U.S. and Israel Beat Iranian War Drums

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright December 3, 2011
All Rights Reserved.                                         

               With U.S. troops scheduled to withdraw from Iraq by Dec. 31, the drumbeat has already started about going to war with Iran.  Over $1 trillion wasted on Iraq and nearly 4,000 U.S. deaths, the focus has now turned to starting a new war with Iran.  Forget about the possible economic repercussions, including whether or not the world can tolerate another oil shock, should bombs start to fly.  U.S. and Israeli officials have threatened to stop Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, a move viewed by most as risky and problematic.  Iran has most of its nuclear programs deeply buried in concrete and steel reinforced underground bunkers.  Any targeted bombing campaign would succeed in destabilizing the Middle East, if not starting WWW III, not halt Iran from working on an A-bomb.  While the U.S. and Israel accuse Iran of a clandestine nuclear weapons program, they have no real proof.

            Preemptive war with Iran could have far worse consequences than the Iraq War, started by former President George W. Bush to stop Saddam’s nuclear and biological w3eapons programs.  Only one small problem:  Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction as promised by the Bush administration.  A trillion dollars and over 4,000 U.S. deaths later, U.S. national security is no safer. True, an evil dictator like Saddam is gone.  But the financial and human toll continues to outweigh the benefits.  Recent reports by U.S. intelligence indicates that Iraq and Iran, two former bitter enemies, are now allies, leaving the U.S. with more geopolitical vulnerability.  Leading GOP candidates, including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney have all committed to preemptive war with Iran to keep nukes out of the Ayatollah’s hands.

            Years before Cruise missiles hit Baghdad March 20, 2003, Bush administration officials ginned up the case for war against Iraq.  In the wake of Sept. 11, all bets were off about trusting U.S. or foreign intelligence.  When former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell pressed the U.S. case for war to the U.N. Security Council Feb. 6, 2003, U.N. officials, especially chief U.N. weapons inspector Dr. Hans Blix, begged the U.S. for more time.  While hindsight is 20/20, Blix would have saved the U.S. over 4,000 deaths and a trillions dollars.  White House officials, especially former Vice President Dick Cheney, relied on the Pentagon’s self-made intel, not reputable domestic and foreign services like the CIA or MI6.  Getting it wrong in Iraq opens the real possibility that the White House will get it wrong with Iran.  Instead of threatening war with Iran, the U.S. should go back to the drawing board.

            War with Tehran could cause at least temporary disruptions with 40% of the world’s oil supply that passes through the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf.  Any disruption would spike world oil prices almost certainly leading to a worldwide recession.  With the U.S. and Eurozone’s struggling economies, preemptive war could have disastrous consequences   Beyond the economic fallout, another miscalculation would wreck U.S. credibility around the globe.  Already seen as an aggressor, a baseless war would Iran would harm U.S. clout around the planet.  Whatever Iran does with its uranium enrichment program, there’s no compelling evidence that it’s is dangerously close to an A-bomb.  A more recent U.N. report on Iran’s nuclear weapons capability failed to show or provide any proof that the current regime is actively working on a nuclear weapon.

            Selling a preemptive war with Iran is more difficult today than it was back in 2003, only a year-and-a-half removed from Sept. 11.  White House officials wanted to shoot first and then negotiate, after watching the World Trade Center Twin Towers toppled by Osama bin Laden’s programmed assassins.  With Bin Lade out of the picture, it’s a tougher stretch to blame Iran for global terrorism, though there’s little doubt that Iran supports Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Gaza’s Hamas terror groups.  Neither group directly threatens U.S. national security.  No matter how much Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu beats the war drums, the U.S. must show greater restraint.  Ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan must be the administration’s top priority, not starting another war in Iran.  Sovereign nations like Iran have a right to pursue peaceful uses of nuclear power.

            U.S. and Israeli officials have not made a compelling case for preemptive war against Iran.  Unless both sides have proof of Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program, they must take a diplomatic path to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions.  Iraq should have taught the U.S. that preemptive war has real economic and human consequences.  Bombing Iran’s nuclear sites would no doubt destabilize the region and put Iran on a war footing.  If missiles fly in the Persian Gulf, all bets are off with respect to how a regional conflict could spin out of control.  Russia and China have strong economic ties to Iran and would be inclined to align against the West.  Preemptive war in Afghanistan and Iraq has already pushed potential allies to align with U.S. enemies.  More foreign aggression only weakens U.S. credibility by making the U.S. look like the bad guy.  Cooler heads need to prevail about Iran.

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news.  He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com.and author of Dodging the Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.