what if Iran is NOT the target?


i was going back and forth with ek over the outcome of a strike on Iran in clammyc’s diary. here’s what ek said:

given the current correlation of forces we can not win. Iran closes the Gulf.  We can’t prevent this. They cut off our forces in Iraq.  We can’t prevent that either.
Gas goes to $12 a gallon if you can find it.  Global depression.
Bleak enough for you yet?

BushCo must have looked at the same scenarios… they aren’t going in this to lose it or lose control of oil or this country. Unless they’re going for the rapture. And let’s just say Dick Cheney isn’t ready go to heaven just yet.

So if ek is right… if game theory is impeccable, then what is really happening here?

Maybe the target isn’t Iran at all. It’s a much bigger target: THE INTERNET.

It’s the Dan Rather play… give us everything we need and then, when BushCo is ready, they will kill us with it. They will say the internet violates our very security and if the USA ever wanted to attack a country, the internet would compromise any mission.

Because if we can’t win this war… if it isn’t for the rapture, then WTF?

I don’t know where else to go with this.

But I don’t think it’s good enough to accept any of what’s going on. It’s not good enough not to think it through. This is happening to us. We need to do something about it.

Maybe this theory is completely off base. This isn’t for more comments about outrage over Bush and Iran. I want to know what you THINK about their strategy and what their intent it.

And how do we convince what few people in Congress or the military may still be on the side of the Force to do something? And what do we do. Because here is what is at stake and please, read it and then read it again:

i’m kind of in a throwing up my hands and saying “fuck it all” sort of mood.

except i can’t, because part of the future of our country is sitting at my dining room table coloring pictures of rainbows that say “i love you mommy.”

Ming Vase from tonight’s clammyc’s diary


Skip to comment form

  1. But as we interpret the Administration’s actions regarding Iran, we should keep in mind the objective situation out there in Middle East.  It isn’t going to change, and it is what Cheney cares about.

    (1) When the U.S. leaves Iraq, Iran WILL become the defacto benefactor state.  Iraq will be a satellite of Iran.  Just as Iran will be (for all intents and purposes, from Cheney’s pov) a satellite of China.

    (2) Resources are dwindling, and whoever controls them will control the 21st century.  (Again: Cheney’s pov and limited imagination — he would say he can’t afford to be imaginative when he’s playing with the future of “the free world”)

    (3) Something has to be done about (1).  That’s why all the rigamorol about fleets and sanctions and huffing and puffing.  It’s all revving up in preparation for a drag that can’t actually be ripped.

    The real target is ultimately China.  Cheney is trying to explain things to them, through Iran.  It might be, MIGHT be, that he thinks fighting China now makes more sense than fighting China in 2050, and a fight is inevitable. 

    These are random thoughts.  I’m afraid there’s no single response to your question in them.  Except: I don’t think it’s us Cheney cares about.  Or the internet.

  2. this about china but indirectly…..

    a strike would most likely cripple irans oil maybe cheney thinks we can ride out the bump in prices and supply constraint better than the chinese due to their growth rate….

    thus a strike at them by proxy….

    they hold too much debt to strike directly……

Comments have been disabled.