What War with Iran Means

"Diplomacy has
failed,"
Sen.

Chuck Schumer
, D-N.Y., told AIPAC,
"Iran is on the
verge of becoming nuclear and we cannot afford that."

[VIDEO]

"We have to
contemplate the final option,"
said Sen. Evan Bayh,
D-Ind., "the use
of force to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon."

War is a
"terrible thing,"
said Sen.

Lindsay Graham
, R-S.C., but
"sometimes it is
better to go to war than to allow the Holocaust to
develop a second time."

Graham then describes the war we
Americans should fight:

"If military
force is ever employed, it should be done in a decisive
fashion. The Iran government`s ability to wage
conventional war against its neighbors and our troops in
the region should not exist. They should not have one
plane that can fly or one ship that can float."

Danielle Pletka
of the American Enterprise Institute,

Neocon
Central, writes,
"The only
questions remaining, one Washington politico tells me,
are who starts it, and how it ends."
[Iran
Sanctions Are Failing. What`s Next?
,
WSJ, March 31,
2010]

As to who starts it, we know the
answer. Teheran has not started a war in memory and is
not going to launch a suicide attack on a superpower
with thousands of nuclear weapons. As with Iraq in 2003,
the war will be launched by the United States against a
nation that did not attack us—to strip it of weapons it
does not have.

But to Graham`s point, if we are
going to start this war, prudence dictates that we
destroy Iran`s ability to fight back. At a minimum, we
would have to use airstrikes and cruise missiles to hit
a range of targets.

First, Iran`s nuclear facilities
such as the uranium enrichment plant at

Natanz
, the U.S.-built reactor that makes medical
isotopes, the power plant at Bushehr, the centrifuge
facility near Qom and the heavy

water plant at Arak
.

Our problem here is that the last
three are not even operational and all are subject to
U.N. inspections. There are Russians at Bushehr. And
there is no evidence that diversion to a weapons program
has taken place.

If Iran has secret plants working
on nuclear weapons, why have we not been told where, and
demanded that U.N. inspectors be let in? Why did 16 U.S.
intelligence agencies, three years ago, tell us they did
not exist and Iran gave up its drive for a nuclear
weapon in 2003?

If Iran is on the
"verge" of a
bomb, as Schumer claims, the entire U.S. intelligence
community should be decapitated for incompetence.

This week, in a hyped headline,

"CIA: Iran
capable of producing nukes,"
the
Washington Times
said that a new CIA report claims,
"Iran continues
to develop a range of capabilities that could be applied
to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to
do so."

Excuse me, but this is mush. We
could say the same of a dozen countries that use nuclear
power and study nuclear technology.

But let us continue with Graham`s
blitzkrieg war.

To prevent a counterattack, the
United States would have to take out Iran`s 14 airfields
and all its warplanes on the ground. We would also have
to sink every warship and submarine in Iran`s navy and
destroy some 200 missile, patrol and speedboats operated
by the Revolutionary Guard, else they would be dropping
mines and mauling our warships.

Also, it would be crucial on day
one to hit Iran`s launch sites and missile plants for,
like Saddam in 1991, Iran would probably attack Israel,
to make it an American and Israeli war on an Islamic
republic.

Among other critical targets would
be the Silkworm anti-ship missile sites on Iran`s
coastline that would menace U.S. warships and oil
tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Any Iranian
attack on ships or seeding of mines would likely close
the gulf and send world oil prices soaring.

Revolutionary Guard barracks,
especially the Quds Force near Iraq, would have to be
hit to slow troop movement to and across the border into
Iraq to kill U.S. soldiers and civilians. The same might
be necessary against Iranian troops near Afghanistan.

With Iran`s ally Hezbollah in south
Beirut, all U.S. civilians should probably be pulled out
of Lebanon before an attack lest they wind up dead or
hostages. And how safe would Americans be in the gulf,
especially Bahrain, home of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, a
predominantly Shia island?

And whose side would Shia Iraq
take?

Would we have to intern all Iranian
nationals in the United States, as we did Germans and
Italians in 1941? How many terror attacks on soft
targets in the USA could we expect from Iranian and
Hezbollah agents in reprisal for our killing thousands
of civilians in hundreds of strikes on Iran?

Before the War Party stampedes us
into yet another war, the Senate should find out if
Teheran is really on the
"verge" of getting a bomb, and why deterrence, which never failed
us, cannot succeed with Iran.

COPYRIGHT

CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.



Patrick J. Buchanan

needs

no introduction
to
VDARE.COM readers; his book
 
State
of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and
Conquest of America
, can
be ordered from Amazon.com. His latest book

is Churchill,
Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How
Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost
the World,

reviewed

here
by

Paul Craig Roberts.