Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Regime Change Redux Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/regime_change_redux#7669 Post contents: First, a couple of perhaps pedantic points of factual error (hey, the devil's in the details, right?): "supersonic B-2 stealth bombers" The B2 is definitely NOT supersonic ... not even close. It's an issue of credibility, really. Obvious canards provide a toe-hold for riposte, and an excuse for dismissal of one's more important argument. And, rinty ... "talk of an incredible new torpedo" Talk? I saw a vid of said torps being launched by Iranian military personnel. The weapon in question is not new, however, but is this: "VA-111 Shkval underwater rocket In 1995 it was revealed that Russia had developed an exceptionally high-speed unguided underwater missile which has no equivalent in the West. Code-named the Shkval (Squall), the new weapon travels at a velocity that would give a targeted vessel very little chance to perform evasive action. The missile has been characterized as a "revenge" weapon, which would be fired along the bearing of an incoming enemy torpedo. The Shkval may be considered a follow-on to the Russian BGT class of evasion torpedoes, which are fired in the direction of an incoming torpedo to try to force an attacking [sub] to evade (and hopefully snap its torpedo's guidance wires). The weapon was deployed in the early 1990s, and had been in service for years when the fact of its existence was disclosed." more: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/shkval.htm No doubt at all it's Russian, and no doubt either that Russia -- and China too -- are trying to counterbalance US unilateralism with a not altogether convincing show of solidarity. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as the strategic saw has it, but I'm pretty sure neither of those parties is deluded as to how far they can ride on that ticket once the strategic objective of blocking US triumphalism is achieved. But I suspect - and here we can only speculate - that Mr. Foy has put his finger very close to the heart of the matter in his last paragraph: "Perhaps the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have quietly informed the Regent and the dauphin that this whole project to attack Iran is crazy ..." I think that he casts too wide a net, though. The CIA is seen as part of the marketing department, the purveyors of assorted "facts" to be cherry-picked (or even fabricated from whole cloth under the aegis of their "brand") as the situation demands, while Sec. Gates is a go-along guy-for-all-seasons as near as I can see. But the military knows its limitations even if their civilian "masters" do not. They've read Sun Tzu and recognize the deadly implications of believing their own BS. They know how close they are to the snapping point and are not about to follow, as it were, Napoleon (or Hitler for that matter)into the Russian winter. That, for what it's worth, and based on nothing more than straws in the wind about Adm. Fallon's objection to a third Carrier deployment (since accomplished in any case) and vague rumors that some pilots might refuse to fly missions into Iran, is my my particular speculation on the matter. Also, it's always advisable to avoid mono-causal analysis in such complex matters, so don't forget China's use of the term "nuclear option" in reference to sales of US assets. Terms don't get any stronger than that in the world of diplomacy. It's not inconceivable that Russia and China together have amassed enough economic power to turn the tables on the US and employ the Reagan strategy of economic implosion. If they could, they would, and we in the west would be fools of the first order to fall into that trap. We badly need to stop BS-ing ourselves and I'm beginning to wonder if that's even possible anymore. BS has become, in so many ways -- mostly economic -- vital to our survival. Sorry for going on so long ... Sent at: 2008 05 16