Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow Politic arrow Attacking Basra on the Way to Iran?
Mar 31 2008
Attacking Basra on the Way to Iran? | Print |  E-mail
Political Views
By MWC NEWS   

Translation

Attacking Basra on the Way to Iran?
by Jacob G. HornbergerImage

As most everyone knows, since last week the Iraqi government, supported by U.S. troops and warplanes, has been engaged in fierce battles for control of Basra.

The question, of course, is: Why now, and why is control over Basra so important? We can only hope that the answer does not lie in any plans that President Bush might have to bomb Iran.

As things stand right now, the Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr and his fighters control Basra. Al-Sadr is closely aligned with the Shiite regime in Iran. In fact, one could easily argue that matters in Basra are effectively controlled by Iran.

What would an Iraqi-U.S. assault on Basra have to do with a possible plan to bomb Iran?

The answer is found in a recent article entitled “Operation Cassandra” by William S. Lind, an expert on military affairs.

Lind outlines the danger of a potentially catastrophic outcome on U.S. forces in Iraq of a U.S. attack on Iran. He posits the likelihood that Iranian forces, combined with Iraqi Shiite forces, would move into Southern Iraq to attempt to cut off supply lines to U.S. troops in Iraq. He points out that most U.S. army units in Iraq depend on supplies that come up from Kuwait.

Lind points out that if Iranian and Iraqi Shiite forces were successful in cutting off that Southern supply line, army forces in Iraq would soon find themselves without oil, food, parts, and other essential supplies, making them easy prey to enveloping enemy forces. Lind describes the possibility of a massive military catastrophe, the type that has struck hubris-filled imperial armies in the past that were considered invulnerable.

If a war against Iran were to break out, the situation that Lind posits would obviously be significantly aggravated if Iran is controlling a major port city — Basra — that is situated just a few miles away the Kuwaiti border.

Lind writes:

“The purpose of this column is not to warn of an imminent assault on Iran, though personally I think it is coming, and soon. Rather, it is to warn of a possible consequence of such an attack. Let me state it here, again, as plainly as I can: an American attack on Iran could cost us the whole army we now have in Iraq.”

He continues:
“How probable is all this? I can't answer that. Unfortunately, the people in Washington who should be able to answer it are not asking it. They need to start doing so, now. It is imperative that we have an up-to-date plan for dealing with this contingency. That plan must not depend on air power to rescue our Army. Air power always promises more than it can deliver. As I have warned before, every American ground unit in Iraq needs its own plan to get itself out of the country using only its own resources and whatever it can scrounge locally.”

Let’s just hope that Bush isn’t foolish enough to attack another country that hasn’t attacked the United States. Let’s just hope that his recent firing of Admiral William J. Fallon, who opposes a war on Iran, and the recent assault on Basra are not preparatory steps on the way to attacking Iran. Otherwise, the American people might well find themselves “supporting the troops” by praying that all 158,000 of them make it out of Iraq on their own.

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.  

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. 


This_Category
Category:: Political Views

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1294

Comments (4)
RSS comments
1. 06-04-2008 02:09
iran - evaluate evil
remember how WWII was introduced 
 
analyze what they thought 1932 until 1945 
how they behaved . Dishonest and with perfidy . 
Then it was italy NaziGermany and Japan. 
Today 
Look at Iran ( strive for the A- Bomb), Taliban 
and Hizbolah etc. 
 
 
1932 nanking emp.japan  
1934 abessinia moussolini  
1937 manchoria Emp Japan  
WWII Hitler goehring  
1956 Budapest Chruchow  
1968 Prag Breznew  
1975 Cambodia Pol Pot  
1991 saddam  
2001 taliban  
2003 saddam  
2009 Iran 
 
At what point and time it was inevitable to 
conquer the Axis of Evils ? What was the equation in the timeline 1942 -1944 ? 
 
just keep in in mind ,I could sleep a lot better 
if the current Evil's would be contained and/or 
prevented from exerting their lethal potentials.
hlg
2. 06-04-2008 02:31
Basrha
the engagement in Basrha is  
mysterious in many respects 
especially Al-Sadr ' actions/inactions 
 
and Maliki's surprise actions 
and reversal. 
 
To me a miracle why th US  
Firepower was allowed to punch in so rapidly. a big questionmark is Bashra in my mind thensince
hlg
3. 06-04-2008 23:39
prevailings USA
prevailings and failures USA 
 
 
1932 nanking emp.japan USA no action 
 
1934 abessinia moussolini USA no action 
 
1937 manchoria Emp Japan USA sanctions 
 
WWII Hitler goehring USA full success allied response against EVIL 
 
1953 Korea USA success cease fire up to today 
 
1956 Budapest Chruchow USA no action reason anxiety 
 
1968 Prag Breznew USA no action reason anxiety 
 
1975 Cambodia Pol Pot USA failure after 58000 dead 
 
1989 Cold WAR terminated absolute success (0) dead !! 
 
1991 saddam USA success after 200 dead 
 
2001 taliban in progress 
 
2003 saddam resolve at the pivotal point in progress 
 
2009 Iran resolve at the pivotal point THIS WEEK as we speak 
 
 
 
Now here some say it is about $$/OIL and /or israel. 
 
It is a side product . Important is the test question here ,can 
 
we or can we not prevail against EVIL. If we fail the $$ will fall 
 
deep below EURO and the other 4 forex's. If we fail we also 
 
will possibly lose OUR privileges and rights , goals and way of life. 
 
 
 
Decimate iran now, why not now.  
 
MAny say : NOWAY HLG you cannot do this ,because 
 
if you do, more EVIL would be produced and the struggle is getting 
 
even worse. Now,look at the history table above, would you have said 
 
so also in 1933 -1941 ? Pearl Harbour attack was coming , no matter 
 
what , it is like a hurricaine , noone can stop it. 
 
Bertold Brecht once said," what if they gave a war and nobody came? His answer (in brief) "The war is coming to YOU " 
 
 
 
Of course the next few days you will see endless attempts for diplomatic resolve - attempts . Are they halfheartidly on either or both sides, I 
 
don't know, but it will be worthwile to examine each and every argument that will be thrown across the negotiating table(s). 
 
 
 
by HLGinoped on Sunday, April 6, 2008 at 6:28:31 PM
hlg usa
4. 08-04-2008 03:39
Bashra is important
Bashra is more important than Baghdad ,especially for IRAN. 
 
The Maliki authority and reliability 
of him to the USAF needed to be tested.
hlg

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Jacob G. Hornberger Moqtada al-Sadr Basra Attacking Iran
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Enter Amount: