LiveWire

A post by Maynard

The Economist has published this report of the Iranian nuclear situation. It’s a good overview of where we are and how we got here. And this is the latest Economist update.

That Iran is racing ahead with its illegal nuclear program is apparent to all. If and when Iran gets the bomb, then the threat of nuclear annihilation will hang over the region and the world. Either Iran will be the big dog controlling the world’s gas tank through intimidation, or there will be a regional rush for everyone to go nuclear. With the prevailing Mid-East mentality (that is to say, genocidal maniacs generally in charge), nuclear war will soon follow, one way or another.

Should Israel or America launch a pre-emptive strike? Obviously such a move would be very dangerous. Unless we’re prepared to occupy and rebuild Iran — which isn’t on the table — then a strike would leave behind an Iran that, although weakened, would be angry and potent. Regional flashpoints would likely flare up as Iran’s proxy warriors launched attacks on other fronts. An oil shock and a spike in prices would follow, causing severe global economic disruption. And a pre-emptive strike would have to destroy a number of targets that are entrenched and defended. Do we even know the location of all the targets that must be destroyed? The size of the task may be too big for the Israeli air force — unless the Israelis decide to take out targets using tactical nukes.

Maybe a pre-emptive strike is the least-bad option. At least the resulting war wouldn’t be nuclear. But I understand the temptation to do nothing and pray.

Drudge has linked this Reuters report:

A “bunker buster” bomb with more than 10 times the explosive power of its predecessor will be put into service by the United States next December, six months later than previously scheduled, the U.S. Defense Department told Reuters on Friday.

The deployment’s timing may help shape calculations of the United States and others in long-running standoffs with Iran and North Korea over their nuclear programs.

The precision-guided, 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, is designed to wreck potential targets such as deeply buried nuclear facilities that are beyond the reach of existing bombs.

“Funding delays and enhancements to the planned test schedule have pushed the capability availability date to December 2010,” Tara Rigler, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said in an email.

“Funding delays”? This announcement, and the implication that the weapon won’t be available for a year because of a voluntary choice of funding, suggests that this is the Obama administration’s method of signaling that a strike on Iran has been taken off the table. This may also be the signal of acquiescence to a nuclear Iran, since the situation will likely have come to a boil before this bunker-buster is ready to deploy.

Likewise, the earlier decision to cancel plans to deploy a missile shield in Eastern Europe seemed to signal America’s willingness to have Europe exposed to Iranian nuclear blackmail.

Then again, these decisions may represent a more complex message in a more sophisticated game. Some of these things can’t be understood except in hindsight. But Obama’s foreign policies have seemed pretty weak and ineffective thus far. He seems to reserve his venom and coercive authority for America’s allies such as Israel, or for his political opposition.

Is there any method to what seems on the surface to be Obama’s suicidal madness? I guess we’ll find out.