I have a weird ability to foresee the future on occasion. No, I'm not crazy and I've learned not to talk about it too much. It only kicks in now and then and hasn't been really useful in life. I have a couple of notches in my belt though: knew Iraq didn't have WMD from the start, made money during the 2008-9 stock market crash, haven't b…
I have a weird ability to foresee the future on occasion. No, I'm not crazy and I've learned not to talk about it too much. It only kicks in now and then and hasn't been really useful in life. I have a couple of notches in my belt though: knew Iraq didn't have WMD from the start, made money during the 2008-9 stock market crash, haven't been surprised by anything Trump has done so far, etc. Why am I writing this? I have a suspicion. This is a 10% probability scenario. Some would label that improbable, I'd label it disturbingly likely, most people can't wrap their head around what to do with it. I suggest reading it as a strategy for the red team in a wargame exercise.
It hinges on blind spots and unexamined assumptions that I've noticed in the Neocon / Israeli analysis of Iran over the last few decades. I'm going to list the bad assumptions below and build up to the 10% scenario.
Assumption: Iran is run by religious fanatics who don't think clearly about military strategy.
There was a time in the early Iran/Iraq war when this was true - i.e. the human wave attacks - but those people are dead or discredited by now. Their leadership has shown a good grasp of strategy. They've had some successes and some failures, as in any war, but they seem to be strategizing as effectively as the U.S. Are they engaged in a religious war against the west? Sure, maybe, but look at the history of the crusades and the protestant/catholic wars. They flared hot and cold over the course of centuries. That's a very long term goal.
Assumption: Our intelligence services are fantastic and we know everything about their nuclear program.
If I was facing an enemy with overwhelming intelligence-gathering abilities I would do two things. First, I would separate my secrets into two piles: things the enemy will uncover anyway versus things I will take extreme measures to keep secret. Second, I would feed the enemy a bunch of false intelligence to cover up the second pile of items. I'm going to assume Iran has a few tricks still up their sleeve.
Assumption: If Iran gets the bomb then Israel faces an existential threat - in other words, Iran will nuke them off the map.
The history of nuclear proliferation has a pattern. No nation has obtained the bomb and immediately used it against their enemies. Consistently they attempt to deter their enemies from attacking them. If I were planning a first strike attack on an enemy I wouldn't plaster the subways with propaganda posters denouncing them - I would want the element of surprise.
Assumption: Iran's missiles have improved but are not big enough for nukes, and they do not yet know how to miniaturize a warhead.
There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Assumption: Iran is months away from the bomb - and has been for ten years!
It almost refutes itself. I'll note that Iran has done an excellent job of frog boiling here.
Scenario: Trump gives the go-ahead and US joins the air war against the Iranian nuclear program. Iran's immediate counter-move is to close the Straits of Hormuz to ship traffic, cutting off half the world's supply of oil from the Persian Gulf. That forces the US to respond, and in go the carrier task forces to break this up.
It is two in the morning when they spot the incoming missiles on the radar of the USS Nimitz. Fortunately they are not terribly effective and no ships are hit as they scramble their defenses against attack from the air. At the same time, though, sailors spot speedboats. Iran has employed them before and the admirals have practiced defenses against a zerg attack by suicide bombers on these craft. When the first shells hit the water and take out the first speedboat, though, the radio operators hear "<click> <click> <click>." The nighttime turns to day. Two of the boats detonate their weapons. Their design is primitive but reliable and they are larger and heavier than missile-delivered nukes. One misfires and delivers a 10 kiloton blast but the other provides its designed 100 kiloton explosion.
The ayatollah broadcasts a message. He was always reluctant to use these un-islamic weapons but both the greater and lesser Satans (U.S. and Israel) have them and Iran needs a deterrent. Therefore, if there is any retaliation he promises to detonate more bombs which are pre-positioned in American cities and near military bases. And if the U.S. invades, he promises that he will nuke the beachheads.
Reminder: fight on the ground of your own choosing!
I have a weird ability to foresee the future on occasion. No, I'm not crazy and I've learned not to talk about it too much. It only kicks in now and then and hasn't been really useful in life. I have a couple of notches in my belt though: knew Iraq didn't have WMD from the start, made money during the 2008-9 stock market crash, haven't been surprised by anything Trump has done so far, etc. Why am I writing this? I have a suspicion. This is a 10% probability scenario. Some would label that improbable, I'd label it disturbingly likely, most people can't wrap their head around what to do with it. I suggest reading it as a strategy for the red team in a wargame exercise.
It hinges on blind spots and unexamined assumptions that I've noticed in the Neocon / Israeli analysis of Iran over the last few decades. I'm going to list the bad assumptions below and build up to the 10% scenario.
Assumption: Iran is run by religious fanatics who don't think clearly about military strategy.
There was a time in the early Iran/Iraq war when this was true - i.e. the human wave attacks - but those people are dead or discredited by now. Their leadership has shown a good grasp of strategy. They've had some successes and some failures, as in any war, but they seem to be strategizing as effectively as the U.S. Are they engaged in a religious war against the west? Sure, maybe, but look at the history of the crusades and the protestant/catholic wars. They flared hot and cold over the course of centuries. That's a very long term goal.
Assumption: Our intelligence services are fantastic and we know everything about their nuclear program.
If I was facing an enemy with overwhelming intelligence-gathering abilities I would do two things. First, I would separate my secrets into two piles: things the enemy will uncover anyway versus things I will take extreme measures to keep secret. Second, I would feed the enemy a bunch of false intelligence to cover up the second pile of items. I'm going to assume Iran has a few tricks still up their sleeve.
Assumption: If Iran gets the bomb then Israel faces an existential threat - in other words, Iran will nuke them off the map.
The history of nuclear proliferation has a pattern. No nation has obtained the bomb and immediately used it against their enemies. Consistently they attempt to deter their enemies from attacking them. If I were planning a first strike attack on an enemy I wouldn't plaster the subways with propaganda posters denouncing them - I would want the element of surprise.
Assumption: Iran's missiles have improved but are not big enough for nukes, and they do not yet know how to miniaturize a warhead.
There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Assumption: Iran is months away from the bomb - and has been for ten years!
It almost refutes itself. I'll note that Iran has done an excellent job of frog boiling here.
Scenario: Trump gives the go-ahead and US joins the air war against the Iranian nuclear program. Iran's immediate counter-move is to close the Straits of Hormuz to ship traffic, cutting off half the world's supply of oil from the Persian Gulf. That forces the US to respond, and in go the carrier task forces to break this up.
It is two in the morning when they spot the incoming missiles on the radar of the USS Nimitz. Fortunately they are not terribly effective and no ships are hit as they scramble their defenses against attack from the air. At the same time, though, sailors spot speedboats. Iran has employed them before and the admirals have practiced defenses against a zerg attack by suicide bombers on these craft. When the first shells hit the water and take out the first speedboat, though, the radio operators hear "<click> <click> <click>." The nighttime turns to day. Two of the boats detonate their weapons. Their design is primitive but reliable and they are larger and heavier than missile-delivered nukes. One misfires and delivers a 10 kiloton blast but the other provides its designed 100 kiloton explosion.
The ayatollah broadcasts a message. He was always reluctant to use these un-islamic weapons but both the greater and lesser Satans (U.S. and Israel) have them and Iran needs a deterrent. Therefore, if there is any retaliation he promises to detonate more bombs which are pre-positioned in American cities and near military bases. And if the U.S. invades, he promises that he will nuke the beachheads.
Reminder: fight on the ground of your own choosing!