Corps General Zinni. The day after we attack Iran won't be the end it will only be the beginning of something. Also, Russia and China's relationship with Iran might come into play as well. And that is another unknown. So, even though it is an expedient thing to say for a president to be (either one) it may not in the end be a practical decision or even a useful one in any way in the end.
So says retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni, who stopped by the Tribune last week to talk about what might happen after U.S. and/or Israeli planes carry out a preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear sites. The question he wants to ask those in charge, he says, is: "Do you understand what you're getting into?" As head of Central Command, which covers the Middle East, he gave questions of that kind a lot of thought.
An American president might have in mind a brief campaign that would cripple the Iranians. But the Iranians have the option to strike back in all sorts of ways. "What if they lob a missile into Fifth Fleet headquarters?" he asks. "Or we have another 9/11?" He advises, "Don't think it's necessarily limited."
-
- Bio | E-mail | Recent columns
- Home Solar Power LeaseWe Even Maintain the System! Start for As Low As $0 Down www.sunrunhome.com/lease-solar
- Mammoth MVP Pass $799Buy Now - Price Goes Up Nov. 12! Take Advantage of Unlimited Skiing www.mammothmountain.com/MVP
If Iran escalates, he says, the president needs to know he will respond. In an expanded war, we might find ourselves forced to try to bring down the Iranian regime. For that, ground forces may be unavoidable. Can he envision using 100,000 troops to march on Tehran? "You'd have to plan for it," he warns -- not assume it will happen, but be ready for the possibility.
There's always the chance that an attack on Iran would be quick, successful and conclusive, as our politicians seem to believe. But if history suggests anything, it's that we shouldn't go to war unless we've considered the worst that can happen. Because it may.
end quote from:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/chi-after-the-attack-on-iran-20121029,0,6163790.column
I think I agree with retired Marine Corps General Zinni. The day after we attack Iran won't be the end it will only be the beginning of something. Also, Russia and China's relationship with Iran might come into play as well. And that is another unknown. So, even though it is an expedient thing to say for a president to be (either one) it may not in the end be a practical decision or even a useful one in any way in the end.
No comments:
Post a Comment