Threats and Promises

Do Obama’s red lines with Iran and others really mean “or else”?

BY JAMES TRAUB | JANUARY 13, 2012

In these matters, Barack Obama is, of course, the consummate grown-up. He neither issues ultimatums nor takes the bait when others do so. He is elaborately respectful of the sovereignty of other states (except, perhaps, when he authorizes drone strikes). At some deep intuitive level, Obama believes that he can persuade adversaries that their true interests lie in cooperation. But his presidency has offered him an education in the limits of this principle, domestically as well as abroad. He has learned that congressional Republicans don't actually want to cooperate for the greater good, and so he has belatedly started to issue demands -- extend the payroll tax cut, or else.

You can be too forbearing, as you can be too peremptory. Engagement does not work if it's one-sided. Indeed, Obama now seems to have applied this lesson to foreign affairs: According to the New York Times, the president has responded to the Iranian ultimatum with one of his own: the United States will treat any attempt to block the Straits as a casus belli. Unlike Iran, the United States delivered this message privately: The goal was to clarify the consequences of Iran's action, and to give them a chance to quietly back down, rather than to bully them into compliance.

If you deliver a threat in private, does that make it a diplomatic demarche rather than an ultimatum? Maybe; I won't quibble. It still comes with an "or else" attached. And if the threat to Tehran has the intended effect, perhaps it will embolden our ever-cautious president to try out this tactic elsewhere -- in Egypt, for example. Over the last week, Egypt's military government has engaged in a crackdown on civil society unprecedented even during the long rule of Hosni Mubarak. The time has come for Obama to tell Egypt's rulers that he will withhold some of the $1.3 billion in military aid, and then more, if they continue to send Egypt back towards autocratic rule. He should convey this threat privately, of course. And he should be prepared to make good on the "or else."

MASSOUD HOSSAINI/AFP/Getty Images

 

James Traub is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and a fellow of the Center on International Cooperation. "Terms of Engagement," his column for Foreign Policy, runs weekly.

JOHNBOY4546

5:59 PM ET

January 13, 2012

Well, yeah, it's obvious....

Keep sticking your finger in Other People's Pie and they will demand that you pull that filthy sticking thumb outta' there.

Sure, they are weak and you are a bully. Sure. But the sticking of thumbs into their pie is intollerable to them, and they have to do something about it.

They are weak, and so the only thing they can do is yell at you.

If they were strong they'd pin you to the ground and break all your fingers, and all the while telling you in no uncertain terms that You Had This Coming To You..

So be thankful they are merely issuing the USA with Red Lines because, in all honesty, the USA has spent the last decade just begging for something a whole lot worse.

 

ANON45

8:14 PM ET

January 13, 2012

Be cautious of placing all the blame on one side.

None of these countries are innocent, Pakistan wants to stick its thumb in Afghanistan's pie, Afghanistan is a group of warlords with their thumbs in each other's pie, Iran has Syria and Palestine, and of course this isn't limited to the Middle East.

Basically you are correct that they'd break our fingers if they had the power, and that makes me thankful that they don't, but neither does it make me regretful that we have our own in there.

This has been going on since long before the US was a country, and will continue far into the future.

 

COSSACK

12:39 AM ET

January 14, 2012

Whats funny, is that all of

Whats funny, is that all of these countries would loooove to be in America's place and stick their dirty thumbs everywhere. A weak kid who plays victim all the time, but around those weaker than him, he is the bully. Envy is behind the actions of all these regimes who claim that they just want to live in peace.

The ridiculous thing, is hearing all this America-bashing from some European countries and Russia. I guess they all have forgotten how they used to stick their thumbs and bleed the world dry for resources and slave labor for centuries.

 

ILLBUNCH

10:38 AM ET

January 14, 2012

Dear Cossak

European counties sticking their thumbs in Africa, you're surely talking about it. Well, my friend, it was more than 70 years ago... maybe you should take a look in your own yard, bacuse lately a lot of shit is going on down there.

 

COSSACK

11:36 AM ET

January 14, 2012

It might have been a while

It might have been a while ago, but the problems that European colonialism has created still resonate today - ethnic wars throughout Africa, India-Pakistan rivalry, belligerent Iran, etc. And now they sit quietly, sipping cognac, and frown on America for invading Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries.

 

ILLBUNCH

5:27 AM ET

January 15, 2012

sorry

oh sorry, criticizing america for what you're doing today, after what my grand grand father did in africa. please go on and clean all the middle east from muslims, it will be much appreciated! and don't forget to take a pee on their bodies, because (and I bet you'll agree) bombing a bunch of nomad sheperds handling ak with hi-tech weapons...well it's never enough! get a life, dude, and start thinking about nowadays problems instead of talking about what we did in europe 100 years ago, as those are the days when you had black slavery down in alabama...i feel sorry for you.

 

COSSACK

11:00 PM ET

January 15, 2012

Europe has no right to tell

Europe has no right to tell America anything if you look back at history. So sit quietly, and worry about those nomad shepherds that are right at your doorstep, refusing to integrate into your society.

 

ILLBUNCH

12:46 PM ET

January 16, 2012

no worries

If the things are like you said, tell me why an italian person can easily travel ME or Africa, while for US citiziens it's quite dangerous. Tell me why you always have to look at your back and pay attention to terrorists, while in Italy and in the rest of Europe the threat is less intense. We've been dealing with the things we've done during WWI and WWII for more than 50 years, maybe now it's your time...

 

VERMICIOUS KNID

2:59 PM ET

January 16, 2012

COSSACK said: It might have

COSSACK said:

It might have been a while ago, but the problems that European colonialism has created still resonate today - ethnic wars throughout Africa, India-Pakistan rivalry, belligerent Iran, etc. And now they sit quietly, sipping cognac, and frown on America for invading Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries.

---------------

A lot of these problems predate colonialism. In India/Pakistan, Muslims and Hindus have been fighting vicious wars for centuries. Afghans and Africans fought among themselves at a rapid pace well before Europeans had anything to do with them.

 

09BAYKID

1:23 AM ET

January 14, 2012

When The World Is Running Down

You know, it's laughable on how people think Iran is like Syria. If the US is capable of destroying Iran, then why haven't they done it yet? The US is VERY powerful, yes, but even they have their limits. Iran is red line they cannot cross.

If the US and Israel is SO sure Iran has nuclear weapons, then why haven't they bombed Iran yet?

Iraq and Syria were bombed by Israel for trying to create nuclear bombs and I know for a FACT Israel did it with the permission from the States. There was no warning, no sanctions. Tell me, what makes Iran different from other countries? How come when it comes to Iran, Israel doesn't attack them but instead they use sanctions to try to "stop" Iran?

Iran is not trying to make nuclear bombs. They already have it. The US and Israel know that no matter what happens, Iran will not stop. I seen a post on mamaws primitives saying that sanctions are NOT going to work! Bombing them is the ONLY answer and they know that. So... why isn't anyone bombing Iran?

 

KHANJEE

10:22 AM ET

January 15, 2012

If Bombing Could Work!

Gone are the days when Israel or any other country could attack a state suspected to be involved in nuclear or activities against their desire. Please understand the changed world environment.
Bombing is not the solution for success. Instead of solving the conflictual issues, it only complicates them. The "Daisycutters" did unhinge AL - Queada from Tora Bora, but did they help NATO in successfully winding up the war or ensure ultimate success of the campaign? No. The solution, in my opinion, lies in dispassionately analysing the situation and trying to resolve the issues peacefully through multi- lateral channels of communication. Purposeful engagement, not an overt / covert kinetic confrontation should be pursued to resolve such wicked problems.

 

MARY MCCORMICK

4:18 AM ET

January 14, 2012

Great article James

An obvious conclusion by many counts I think but something that does need to be emphasized in the media and political editorials to remind the US at least, when they go diving into a serious 'victim complex' mode. Much of what they receive now are borne from seeds they planted in the first place.

Your one line captures the point in a nutshell:

The solution is to stop provoking this form of asymmetric warfare.

End that, and America would be in a much better place. It is impossible to apply their current intervention policy consistently (otherwise, the US would have had to invade Zimbabwe, not just Iraq as a matter of default in their quest for true democracy worldwide!)

Mary

 

KHANJEE

6:38 AM ET

January 14, 2012

Ultimatums!!

Theoretically, correct. An objective introspection is warranted to comprehend the reasons why comparatively weaker countries resort to issuing ultimatums to a hyperpower like USA. It may reveal to you that self - centered policies of powerful countries are responsible for the phenomenon.
There are limits to coercion and atrocious behaviour. Left with no option, even a weaker country would like to die honourably. Hence ...ultimatums, in your reckoning.

 

MINIMEME

3:11 PM ET

January 18, 2012

They have no concept of these

They have no concept of these things, their religious and nationalist fanaticism precludes any notion of democracy. Their Enlightenment will happen, hopefully, in the next 3,000 years, that's the insurance to our future. Not only invading them is bad, but giving them any kind of aid or assistance is bad. As soon as the situation gets slightly worse, they will start blaming everyone around them. Everyone but themselves. Its like playing around a pit of snakes - sooner or later they will bite. So, U.S. needs to leave them alone for that reason - nothing good (not even oil, regional influence, stability, trade opportunities, and resources) can come out by meddling in that part of the world.

 

MAIWAND

3:00 PM ET

January 14, 2012

THe mess lies within AMERICAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you look intropsectively into all these conflicts going across the world right now, you would realise that behind the story of all these conflicts lie some American intervention in the past!! Have a look at the following Q & As...

Q:Who created Afghan warlords and strenghtened them against soviets? A:AMERICA!

Q:Who destroyed the Afghan reconcilliation process after the Soviet withdrawl under the auspices of UN and Afghan president, Dr Najeebullah? A:AMERICA.( William Kacey of CIA declared this in his famous quotations: Kabul must burn!!! no wonder the same happened.)

Q: Who left Afghanistan in a lurch after abusing it against the Soviet infidels, so that it can become heaven for CIA created Bin Laden?
A: AMERICA.

Q: Who helped Pakistan to promote Extremist Idealogy across its thousands of Madrasses so as to find more fuel for the Soviet war?
A: AMERICA.

Q: Who enabled Pakistan with Military aid worth billions which assisted them to make a nuclear bomb?
A: AMERICA

Q: WHO turned Saddam into an evil giant to fight against Iran for american interest, until he himself fell a prey to this conspiracy?
A: AMERICA

SO MY AMERICAN FRIENDS,
DONT BLAME THE WORLD...................
BLAME AMERICAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA................
IF IT IS REFORM AND DEMOCRACY, AMERICA NEEDS IT MORE THAN ANY NATION ON EARTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

COSSACK

11:07 PM ET

January 15, 2012

The world should blame itself

The world should blame itself for being a bunch of morons - not being able to create stable, prosperous societies and letting someone smarter to exploit and control it - be it America, Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, Napoleon, Tamerlane, or future space aliens.

So stop whining (and especially stop asking for aid) and blame yourselves for all your troubles.

 

MAIWAND

2:12 PM ET

January 17, 2012

@COSSACK...IS THAT HOW U DEFINE AMERICA????????

Well Mr American, You are telling us that the world is a jungle with no rules and laws and America being the wildest animal out there has the right to tear anyone apart!!!!!!!!

Then STOP BEATING THE NOISY DRUMS OF YOUR NONSENSE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS TO THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!
TELL THE WORLD THAT YOU ARE A BUTCHER , WITH A KNIFE AND EMPTY MORAL SLOGANS, READY TO STAB ANY SPECIE CALLED HUMANS AND THE WORLD WILL DEFEND ITSELF.

STOP LYING TO THE WORLD THAT U WERE FIGHTING IN IRAQ FOR DEMOCRACY!!

STOP LYING TO THE WORLD THAT U WERE LITERALLY INDUCING ARAB SPRING FOR ARAB WELFARE!!!!!!!!!

STOP LYING TO AFGHANS THAT U ARE SITTING OUT THERE TO SAVE AFGHANISTAN!!!!!

UR TELLING US THAT AMERICA IS WILD GIANT WITH NO MORAL VALUES OR OBLIGATIONS, SO THERE IS NO POINT TO CRITISIZE...WELL DONE,, YOU HAVE EXACTLY DEFINED WHAT AMERICA AND AMERICANISM STANDS FOR!!! IF THAT IS THE TRUE FACE OF IT THEN LET'S FACE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

COSSACK

5:03 PM ET

January 17, 2012

Yes, America is a wild beast.

Yes, America is a wild beast. But its stupidity lies in invasions (and assistance) of other wild beasts, most of whom still live in the 3rd century B.C. who have only recently discovered that their lives are worth more than a penny (Arab Spring). Even if democracy was the true reason for invasion of Iraq for example, it is still a flawed concept. The third world, by and large, doesn't want democracy, liberalization, human rights, etc. They have no concept of these things, their religious and nationalist fanaticism precludes any notion of democracy. Their Enlightenment will happen, hopefully, in the next 3,000 years. Not only invading them is bad, but giving them any kind of aid or assistance is bad. As soon as the situation gets slightly worse, they will start blaming everyone around them. Everyone but themselves. Its like playing around a pit of snakes - sooner or later they will bite. So, U.S. needs to leave them alone for that reason - nothing good (not even oil, regional influence, stability, trade opportunities, and resources) can come out by meddling in that part of the world.

But U.S. does not leave them alone because the U.S. does what any prudent and smart realist would do - take advantage of the weak and exploit them under any guise (until it bites us in the ass). Its a double-edged sword.

And the world is a jungle, with no rules or laws, as you have stated correctly.

 

MAIWAND

3:22 PM ET

January 14, 2012

THe mess lies within AMERICAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Q: Who planted the seeds of corruption in current Afghan government by donating BAGS OF DOLLARS to Afghan warlords and laying the foundation of a corrupt evil WARLORD DEMOCRACY ? ( Instead of prosecuting and beheading them like German Nazis in a war tribunal!!!!!!!!)
A; AMERICA.

SO MY AMERICAN FRIENDS!!!!!!!!!!!!
STOP LECTURING US ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND YOUR SO CALLED AMERICAN DEMOCRACY.......................
AS WE ARE JUST FED UP OF BOTH OF THEM...............
LITERALLY THE WOES OF EVERY INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BREATHING ON THIS PLANET CAN BE TRACED BACK TO YOUR DARLING AMERICAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

NBFLDFIDSA9

8:16 PM ET

January 14, 2012

very good web: ===

very good web: === http://www.plzzshop.com

The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike, jordan, prada, also including the jeans, shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.

All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment., After the payment, can ship within short time.

We will give you a discount

WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT

YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

=== http://www.plzzshop.com

thank you!!!

Believe you will love it.

We have good reputation, fashion products,

come here quickly== http://www.plzzshop.com

Opportunity knocks but once

 

9 VOLT

11:51 PM ET

January 14, 2012

Red Lines and Ultimatums: Tools of Warmongers

Acc’d to leaked memos Tony Blair was actually willing to invade Iraq after just the first UN resolution. Anyway, didn’t Blair convince W. to go to the UN in the first place? So Bush did make concessions to the British before going into Iraq. Which of course was a catastrophic mistake. Those were the days, eh?

And shouldn’t Israel be included in your first paragraph as prime example of a small country who does nothing but give us marching orders?

As far as ultimatums, I agree that they should be given in private since public ultimatums tie a leader’s hands into following through with an act that may no longer be prudent at that point in time. A public ultimatum gives the press way too much power to coerce the ultimatum-giver into acting rashly by throwing his words back at him. Unfortunately, Obama has made ultimatums in regard to Mubarek and Gadaffi no longer being "acceptable", and similar "unacceptable" ultimatums regarding Iran's nuclear program. The press badgered a reluctant Obama into participating in Libyan regime-change. Too often red-lines and ultimatums are snares for hawks to entangle politicians into making war.

 

CYNICUS EMERITUS

11:46 AM ET

January 15, 2012

Why do they hate us?

Why is the USA hated?

1/ We're constantly meddling in other countries usually for the benefit of corrupt corporate interests and not for the people's interests (either people within the USA or the other countries).

2/ We've allowed our USA interests to be compromised and not just become entangled with, but controlled by another country that has a history of UN sanctions and is obviously disrespected throughout the world. Not only that but they have a history of using false flags to achieve their own means to an end and to their advantage regardless of the numbers of victims.

 

MICHAEL GIBSON

8:41 AM ET

February 8, 2012

Yes

The US has preached freedom, liberty and democracy to the world, while at the same time aligning itself with evil dictators and oppressors all over the place when there have been American interests at stake. Is it any wonder why the US is hated? Mike

 

NICOLAS19

4:46 AM ET

January 16, 2012

treat those "ultimata" at their place

I kindly ask all of you to re-read the "threats" the author cites to make his point.

- Karzai: hand over an Afghan prison facility in Afghanistan for me, the Afghan PM. I agree, a bold request for the head of a mere puppet government, but not exactly groundbreaking.

- Pakistan: close the facility which you use to murder my citizens on my own soil, situated in a third party country you illegally occupy for a decade now. If somebody's genuinely surprised at such request, he should get his head examined. Still, hardly an existential threat to the US, in fact, hardly a bigger threat than the US throws at Pakistan daily in the form of military aircraft at their airspace.

- Iran: let me close a strait in my national waters. Knowing that less than 25 percent of US-destined oil runs through there, this "ultimatum" is hardly on par with that of George W Bush about going to war.

Ultimatum means a threat with a leverage. As none of these countries have true leverage on the US, these threats can't be qualified as ultimata.

I have two points to make. First of all, what other remedies these countries have but these kinds of big-looking fake menaces? Take Iran: do they have any other kind of leverage over the US? (insisting on the nuclear program hardly did the trick). Take Karzai: how else can he show his own population that he at least tries to stand up against the occupiers? Take Pakistan: are they expected to sit silent while scores of innocent people are killed on their soil? Now, I'm not giving these countries a free pass here, but if you are a weak country, constantly threatened with war for no good reason (see: Pakistan or Iran), you have to show your mimicry of non-existent teeth, to convince at least your own population that you are not a wussy. Obama does the same on a much larger scale.

Secondly, this is the classic case of overreacting. "The Afghan leader wants us to hand over an Afghan prison! This is nonsense! How would we look like if we just gave up an important strategic asset like that? The world would think we are weak! We have to show force somewhere..." and there you go, a recipe for another mass war hysteria. Remember the all-powerful WMDs of Saddam that led to a catastrophic war? Started from a tiny fragment of threat, escalated into 8 years of war. Bravo for cultivating the same.

 

KUNINO

1:54 PM ET

January 16, 2012

Snotty Traub

Hard to respect the thinking and writing of a man who says Mr Karzai speaks firmly when (and thus, apparently, because) he's in a bad mood. This given as a starting point, we can see it as fair warning that the rest of the piece is empty nonsense. It certainly ignores the fact that the Afghan president's complaints are frequently prompted by the fact that America and its allies are killing peaceful civilian Afghans. News reports suggest that these civilians have in the past year or so included two members of the president's family. Disliking that "a bad mood"? No, Mr Traub; no.

Let's not forget that generals Petraeus and McChrystal traced a well-worn path to apologize to mr Karzai in Kabul, but did not blaze it. Each apology was for an American wrong, acknowledged as such by the American commander of the day. This makes dopey nonsense out of any suggestion that it's who's in the White House at any point that stirs the blood of Mr Karzai -- plus, we can surmise, some millions of his his people. He is, after all, the elected leader of his nation. I have heard no Afghan voices calling out that he should not be rude to the Americans occupying his nation. Are there any?

 

PRINCE SIDDHARTHA

3:29 PM ET

January 16, 2012

A simple solution. Align with India

America has followed a twisted foreign policy for 60 years by aligning itself for short-term benefiits with rogue nations, dictators, islamic fundamentalist snakes ( who've come back to bite them) and also a delusion that somehow China will be a partner?

It is time to re-align America's priorities.

Align with India, a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, pluralistic, secular democracy , a natural bulwark against a totalitarian China and a perfect ally against Islamic fundamentalism.

A perfect alliance in Asia would be USA, Britain, European union, NATO, India, Israel, Australia/New Zealand , South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and maybe Indonesia.

This would be a perfect alliance against not only totalitarian China but also the increasingly radicalized islamic world.

It is time for the US to see the big picture and invest in long-term, stable alliances with sister democracies.

 

VIHANVN

9:50 PM ET

January 16, 2012

the real

Wonderful post! Youve made some very astute observations and I am thankful for the the effort you have put into your writing. Its clear that you know what you are talking about. I am looking forward to reading more of your sites content.
Công ty thiet ke web chuyên nghi?p Vi?t Nam

 

09BAYKID

11:49 PM ET

January 16, 2012

Issues in the united states

You know, it's laughable on how people think Iran is like Syria. If the US is capable of destroying Iran, then why haven't they done it yet? The US is VERY powerful, yes, but even they have their limits. Iran is red line they cannot cross.

If the US and Israel is SO sure Iran has nuclear weapons, then why haven't they bombed Iran yet?

Iraq and Syria were bombed by Israel for trying to create nuclear bombs and I know for a FACT Israel did it with the permission from the States. There was no warning, no sanctions. Tell me, what makes Iran different from other countries? How come when it comes to Iran, Israel doesn't attack them but instead they use sanctions to try to "stop" Iran?

Iran is not trying to make nuclear bombs. They already have it. The US and Israel know that no matter what happens, Iran will not stop. I seen a post on pro seo advice saying that sanctions are NOT going to work! Bombing them is the ONLY answer and they know that. So... why isn't anyone bombing Iran?

 

MARSHALMALLOW

6:07 AM ET

January 17, 2012

This is not a deception !! It

This is not a deception !!

It will be a perfect promise and i hope they will complete it. :)

 

MKOHAGWU

12:56 PM ET

January 17, 2012

my opinion

America has followed a twisted foreign policy for 60 years by aligning itself for short-term benefiits with rogue nations, dictators, islamic fundamentalist snakes ( who've come back to bite them) and also a delusion that somehow China will be a partner?

It is time to re-align America's priorities.

Align with India, a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, pluralistic, secular democracy , a natural bulwark against a totalitarian China and a perfect ally against Islamic fundamentalism.

A perfect alliance in Asia would be USA, Britain, European union, NATO, India, Israel, Australia/New Zealand , South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and maybe Indonesia.

This would be a perfect alliance against not only totalitarian China but also the increasingly radicalized islamic world.

It is time for the US to see the big picture and invest in long-term, stable alliances with sister democracies.

 

COSSACK

5:10 PM ET

January 17, 2012

And how long will it be,

And how long will it be, until the good India becomes a nightmare? When the country's problems, like overpopulation and staggering poverty lead to a dictator with a nuclear warhead? And now they, Indians, will start the blame game with U.S. and send suiciders and hackers to attack it? "Entangling alliances with none" - Thomas Jefferson. There are no perfect alliances. U.S. should take care of its own priorities at home and forget about NATO (waste of dollars), Israel (waste of more dollars), Middle East (waste of dollars and lives).

 

KAYKURI

1:53 PM ET

January 17, 2012

Talk about burying the lede...

But thanks for writing this nonetheless:

"The real reason the United States has been the target of these vexing ultimatums is that over the last decade it has meddled deeply with the sovereignty of brittle states, which in turn react with intense resentment. The solution is to stop provoking this form of asymmetric warfare."

 

JENNIFERPROKHOROV

5:21 PM ET

January 17, 2012

avoid naivety

Iran has some intelligent and peaceful people, including some in leadership, who are skilled at causing followers to lead without seeming to do so. Of interest to me beyond what modern maps show on paper is how three monotheistic tribes seemed to have engaged in such apparent conflict; we are looking at the oldest trade routes. These are ancient civilizations formed together in ways which do business together, since time beyond memory. I mean, I keep thinking the apparent conflict, as convincing as it is, has got to be a hoax and a local population management system.

Now here is a map I really prefer to see. Show me what the Middle East says in terms of ancient bloodline and ancient language; specifically who is living specifically where. This is a map which could say what is happening. Definition of ancient for the purpose of this map, in existence in some recognizable form for over 3000 years. In terms of real life on real land, keep Israel.

The ancient business in this situation seems to me different from God, different from land ownership, different from taxation.

 

ALANCHRISTOPHER

4:40 PM ET

January 26, 2012

External Threats of War

Iran has another plan for winning the war. They have unmanned underwater vehicles in the form of mines and torpedoes under the waters of the Persian Gulf, the Straits of Hormuz, and Gulf of Oman to sink ships in those bodies of water. They have 50,000 missiles that they will fire in barrages of several hundred against the military targets, but the strategic targets will be the oil and gas infrastructure of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman. Iran has hacking programs, developed with China, that tell defenders that Iranian missiles are friendly, so defenders should not fire. Iran used a defensive version of hacking program to take control of the US RQ-170 drone to tell it to land, so defensive versions of the program work. Should defenders intercept Iranian missiles, two SUV-sized masses of flaming debris could fall on oil and gas facilities, and barrages should overwhelm defenders in any case, so the southern coast of the Persian Gulf should be filled with oil and gas fires. The US and its allies will "defeat" Iran and destroy its oil and gas infrastructure, but the reconstruction of all nations will take years. Oil is fungible, so disruptions in any country affect prices for all nations. Prices for gasoline will be $10+ per gallon in the US and $20+ per gallon in the EU. The US and EU will fall into a 10 year depression. Russia will thrive because it sells oil and gas with massive new fields in Siberia. China openned 2 oil and gas pipelines from Russia, began 3 more, openned a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan, and has more being built in the seven "stans." Also, China buys oil and gas from Asia, Latin America, Canada, Mexico, and Africa to keep its economy growing from 8% to 9%, and it will be the main country able to rebuild the oil and gas infrastructure of the Middle East and Iran to tie the southern Gulf, Iraq, Iran, the Caucasus, and the seven "stans" to China. The point is that China's help will let Iran recover in 3 years while the US and EU take 10, and China will be the dominant superpower when the US recovers. The US may not like its diminished position in the world, and Iran will be stronger, relative to the US, than it is today. Iran may take a military defeat, but its economy will gain a higher place in the world with the collapse of the US and EU.

 

ALANCHRISTOPHER

5:00 PM ET

January 26, 2012

Internal Threats of War

The second problem of war with Iran is that numerous US residents have Iranian ancestry, and many no longer remember the Shah or any privileges their families may have had under the Shah. They may see any attack on their fatherland as aggression and may respond against the aggressor. Add to that the harassment muslims have had in the US since 9-11, and the US may create forceful resistance in the US against armed conflict with Iran. Iran is a major oil producer, so retaliation may be directed against US oil and gas infrastructure on which the US economy and US military both depend. US oil and gas refineries, pipelines, storage tanks, tanker trucks, drilling rigs, and pumping rigs are easy targets. Rockets and mortars are easy to make. Tracer rounds, for igniting tanker trucks and other targets, are easy to make. Thermite and its igniter, napalm, and other incendiaries are easy to make, and the materials are readily available without identification if people make their own powders and can use simple tools. The point is that a US war with Iran could create a war by those of Iranian ancestry against the US.