In watching the developments in the Middle East, these last few months I have to tell you that Iran is likely to be our next stop militarily. I do not believe this to be a choice of ours, but rather a choice of theirs.

A couple of days ago I became embroiled in a conversation with Alex Knapp over at Outside the Beltway, as regards Hamas and its anti-Israel activities.  I suggested at the time that they were being supplied by Iran. I pointed to several news articles at the time, which in fact, this contention. Even worse, I was able to point to evidence which suggested that Iran is still hip deep in supporting terrorist organizations in the Gaza.

Makes sense, too, if you think on it. As I said at the time, when Israel is tied up dealing with Hamas, or Fatah,(whichever is in power at the given moment) they’re not dealing directly with Iran, are they? If Iran has designs on Israel, and I think it clear they do, then what better way to deal with Israel than using Hamas or Fatah as a sheild? It would be in their interests to keep them minimally supplied.

So this morning, I start catching up on my mail, and I find a note from Chuck Simmins over at the North Shore Journal. He points to reports that Iran is up to it’s pits there, too, in supporting Terrorists… in this case, Sadr.

AP reported on March 26 “Mahdi Army commanders have told the AP that the militia has recently taken delivery of new weapons supplied by backers in Iran. The arsenal, they said, included roadside bombs, anti-aircraft guns and Soviet-designed Grad rockets.

They also said an infusion of cash, also from Iran, helped the militia set up new command centers equipped with Internet-linked computers, fax machines and satellite mobile phones. They have also received global positioning system devices, they said.

The United States has long accused Iran of providing Shiite militias in Iraq with arms and training. Iran denies it.

Of course they deny it. But it’s kind of hard to come to any other conclusion, given the markings on the munitions before found, and being fired at Iraqi and American forces.

And of course we now see Sadr swearing fealty to Iran in this Washington Post article… (From 2006!).

So much for the myth that we’re embroiled in an Iraqi civil war. Such a civil war, after all, would exclude Iranian support, and Iranian fighters such as have been found killed following fighting With Sadr’s people.  And given the back and forth that Sadr himself has been doing, between Iran and Iraq… mostly after he’s lost battles and large numbers of troops, why would it be so hard to fathom, that he’s going to Iran to report to his betters, and to pick up more men and supples to continue his fight against the legitimate government of Iraq? Even what ‘cease fires’ have occurred, appear to have occurred at Iran’s bidding.

Even within the last hour, now, stories have surfaced which solidify this link.

It seems clear that Iran is the central supporter of terrorist activities and unrest in the region. It doesn’t take a great deal of thought to determine our next course of action. 20 years gone, now, such evidence as I’ve posted here alone would have resulted, rightly, in a military response against Tehran which would make ‘shock and awe’ look like a tea party. We delay such response now, at our own peril, I think. The centrifuges, after all, continue to spin in the underground facility in Iran.

By contrast,James at OTB suggests we might do well to employ a MAD philosophy.

We learned to play the nuclear game during the Cold War and developed our theory of strategic deterrence around the idea of mutually assured destruction. We threatened to wipe the other guys off the face of the map if they launched a nuclear strike against us and left the option on the table to strike them first. This brinksmanship came dangerously close to being tested, most notably with the Cuban Missile Crisis, but it otherwise worked.

Only one problem with that idea. The Soviets, for all their stupidity, did not suffer from a suicide-bomber mentality, that they were all going to be rewarded in heaven for killing infidels. Consider that Iran is working toward Nuclear weapons capability, despite having no rockets that can get such a weapon far enough downwind to prevent radiation problems for it’s own territory. Surely, a suicidal attitude, and one vastly different from anything we faced during the cold war.

The kind of war we have fought so far in Iraq and Afghanistan should, if nothing else, be solid enough indication that strategies we’ve used in the past will simply not work, or worse, will work to our the advantage of our enemy.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,