Odds on a war with Iran before 2013?

[Cain]

I'm giving it a 1/7 chance, after today's IAEA report.

Playbook goes like this: Israel and Saudi Arabia want Iran gone, but they don't want to do the heavy lifty.  Cue a bunch of scary stories about assassination and nuclear potential and war plans.  Pressure mounts internally and externally for Something To Be Done.

The people around Obama are probably the least enthusiastic about war in the Beltway elite, but this does not mean much in the grand scheme of things.   Obama may also see there being some kind of electoral gain from a war, especially if Romney is in the race and it looks like independents are shying away from the White House campaign.

The odds are still lower than a war would be with the Republicans in charge, and it's not a done deal yet...but the stuff I'm hearing is discouraging, to say the least.  I feel like ringing Hillary Clinton and shouting down the line "you're getting played, you dumb fuck", but that's just a good way to get onto airport check lists.

[Elder Iptuous]

how do you think war would unfold with them?
it seems that it would look very different than what we have experience with heretofore...
i can see some kind of overt action on the pretext of keeping them from going nuclear, but boots on the ground?  that would be scary.  and i'm not absolutely sure the US population would stand for it.

could you foresee a 'coalition of the willing' to engage in a conventional war with Iran?
and who might take up sides with Iran in such a conflict?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I would be surprised if the US put boots on the ground in Iran... through from what I'm picking up around here, if Israel gave over on the Pali issue, the Turks might well go kick some Persian ass. They seem to be trying to get the dominant position in the region and having a nuclear Iran on the southern border isn't in their best interests.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

how do you think war would unfold with them?
it seems that it would look very different than what we have experience with heretofore...
i can see some kind of overt action on the pretext of keeping them from going nuclear, but boots on the ground?  that would be scary.  and i'm not absolutely sure the US population would stand for it.

could you foresee a 'coalition of the willing' to engage in a conventional war with Iran?
and who might take up sides with Iran in such a conflict?

Russia and China have supported Iran in the past, though, I don't think that they would offer military support if the war involved the US- war between any of these powers with the US is the last thing any of them would want, and the last thing we would want also.

If either Russia or China offered military support to Iran prior to any declaration of war, it would probably discourage the US from getting involved. Unless it was the type of war where superpowers support lesser powers without directly fighting each other.

[Jenne]

My own prediction:  I don't see us going in against Iran...too complicated a measure.   Too risky by half.  Plus, no one in Iran would really want that--the Imams running the joint might posture, but that's as far as they'll go.  Turkey won't go against Iran, either, same reason.  Though Turkey is now trying to vy against Iran for the "most powerful Islamist nation"...and it's interesting to say the least to watch them go at it.

Turkey's example is an interesting one in and of itself.  I wish that beautiful little country well, though I think they go overboard sometimes in their usurpation of people's freedoms.  On the other end of the spectrum from Iran, of course.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I've been suspecting that the US is gearing up for a war on Iran for a bit.

[Cain]

They'd carry out airstrikes.

But it wouldn't stop there.  Iran would likely close the Hormuz Straits, sponsor terrorist attacks against US targets in Iraq and Afghanistan and agitate for an uprising in the Shi'a dominated region of Saudi Arabia.  Which, incidentally, produces all the oil.  Hezbollah would probably also take advantage of the chaos to start needling Israel also, since Tel Aviv will be looking eastward and not north.

In short, it would be a clusterfuck.

[Elder Iptuous]

it doesn't seem to me that anyone would benefit enough to justify pushing for it...
i think (further) deniable measures to prevent nuclear capability are sufficient and inevitable, though.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I think it's going to happen.

We've finally reached Curtiss Lemay's ideal of perpetual war.

[Cain]

it doesn't seem to me that anyone would benefit enough to justify pushing for it...
i think (further) deniable measures to prevent nuclear capability are sufficient and inevitable, though.

It would certainly benefit Tel Aviv and Riyadh.  If they did it themselves, Iran might target them instead.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think it's going to happen.

We've finally reached Curtiss Lemay's ideal of perpetual war.

Yep.

Hey, hey, Orwell!

I think that the US has a boner for the Middle East and this shit isn't going to stop for a long, long time.

[Cain]

US policy elites have convinced themselves Iran getting the The Bomb will be the end of all civilization as we know it.  Possibly because Americans are generally considered to be bad at geography, and they have not realised the USA is not in the Middle East.

The fact that Pakistan is twice as treacherous and three times as unstable as Iran and yet still has nuclear weapons is, of course, Missing The Point.

[Verbal Mike]

America might not have a real interest but I'm kind of worried Israel might drag them into it.
Frankly I haven't been following this as closely as I should, because my family is in Israel and the thought of war with Iran scares the bujeezus out of me, but I'm not sure it's such a crazy scenario.
Fact: the exiting head of one of the Israeli intelligence agencies, a few months ago, went public in the Israeli media about PM Netanyahu and Defense Minister Barak having *actively been working on war with Iran for years*. Said exiting head claimed he worked hard to make sure those nutjobs didn't get anywhere while he was in his job, but as soon as he became a civilian he had to make sure to alert the public to help keep it from happening. He noted that although Israel might survive war with Iran, the casualties would be horrific and any victory likely Pyrrhic. I recall mention of massive land invasion.
Now, Netanyahu – who has been running on the Iran panic platform for years and years, like many of the established politicians there – very quickly forced the ex-head to retract his statement.
And in case anyone thought that was because the statement was false, Netanyahu and Barak are now publicly trying to get a majority in government for an attack (as of last week – again, I'm not following this like I should) and I think I heard something about them talking with the US.

It's important to recall that when it comes to Israel, Obama is very limited in what he can do because of the ridiculous power held by AIPAC (as well, I guess, as the alignment of the Republic majority in Congress with the uncritical pro-Netanyahu "pro-Israel" platform.) As we've seen over the past couple of years, Netanyahu's government blatantly and deliberately ignore Obama+Clinton and their interests whenever it suits them. This is because Israeli foreign relations have become entirely consumed by Israeli internal politics – our "leaders" are more concerned with telling the public what it wants to hear and with posturing the way the public likes to see than with actually managing our country's position in the world.

The vague and horrific scenario I can imagine, then, is that Netanyahu+Barak manage to wrangle the political support to initiate an attack, then force the Obama administration to do something. If the attack is happening, there will be counter-attacks from Hezbollah, possibly Hamas, and certainly Iran itself. Netanyahu may publicly blame Obama for abandoning Israel if the US does not intervene with great force. Seeing as land invasion (via Syria?) may be in play, any response that does not include a lot of feet on the ground is not going to be enough. I imagine that any scenario in which the US does not do enough to help Israel would be unacceptable to the White House as far as both US and international politics: domestically, they could kiss re-election goodbye, and internationally, they would be creating a vacuum in which basically anybody who steps in might become the new major player in the region. On the US side of things, I imagine that even if it's obvious to everyone involved that Israel started this thing, most American Jews would not feel able to vote for an Obama who stood by and let the counter-attacks come – not even the growing number of American Jews who deeply question Israel's politics and the uncritical US "pro-Israel" stance. I'm not sure how much of a critical base they are but I get the impression Obama can generally count on them.

This is more or less where the thought ends. Let's hope it's completely wrong.

Side note: Tel Aviv isn't where decisions are made, it's just the internationally recognized capital. Jerusalem (my hometown, yo!) is where the fucktards sit and plot their plots.

[Cain]

Everything you've said about the situation in Israel matches what I've heard.  I also think I heard a top ranking Mossad official state that war with Iran was necessary, but war by Israel was unthinkable.  Hence why they are pulling all the stops out to get the US to do it for them.

I find the land invasion scenario unlikely, though.  Getting troops to Syria would be no easy feat, and Syria is already on a knife-edge due to the civil unrest there - the presence of foreign troops would cause the whole thing to spiral entirely out of control, and possibly draw Turkey in as well (they may no longer be friends with Israel, but they despise Assad nearly as much, and are not keen on seeing Tehran flex their muscles westwards).  Iran will stick to unconventional responses, maybe send a few likely lads from the Qods Force to liase with Hezbollah and Hamas, give them extra targeting data, supply them with higher quality explosives, carry out raids, that kind of thing.

One facet that doesn't come up much is the role of Azerbaijan in any such conflict.  Israel has a large military base on the Azeri-Iranian border, which is as likely a target as downtown Tel Aviv.

[Verbal Mike]

Shit, I wasn't aware we had *any* bases outside of Israel.
Guess there's a good reason why "according to foreign sources" has become a standard way to say "you don't have this from me, but..." in Israel...

Thanks for the perspective on Syria. Music to my ears.