NUCLEAR WAR is an IMMINENT threat!

There's been a lot in the news recently about Iran and nuclear weapons. The perspective from which most people are looking at the situation is that Iran will turn into another Iraq, and we'll screw ourselves over with another war we can't win, and we'll go on and blunder in anyway. Partly true, but it misses the big picture. The threat here in this situation is a global one, not limited to Iran. In fact, it could be argued that Iran's role in all of this is extemporaneous. I'll elaborate.

Iraq may not have had too many friends there near the end, and the sales were limited to military technology and that sort of thing. Iran is a very different story. Iran has massive supplies and resources of oil and natural gas, and they're willing to sell to anyone willing to buy. Now they've found a buyer. They've also found a couple buddies, both of whom hold veto positions on the UN Security Council. Observe:

http://www.atimes.com/...

Speaking of business as unusual. A mere two months ago, the news of a China-Kazakhstan pipeline agreement, worth US$3.5 billion, raised some eyebrows in the world press, some hinting that China's economic foreign policy may be on the verge of a new leap forward. A clue to the fact that such anticipation may have totally understated the case was last week's signing of a mega-gas deal between Beijing and Tehran worth $100 billion. Billed as the "deal of century" by various commentators, this agreement is likely to increase by another $50 billion to $100 billion, bringing the total close to $200 billion, when a similar oil agreement, currently being negotiated, is inked not too far from now.

China and Iran linked in an economic deal? Doesn't seem too big at the front, I mean, how long does it take the U.S. to piss through $200 billion in a pointless war? But there's more.

Thus some Iranian officials are hopeful that the China deal can lead to a fundamental rethinking of the risks of doing business with Iran on the part of European countries, India, Japan, and even Russia. Concerning India, which signed a memorandum of understanding with Iran initially in 1993 for a 2,670-kilometer pipeline, with more than 700km traversing Pakistani territory, the Iran-China deal will undoubtedly give a greater push to New Delhi to follow Beijing's lead and thus make sure that the "peace pipeline" is finally implemented. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to Russia, which has as of late been dragging its feet somewhat on Iran's nuclear reactor, bandwagoning with the US and Group of Eight (G8) countries on the thorny issue of Iran's uranium-enrichment program. The Russians must now factor in the possibility of being supplanted by China if they lose the confidence of Tehran and appear willing to trade favors with Washington over Iran. Russia's Gazprom may now finally set aside its stubborn resistance to the idea of entering major joint ventures with Iran.

Two things to note here. First, Iran has learned from watching Saddam's example. Saddam isolated himself from the international community, ensuring that he was without a friend when the U.S. came knocking. This may be attributed to the fact that Iran is not run by a single lone lunatic dictator, but actually has some form (twisted though it may be) of representative government. The second big thing to note is that Iran is also looking at making a deal with India as well as China, and is working to ensure good relations between the two countries. That's big news there, because between India and China you have got a huge chunk of the world's manufacturing capability, a whole lot of smart folks, and a majority of the global population.

And there is even more.

Iran appears more and more interested to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and form a powerful axis with its twin pillars, China and Russia, as a counterweight to a US power "unchained". The SCO comprises China, Russia, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.

China, Russia and Iran share deep misgivings about the perception of the United States as a "benevolent hegemon" and tend to see a "rogue superpower" instead. Even short of joining forces formally, the main outlines of such an axis can be discerned from their convergence of threat perception due to, among other things, Russia's disquiet over the post-September 11, 2001, US incursions in its traditional Caucasus-Central Asian "turf", and China's continuing unease over the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan; this is not to mention China's fixed gaze at a "new Silk Road" allowing it unfettered access to the Middle East and Eurasia, this as part and parcel of what is often billed as "the new great game" in Eurasia. Indeed, what China's recent deals with both Kazakhstan (pertaining to Caspian energy) and Iran (pertaining to Persian Gulf resources) signifies is that the pundits had gotten it wrong until now: the purview of the new great game is not limited to the Central Asia-Caspian Sea basin, but rather has a broader, more integrated, purview increasingly enveloping even the Persian Gulf. Increasingly, the image of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a sort of frontline state in a post-Cold War global lineup against US hegemony is becoming prevalent among Chinese and Russian foreign-policy thinkers.

Right now, the nature of these alliances are not militaristic. However, with all the money involved, should the U.S. seek to disrupt activities with Iran, and attack that country, what do you think China will do? It goes even further then that. China has got a lot of people and a lot of industry, and they are very very oil hungry right now. They need natural gas and they need oil, absolutely need it, and Iran is prepared to give it to them. The U.S. is more than prepared to go to war over oil, what makes anyone think the Chinese will do any less? If we attack Iran, we disrupt the fuel supply of China, and China will react in kind.

The next issue on the table is Russia. How will they react in all this?

But, realistically speaking, what are the prospects for any regional and or continental realignment leading to the erasure of US unipolarism, notwithstanding the US military and economic colossus bent on preventing, on a doctrinal level, the emergence of any challenger to its global domination now or in the future? The strategic debates in all three countries, Russia, China and Iran, feature similar concerns and question marks. For one thing, all three have to contend with the difficulty of sorting the disjunctions between the different sets of national interests, above all economic, ideological and strategic interests. This aside, a pertinent question is who will win over Russia, Washington, which pursues a coupling role with Moscow vis-a-vis Beijing, or Beijing, trying to wrest away Moscow from Washington? For now, Russia does not particularly feel compelled to choose between stark options, yet the situation may be altered in China's direction in case the present drift of US power incursions are heightened in the future. The answer to the above question should be delegated to the future. For now, however, the quantum leap of China into the Middle East and Caspian energy markets has become a fait accompli, no matter how disturbed its biggest trade partner, the US, over its geopolitical ramifications.

Well, let me put it this way. Who will Russia choose, should it come to an economic or military conflict? The U.S. has never seriously feared China, because their greatest strength is the size of their land based army. China has more in their military then the U.S. has people. We don't worry about it too much because barring teleporters they can't get over here without us seeing them coming. Russia, however, shares a land border with China. For much of it, Mongolia forms a barrier, but there is still a whole lot of border between Russia and China, and Russia may find it easier to simply ally with the threat at their back door and have an enemy overseas then the reverse.

And then there's Russia on the nuclear side of things. Most of this article is only readable by subscribers, but the important part is in the viewable second paragraph:
http://www.janes.com/...

Russia appears ready to co-operate with both the USA and Iran in order to boost its trade relations with the two countries. Although Russia is also a leading oil exporter and therefore unlikely to be intimidated by Iranian threats to reduce oil sales, the Russian nuclear industry is dependent on the completion of Iran's USD1 billion Bushehr project, which Moscow hopes will be followed by future billion-dollar contracts. Russia's defence industries, also badly in need of an economic boost through exports, have also been selling weapons systems and aircraft to Iran.

Russia has sold a great deal of it's old Cold War weaponry to China, but China is starting to pick up it's own defense industry. However, Russia has found a new friend when it comes to weapons sale, and is now in a deal with Iran for nuclear energy and weapons systems and aircraft. Should we seek to invade Iran, we will not find it nearly as easy a target as Iraq. We also will find that it has a couple of very big friends.

And now we come to the United States and our role in all of this. The United States currently owes hundreds of billions of dollars to China, largely in war debts due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Not only do we not have the money to go to another war, we owe money to the allies of the next country we're posturing to go to war with. China has our balls in a blender; a simple change in the value of the yuan and we would feel in the United States the financial impact of yet another war, simply from the economic damage done. Sure, China currently enjoys it's trading position with the U.S., but that doesn't mean that they have the most to lose in the event that our trading relationship went away. The U.S. is a great cash cow for the Chinese to milk now, but cows can be sold.

And so the question remains: with the realization of all this, what will the United States do? Do our leaders even recognize this? Are they cognizant and understanding of the reality of the situation? Will they exercise restraint and intelligence with respect to the Iran situation?

What do you think?

Yeah, there's a snowball's chance in hell that we will. No, we're probably going to do a whole lot of really ill-advised crap to Iran, maybe bomb their nuclear sites or even hit them with a nuke. Hell, we don't have to be the ones to do it, Israel has nukes and their trigger finger is looking even itchier with respect to Iran, and perhaps with justification given what Iran has said about Israel. Whoever fires first, it's clear that the U.S. will not have the luxury of another long leisurely Iraq-style conflict. We don't have the money or the manning for the one we already have. Chances are it would get nuclear at some point, and then you face the very real likelihood of a nuclear standoff or perhaps even fullblown conflict between Russia-China-Iran (with Russia and China together being amply able to fuck us up) and the US. If we're lucky, we'll have Japan, whatever is left of Israel, and England on our side. However, given the nature of U.S.-U.K. relation recently, I think that the U.K. will say "piss off, wankers" and leave us (somewhat deservedly) high and dry.

This is the situation we face now. I honestly believe that we are seriously on the verge of some very deep shit. When I get back to the States next month, I'll be buying a truck that is pre-90's, because then it won't have enough electronic components that an EMP pulse from a nuclear blast will render it undriveable. It will have a camper shell and be stock with medical supplies, non-perishable foods, probably a tent and some sleeping bags, weapons, and fuel reserves. I would reccomend that whatever you do, start planning ahead and plan for the worst. Things are looking dark down the road and I'm scared.

Making the situation worse (ha!) is the very real likelihood that if the Republicans keep Congress this year, we'll be looking at an Imperial "Presidency". I hope we make it to '08 and we'll see where to go from there.

Seriously people, things are looking very bad.