Redstate

  Right now, everything that happens vis-a-vis Iran goes back to Iraq.  Even if the relevence isn't clear on the surface, it's all connected to Iraq.  

  Lt. Gen. McInerney notes in the cited evidence that Israel requires overflight permission from the United States (through Iraqi airspace) to attack Iran.  Iran is going to see such permission as an act of war on our part.  Iran knows, however, that they have no chance of defeating us in an open war, so they'll attempt to exact their retribution in Iraq.  

  Iraqi Shia have been organized by Iranian inteligence services.  With the jockeying for position in the new government ongoing, Iranian influence has surely waned.  But expect them to do their very best to try and whip up a Shia uprising in Iraq in response to an Israeli air attack on their Shia brethren in Iran.  That would be bad on a number of levels, not the least of which is that Shia political parties hold the most power in the Iraqi government we just helped establish.  

[Insert cost-benefit analysis here.]

The world oil supply is fixed and it is basically maxed (exclusive of new long term investments to tap existing oil in places like Iraq or Alaska, or new finds).  The Saudis currently have an extra 500,000 barrel a day capacity, maybe.   If Iran's oil came off the market the reduced supply in the face of record demands, would drive the price to an estimated $150 to $200  a barrel.  

I'd recommend your diary, but heck man!  You're already on the front page!  Good job.

By the way, I voted that the US should hit Iran.

Well done.

Change the "it" to "somewhere".

with the US Military...big supporter!

I suggest changing the tag to "When it absolutely, positively needs to become nowhere overnight."

I see no advantage (to the United States) to "subcontract" any strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities to Isreal.

The fact is Israel can't get there (let alone back) without our at least grudging permission.  Just look at the map.  Since we will be accused (probably with good reason as mentioned) of supporting the strike, we might as well do it ourselves.  After all our stealth assets and a massive cruise missile volley (neither of which Israel can supply) would make the mission have a much greater chance of success without major losses on the side of the good guys.

I hope we don't try to take the "easy" way out and leave it to the Israelis.  No one in the (muslim) world will buy it anyway.

It would be fun to do to the bad guys what they did to us in Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, etc.: Work with trusted allies invisibly to enhance the ally's capability.

The Iranian Shia connection to recent partisan uprisings in Iraq hasn't been forgotten, nor has there been any lack of debate concerning those ramifications in our recent "nuclear Iran" discussions. Duly noted.

Some serious risks must be taken at critical points, when the problem at hand presents a greater potential danger than the risks associated with action.

War is fraught with such catch-22 decisions, none of them pleasant, some of them necessary.

we would get it, not how much it would cost. You're right, the geo-political disruption would send prices out the roof.

Note, though, that my premise was that the Iranian oil supply would not be off line for any extended period of time, since we're talking about strategic air strikes.

On the other hand, if we go into a ground engagement, it's a whole 'nother story.

I wish I had some stock in ANWR right now.  Alas, youth and a lack of rich parents...

Israel just has to purchase plenty of American bunker-busters first, if they haven't already. Then Israel, plus about 1000 American cruise missiles could probably get the job done. With American cruise missiles, there's lots of cruise, but no "crusader."

Israel buys the bunker busters from us and we delivery them to the address requested by the Israelis....

What can The Red, White and Blue do for you!

When it absolutely, positively has to get there overnight!

of good customer service.  

"Would you like Stealth with that?"

That's what most of the world would like to see ... let the Israelis do it, so that we can condemn them in the aftermath and not trouble ourselves with actually dropping any "gifts" ourselves.

I think the Israelis know that they have a window of opportunity to take out their nearby problems, before Iran gets its nukes and makes that more difficult.  But I'm not sure they're ready to take out Iran ... if only because it's what the rest of the world would like them to do.

No doubt the Israelis have the capability ... but the Irani facilities are buried pretty deep (they learned that from the Israeli strike on Iraq's nukes).

Politicians and diplomats will dither ... Israel just might like to see them actually do something. Iran is up to us, Europe, Russia, and China.

When that happens, all eyez on Iran.

I think the majority of our allies would like a peek into Syria.  Israel will give us that peak.  Let's not forget, they are looking for a couple soldiers.

If not dead, I bet they are in Syria. If that's the case, sooner or later , Iran will be the target.

.... because if Israel attacks Iran we will have be walking, pedeling, rollerskating, or whatever, to work and to school.

the Sauds will still be selling us oil. But if not, the orders will simply be increased from Mexico and Venezuela (who will in turn buy and resell more from Russia, which they are currently doing to complete their standing orders as it is).

Unless we or Israel strike the Iranian oil infrastructure, which I haven't seen anyone call for, I doubt the conflict will physically do much to affect the world oil supply, once Iran gets their power supplies up and running again. Now, politically that may be a different story entirely.

would make any return visits necessary to make sure the delivery is.... ah.... complete, and the customer is fully satisfied with the product.

are looking sweet right now.