I have been conversing with brilliant and prolific Iranian dissident Ghazal Omid (http://www.ghazalomid.com , http://www.ghazalomid.com/videos , http://www.livinginhell.com ) for only a very short time, but I have been impressed enough with her tenacity and her intellect, as well as her cogent arguments, to change some preconceptions that I had regarding the wisdom of a US military attack on Iran at the present time.
I am an independent military analyst, having studied military history and military science for over 30 years. I am no great soldier, having only served in the US Army as an M60A1 tanker at Ft Knox in 1982-1983 before leaving the Army after 3.5 months. I was too much of an individualist to settle into the last years of the Carter military (the Reagan reforms had not reached into the training brigades when I signed up for delayed entry while still in high school).
However, my brigade commander at the time, Lt Col Birdingame, spoke to me about the responsibilities of a US citizen to his country, and the requirement of each citizen to find some way to serve his country. I never forgot that, and have never wavered in my support of the US military, and have independently lobbied elected officials to press for funding for troop levels and military hardware advances ever since.
I have intesively studied military strategy and have had, as a personal mission, a conviction to support the military and its causes as a civilian, and understand military studies as thoroughly as a graduate from Staff Colleges. I understand the tactical, operational and strategic levels of military functions, and even though I have no extensive military credentials, I know from which end of the tube the round emits, if you can read me 5x5.
When I first contacted Ghazal, I was thoroughly convinced that a US attack on Iran should most certianly occur, with these objectives:
1. Degredation of anti-air assets through concentrated SEAD attacks;
2. Removal of SSM threat in the Persian Gulf littoral and removal of ASM abilities through air superiority and immediate removal of Iranian naval assets, including denial of small boat launch through minelaying and selective insertion of Special Forces to slips and launch areas;
3. Reduction of Iranian government anti-insurgent assets through attacks on Iranian military and Revolutionaryu Guards assembly areas;
4. Elimination of Iranian nuclear facilities with ground-penetrator small-yield high explosive (250-lb) munitions;
5. Release of Iranian ethnic resistance groups which have been trained, supplied, and supported by US Special Forces working in-country to topple the Iranian government and raise indigenous resistance to support the overthrow of the current regime.
In our conversations, I learned of her stolid conviction that the current regime has over three years before reaching operational status with an atomic fission weapon, that the Iranians' patriotic fervor would galvanize around the government, no matter its brutality, in the face of a US attack, and that legitimate resistance groups in-country, with the proper funding, would be able to remove the current government far before a nuclear weapons program reaped its goals.
What is important now is to put the disparate pieces together and come up with a cogent total picture. US and allied naval forces massing in the Arabian Sea and the Eastern Med, as well as developments in the US, are pointing to one conclusion: The US is preparing for an assault either on Iran, which would be a tragic mistake and could actually set back the Grand Strategy in the Global War on Terror, or we are getting ready to hit Assad's Syria, which would end up isolating Iran and cut off logisitical and command and control to Hezbollah, and avert a Syrian attack on Israel into the Goan Heights in support of Iran, if it is attacked.
I am just a regular guy out here in Colorado who keeps up with military and geopolitical developments, and who has the ability, with a 30-year background in military science and military research, to put the pieces together and can see where the main thrust is heading. I have a sincere desire to see Iran freed with as few innocent lives lost as humanly possible, and with no US military casualties. I fully support the Global War on Terror, because I know what radical Islamic groups can do with conventional weapons, and can also understand what will happen if NBC agents are passed to the wrong hands by the Mullahs and their myrmidons in Teheran.
What I am unable to determine in the current picture is whether the thrust is headed west out of Iraq into Iran, or East into Syria towards the Mediterranean. One goal, into Iran for regime change, can very well fail in the face of Iranian nationalistic patriotism. The other goal, westward into Syria simply for degredation of Syrian military capabilities and elimination of terrorist training areas, is a more reachable goal for now, with redirection of resistance funding in Iran to bring down that government without US military operations.
Joel Pousson
Independent Military Analyst
Castle Rock, CO
I am an independent military analyst, having studied military history and military science for over 30 years. I am no great soldier, having only served in the US Army as an M60A1 tanker at Ft Knox in 1982-1983 before leaving the Army after 3.5 months. I was too much of an individualist to settle into the last years of the Carter military (the Reagan reforms had not reached into the training brigades when I signed up for delayed entry while still in high school).
However, my brigade commander at the time, Lt Col Birdingame, spoke to me about the responsibilities of a US citizen to his country, and the requirement of each citizen to find some way to serve his country. I never forgot that, and have never wavered in my support of the US military, and have independently lobbied elected officials to press for funding for troop levels and military hardware advances ever since.
I have intesively studied military strategy and have had, as a personal mission, a conviction to support the military and its causes as a civilian, and understand military studies as thoroughly as a graduate from Staff Colleges. I understand the tactical, operational and strategic levels of military functions, and even though I have no extensive military credentials, I know from which end of the tube the round emits, if you can read me 5x5.
When I first contacted Ghazal, I was thoroughly convinced that a US attack on Iran should most certianly occur, with these objectives:
1. Degredation of anti-air assets through concentrated SEAD attacks;
2. Removal of SSM threat in the Persian Gulf littoral and removal of ASM abilities through air superiority and immediate removal of Iranian naval assets, including denial of small boat launch through minelaying and selective insertion of Special Forces to slips and launch areas;
3. Reduction of Iranian government anti-insurgent assets through attacks on Iranian military and Revolutionaryu Guards assembly areas;
4. Elimination of Iranian nuclear facilities with ground-penetrator small-yield high explosive (250-lb) munitions;
5. Release of Iranian ethnic resistance groups which have been trained, supplied, and supported by US Special Forces working in-country to topple the Iranian government and raise indigenous resistance to support the overthrow of the current regime.
In our conversations, I learned of her stolid conviction that the current regime has over three years before reaching operational status with an atomic fission weapon, that the Iranians' patriotic fervor would galvanize around the government, no matter its brutality, in the face of a US attack, and that legitimate resistance groups in-country, with the proper funding, would be able to remove the current government far before a nuclear weapons program reaped its goals.
What is important now is to put the disparate pieces together and come up with a cogent total picture. US and allied naval forces massing in the Arabian Sea and the Eastern Med, as well as developments in the US, are pointing to one conclusion: The US is preparing for an assault either on Iran, which would be a tragic mistake and could actually set back the Grand Strategy in the Global War on Terror, or we are getting ready to hit Assad's Syria, which would end up isolating Iran and cut off logisitical and command and control to Hezbollah, and avert a Syrian attack on Israel into the Goan Heights in support of Iran, if it is attacked.
I am just a regular guy out here in Colorado who keeps up with military and geopolitical developments, and who has the ability, with a 30-year background in military science and military research, to put the pieces together and can see where the main thrust is heading. I have a sincere desire to see Iran freed with as few innocent lives lost as humanly possible, and with no US military casualties. I fully support the Global War on Terror, because I know what radical Islamic groups can do with conventional weapons, and can also understand what will happen if NBC agents are passed to the wrong hands by the Mullahs and their myrmidons in Teheran.
What I am unable to determine in the current picture is whether the thrust is headed west out of Iraq into Iran, or East into Syria towards the Mediterranean. One goal, into Iran for regime change, can very well fail in the face of Iranian nationalistic patriotism. The other goal, westward into Syria simply for degredation of Syrian military capabilities and elimination of terrorist training areas, is a more reachable goal for now, with redirection of resistance funding in Iran to bring down that government without US military operations.
Joel Pousson
Independent Military Analyst
Castle Rock, CO
3 comments:
My impression has been that Iranians can be charming, enthusiastic and exaggerative, and mistaken. This makes it hard to incorporate their views into one's general picture. Here's a comment I made elsewhere a while back about an Iranian whom I used to know, he called being a university student his career.
Ghazal Omid is a cogent, thoughtful, and determined Iranian dissident who is not prone to exaggeration, hyperbole or hysteria.
She has contacts within the country, and has provided me with intelligent, well-sourced and well-thought-out positions on the future of Iran, as well as chances for removing the regime there from within.
You might look at more of her writings before making blanket statements about "Iranians" as if they are all cut from the same cloth.
A population of 70 million produces a huge spectrum of personalities, attitudes, and levels of intellect. Lumping all Iranians as "charming, enthusiatic and exaggerative" is tantamount to equating all Americans with Nancy Pelosi, and I do not think, from reading your own comments elsewhere, that you would be comfortable with that characterization.
Ghazal Omid is a woman who can be believed on this issue, my friend. Read more of her writings.
bropous
I don't want to paint with too broad a brush, and I don't think that I know all that one needs to know about Iran, but some cultures do have distinctive characteristics, and I have spoken with quite a few Iranians over the years and decades, and have read about Iranian issues over the years. It's hard not to note an Iranian tendency towards being possessed by one idea or another and toward having a consuming agenda, howsoever well-intentioned it sometimes is. Back during the breakdown of the Iron Curtain, if I had read of Polish reports of 10,000 killed in some Polish city, I would have given it credibility; when I did hear of reports by Romanians of 10,000 killed in Timosoara in Romania, I told friends it was probably 1,000. I was right (but still overjoyed to see the Romanian crowd chanting "Timosoara!" at the monster Ceaucescu).
What I'm saying is, don't be precipitous. Just a week ago at L.com you were advocating war against Iran (I'm the same ForNow there). It's good to be adaptive and to correct one's errors quickly. But I think that Iran has long been a place about which it is difficult to get reliable info.
Post a Comment