AJC.com > Opinion > Opinion Talk > Archives > 2008 > May > 06 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USShould we broaden war to Iran?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In the opinion of CIA Director Michael Hayden, “it is the policy of the Iranian government, approved to the highest level of that government, to facilitate the killing of Americans in Iraq.”
Hayden’s assessment is widely shared in the U.S. government, and it’s no doubt correct. The Iranians are arming and probably training Iraqi insurgents, and they are in part responsible for the recent rise in U.S. casualties. Last month, 52 U.S. personnel were killed in Iraq, by far the highest total since September 2007.
The question is what to do about it, given the basic facts of the situation:
Fact one: Iran has every incentive to prevent us from “winning” in either Iraq, its neighbor to the west, or Afghanistan, its neighbor to the east. The reason is sheer self-preservation.
The U.S. government has publicly committed itself to the overthrow of Iran’s government. But the Iranians know that as long as they can keep us tied up and bleeding in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can’t turn our attention to them. From the Iranian point of view, they’d rather fight the Americans “over there” —- in Iraq and Afghanistan —- than have to fight us at home.
Fact two: Already overstretched by fighting two long-term wars with insufficient manpower, the U.S. military knows it cannot afford to open a third front against Iran. We do have the power to strike and strike hard at Iran —- “It would be a mistake to think we are out of combat power,” as one top American official warned recently —- but if attacks on Iran led to something bigger and more sustained, we would have a hard time containing the consequences.
Fact three: Gasoline is now approaching $4 a gallon in the United States. A broader war in the oil-rich Persian Gulf involving Iran could quickly drive the price of gasoline to $8 a gallon or higher, with immense ramifications for a global and national economy already teetering on the edge.
At one level, it is tempting to forget facts two and three and focus instead on the fact that Iran is helping to kill U.S. soldiers. But history suggests the answer is not so simple.
In fact, American presidents and foreign leaders have often had to face this sort of dilemma, weighing the dangers of a broader war against the perceived benefits of military action. Most of the time, they have understood that a broader war would do little good.
In the Korean War, President Harry Truman refused to approve attacks against Communist China even though the Chinese were supplying weaponry and manpower to our North Korean opponents and helping to kill U.S. troops. Truman understood that the dangers of an all-out land war in Asia outweighed the possible benefits.
In Vietnam, presidents Johnson and Nixon made similar calculations even though the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong were being supplied by the Soviet Union and China. A decade later the roles were reversed, with the United States smuggling arms to insurgents in Afghanistan fighting the Soviet Union, and the Soviets were forced to accept that reality.
Limited war, with all its frustrations, is sometimes the best option available. But it takes wisdom and patience to appreciate that difficult fact, two traits seldom seen in the current administration.
Permalink | Comments (21) | Categories: Forum
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Copyleft
May 6, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this
You know what would prevent Iranians from killing American soldiers in Iraq?
If THEY WEREN’T IN IRAQ. Sheesh!
By Paco
May 6, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this
“Mission Accomplished!”
By James
May 6, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this
The American people just don’t realize what it takes to promulgate war. Not only actual troop strength but the will of the people.
We have 10 Army Divisions today. In World War II we had close to 100.
Most people don’t know this but the draft rate in World War II was 66+% !! (Vietnam was only 25%). Most people have to be “encouraged” to go off and have other people try to kill them no matter the cause.
Bottom line - this country is not ready for a war with Iran (or anyone else right now) unless our shores were actually being invaded. That’s not necessarily good - it’s just the truth.
James - USMC Vietnam combat infantry veteran
By Charles
May 6, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this
Sadly, nothing will be done with Iran until one of their nuclear devices they’ll build (if they haven’t already) is set off inside the borders of the U.S. or Israel. America has become ‘fat and happy’ in this time and day. President Bush’s offensive tactics are frowned upon these days - prevention is a “bad thing” to the Democraps.
By Road Scholar
May 6, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this
What do you not understand about “NO”.
They would not be aiming at us if we were not in Iraq! The nuclear issue should be handled by the UN through economic sanctions.
By RealityKing
May 6, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this
Iran has been training terrorists to kill Americans, Jews, Euros, and anyone else that disagrees with them, for decades now Jay. Where have you been?
But fear not protected ones, at least in Iraq, there are just as many Americans killing Irianians as there are Irianians killing Americans. It’s called special forces counter-insurgency, shhhh… A excellent tool we designed to use against the bad guys since learning that running away never works.
Now with increased UN sanctions for non-compliance and even Russia giving up their nuclear secrets, Iran has found itself boxed in between UN sanctions and the 30% of non anti-peace Americans supporting W. And like al Qeada, Iran’s only hope now is for the democrats to win in Nov and run away from the fight for peace. Leaving the M.E. to fall back into the grasp of tryanny. Just like Iran wants..
Yes indeed, W has done an excellent job of exposing Iran, freeing 57 million oppressed Afganistans and Iraqis, bring Libya and North Korea to it’s knees and of course, protecting us from terrorist attacks on the US.
Only America’s sheep and bitter, self-centered, partisan liberals think otherwise. Don’t you agree Jay??
By Michael H. Smith
May 6, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this
Reality One: End the oil addiction in this country, become energy independent, win the war. Game over!
Hard to finance terror, militaries and WMD programs when all you have to sell is camel dung and sand in the global economy.
By atlpaddy
May 6, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this
I want to personally thank RealityKing in his courageous fight for Iraqi Freedom on message boards and internet blogs everywhere.
By Filster
May 6, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this
I agree that opening hostilities on a third front would be a disaster due to lack of manpower. For that reason, and to save American lives, I say just nuc the @ssholes, both in Iraq AND Iran. The terrorists want to make it to paradise. Well, let’s just help them on their way. Neither Iraq nor Iran are worth one U.S. servicemembers life, so a couple nice little nucs and - viola! - problem solved.
By Matt
May 6, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this
Its amazing how easily we are brain washed by our media. There has been no real evidence in Iraq suggesting Iran has a role in the violence or that it is fighting a proxy war. Here are some facts though: 1. Iran helped us against the taliban in 01 2. Iran helped us in Iraq by helping keep the shiites from taking part in the attacks on our troops. (Most of the insurgency up until recently has been by the sunnis) 3. Iran asked for talks and better relations in 2003 and was denied for unknown reasons.
By Charliedog8
May 6, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this
The U.S. isn’t at war.
A few couragous men and women have volunteered for extremely hazardous duty in Iraq and Afganistan, risking their lives for “our national security”. What absolute baloney. They are pawns in a battle for control of oil.
The rest of us got a damn tax cut. Boy, what a hardship we’re enduring.
So exactly which army does our dim-witted president plan to invade Iran with? And does he have a better plan than he did in Iraq? (No plan!)
And how’s that top-secret energy policy going? Better keep that one a secret. So far, so good. I certainly haven’t seen any sign of it.
By satch
May 6, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this
hmmm we armed the taliban against the russians in afghanistan then cry when someone{iran} does it back to us?what the heck did we think was going to happen.what goes around comes around.how naive to think that the other arabs would not send money and guns to their muslim brothers .
By Tariq
May 6, 2008 1:13 PM | Link to this
Point 1) I don’t blame the majority of Americans to be ignorant (electing Bush for 2 terms) because of all BS they are fed 24/7 via the Zionist controlled media. Point 2) Iran has not been and will not be a danger to USA or Israel. Iran has not and will not have Nuclear Weapons because they don’t need it and it is the official policy of the Iranian Government. Point 3) Iran has not Threatened USA or Israel by saying it will obliterate it with alleged Nuclear or for that matter with anything else. US and Israel have done it and continue to do it. Point 4) Iran is not on USA shores, rather it is the other way around. if you are a realistic human, think how would you feel if you had your enemy military over your borders Threatening your people?! Point 5) the easiest fix to all problems for longterm sustainable peace is talks… not threats! stop threatening and looking down at the Iranian nation because we have an old civilization and have contributed to the world and do deserve RESPECT. give Iran respect and they will be your best friend.
Point 6) it is sad to see nobody talks about point 5 (long term peace) instead focus on the BS they are being fed through the Media and think the solution is ultimately war. stop your double standards. if you want Iran not to have peace full nuclear cycle fuel, then put pressure on Nuclear weapon states (US, Britain, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, Russia, France) to abandon theirs and stop threatening non-nuclear states with their Nukes!
Peace
By Mark
May 6, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this
When have we become the world police? Bring our boys (or what’s left of them) home, secure our borders, and let the ragheads kill themselves.
By Bob
May 6, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this
I want to withdrawl from the world sometimes too.. But when I look into my children’s eyes at night, I know that is not the answer either.
By RealityKing
May 6, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this
And now I can call it ‘dissent’ atlpaddy!
We do love dissent don’t we…, no thanks necessary.
By Q
May 6, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this
Sadly most of you don’t know much about the history of the region and most alarmingly neither does the current US administration. The think these mullah’s in Iran are bunch of idiots and nothing more than your average priest found in any Sunday churches. These people are very educated and much more resilient than what we give them credit and/or what we have in the western world.
I was born in Iran and left before fall of Shah in my early teens. I find these people to have long memory and very vindictive, the current Iraq situation is a payback for the 8 year old war that was manufactured to decimate Iran, and now the other shoe falls and everyone is pointing the finger at them. Remember, Iran has not gone over 10K miles to the border of US, US has moved its military there and they have threatened them as “NEXT.” Anyone who thinks the Iraq was for “democracy” is either blind or stupid, this was to control the world oil supply. Currently over 65% of the world oil supply is bound and restricted by US and some others like Venezuela does not have any other viable customers except US.
There is no solution there without Iran, the sooner the US gets it the lower the pain will be. Unless you do as Clinton suggested to destroy Iran, because a wounded Iran will keep coming at you.
The biggest problem here is that US thinks Iranians are idiots and thinks they can pull the wool over the heads, those days are GONE! Sit down and negotiate in good faith.
By jim
May 6, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this
Charliedog8
Just how much oil is in Afghanistan?
By Edward
May 6, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this
Silly people, this “war” isn’t about oil, at least not directly. It was all about 1) revenge, 2) raiding the US treasury to enrich major neocon corporations (Halliburton, Blackwater, etc.). That’s what our soldiers have died for, not our security. The oil is just an added bonus that gives the traders and oil companies yet another excuse to raise the prices and rake in record windfall profits.
The only ideology this “war” proffers is greed.
By David
May 6, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this
I am and always will be patriotic toward the USA. I have served in the military, and would do so again to defend this great country of ours. I will always honor those that had to serve any war no matter the reason. I am a vet from the Persian Gulf War.
It is great to assist a country (like Iraq)to get back on their feet. But they have to want this bad enough for the plan to work. They must help us in action, not just words.
I know there are many motives for this war (some good and some bad), and we can see it is tearing us Americans apart here at home. This war is dividing our people and weakening our morale and principles.
We’ve been there long enough, and seems there is no end in sight. While this goes on, we Americans are paying dearly in steeper prices and economic problems. If this continues much longer, there won’t be a home for the soldiers to come home to.
Bring the troops home, and fix the mess in America. It is time to lick our wounds and strengthen our resolve.
By Skeptic Tank
May 6, 2008 5:49 PM | Link to this
To hell with Iran. Let’s invade Mexico. They’re the only country in the world that spits on our sovereignty with impunity.