US Vs Iran – War Of Apples Vs Oranges

Donate

US Vs Iran – War Of Apples Vs Oranges

Written by TheSaker; Originally appeared at TheUnzReview

One of the most frustrating tasks is to try to debunk the Hollywood myths imprinted on the mind of Americans about warfare in general and about special forces and technology in particular. When last week I wrote my column about the first SNAFUs of the Trump Presidency I pretty much expected that some of the points I made would fall on deaf ears and that indeed did happen. What I propose to do today is to try, yet again, to explain the vast difference between what I would call “the American way of war” as seen in propaganda movies and the reality of warfare.

Let’s begin by the issue of the use of special operation forces and immediately say what they are not: special operation forces are not SWAT or anti-terrorist forces. The US propaganda machine has imprinted on the mind of people in the West that if a force is “elite” and looks “tacti-cool” it is some kind of special force. By that criteria, even some riot cops could be considered as “special forces”. This is, by the way, not only an American sin. The Russians have gone down the exact same ridiculous road and now you have “spetsnaz” forces all over Russia – even the Russian equivalent of the US department of correction which now has “spetsnaz” forces to deal with prison riots! Likewise, the famous anti-terrorist unit “A” (mistakenly called “Alpha” as opposed to the US “Delta”) is exactly that – an anti-terrorist unit and not a military special force. So what are, stricto sensu, special forces? They are a military force which participates to the overall war effort but autonomously and not in direct support of the main/conventional fighting force. Depending on the country and service, special forces can deal with a variety to tasks ranging from providing “advisors” to what Americans call direct action operation such as the recent ill-fated attack on the al-Qaeda compound in Yemen. Just like airborne forces, special forces have often been misused, especially when conventional forces could not be counted on, but that does not mean that SWAT and anti-terrorist forces should be thought of as “special forces”. Special forces are always military forces and they operate in support of military operations.

[Sidebar: some American readers who where miffed by my assertions that US special forces have a terrible real-life record have tried to counter with a logically fallacious argument: what about Russian special forces, are they any better? Examples given where Beslan, Nord-Ost and Budennovsk. There are two problems with this argument: one, none of these events can be considered as “special operations” and, two, even if the Russian special forces have a terrible record, this hardly means that the US special forces’ record is good or, even less so, better. Besides, these three tragedies are totally different. The Budennovsk hospital hostage crisis was, indeed, a total disaster which occurred against the backdrop of another total disaster, the First Chechen war, and which resulted in 130 dead civilians out of a total of about 2000. That is a 93.5% of hostages which survived. Considering that the civilians political authorities were arguably the worst in Russian history and considering that the hostage takers were well over 100 hardened Chechen terrorists, I think that this is not the “disaster” that civilians like to think of. Next, let’s look at Beslan. Here we have well over 1000 hostages when 385 fatalities – much more of a “disaster” indeed. But let’s remember what happened that day: a bomb, apparently one of the biggest one held in the sports hall, blew up which resulted in local civilians (parents) spontaneously storming the school. At this point, the anti-terror forces simply joined in to save as many people as possible and many of them died by shielding the kids with the own bodies. There is simply no way that Beslan can be blamed on Russian anti-terrorist forces. As for Nord-Ost, this is one of the most successful hostage rescue operation in history: about 900 hostages are taken by about 45 terrorists. As a result of the operation, all of the civilians are freed, all of the terrorists are killed and all the anti-terrorist troops survived. Not a single bomb was detonated. However, the tragedy happened after the operation when the medical services simply did not have enough manpower to revive the freed hostages, some of whom even died in buses on the way to medical care. In theory, every single one of these hostages had undergone a full anesthesia (without being intubated) and every single one of them needed to be revived by a medical team. In their worst nightmares the Russian anti-terrorist forces had never expected to deal with such a huge number of civilians needing immediate specialized medical care. The civilian emergency medical response units were completely overwhelmed and did not even know what gas had been used. As a result, 130 hostages died, or about 15% of the hostages. Had the Russians not decided to use gas the most likely casualty figure would have been well over 500 if not more. That is hardly what I would call a failure of the entire operation, including the civilian support. In terms of pure anti-terrorist operation is probably the most successful hostage liberation operation in history. Let me end this sidebar with a simple question: when is the last time that any anti-terrorist force in the West had to deal with a situation involving over 1000 hostages taken by a large number of ruthless military-trained terrorists?]

If one is absolutely determined to assess the Russian record on special operations I would point to the

capture of the Ruzyne International Airport in Prague in 1968, the storming of the Tajbeg Palace in Afghanistan in 1979 and, of course, the Russian operation to seize Crimea in 2014. But, again, there is no logical need to prove that Russian can do it well/better to assert that Americans can’t.

Now let’s turn to the issue of a possible war between Iran and the United States.

The dumbest possible thing to evaluate the possible outcomes of a US attack on Iran would be to do compare all the technologies available to both countries and come to some kind of conclusion. For an example of that kind of nonsense, check out this typical article. Generally, the obsession with technology is a typical American pathology which is a direct result of fighting overseas wars against vastly out-gunned enemies. I call that the engineer’s view of war, as opposed to the soldier’s view. That is not to say that technology does not matter, it does, but tactics, operations and strategy matter a whole lot more. For example, while it is true that a modern M1A2 Abrams is vastly superior to an old Soviet T-55, there are circumstances (high mountains, forests) where the T-55, properly engaged, could be a much better tank. Likewise, putatively outdated WWII anti-tank guns can be used with devastating effect on modern APC just as outdated air defense guns can by turned into absolutely terrifying assault fire support vehicles.

In the case of the US attack on Iran, only a total ignoramus would suppose that as soon as the Iranians detect the US attack they would scramble their mostly dated air force to try to achieve air superiority or that they would hope to stop the US attack using their air-defenses. Let me remind everybody here that Hezbollah made exactly zero use of their air defenses (only MANPADS anyway) during the Israeli attack on Lebanon in 2006 and that did not prevent Hezbollah from inflicting upon the IDF the most crushing defeat in their history. Why?

Because generally the American way of war doesn’t really work. What do I mean by “American way of war”? Using airstrikes and missile attacks to degrade the enemy’s capabilities to such a degree that it forces him to surrender. This was tried against the Serbian military in Kosovo and resulted in an abject failure: the Serbian forces survived the 78 days of massive NATO bombing completely unscathed (a few MBTs and APCs were lost, that’s about it). When that failure became apparent to the NATO commanders they did what the US military always does and turned against the civilian Serbian population in retaliation (same as the Israelis in Lebanon, of course) while offering Milosevic a deal: you surrender and we leave you in power. He accepted and ordered the Serbian military out of Kosovo. This was a spectacular political success for NATO, but in purely military terms, this was a disaster (well-concealed from the western public opinion courtesy of the best propaganda machine in history).

In one case only once did that American way of war really work as advertised: during the first Gulf War. And there is a good reason for that.

During the Cold War US force planners and strategist had developed a number of concepts to prepare for a war in Europe against the Soviet Union. Such concepts included the AirLand Battle doctrine or the Follow-on-Forces Attack (FOFA) which I shall not discuss in detail here, but which all placed a heavy emphasis on long-range reconnaissance-strikes systems and the use of air forces to defeat an assumed Soviet conventional superiority, especially in armor. I believe that these were fundamentally sound doctrines which could have been used effectively in the European theater. By the time Iraq invaded Kuwait, the USA had honed these concepts to quasi-perfection and the US armed forces were well trained in applying them. Saddam Hussein then committed a series of unforgivable mistakes the worst one being to give the USA many months to deploy into the KSA (this blatantly contradicts Soviet military doctrine which tells me that Saddam Hussein did not listen to this Soviet-trained generals or that these generals were afraid to speak up).

Apparently, Saddam Hussein believed that having fought the Iranians during the Iraq-Iran war (1980-1988) he was ready to take on the USA. Well, he wasn’t. In fact, the way the Iraqis prepared for a US attack was a dream come true for US force planners and analysts because Saddam gave them the absolutely *perfect* target: large armored formations deployed in a desert with no air cover. The US, who for years had prepared to fight a much more sophisticated Soviet conventional military in the complex central European terrain (“Mischgelende” forests, many villages and town, rapid streams, steep hills and riverbanks, etc.) could simply not believe their luck: the Iraqis deployed in the worst possible manner making them an ideal target, much easier in fact that what was practiced for in US desert trainings. The result was predictable, the USA simply crushed the Iraqis and almost took no casualties.

Guess who observed that from right across the border with rapt attention?

The Iranians, of course.

If anybody seriously believes that the Iranians will prepare for a US attack by trying to out-American the Americans I have a few bridges to sell to them.

What Iranians, and Hezbollah, perfectly understood is that the key to prevail against the USA is to deny them the American way of war and to impose them a type of warfare they absolutely loathe. We can call that the Iranian way of war. Here are a few of its key components:

1) Assume that the American will establish air supremacy in 24 hours or less and deny them any lucrative targets. Sounds simple, but it is not. This requires a number of steps which can take years to implement including, but not limited to, concealing, hardening and deeply burying the most valuable civilian and military assets, creating an highly redundant network of communication and prepare for semi-autonomous operations when communications fail, creating a country-wide system of local civilian-military cooperation aimed at the survivability of essential government services including law and order, have procedures in place to compensate for the disruption of energy distribution and the destruction of key transportation nodes, etc. It might be my Swiss training speaking here, but I would assume that over the past 30 years the Iranians have dug thousands of miles of underground tunnels and command posts which allows the country to literally “go under” for as long as is needed.

2) Develop a number of key advanced technologies such as GPS-spoofing, computer network penetration and disruption, electronic counter-measures warfare, advanced mine warfare, small boat operations and, of course, missile strikes not to deny the US forces any portion of the Iranian territory, but to dramatically increase the risks and costs of US operations. This is were a limited number of advanced air defense systems can make a critical difference, especially if successfully concealed.

3) Engage in “horizontal escalation”: rather than wasting efforts in trying to shoot down US aircraft, use missile strikes to destroy US airfields (and ports) in the region. That is, by the way, official Iranian doctrine. Or strike at US forces in Iraq or Afghanistan. Target Israel or, even better, the Saudi regime. Force the US Navy to either engage in brown-water or, at most, green-water operations (here the Russian Kilo-class subs will excel) or force them to move back and shut down the Strait of Hormuz (the US Navy hates brown and green water operations, and for good reason, the USN is a blue-water navy par excellence) and the Americans are acutely aware of what happened to the US-built Israeli Sa’ar 5-class corvette when it got hit by Hezbollah fired Chinese-built C-802 missile.

4) Play the time card: time is always against the US military as the expectation is a short, easy war, with as little as casualties as possible and then a quick “out”. The Israelis ran out of steam in 33 days, NATO in 78 – so plan for at least a 12 month long conflict. Western forces have no staying power, let them hope for a “quickie” and then see how they react when it ain’t happening.

5) Use the traditional American sense of superiority and condescension for “sand niggers”or “hajis” and don’t bother trying to intimidate them. Instead, try to use that racist mindset to make them commit crucial strategic mistakes as Iran did when it used fake Iraqi “defectors” who spread disinformation about non-existing Iraqi WMDs to convince the US Neocons to lobby for an attack on Iraq to protect Israel. I find the notion of using US Neocons to make the US get rid of Saddam Hussein and basically hand over Iraq to Iran nothing short of pure genius. This is, of course, why it is never mentioned in western sources :-)

6) Force the Americans to present you more targets: the more US forces are deployed near Iran, the more targets they offer for Iranian counter-attacks and the more they get politically bogged-down (as shown by the recent Iraqi threat to revoke visas for US servicemen in Iraq in response to Trump temporary visa-ban; the threat is empty, but clearly nobody in the White House or Foggy Bottom ever considered such an option). Basically, being being everywhere CENTCOM forces are hated everywhere.

The above are just a few examples from a long list of things the Iranians can do to respond to a US attack on Iran. We can expect the Iranians to come up with a much longer and far more creative list. By the way, there is nothing new or original in the list I made above, and the Americans are quite aware of it. There is a reason why even though the US has come as close as being hours away from striking at Iran they always backed down at the last second. So we have that endless tug-of-war: the US politicians (who believe their own propaganda) want to strike Iran, while US military specialists (who know better than to believe their own propaganda) constantly try to prevent such an attack. I want to mention Admiral William Fallon here, a true hero and patriot, who bluntly declared about a possible attack on Iran “not on my watch” in direct defiance of his political superiors. I hope that one day his service to his country in a very difficult situation will be finally recognized.

More more thing: Israel and the other regional powers. They are basically the equivalent of the vegetables served in a steak house: decoration. Just as NATO is a pretend force, so is the IDF and all the rest of the locals, including the Saudis, at least compared to Iran and Hezbollah. Yes, sure, they spend a lot of money, purchase expensive systems, but should a war break out, the Americans will be carrying 90%+ of the burden of real warfare, as opposed to politically correct coalition-building. Iran is a very large country with a complex geography, and the only ones who have to kind of power-projection capabilities to strike at Iran other than symbolically are the Americans. Of course, I am quite sure that should the US strike at Iran the Israelis will feel obliged to strike at some putatively nuclear target, return home and declare yet victory of the “invincible Tsahal”. But to the extend that Iran will be meaningfully hurt, it will be by the US, not Israel.

So does that mean that Iran would come unscathed from a US attack? Absolutely not. What I expect the Americans to do is what they have always done: engage in the mass murder of civilians in retaliation for their military failures. I know that this will, yet again, offend some doubleplusgoodthinking patriots, but massacring civilians is an American tradition dating from the very foundation of the United States. Anybody doubting that ought to read the superb book by John Grenier (USAF Ret.) entitled “The First Way of War 1607-1814: American War Making on the Frontier” which explains in exquisite detail how the US anti-civilian terror operations doctrine was developed over the centuries. This is, of course, what the Anglos did during WWII when they engaged in mass bombings of German cities to “break their spirit of resistance”. And this is what they did in Iraq and Serbia and what the Israelis did in Lebanon. And this is exactly what we should expect will happen in Iran. At least, this is the worst case scenario. There are really fundamentally two basic options for a US attack on Iran and I outlined them in my 2007 article about Iranian asymmetrical response options:

Broadly speaking, we see the Neocon Empire has having two options in an attack on Iran:

  1. A short, limited, attack on some Iranian nuclear and government installations. The goals of that kind of attack would be solely political: to appear to have “done something”, give the despondent Americans and Israelis some flags to wave, to “show resolve” and “send a firm message” – the kind of State Department nonsense. If lucky, they could hope to kill some Iranian leaders (although what exactly that would achieve is anyone’s guess). Lastly, it would punish the Iranians for their “bad behavior”.

  2. A more significant military attack, which could not be limited to an air campaign and one which would have to include at least some insertion of ground forces. That would be similar to the strategy outlined in my How they might do it article. The goal of this option would be radically different from the first one: “to punish the Iranian population for its support of ‘the Mullahs’ (as the expression goes in the USA) via the ballot box. This is exactly the same logic which brought the Israelis to hammer all of Lebanon with bombs, missiles and mines – the same logic by which they killed over 500 people in Gaza – the same logic by which the U.S. bombed all of Serbia and Montenegro and the same logic which explains the bizarre embargo of Cuba. The message here is: if you support the bad guys, you will pay for it.

The option I discussed today is the 2nd one, because this is the one which would get most people killed. But make no mistake, since neither one of these options would result in anything remotely resembling a victory (this is a political concept defining an achieved political objective) one would have to conclude that both of these options would result in failure and defeat. Such an attack would also seal the end of the US political role in the Middle-East unless, of course, being a despised elephant in a porcelain store is considered a “role”. But make no mistake, even if the Iranian casualty figures go in the hundred of thousands, or even over a million like in Iraq, the Iranians will not surrender and they will prevail. For one thing, terrorizing civilians has never worked. Genocide can be a much more viable option, but there are too many Iranians to do that and they are too well dug-in in their country to contemplate such an option (sorry, Israelis, even nuking Iran will not result in a “victory” of any kind). The Iranians have been at it for, what, 3000-9000 years (depending on how you count) and they will not be subdued, submitted or defeated with 200 or 70 year old states, or by an AngloZionist Empire in terminal decline.

I suspect that by now quite a few readers will be thoroughly irritated with me. So what better way is there for me to end this discussion than by adding religion to the mix? Yes, let’s do that!

Most Iranian are Shia, that is well known. But what is less well-known is one of the key motto’s of the Shia which, I believe, beautifully expresses one of the key features of the Shia ethos, is: “Every day is Ashura and every land is Karbala”. You can find an explanation of this phrase here. It basically expresses the willingness to die for the truth at any time and in any place. Millions of Iranians, even those not necessarily very pious, have been raised with this determination to fight and resist, at any cost. And now think of Donald Trump or General “Mad Dog” Mattis and try to imagine how hollow and grotesque they and their threats look to their Iranian counterparts.

Should I write an analysis of Chinese response options to a US attack? Nah – let’s just say that if the US doesn’t have what it takes to prevail over Iran, an attack on China would be simply suicidal.

Next week, alas, I will probably have to turn back to the dramatic events in the Ukraine.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Daniel Castro

    Trump is buying time throwing some bones to the neocons and zionists in the deep state.

  • John Brown

    Not a bad article but the writer does not understand the Zionist
    empire at all. He understands Iran only so as SunTsu says, you can only be
    half right. When he uses the term Anglo Zionist empire it shows his lack of
    understanding.

    Maybe you could say that 150 years ago, but today what was once the west has been conquered and is ruled by Zionist dictatorships, it is only the Zionist empire now. See video proof
    form Aljazeera investigation. Israel totally controls all major political
    parties in the UK, Israel decides who will be in the government cabinet and who
    will be the PM. They Israel also recently passed apartheid type laws in the UK, making
    Jews legally and racially superior to all others including Anglos. So much for
    the Anglo part of the Zionist Empire.

    The goal of the Zionist empire in any war with Iran is as the Talmud and Kabala say, to kill as many Goyim Iranians as possible and to destroy their economy and civilian infrastructure as they are doing in Syria and did in Iraq and Libya, to create a failed state. They were both big wins for the Zionists. Yes Iran may have more influence in Iraq now but what is that influence worth? Iraq has been destroyed as a modern state and is now a failed state. Iraq is now a source of instability for Iran right on its border. This will be the goal of the empire in Iran. To destroy the civilian infrastructure and economy to create a failed state and they will. The Iranian death toll will be much higher than 1 million.

    Then the jihadists 10,000 times what they are in Syria will be sent into Iran and from there into
    Southern Russia and Western China. The empire will then win. You think the empire is
    arrogant. No it is you who is arrogant. Yes the empire lost in Lebanon in 2006
    but it learned and is now winning in Syria, won in Libya and won and is still
    winning in Iraq.

    Russia still needs to get rid of its Rothschild controlled central
    bank and bankers (the fifth column installed by the USSA in the 1990s) and
    start creating its own money out of nothing to pay for it military, health care,
    education infrastructure etc as the Rothschild Empire does and has done for hundreds of
    years. Also to ban fractional reserve banking and to make it illegal for the
    Russian government at any level to borrow money. Russia also needs to crack down more
    on corruption and to lend at low interest rates to sectors of the economy that are identified
    as weak and or strategically important. Speculation against the Russian currency
    must also be banned and loans for speculation by George Soros etc against the
    Russian currency should also be banned. Any large Russian currency to foreign currency
    transactions not done by corporations or individuals for legitimate business needs will be
    subject to Russian government approval, as well as any transactions over 1
    million or multiple transactions over 1 million dollars.

    There is no west left, it has been conquered by the Zionist
    empire and the empire is in the process of eradicating its native European
    populations and destroying their governments and replacing them with Zionist
    dictatorships which has also happened to every third world country that tried
    to make any deal with the Zionist empire.
    Even if one were so stupid as to actually think the
    Zionist Trump, (Trump is just a different faction of the Zionist empire) would
    full fill any deal Trump made, as soon as Trump is out the deal will be broken if
    not broken by Trump himself and such persons will deserve to be wiped out. The
    empire broke the deal with the Soviet Union about NATOs eastward expansion etc.

    The empire has broken every treaty it has ever signed.
    Russia and China now must rapidly build up their nuclear arsenals to at
    least 20,000 nuclear warheads or more each with many thousands of launchers,
    nuclear trains, submarines, long range bombers, surface ships etc. maybe a few
    hundred nuclear weapons in high earth orbit at the Lagrange point between the
    earth and the moon, as well to deter a nuclear first strike
    by the empire.

    China has finally started to do this with their new mobile land based ICBMs.
    See link from Sputnik, USSA preparing for and researching a nuclear first
    strike against Russia and China. Can it be any more obvious?
    All Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons need to be aimed the
    trillionaire/ billionaire Zionist criminal elite and their slave armies Jafa,
    in what was once the west, and any area with large Jewish populations, this is
    the only way to avert a global nuclear war. Jews are happy to see stupid
    (animal beast); Goyim (as Henry Kissinger refers to American soldiers) kill
    Goyim until only Jews are left. If organized Jewry knows it will be destroyed
    completely if it starts a nuclear war they will never start it.

    Contrary any appeasement to the empire, Russia and China should tell the
    empire that in no uncertain terms, any unprovoked attack on Iran will result in the actions
    I have just outlined above immediately, so organized Jewry and its slave armed
    forces will cease to exist. If this is not done Jewry will attack and destroy
    Iran and then send 1000 times worse in barbarity and numbers then ISIS is now
    into the south of Russia and the west of China.

    Better yet Russia China and India should each establish a large naval
    base on the coast of Iran to act as a shield a trip wire for this policy.

    In the mean time Russia, China Iran etc must continue their
    work of destroying Zionist, Federal Reserve dollar and creating an alternative
    to swift and pulling out of swift ASAP and making an alternative internet.
    Once the Zionist dollar is destroyed the empire will have no
    money to maintain its military empire and to occupy its vassals and the threat
    to wipe out all of humanity will be over, as the zio Nazi satanic empire will
    be defeated.

    The Persecution of African Migrants in the Holy Land

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPxv4Aff3IA&t=421s

    Israelis Want Africans Out

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOGSBHqRDuw

    Racism against Africans in Israel

    (2/4)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iIZd4O5IDo

    The Lobby P1:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceCOhdgRBoc&t=271sThe Lobby P2:

    The Lobby P2:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vuk1EhkEctE&t=646s

    The Lobby P4:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vuk1EhkEctE&t=589sThe Lobby P3:

    The Lobby P4:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3dn-VV3czc&t=391sThe Lobby P4:

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201701311050182397-us-study-decapitaing-russia-nuke-attack/

    US Study on ‘Decapitating’ Russia, China May Raise Fear of

    Surprise Nuke Attack

    © Wikipedia/

    World

    07:37 31.01.2017Get short URL

    223602

    Congress’s request to US intelligence agencies to evaluate

    the “survivability” of Russian and Chinese leaders after a nuclear attack is

    unnecessary and could be interpreted as preparing for a US preemptive strike,

    former US officers and analysts told Sputnik.

    © Sputnik/ Alexey Filippov

    Ex-Pentagon Adviser: US Study on Russian Leader

    ‘Survivability’ Ups Nuclear Risk

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The comprehensive study mandated by

    Congress will be carried out by the US intelligence agencies as well as by the

    Strategic Command (STRATCOM), which is in charge of the American nuclear

    forces, according to a little-reported section of the 2017 National Defense

    Authorization Act (NDAA).

    “No other nation-state has any intent of attacking us except

    if they should survive our initial ‘preemptive attack,’ they can be expected to

    retaliate the best they are able,” retired US Army Major and historian Todd

    Pierce said on Monday.

    Pierce said the research directive could only be explained

    by a desire to explore the possibility of wiping out the leaderships of both

    major nations in a sudden surprise attack.

    “That’s the reason for this study: to ensure we wipe out

    their command and control with a first strike,” Pierce said.

    Pierce claimed it was highly misleading to describe the

    study as being a defensive or deterrence move in any way since it was exploring

    the possibilities for carrying out an offensive attack.

    “Here is typical American double talk when we are in the

    process of planning offensive military operations, and that is all we plan

    because,” Pierce stated.

    Pierce recalled that Congressman Mike Turner had stated in

    an email to Bloomberg News that the United States needed to understand how

    China and Russia intended to fight a war and how their leadership would control

    a potential conflict in order to be able to deter such a threat.

    © Sputnik/ Alexander Vilf

    Ex-Soviet Leader Gorbachev Calls on US, Russia to Lead

    Efforts Preventing Nuclear War

    However, Pierce insisted, “There is no ‘threat’ to deter.”

    Former CIA officer Phil Giraldi told Sputnik that the study

    Congress had called for fell into the realm of comprehensive but not serious

    assessments routinely made by military intelligence bureaucracies.

    “I think it’s routine contingency planning as I see no

    evidence that it was initiated personally by any of the identifiable hawks,”

    Giraldi said.

    Giraldi said the US Department of Defense had prepared plans

    for the most improbable contingencies that had never occurred and almost

    certainly never would.

    “I’m sure the Pentagon has even worked up a plan and

    assessment regarding what would happen if we were to invade Canada. Didn’t work

    out too well in 1812.” he concluded.

    On Friday, US President Donald Trump issued an executive

    order calling for a review of the readiness and modernization needs of the US

    nuclear arsenal. Previous President Barack Obama approved a $1.7 trillion 30

    year program to modernize US nuclear forces.

    The saker version

    The only difference between trump and Hillary or the Zionist

    faction backing him is they and Trump did not want to risk a nuclear war with

    Russia. It is still the Zionist empire.Tactics have changed thats it.The empire

    thinks it can trick Russia into giving up Syria and or Iran for for Ukraine.
    Russia

    needs to keep them all or 1000 times the number of ISIS fighters there is now

    will be sent to Southern Russia and probably western China.The Zionist empire

    has broken every deal or treaty it has ever made just ask Gorbachev. See link

    below the empire is researching nuclear first strike against Russia and China,

    can it be any more obvious what the plan is???

    The racist, supremacist, Jewish, Zionist, empire as I have

    proven with overwhelming

    irrefutable evidence in my previous posts wants war and conquest.

    Russia still needs to get rid of its Rothschild controlled

    central

    bank and bankers (the fifth column installed by the USSA in

    the 1990s) and start

    creating its own money out of nothing to pay for it

    military, health care, education

    infrastructure etc as the Rothschild Empire does and has

    done for hundreds of

    years. Also to ban fractional reserve banking and to make it

    illegal for the Russian

    government at any level to borrow money. Russia also needs

    to crack down more on corruption

    and to lend at low interest rates to sectors of the economy

    that are identified

    as weak and or strategically important. Speculation against

    the Russian currency

    must also be banned and loans for speculation by George

    Soros etc against the Russian

    currency should also be banned. Any large Russian currency

    to foreign currency transactions not done by corporations or individuals for

    legitimate business needs will be subject to Russian government approval, as

    well as any transactions over 1 million or multiple transactions

    over 1 million dollars.

    There is no west left, it has been conquered by the Zionist

    empire and the empire is in the process of eradicating its

    native European

    populations and destroying their governments and replacing

    them with Zionist

    dictatorships which has also happened to every third world

    country that tried

    to make any deal with the Zionist empire.

    Even if one were so stupid as to actually think the

    Zionist Trump, (Trump is just a different faction of the

    Zionist empire) would full

    fill any deal Trump made, as soon as Trump is out the deal

    will be broken if

    not broken by Trump himself and such persons will deserve to

    be wiped out. The

    empire broke the deal with the Soviet Union about NATOs

    eastward expansion etc.

    The empire has broken every treaty it has ever signed.

    Russia and China now must rapidly build up their nuclear

    arsenals to at least 20,000 nuclear warheads or more each with many thousands

    of launchers, nuclear trains, submarines, long range bombers, surface ships

    etc. maybe a few hundred nuclear weapons in high earth orbit at the Lagrange

    point between the earth and the moon, as well to deter a nuclear first strike

    by the empire.

    China has finally started to do this with their new mobile

    land based ICBMs. See link from Sputnik, USSA preparing for and researching a

    nuclear first strike against Russia and China. Can it be any more obvious?

    All Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons need to be aimed the

    trillionaire/ billionaire Zionist criminal elite and their

    slave armies Jafa,

    in what was once the west, and any area with large Jewish

    populations, this is

    the only way to avert a global nuclear war. Jews are happy

    to see stupid

    (animal beast); Goyim (as Henry Kissinger refers to American

    soldiers) kill

    Goyim until only Jews are left. If organized Jewry knows it

    will be destroyed

    completely if it starts a nuclear war they will never start

    it.

    Contrary any appeasement policy to the empire, Russia and

    China should tell the empire that

    in no uncertain terms, any unprovoked attack on Iran will

    result in the actions

    I have just outlined above immediately, so organized Jewry

    and its slave armed

    forces will cease to exist. If this is not done Jewry will

    attack and destroy

    Iran and then send 1000 times worse in barbarity and numbers

    then ISIS is now

    into the south of Russia and the west of China.

    Better yet Russia China and India should each establish a

    large naval

    base on the coast of Iran to act as a shield a trip wire for

    this policy.

    In the mean time Russia, China Iran etc must continue their

    work of destroying Zionist, Federal Reserve dollar and

    creating an alternative

    to swift and pulling out of swift ASAP and making an

    alternative internet.

    Once the Zionist dollar is destroyed the empire will have no

    money to maintain its military empire and to occupy its

    vassals and the threat

    to wipe out all of humanity will be over, as the zio Nazi

    satanic empire will

    be defeated.

    The Persecution of African Migrants in the Holy Land

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPxv4Aff3IA&t=421s

    Israelis Want Africans Out

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOGSBHqRDuw

    Racism against Africans in Israel (2/4)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iIZd4O5IDo

    The Lobby P1:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceCOhdgRBoc&t=271sThe

    Lobby P2:

    The Lobby P2:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vuk1EhkEctE&t=646s

    The Lobby P4:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vuk1EhkEctE&t=589sThe

    Lobby P3:

    The Lobby P4:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3dn-VV3czc&t=391sThe

    Lobby P4:

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201701311050182397-us-study-decapitaing-russia-nuke-attack/

    US Study on ‘Decapitating’ Russia, China May Raise Fear of

    Surprise Nuke Attack

    © Wikipedia/

    World

    07:37 31.01.2017Get short URL

    223602

    Congress’s request to US intelligence agencies to evaluate

    the “survivability” of Russian and Chinese leaders after a

    nuclear attack is

    unnecessary and could be interpreted as preparing for a US

    preemptive strike,

    former US officers and analysts told Sputnik.

    © Sputnik/ Alexey Filippov

    Ex-Pentagon Adviser: US Study on Russian Leader

    ‘Survivability’ Ups Nuclear Risk

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The comprehensive study mandated by

    Congress will be carried out by the US intelligence agencies

    as well as by the

    Strategic Command (STRATCOM), which is in charge of the

    American nuclear

    forces, according to a little-reported section of the 2017

    National Defense

    Authorization Act (NDAA).

    “No other nation-state has any intent of attacking us except

    if they should survive our initial ‘preemptive attack,’ they

    can be expected to

    retaliate the best they are able,” retired US Army Major and

    historian Todd

    Pierce said on Monday.

    Pierce said the research directive could only be explained

    by a desire to explore the possibility of wiping out the

    leaderships of both

    major nations in a sudden surprise attack.

    “That’s the reason for this study: to ensure we wipe out

    their command and control with a first strike,” Pierce said.

    Pierce claimed it was highly misleading to describe the

    study as being a defensive or deterrence move in any way

    since it was exploring

    the possibilities for carrying out an offensive attack.

    “Here is typical American double talk when we are in the

    process of planning offensive military operations, and that

    is all we plan

    because,” Pierce stated.

    Pierce recalled that Congressman Mike Turner had stated in

    an email to Bloomberg News that the United States needed to

    understand how

    China and Russia intended to fight a war and how their

    leadership would control

    a potential conflict in order to be able to deter such a

    threat.

    © Sputnik/ Alexander Vilf

    Ex-Soviet Leader Gorbachev Calls on US, Russia to Lead

    Efforts Preventing Nuclear War

    However, Pierce insisted, “There is no ‘threat’ to deter.”

    Former CIA officer Phil Giraldi told Sputnik that the study

    Congress had called for fell into the realm of comprehensive

    but not serious

    assessments routinely made by military intelligence

    bureaucracies.

    “I think it’s routine contingency planning as I see no

    evidence that it was initiated personally by any of the

    identifiable hawks,”

    Giraldi said.

    Giraldi said the US Department of Defense had prepared plans

    for the most improbable contingencies that had never

    occurred and almost

    certainly never would.

    “I’m sure the Pentagon has even worked up a plan and

    assessment regarding what would happen if we were to invade

    Canada. Didn’t work

    out too well in 1812.” he concluded.

    On Friday, US President Donald Trump issued an executive

    order calling for a review of the readiness and

    modernization needs of the US

    nuclear arsenal. Previous President Barack Obama approved a

    $1.7 trillion 30

    year program to modernize US nuclear forces.

  • Alex Popoff

    All is great except 1 thing: there are no “Iranians”. Iranians is a bunch of various religion sects and ethnicities, every one of them will go their own way, when central gvmnt will lose the ability to forcing them to be to together. Iranian Azeris will try to secede and to reunite with their Azerbaijanian relatives, same with Kurds and many other groups will do the same. Iran is crazy quilt, where very “iranians” or we batter call em “persians” are only 60% of Iran population. Even their shia brotherhood is virtual, because their ethnic and language differencies are much deeper.

    So all that US will need to do with Iran is to bomb out central gvmnt, ethnic, language and religoius minorities will do the rest.

    • BL

      What a load of bullshit. As stated in the article, Iran has thousands of years of history. It is not an artificial state made up by colonial powers overnight. Azeris (I’m talking about the real Azeris now not the fake ones in the fake “nation” of Azerbaijan) are ethnic Iranians and genetically they are no different from their Persian speaking countrymen. Azeris speak Turkish not because they are a separate ethnicity but because the old Iranian Azeri language that was spoken in that area was slowly Turkified during the Mongol invasions after Turkic tribes from Central Asia immigrated to that area and controlled it politically. The Turkic tribes however were a small minority and have intermixed with the local population to the extent that they no longer exist as a separate group, the same is true in Turkey. Ethnic Turkic people are the people of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, etc. who have Mongol like physical features. The fake artificial country called “Azerbaijan” was in fact never called “Azerbaijan” before the Stalin era of USSR. That region was always called “Aaran” or “Shirvan” historically. Feel free to resort to any historical map or book written before Stalin’s era to see this. It was Stalin’s idea to rename this region “Azerbaijan” as a strategy of later trying to annex Iran’s Azerbaijan to the USSR, a plan he tried after WWII. Today a completely false and made up history is being taught in the fake nation of “Azerbaijan” and the reason for it is that Azerbaijan “nation” is deeply infiltrated by Zionist elements who have been using it as a battering ram against Iran. The Zionists are experts are falsifying history and making up outlandish lies and nonsense to advance their own political goals. Even today in the fake “nation” of Azerbaijan many cities and regions still retain their historical Persian names and the historic Persian poet Nezami who is now being false claimed as a “Turk” never even spoke Turkish.

      Kurdish is an Iranian language and (At least the Iranian version) is easily understandable by Persian speakers. Kurds have lived in Iran for thousands of years and share the same culture and history. You’re under the delusion that Iran is Yugoslavia where a group of unrelated ethnicities were forced into the same artificial state by outside powers. You’re only expressing you’re Zionist fed delusions and wet dreams. During the 8 year war against Iraq all Iranians fought and died not just one group. Saddam Hussein was also under the false delusion that he could get the Arabic speaking Iranians to join his side and fight against their own nation when in fact the Arab speakers of Iran were at the forefront of Iranian resistance against him and contrary to all other groups the Arabs are not even an Iranian ethnic group.

      Of course there’re separatists in Iran as there are in most other large nations but they do not have mainstream popular support.

    • Bob

      Balkanization, the preferred means of imperial rule since early nineteenth century.

    • chris chuba

      If that happens then the aftermath will make the chaos of Iraq which led to the rise of ISIS look like paradise. The refugee crisis alone would wreak havoc on Europe, maybe even Pakistan would become destabilized.

      • Alex Popoff

        This is all very good for US.

        • chris chuba

          I don’t see how. There were never any Islamic terrorist attacks on U.S. soil until we started destroying Arab countries. The more we destroy stable countries like Iran, the more we empower the really whacko Sunni majority. The Iranians are the only ones keeping a cork on the M.E. We are just too stupid to realize it.

          • Alex Popoff

            Main world issue is uniting of the western Europe. This potential superstate would have economy and cultural dominance over US and whole world. This is the only one who can push out US from world leader position, not China of course.

            Main goal of NATO occupation of Western Europe is to prevent creation of the United European army. Main US goal in the middle east is to destroy EU neighboring oil and gas regions to slow down EU economy. Main goal in Ukraine is to create wall with balts-poland-Ukraine belt between western Europe and Russia. So destabilization of everything around EU is American goal. And of course this is very good for US))

    • S600

      I have to disagree on this notion. Saddam tried the same during the Iran-Iraq long conflict but Iranians held together. If they will split then on only mullah/anti-mullah lines but otherwise they would fight the invaders.

      • Alex Popoff

        Saddam has no means to destroy central gvmnt in Iran, to isolate it from provinces, and of course Iraq has no influence on local communities and especially on Iran diaspora that US has.

        Iraq has restricted goals: to get some territory with population mostly friendly to Iraq (while international environment was against Iran) and nothing more. On the contrary, US want to punish Iran because they need to answer to 1979 humiliation. The only thing that prevents US from doing this is that Irans dissolving will change too much system of alliances on the middle east.

        Until 1991 after Irans dismembering USSR could gain new territories, Caspian sea would be 100% USSR internal sea. Very likely that USSR could get Beludgistan as 16th republic and get access to the Hormuz bay.

        Many of these problems exists today even after USSR fall. For ex. creation of independent Kurdistan will lead to big problems with Kurds for top US ally Turkey.

        Who knows, maybe this life in isolation for generations of Iranian is the US manner of punishing Iran. But If US will ever want to dismember Iran they will can do it very easy.

    • BL

      I wrote a response earlier but for some reason it’s awaiting moderation so I’ll post this quick summary instead.

      1. You said “There’s no Iranian”. What an absolute load of anti-Iran Zionist created garbage, I know where you’re getting this nonsense from and its ultimate source is Israel whether you know it or not. As you read in the article above Iran has thousands of years of history and we have always called ourselves “Iranian”. Iran is one of the oldest if not the oldest nation on earth so it only takes a Jewish level of Chutzpah to say the oldest nation on earth “doesn’t exist”.

      2. Azeris are ethnic Iranians, they are NOT a separate ethnicity or nationality. Genetic tests consistently show they are ethnically exactly the same as their Persian speaking brethren. The word “Azeri” comes from the region “Azerbaijan” which in ancient Persian means “Protector of Fire” (Comes from Persian Zoroastrian religion). Historically this name only applied below the river Araxes. The region above the river that is today falsely called “Republic of Azerbaijan” used to be named “Aaran” or “Shrivan” and was never called “Azerbaijan” in history. Feel free to look at any historical map or book written by any source before Stalin to confirm this. This name change was a strategic plan by Stalin to annex Iran’s Northern regions to USSR, a plan he tried to implement after WWII. The real Azeris in Iran have NOTHING in common with the citizens of the republic of Azerbaijan other than language and religion and they share these two because Aaran used to be part of the Persian empire before being conquered by Russia. While there are still ethnic Iranians in Azerbaijan the population today is ethnically mixed. The republic of Azerbaijan today is heavily infiltrated by Zionist powers and they have used their influence to spread complete historical fabrications and lies all intended to hurt Iran. Many cities in the republic of Azerbaijan still retain their historic Persian names and historic Persian figures like the Persian poet Nezami whom they are falsely claiming to have been “Turk” never even spoke Turkish. The ancient language of Azerbaijan was Azeri which is an Iranian language that is still today spoken in small villages in this area. The language change from Azeri to Turkish occured during the Mongol invasions when hordes of Ghuz Turkic tribes immigrated from modern day Turkmenistan to the Caucasus and Anatolia and established local dynasties there. As you can see today Turkmen people look nothing like the citizens of Iran, Turkey or republic of Azerbaijan as they are a completely separate race. Turkmen originate from Mongol race, the people of Caucasus, Turkey, and Iran are ethnically White.

      3. Kurds are also an Iranian ethnic group as are Baloochis, and the rest. All these different languages share the same root and a Persian speaker can understand all the others even if he is unable to speak them himself We all share a common history and a common culture, we share the same holidays, have the same festivities, and idolize the same historic figures. To say Iran is not a nation is the epitome of stupidity and ignoance but of course I don’t expect much more from someone who spews Zionist created lies and propaganda.

      4. On the surface the weakest link in Iran could be identified as Arabs since they are the only group in Iran that is ethnically not Iranian, whose language isn’t Iranian, and whose culture isn’t Iranian and yet when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran putting his hopes on the local Arab population rising to aid him he learned the hard way about Iranian unity and Patriotism. The Arabs of Iran were at the forefront of resistance against Saddam. But Iran’s delusional and dumb enemies will never learned I suppose.

  • John Mason

    The author of this article omitted one valid option; Iran attacking US soil, otherwise a good article.

  • Barba_Papa

    I’ve been three times to Iran and what I got from those visits was that it’s a beautiful country, with very nice people and a not so nice regime that most Iranians would rather see the back off. Most Iranians are patriotic about their country but care nothing for their governments and the mullahs. Military service is something to be avoided, with wealthy families buying it off for their sons, or at the least buy a favorable posting close to home. Most Iranians would potentially even welcome a US invasion that would change the regime. Because they don’t imagine what cost the aftermath will be if that were to happen. In that sense they’ve probably been brain washed by watching the many Farsi language TV shows and news channels that are being beamed into Iran via satellite from the US by the large Iranian community that fled there after the revolution. And make no mistake, most Iranians watch those channels more then their own national media, if only because those are as boring as watching paint dry.

    Only a minority would willingly defend the Islamic Republic from a US invasion. But as Iraq showed us, you only need a minority to make life hell for an occupying army. I hope it never comes to such a war because as I said, it’s a beautiful country with nice people that deserve better then to be bombed back into the stone age because the US has to make the world safe for Israel. If only Iran had the atomic bomb, then the point would become moot as nobody attacks a nuclear armed power. Any news of that possible sale of SU-30’s to Iran?

  • chris chuba

    I thought that this was a good article on some of the things that Iran could potentially do to offset the U.S’s overall military superiority … http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-iran-would-go-war-against-america-12548

    Iran knows that a war with the U.S. would be ruinous to their country, so they would never start one but we would be fools to start it. A country like Iran is bound to have a few surprises to make it costly. I am distraught that our aggression is being masked as Iranian aggression.

  • razerznak

    dont worry crusades 2.0 will happen, but bitcoin and gold and water and food

  • S600

    Good article , I think the Iranian partners will also come in play some actively(like Hizbollah, Iraq, Yemen etc) and some quietly will hold their geographical interests like Russians, Chinese and some of the EU countries.
    This wont be a Libyan dish for sure.

  • Superfly

    Iran is a bridge too far and any war will spell the end of Zionist cancer.

  • Tobin Drake

    It’s a good article. However, I think Mattis is a student of history and understanding how the enemy thinks. I’m sure he’ll discourage Trump from going to war with Iran, but if it comes to it he’ll advocate overwhelming force with few rules on how that force is employed. It is possible he might remove the handcuffs US troops have on how it uses force to attack. Under an aggressive stance, US forces could be rather terrifying. For example, the problem with underground bunkers for instance is they are very vulnerable to fuel-air bombs. While it will kill a large number of civilians in the area, it will bury anyone inside (where they’ll suffocate) or outright kill them. Also, if the US stops using smart weapons, but reverts to using bombs to terrorize civilian populations, that could have a large impact as well. After all, most people are used to their modern comforts nowadays. Without running water, electricity and other modern conveniences, I’m sure the civilian population will be heavily impacted. Striking hospitals and other NO-GO targets for Western attacks would further push that agenda. But that may also be a bridge too far even for Mattis.