The Washington Post writes When nearly $100,000 landed in an undercover FBI bank account from a source linked to an Iranian paramilitary force, officials began taking seriously an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador that at first had seemed outlandish.
Professor Juan Cole on his website Informed Comment says Arbabsiar had $100,000 wired FROM A THIRD COUNTRY (my emphasis) to what he thought was the Mexican drug gangster s account. THE MONEY DID NOT COME FROM IRAN. (my emphasis) Even if it originated there, there is no reason to think it was government funds. Arbabsiar was himself worth $2 million in Iran; for all we know, as he got lost in his fantasyland, he began being willing to spend his Kermanshah inheritance on the crazy scheme.
We had better not get jacked into another war over this fantsyland plot, when there is no conceivable way it could have been done in any furtherance of Iran s interests. However, it may well be worth our consideration of what other nation s interests may be served in it. What nation does wants war with Iran? Provided we fight it for them?
Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow at Brookings, recently wrote in the Nixon Centre's "National Interest" that a new war on Iran would be catastrophic .
An Israeli attack on Iran is a disaster in the making. And it will directly impact key strategic American interests. Iran will see an attack as American supported if not American orchestrated. The aircraft in any strike will be American-produced, supplied and funded F-15s and F-16s, and most of the ordnance will be from American stocks. Washington's $3 billion in assistance annually makes possible the IDF's conventional superiority in the region. Iran will almost certainly retaliate against both U.S. and Israeli targets . Even if Iran chooses to retaliate in less risky ways, it could respond indirectly by encouraging Hezbollah attacks against Israel and Shia militia attacks against U.S. forces in Iraq, as well as terrorist attacks against American and Israeli targets in the Middle East and beyond.
America's greatest vulnerability would be in Afghanistan. Iran could easily increase its assistance to the Taliban and make the already-difficult Afghan mission much more complicated. Western Afghanistan is especially vulnerable to Iranian mischief, and NATO has few troops there to cover a vast area. President Obama would have to send more, not fewer, troops to fight that war.
Making matters worse, considering the likely violent ramifications, even a successful Israeli raid would only delay Iran's nuclear program. Support for the existing sanctions on Iran after a strike would likely evaporate.
No to Curveball, no to fabricated yellow cake reports, and no to a new and most catastrophic war with Iran.
The sound of the gates to the Straights of Hormuz slamming shut is our virtual doom.
No comments:
Post a Comment