This is complicated, what people have to remember is the Ayatollah wars between Iran and Iraq In the 80"s thousands of kid's were sent to clear mine fields by blowing them self's up by just walking on them so regular troops could follow up. After this was done Saddam used gas to even the playing field. Bush senior even helped out with Gas Tech. The sin's of the father left on the son is one reasons were in Iraq. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The following is a articles sent to me a while ago. The implication is for a quick attack on Iran. But it is vital to keep in mind the classic joke about the sadist and the masochist, where the masochist yells out, "whip me! whip me!" and the sadist answers, sadistically, "no!" So there is a case for taking the sadist's point of view, and continuing to threaten the Tehran regime without actually striking it. That would upset their expectations, and indeed their psychological need to be provoked into justified rage. For that reason, rather than overt air attacks, under-the-public-radar sabotage operations are always preferable.
It must be said that there is a real possibility that the martyrdom regime has planted retaliatory dirty bombs in various places around the world, to go off if Iranian targets are hit. A'jad has said that
"The anger of Muslims may reach an explosion point soon. If such a day comes [America and the West] should know that the waves of the blast will not remain within the boundaries of our region."
That warning could not be clearer. Retaliatory bombs could exist in small coastal freighters or other delivery vehicles in the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf, and in or near the US. The regime has been signing up hundreds of Basiji for martyrdom operations. Those are cheap cannon fodder for them, like the teenagers who were trained to move right into minefields in the Iran-Iraq war, wearing green plastic "keys to paradise" around their necks, to clear the way for assault troops. That is the environment in which A'jad developed his understanding of war.
Sending hundreds of kids to martyrdom on the orders of Ayatollah Khomeini must play havoc with anyone's mind. Ahmadi-Nejad may not have been directly involved in doing that, but he must certainly have known about it during the Iran-Iraq War and approved of it, else he would not be trusted by the Khomeinists who run Iran to become president.
Psychologically, that life experience implies immense personal survival guilt, along with a readiness to commit suicide oneself to bring about the messianic age of the Mahdi. That is an almost inconceivable state of mind for Westerners who have grown up in a generally peaceful world.
What are the implications for the West? First of all, any action against the cult regime should come at a time and place of our choosing, if possible different from the cult predictions. But our hand is being forced by unverified claims by A'jad to possess 3,000 centrifuges. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other countries may have good intelligence sources in Iran, which are needed to check this astonishingly bizarre, dangerous and secretive regime.
Second, it is critical to neutralize the fanatical leadership which sustains their delusional system in any major attack. That in itself is very difficult, since humans are easier to hide than industrial facilities. But special ops teams must silence the command, communication and control capacity of the regime instantly.
During the Syrian bombing operation, reports suggested that the entire Syrian communications grid was knocked out. Even cell phones connections in neighboring Lebanon were disrupted. Special Forces were believed to be on the ground, laser-designating the target, and supposedly smuggling out samples. They may also have sabotaged the communications grid, including hardened communications between Pantsyr anti-air defenses. It was a successful dress rehearsal.
Thirdly, unlike the one-shot Israeli attack in 1981 on Saddam's Osirak nuclear reactor, any attack on Iran today may trigger extended hostilities, including assaults on civilians far away from the theater of war. Previously the Iranian Guard (including Ahmadi-Nejad) committed attacks on Jewish synagogues in Buenos Aires. The people who did that are in charge today in Tehran. So this time there will surely be a barrage of Hezb'allah missiles directed at civilians in Israel, like last summer, but possibly much more accurate.
As soon as military action starts, pressure will be brought to bear to shut it down prematurely. For once that pressure must be resisted. This gang is too dangerous to leave them with any of their total war capacities intact. A'jad just flew to Venezuela to arrange for added supplies of refined oil products which Iran cannot make at home. He is planning for a long war. He may increase Iranian meddling in Iraq, but a conventional Iranian invasion of Iraq is unlikely, since conventional forces are highly vulnerable from the air, and the US controls the air.
It seems vital for the West not to take military action until the Iranian nuclear plan has become quite clear. As suggested previously, one possibility is for the IAF to attack several established nuclear targets in Iran, with the United States allowing Israeli overflights of the Gulf. If and when Iran attempts to retaliate against Israel, or even Saudi Arabia, using missiles and aircraft, USN Gulf defenses would be automatically triggered, bringing US forces into the fight. The Saudis would not be happy with Iranian military overflights, since Khomeini fanatics believe they must eventually rule the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Iran may try to blockade the Straits of Hormuz, leading to US actions to open the Straits as the guarantor of free shipping through international waterways.
Contrary to the Saddam war, today we have France and Germany in support. Whether that actually means anything, or whether they will bend to domestic opposition, is anybody's guess. They could turn out to be weak sisters. But at least they are not actively sabotaging us, as they did with the overthrow of Saddam.
A very dangerous time is coming up. If we are very lucky, the world will be saved by some brilliant secret raids and naval actions along the lines of the Tanker War of the 1990s. With even greater luck there will be a military coup d'etat, throwing the Khomeinist fanatics out of power. But these are extremely ruthless people. Right now it seems more likely there will be an extended conflict, along the lines that the West and Israel will find most difficult to deal with.
If a major Israeli city is severely hit, Israel may respond with massive retaliation. In the Osirak reactor strike of 1981, Israel managed to kill only one person. The coming battle with Iran may make that impossible.
If this interpretation is correct, we have some very difficult times coming up. Our domestic political dialogue has been utterly immature since 9/11. But the prospect of hanging in a fortnight concentrates the mind wonderfully, and it is possible that some on the Left will wake up.
The Iranians are quite capable of stirring up terrorist retaliation in their war of Armageddon. They are suiciders, like the kamikaze cult of WW Two: Very difficult to deal with indeed. Making adequate civil defense preparations may become a crucial part of everyday life, even in the United States. Our feeling of immunity to direct attack is simply out of date. I wonder whether Democrats will allow us to improve protection against domestic attacks?
In making rational predictions of danger we always hope to be wrong. But we cannot plan based on hope alone.