Select date

May 2024
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Short “intermission” of Sorts with a Few (Apparently Needed) Explanations, by The Saker

6-1-2020 < UNZ 39 1573 words
 

I feel that there is a need to clarify a few things here which apparently baffle and perplex many. Since the beginning of this crisis the Saker Community worldwide (literally!) has been crazy busy trying to keep up with the events and make sense of what seems totally insane. I have been working nonstop for the past 2 days now and I ask you to forgive me for being even more curt than usual (nevermind my typos and grammar!). Here we go:


1) Iranian nukes: Iran never had a military nuclear program and Iran will never have one. For two reasons: first, nukes were officially declared “haram” by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But there is also another reason, unless you have a full spectrum of nuclear weapons (like Russia and the USA) your nukes are just targets and not only that, they become ideal targets from a PR point of you: the US and/or Israel can claim that they HAD to use nukes to destroy the Iranian ones. The truth is that Iran does NOT need any nukes and that acquiring them would be a major mistake and would paint a huge bullseye on Iran. I know that Iran has announce that it is now moving out of the international agreement about the Iranian nuclear program, but I don’t believe for one second that they are trying to manufacture nukes. Beside, they have also added that they are still working with the IAEA and that they will resume compliance if US sanctions are lifted.


2) US/Israeli nukes: yes, unlike Iran, they have nukes. But what they lack are good targets. Oh sure, then can (and will) strike at some symbolic, high-visibility, targets and they can nuke cities. But “can” does not mean that this is a smart thing to do. The truth is that Iran does not offer any good targets to hit with nukes so using nukes against Iran will only make the determination of Iranians (and they allies) go from “formidable” to “infinite”. Not smart.


3) Iranian air defenses: they are pretty good, but no match for a determined USAF/USN attack. Yes, if the US attacks there will be much more resistance from air defenses than over Syria, and the US will loose a number of missiles and aircraft. But not enough to stop a determined attack. As I said it a gazillion times, air defenses are a game of numbers. Even if your missiles have a perfect hit ratio (1:1), this will not help you if the enemy has more incoming missiles than your stores. Speaking about stores, yes, air defense units can reload, but only if they are alive to do so in the first place! Thus all the opponent needs to do is fire enough missiles at your battery to make darn sure that your battery is destroyed before it can reload. Okay, this is a gross over-simplification, because in reality batteries can be mobile and batteries protect each other. But you get the idea. Only a totally modern and fully integrated air defense network on all levels (from MANPADs to long range missiles a la S-400/S-500) can deal with all the threats. Iran is not there yet, in spite of having had some major successes on the air defense front.


4) How can Iran win if it gets nuked?: US Americans are cursed with a special mental block: many (most?!) of them sincerely believe that war is an end in itself. It is not. Wars ALWAYS have a POLITICAL objective. This is why the USA has both won each war it fought since WWII AND lost each one too. If you just look at, say, casualty figures or which side suffered most destruction, then you can believe that the USA is a formidable military force. But just look at the 2006 war of Israel against Hezbollah. Both the US and Israel declared that they had “won” – yet it was one of the most abject military failures in history. And for Hezbollah this was a “Divine Victory”. Folks – you need to free yourself from the categories and slogans used by the AngloZionist propaganda machine. Wars are ONLY won when a POLITICAL objective has been reached. Just going on a rampage and killing civilians does NOT qualify, even if western political leaders think it does.


If the US uses nukes it will be a political suicide for the US. Well, okay, murdering Solemani is already a form of political suicide. But using nukes will only precipitate even a much faster collapse of the Empire. Here is the unmentionable truth: nukes are USELESS as war weapons in 99% of all circumstances. Yes, they ARE crucial to the balance of terror (kuz that is what this is) between Russia and the USA and, to a much smaller degree, China. But as a WARFIGHTING instrument, they are quasi useless. Yes, I know, we are all conditioned to believe that nukes are like a magic wand, or a silver bullet, or a Wunderwaffe (pick your metaphor) – but this is a lie.


So will the US and/or Israel use nukes? Probably. They will do that because they are dumb racists who believe only in violence and in their own, messianic and racial superiority, and because when they will realize that all is lost, they will do what ALL western leaders (including Hitler) would do: make the other guy pay.


The Iranians know that. They have lived under that threat for decades. I assure you that they are ready.



ORDER IT NOW



5) Will Russia intervene? First things first. There are NO legal/formal obligations between Russia and Iran and last time I checked, no Iranians have volunteered to die for Russia. Next, yes, Iran is an important ally for Russia. But what most folks are missing is that Iran does not need (or want) a direct Russian intervention. There are lots of reasons (including historical ones) to this. But what most folks are completely misunderstanding is that the Iranians are confident that they can win without any Russian (or other) help. I am in touch with a lot of folks from the Middle-East (including Iran) and I can tell you that their mood is one of not only total determination, but one of quiet confidence. Nobody in the region doubts that it’s now over for Uncle Shmuel. I know, this sounds incredible for folks living in the West, but that is the reality in the Middle-East.


Besides, you can be sure that Russia will help Iran, but behind the scenes. First and foremost with intelligence: while the Iranian have an extremely sophisticated intelligence community, it is dwarfed by the much larger Russian one which, on top of being much bigger, also has technical means which Iran can only dream about. Russia can also help with early warning and targeting. We can’t know what is really going behind the scenes, but I am getting reports that the Russians are on full alert (as they were during the first Gulf war, alas – Saddam Hussein did not listen to the Russian warnings).


6) Should Russia declare that Iran is now under Russian protection? Absolutely not! Why? Think of what is taking place as if you were sitting in the Kremlin: the Empire is about to embark on its last war (yes, I mean that, see further below) and the Russian specialists all KNOW that the US will lose, and badly. Why in the world would you intervene when your “main foe” (KGB/SVR/FSB expression for “USA”) is about to do something terminally stupid?


Besides, this is a cultural issue too. In the West, threats are constantly used. Not only to scare the enemy, but also to feel less terrified yourself. In Asia (and Russia is far more culturally Asian than European) threats are seen as a sign of weakness and lack of resolve. In this entire career, Putin used a threat only ONCE: to convince the Urkonazis that attacking during the World Cup would have “severe consequences for the Ukrainian statehood”. But you have to understand that from a Russian point of view, the Ukraine is militarily so weak as to be laughable as an enemy and nobody in his right mind will ever doubt the outcome of a Ukie war with Russia. This is an extreme and exceptional case. But look at the case of the Russian intervention in Syria: unlike their western counterparts, the Russians did not first spend weeks threatening ISIS or anybody else in Syria. When Putin took the decision, they simply moved in, so quietly that THE BEST military in the galaxy never detected the Russian move.


So, IF, and I don’t think that this will happen, Russia ever decided to move in to protect Iran, the US will find out about it when US servicemen will die in large numbers. Until then, Russia will not be issuing threats. Again, in the West threats are a daily occurrence. In the East, they are a sign of weakness.


Now you know why US threats are totally ineffective

Print