"You take the blue pill and the
story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to
believe."

Escape
Enter
"You take the
red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I'll show
you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."
Store and Support
|
Iran is bracing itself for an expected American-led air
campaign. The latter is in the advanced stages of military
planning.
If there were to be war between the United States and Iran, the
aerial campaign would unleash fierce combat. It would be fully
interactive on multiple fronts. It would be a difficult battle
involving active movement in the air from both sides.
If war were to occur, the estimates of casualties envisaged by
American and British war planners would be high.
The expected wave of aerial attacks would resemble the tactics
of the Israeli air-war against Lebanon and would follow the same
template, but on a larger scale of execution.
The U.S. government and the Pentagon had an active role in
graphing, both militarily and politically, the template of
confrontation in Lebanon. The Israeli siege against Lebanon is
in many regards a dress rehearsal for a planned attack on Iran.1
A war against Iran is one that could also include military
operations against Syria. Multiple theatres would engulf many of
the neighbors of Iran and Syria, including Iraq and
Israel/Palestine.
It must also be noted that an attack on Iran would be of a scale
which would dwarf the events in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the
Levant. A full blown war on Iran would not only swallow up and
incorporate these other conflicts. It would engulf the entire
Middle East and Central Asian region into an extensive
confrontation.
An American-led air campaign against Iran, if it were to be
implemented, would be both similar and contrasting in its
outline and intensity when compared to earlier Anglo-American
sponsored confrontations.
The war would start with intense bombardment and attacks on
Iran's infrastructure, but would be different in its scope of
operations and intensity.
The characteristics of such a conflict would also be
unpredictable because of Iran's capabilities to respond. And in
all likelihood, Iran would launch its own potent attacks and
extend the theatre of war by attacking U.S. and American-led
troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf.
The United States must also take into account the fact that Iran
unlike Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon would be an opponent with
the capability to resist the US sponsored attacks on the ground,
but also on the sea and in the air.
Unlike the former opponents faced by the United States and its
partners, Iran would be able to target the military launch pads
used by the United States. Iran would also be able to attack the
U.S. supply and logistical hubs in the Persian Gulf. American
ships carrying supplies, troops, and warplanes would be
vulnerable to Iranian counter-attacks by way of Iranian
missiles, warplanes, and naval forces. It is no mere coincidence
that Iran has been demonstrating its military capabilities
during the “Blow of Zolfaqar” war games conducted in late August
.2
Iranian Preparations for an American-led Air Campaign
The United States has continually threatened to attack Iran.
These threats are made under the pretext of halting the
development of nuclear weapons in Iran. The development of
nuclear weapons by Iran is something the IAEA and its inspectors
have refuted as untrue3, but the United States insists on
continuing the charade as grounds for a military endgame with
Iran.
The threat of an American-led attack against Iran with the heavy
involvement of Israel and Britain, amongst others, has primed
Iran to prepare itself for the anticipated moment. Over the
years, this has led Iran to stride for self-sufficiency in
producing its own advanced military hardware and the development
of asymmetrical tactics to combat the United States.
Iranian defense planners have stated publicly that they have
learned from the cases of neighbouring Afghanistan and Iraq.
They are acutely aware of the U.S. military’s heavy reliance on
aerial strikes.
August 2006 saw the start of the virtually unprecedented events
of the Blow of Zolfaqar war games throughout Iran and its border
provinces.4 These were similar to those conducted in April 2006.
The latter were also held during a period of tense confrontation
between Iran and the United States.
April 2006 was a period that could have resulted in military
conflict between both the United States and Iran. In April 2006,
Iran had not only dismissed the deadline set on its nuclear
program, but it announced in defiance to the United States that
it had successfully enriched uranium for the first time.
Iran has taken the opportunity of the launching of both the
April 2006 and Blow of Zolfaqar war games to display its
preparedness and capability to engage in combat. Additionally,
Iran has taken the occasion to fine tune its defenses and
mobilize its military apparatus. This exhibition of Iranian
military might is intended to deter America's intent to trigger
another Middle Eastern war.
During the war games, the Iranian military has adjusted and
modified its air defense shield for maximum dexterity and
efficiency in preparation, to stop incoming missiles and
invading aircraft..5 The war games have been an opportunity for
testing of Iranian capacity to wage war in the air
The Iranian military has also reported the testing of
laser-guided weaponry, advanced torpedoes, ballistic missiles,
anti-ship missiles, bullets that pierce through bullet-proof
vests, and electronic military hardware during the Blow of
Zolfaqar war games.6 Surface-to-surface and ocean-to-surface
missiles (submarine-to-surface missiles) in the Persian Gulf
were also tested in late-August 2006. These included missiles
that are invisible to radar and can use multiple warheads or
carry multiple payloads to hit numerous targets simultaneously.
Iran has also tested a “2,000 pound guided-bomb with long-range
capabilities.” This “2,000 pound bomb” is said to be a “special
weapon developed for penetrating military, economic and
strategic targets located deep underground or on the soil of the
[impending] enemy.”7 In the case of war, this weapon could be
directed against Anglo-American military infrastructure in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf. This guided bomb is an
unmanned aircraft carrying an explosive warhead. Following the
execution of the Blow of Zolfaqar war games, the Iranian Defense
Minister stated that “Iran now joins the few countries that
possess guided missile technology,”8
Iran has also been manufacturing its own warplanes,9 submarines,
attack helicopters, tanks, torpedoes, and missiles. This
includes remote-controlled modified Maverick Missiles.10
Brigadier-General Amini, the Deputy Commander of the Air Branch
(Air Force) of the Regular Forces, has highlighted that Iran has
starting the development and manufacturing of new types of
warplanes besides the “Lighting fighter jets” that have been
showcased in Northern Iran.11
To discourage the United States in its plans to attack Iran, the
Iranian military has additionally been showcasing its abilities
to dog fight in the air with its fighter jets.12 Iranian fighter
and bomber jets have been progressively equipped with advanced
software and hardware, developed in Iran or by way of technology
transfers from China, the Russian Federation, and the republics
of the former Soviet Union.
Iranian Commanders have also stated that Iran can track and hit
warplanes without using conventional radar. Iran has also been
showcasing its signal jamming devices and electronic military
hardware, which it compares to NATO standards13.
Warnings to the United States To Stop Its War Plans
In Iran military commanders and state officials have also
directly warned the United States to halt its march towards war
in the Middle East. An account of a statement by Major-General
Salehi, commander of the Iranian Army, sums up the generic view
of Iranian military officials and planners in the advent of
another Middle Eastern war initiated by the United States;
“Pointing to the joint maneuvers to be carried out by the U.S.
army [meaning military] and some other countries in the regional
waters in the coming days, the General said that the U.S.
presence in the region [Middle East] is considered as a threat
to the security of the regional countries, and further warned
Washington that in case the U.S. dares to practice threats [by
actually attacking], it will then have to face a defeat as bad
as the one that the Zionists [Israel] had to sustain in
Lebanon.”14
The Iranian Defence Minister has said “that his ministry is now
equipping the border units of the army with modern military
tools and weapons in a bid to increase their military
capabilities,”15 and “that any possible enemy invasion of Iran
will receive a severe blow, adding that failures of alien troops
[meaning U.S., British, Coalition, and NATO forces] in Iraq and
Afghanistan have taught trans-regional powers extreme
caution.”16
Other examples of public warnings by Iranian military commanders
directed at the United States and its partners include;
Acting Deputy Commander [Brigadier-General Ahmadi] of the
Iranian Mobilized Forces (Basij), noting the intensification of
the psychological operations and pressures against Iran,
stressed that his troops are fully prepared to encounter “any
stupid act by the enemies.”17 (September 9, 2006)
[Brigadier-General Mohammad Hejazi] advised the U.S. to
relinquish the idea of invading Iran, stressing that as soon as
the U.S. dares to make such a big mistake, it will lose its
forged reputation due to its [the U.S. military’s] frequent and
shocking defeats from the Iranian troops.18 (September 10, 2006)
[Commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Major-General
Safavi has warned that Revolutionary Guard] ground troops form a
defensive force, but meantime warned that in case any foreign
threats are posed to Iran, [assured that the] IRGC adopts an
aggressive strategy and hits enemy targets in strategic depth.
He also described the southwestern province of Khuzestan as the
most strategic region of the country, saying, “Considering that
Khuzestan is a border province located at our sensitive borders
with Iraq where British and American occupying troops aim at
devising cultural and security plots for Khuzestani people
through their intelligence organizations and bodies, IRGC and
Basij troops should maintain their preparedness at [the] highest
levels possible in order to confront and defuse any such
measures by the enemies.”19 (September 13, 2006: Also See
British Troops Mobilizing on the Iranian Border)
During the August war games, Iranian military commanders
claimed, in a gesture directed towards the United States,
Britain, and Israel, “that no air force of any power stationed
in the Middle East is capable of confronting the Iranian
military’s ground forces.”20
This might seem like a psychological tactic to influence morale
on both sides and deter any possible aerial assaults against
Iran. This statement cannot be easily overruled if a
comprehensive analysis is made and studied. In this regard, one
must look at Lebanon, where Hezbollah and the Lebanese
Resistance were able to withstand Israeli air raids and overcome
the Israeli military on the ground. The Lebanese Resistance is
reported as being armed and trained by the Iranian Revolutionary
Guard. What would an Iranian defensive of a larger magnitude,
with state resources and air capabilities, be like?
The anticipation of a conflict are also coming from Iraq. Iraqi
leaders have been charging that the United States and Britain
plan on attacking Iran from Iraqi territory. Government
representatives of Anglo-American occupied Iraq have asked that
Iraq not be turned into a theatre of war between the United
States and Iran. “We do not want Iraq to become an arena where
other states [i.e., the United States, Britain, and Iran] settle
their accounts,”21 said the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Barham
Salih while visiting the Iranian capital, Tehran. This message
looked as if it was mainly directed at the United States, as
well as Iran.
Iran Always a Military Objective for the United States
Washington: “Anyone can go to Baghdad! Real Men go to Tehran!”
According to Michel Chossudovsky (The Next Phase of the Middle
East War, September, 2006), the war on Iran is another phase of
a “military roadmap” which includes the invasions of Afghanistan
(2001) and Iraq (2003) and the Anglo-American sponsored Israeli
siege of Lebanon (2006) as earlier stages.
In May, 2003 after the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in March
2003, the motto in Washington D.C. was
“Anyone can go to Baghdad! Real men go to Tehran!”
One should ask why "real" men would continue towards Tehran
after the invasion of Iraq. This slogan demonstrates that Iran
was an objective or a phase in a broader military operation.
With that said, Washington would prefer some form of internal
"non-violent" regime change in Iran leading to American control
of the Iranian economy and oil resources rather than a high-risk
and high cost military confrontation. The shape and nature of
this conflict, however, is uncertain.
The possibility of conflict with Iran and a major aerial assault
are widely known.
The United States has been planning to attack Iran for years.
Colonel Sam Gardiner (Retired, U.S. Air Force) has stated that
the campaign against Iran is one where “the issue is not whether
the military option would be used, but who approved the start of
operations already.”
The March to War with Iran and Syria
With time fleeting, the Iranian military is positioning itself
in battle formations under the pretext of nationwide war games
and other pretexts. Iran has been steadily strengthening its air
defenses and air units in preparation for the possibility of
strikes. Iranian and Syrian coordination is also intensifying
with the passing of time.
An attack on Iran and Syria would be a combination of heavy air
bombardment by the U.S. Air Force, including the U.S. Army’s air
units. It would also include a ground offensive led by the U.S.
Marines and Army from the American bases surrounding both Iran
and Syria. The U.S. Navy and Coast Guard would predominately
manage the theatre of war in the Persian Gulf, with a view to
guaranteeing the unimpeded flow of oil through the strategic
Straits of Hormuz.
The Israeli military would deal with military operations in the
Levant. Both Israeli troops and Israeli public opinion are being
prepared for the possibility of another Middle Eastern conflict.
In this context, Israel would face the possibility of aerial
assaults from Iran. Iran has threatened to retaliate if it is
attacked, using its ballistic missiles.
British and Australian forces in southern Iraq would deploy with
the strategic aim of occupying the Iranian province of Khuzestan
and securing its oil. Khuzestan is where most of Iran’s oil
fields are located. Meanwhile a naval build-up is developing in
the Persian Gulf which also includes the U.S. Coast Guard and
the Canadian Navy.
The United States and its partners meanwhile are continuing to
marshal and siphon their forces into the Middle East and
Afghanistan. Both the United States and Britain have promised
troop reductions in Iraq, but are actually increasing their
troop levels. It also seems that a muzzle is being placed on
Lebanon to stop any attacks on Israel by the presence of troops
from member states of NATO.
Syria also seems to be expecting a possible aerial campaign. A
vessel sailing to Syria under the flag of Panama, the “Grigorio
I,” has been reported to have been stopped off the coast of
Cyprus transporting 18 truck-mounted mobile radar systems and
three command vehicles for delivery to Syria. This equipment
appears to be part of an air defence system.22
In Iran, the Intelligence Minister has warned that “enemies are
seeking to create instability in Iran through different
measures, including assassinations, explosions and extensive
insecurities” and that “his forces, in cooperation and
coordination with other governmental bodies, have defused
enemies’ plots in different Iranian provinces, including
Tehran.”23
Venezuela has also threatened to halt oil exports in the event
of an Anglo-American aggression against Iran and Syria.
Venezuela has gone on to caution that it will defend Iran “under
threat of invasion from the United States.” This was a warning
given to the United States by Venezuela during the Conference of
the Non-Aligned Movement in Cuba.24
The United States has already started to target both Iran and
Syria’s financial bodies and institutions in an act of economic
warfare. Syria has in step with Iran taken “preventative steps”
in early 2006 by switching from using the U.S. dollar to using
the Euro for all its transactions. The head of the state-owned
Syria Commercial Bank has said that such measures have been
taken to protect Syria from American sanctions (economic
warfare).25
Actions have been taken against the large, state-owned Bank
Saderat of Iran by the United States.26 The Bank Saderat has
been cut off from the U.S. financial system and its network(s).
This is part of a deliberate objective to financially cut off
Iran from the rest of the world. Three large Japanese banks, the
Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Mizuho Corporate Bank and Sumitomo
Mitsui Banking Corporation have followed in step and will
terminate business with Bank Saderat.27
Notes
FAIR USE NOTICE. This document contains
copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by
the copyright owner. GeoCrisis is making this article available in our
efforts to advance the understanding of environmental, justice issues,
corporate accountability, human rights, labor rights and social
understanding. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the
copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.
Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes
of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from
the copyright owner.
|