I’m still working on my Syria post. Meanwhile here’s Simplicius, writing today. Since his cavalier approach to layout is always confusing, I’ve tidied it up – itself an editorial decision when ‘form’ cannot be neatly distinguished from ‘content’ – and tweaked his words for brevity and clarity.
If you’re in a rush – as, indeed, am I – here’s the ten second summary.
The war with Iran sought by an Israel fast running out of options, ideas and indeed any discernible strategy (since ethnic cleansing and genocide do not a strategy make, nor does the goal of a Greater/Biblical Israel) and by the Neocons of both parties in the US duopoly masquerading as a democracy, would be reckless in the extreme.
That’s purely on consideration of Iranian capability, i.e. before we even get to the reality that China, half of whose oil passes through the Hormuz Strait, could not stand idly by in the face of attempted regime change in the Islamic Republic.
Over to Simplicius
Iran Ups Ante as Israel Chafes for Face-Saving Escalation
Israel reportedly edges closer toward unilateral Iranian strikes despite all ostensible efforts by the US to pump the brakes on the clash which could spiral out of control.
Since I recently objected to the vagueness of “reportedly” in a characteristically warmongering piece by the Guardian’s Simon Tisdall, I have to tap Simplicius on the knuckles for not supplying a sample reference or two. That said, the latter likely concluded that evidence – logical no less than empirical – of Israel seeking US backed war with “the head of the snake” is abundant.
Preparations for an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities are said to be nearing completion, with the final steps, including the transfer of munitions and operational planning, currently ongoing, according to Channel 12.
Both sides are holding cards close to chest, signaling at times contradictory information. For instance, Iran has long held that its fatwa against nuclear weapons prevents any possibility of their construction, yet new reports hint at the opposite. Here’s Fereydoon Abbasi, former head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, in a recent interview:
We reached the capability to build nuclear weapons 15-20 years ago [but] have not yet received the orders to produce nuclear weapons. If they tell me to build it, I will.
If Israel or the United States bomb our nuclear production sites, it won’t affect our timetable to get a bomb.
These days it is possible to create tactical nuclear weapons that do not fall under the category of WMDs, we can use them to destroy an Israeli military base for example.
The above point implies that tactical nukes may not be included in Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s ban on WMDs.
Listen very carefully to what he says: not only that Iran can swiftly build nukes if ordered to do so, but that any strike by the West on its facilities would have no effect because Iran has dispersed them, as well as hidden critical segments deep underground.
Some may be skeptical of this, but here’s Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in an interview published today in the Financial Times:
Worse, Iran’s nuclear capabilities could not be destroyed with a single surgical strike. “The most sensitive things are half a mile underground — I have been there many times. To get there you take a spiral tunnel down, down, down.
For his part Charles Lister – Resident Fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington DC, and former visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution [a Washington/Pentagon funded think tank] – tweeted in early April:
The best we could do is set it back 3 months.’ – That’s what a *very* prominent US military official told me in February about what a major US air/missile assault on #Iran‘s nuclear program would do. ‘Some of it, we can’t even reach anymore,’ they added.
When both sides agree on the same notion, it can hardly be called propaganda or misdirection; it clearly points to Fereydoon Abbasi’s statements from the earlier video being accurate.
One analyst states:
[IAEA Head] Grossi is right. The world’s most powerful bunker-buster, the GBU-57, can only penetrate 66 meters, while even the latest nuclear bomb can only impact up to 500 meters underground.
Iran has placed its IR-9 centrifuges on shock-absorber systems, capable of withstanding 6.0 Richter scale earthquakes. These sites lie deep within mountains.
Israel does not have the GBU-57; only the US does, and only B-2 bombers can carry them — 2 bombs per jet. To destroy just one Iranian site at 800m depth, the US would need to drop at least 12 bombs precisely at one spot — requiring 6 bombers per site.
Iran is believed to have at least 5 such deep nuclear sites. To destroy them all, the US would need to deploy 30 B-2 bombers, but it only has 18 total. Meaning, at least 2 Iranian sites will survive.
Moreover, Iran has not built straight shafts. After every 50 meters, tunnels twist hundreds of meters sideways before going down again — making pinpoint strikes nearly impossible. Even if the first bomb hits, the remaining 11 could hit empty ground.
In short, Iran’s underground nuclear infrastructure is now too deep, too complex, and too protected to be taken out militarily.