Edited by Mary Young
Polls Call for War
Published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta
(Russia) on 11 October 2012
by Vladislav Vorob’ev (link to
original)
Here’s four scenarios of what could happen if the U.S. declares war on Iran
In the battle for his re-election to the White House, Barack Obama is rapidly losing points. His rival, Mitt Romney, is triumphantly ahead in practically all American polls. Against this background, the voices heard louder and louder are those of the Washington political analysts who believe that only a victorious war against Iran can help Obama remain in the White House for a second term.
Will the Democrats really decide to strike Iranian nuclear facilities? Virtually everyone is confident that there will be no full-scale military land operation. What with its tremendous debts, America simply cannot afford one at the moment. Furthermore, hundreds, if not thousands, of American soldiers killed by Iranians would not only close the doors of the White House for Obama; it could potentially erase him from the American political map forever.
But to strike Iranian nuclear facilities from a reasonable height is an entirely different matter. This is something that Americans are good at. Of course, there is one big “but.” In Iran, Russian anti-aircraft warfare systems are on duty. Their properties are readily available to the public. Nonetheless, not a single respected American expert would rule out the possibility that Russian missiles could greatly surprise the U.S. air force. In other words, whatever the case, the Obama administration would most likely be unable to avoid casualties.
And yet the famous American expert on foreign policy David Rothkopf still believes that, together with Israel, the U.S. is seriously considering the possibility of inflicting a “surgical” blow to Iranian nuclear facilities. According to Rothkopf, the war in the air would only last a few hours and would take place a few days before the presidential elections in America.
Obama’s team is supposedly convinced that such an operation would help make short work of Romney’s pre-election strategy, which has so far given positive results. The Republican candidate has successfully criticized the president for his insufficient severity towards Iran and his inability to protect the interests of Israel — Washington’s main Middle Eastern ally. If Obama creates a three-hour long Armageddon for the Iranians, Romney will not only have to admit to being wrong, he will also have to support the president’s actions.
On the other hand, the American supporters of a strike on Iran say that if an attack were to take place, the Iranian nuclear program would be pushed back many years. Libya, Syria and Iraq would escape from the influence of Tehran, while Russia and China would realize the foolishness of their attempts to deprive America of its leadership in the Middle East.
While it is difficult to argue with the supposed changes to the internal power distribution in the U.S. that a bombing of Iranian targets would provoke, all other conclusions of the war supporters seem unconvincing to say the least. Let’s examine a few scenarios of how events might develop if the bombings were to take place.
Scenario 1: Iran’s nuclear program, which had existed until now and had been a peaceful one (nobody has yet proven otherwise), really does lie in ruins. However, the proud Iranian nation acquires an incontestable reason not only to restore what has been destroyed with three times the amount of energy, but also to develop, within the shortest possible period of time, its own nuclear bomb — so that nobody else will think that they can bomb Iran and go unpunished. Meanwhile, there is no doubt that in the upcoming Iranian presidential elections next year for replacing Ahmadinejad (who can no longer put himself forward as candidate) will be a politician who, against the background of his anti-American statements, will make the current Iranian leader look like a dove of peace.
Scenario 2: However critical an attitude the West may have toward Iran, it passes off a wish for reality when it claims that Tehran is completely isolated in the Middle East. An attack on Iran will only unite the Arab world, while the “streets” will make the Arab League take a much harder stance toward Washington. In other words, the U.S. can forget about its Middle Eastern policy, not to mention its leadership in the Middle East. Meanwhile, having become a “martyr,” Tehran will unequivocally strengthen its influence in the region. Recent events linked to the release of the scandalous film “Innocence of Muslims” clearly demonstrated the Middle East’s — and indeed the entire Arab world’s — true attitude toward the U.S. An attack on Iran will, without a doubt, make the White House’s position hopeless.
Scenario 3: Having recovered from the bombing, Tehran, as promised, will begin to take its revenge. There is no doubt that among the Iranians, there will be many who will want to place bombs in the New York subway or, for example, at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. In such a case, al-Qaeda threats will seem like child's play compared to a series of bloody acts of terrorism. Furthermore, it cannot be ruled out that Iranian battle groups are already scattered around the globe and are only waiting for an order.
Scenario 4: The most plausible scenario is a combination of all three scenarios outlined above. Is Obama ready to pay such a gigantic price for his re-election?
In the battle for his re-election to the White House, Barack Obama is rapidly losing points. His rival, Mitt Romney, is triumphantly ahead in practically all American polls. Against this background, the voices heard louder and louder are those of the Washington political analysts who believe that only a victorious war against Iran can help Obama remain in the White House for a second term.
Will the Democrats really decide to strike Iranian nuclear facilities? Virtually everyone is confident that there will be no full-scale military land operation. What with its tremendous debts, America simply cannot afford one at the moment. Furthermore, hundreds, if not thousands, of American soldiers killed by Iranians would not only close the doors of the White House for Obama; it could potentially erase him from the American political map forever.
But to strike Iranian nuclear facilities from a reasonable height is an entirely different matter. This is something that Americans are good at. Of course, there is one big “but.” In Iran, Russian anti-aircraft warfare systems are on duty. Their properties are readily available to the public. Nonetheless, not a single respected American expert would rule out the possibility that Russian missiles could greatly surprise the U.S. air force. In other words, whatever the case, the Obama administration would most likely be unable to avoid casualties.
And yet the famous American expert on foreign policy David Rothkopf still believes that, together with Israel, the U.S. is seriously considering the possibility of inflicting a “surgical” blow to Iranian nuclear facilities. According to Rothkopf, the war in the air would only last a few hours and would take place a few days before the presidential elections in America.
Obama’s team is supposedly convinced that such an operation would help make short work of Romney’s pre-election strategy, which has so far given positive results. The Republican candidate has successfully criticized the president for his insufficient severity towards Iran and his inability to protect the interests of Israel — Washington’s main Middle Eastern ally. If Obama creates a three-hour long Armageddon for the Iranians, Romney will not only have to admit to being wrong, he will also have to support the president’s actions.
On the other hand, the American supporters of a strike on Iran say that if an attack were to take place, the Iranian nuclear program would be pushed back many years. Libya, Syria and Iraq would escape from the influence of Tehran, while Russia and China would realize the foolishness of their attempts to deprive America of its leadership in the Middle East.
While it is difficult to argue with the supposed changes to the internal power distribution in the U.S. that a bombing of Iranian targets would provoke, all other conclusions of the war supporters seem unconvincing to say the least. Let’s examine a few scenarios of how events might develop if the bombings were to take place.
Scenario 1: Iran’s nuclear program, which had existed until now and had been a peaceful one (nobody has yet proven otherwise), really does lie in ruins. However, the proud Iranian nation acquires an incontestable reason not only to restore what has been destroyed with three times the amount of energy, but also to develop, within the shortest possible period of time, its own nuclear bomb — so that nobody else will think that they can bomb Iran and go unpunished. Meanwhile, there is no doubt that in the upcoming Iranian presidential elections next year for replacing Ahmadinejad (who can no longer put himself forward as candidate) will be a politician who, against the background of his anti-American statements, will make the current Iranian leader look like a dove of peace.
Scenario 2: However critical an attitude the West may have toward Iran, it passes off a wish for reality when it claims that Tehran is completely isolated in the Middle East. An attack on Iran will only unite the Arab world, while the “streets” will make the Arab League take a much harder stance toward Washington. In other words, the U.S. can forget about its Middle Eastern policy, not to mention its leadership in the Middle East. Meanwhile, having become a “martyr,” Tehran will unequivocally strengthen its influence in the region. Recent events linked to the release of the scandalous film “Innocence of Muslims” clearly demonstrated the Middle East’s — and indeed the entire Arab world’s — true attitude toward the U.S. An attack on Iran will, without a doubt, make the White House’s position hopeless.
Scenario 3: Having recovered from the bombing, Tehran, as promised, will begin to take its revenge. There is no doubt that among the Iranians, there will be many who will want to place bombs in the New York subway or, for example, at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. In such a case, al-Qaeda threats will seem like child's play compared to a series of bloody acts of terrorism. Furthermore, it cannot be ruled out that Iranian battle groups are already scattered around the globe and are only waiting for an order.
Scenario 4: The most plausible scenario is a combination of all three scenarios outlined above. Is Obama ready to pay such a gigantic price for his re-election?