OPLAN TIRANNT
The Pentagon has been working for nearly three years on the war plan for dealing with the freedom hating Iranians. The plan is appropriately code-named TIRANNT--allegedly for "theater Iran near term."
As game time approaches, details of TIRANNT have been leaked to the intrepid defense analyst William M. Arkin.
The core TIRANNT effort began in May 2003, when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran. TIRANNT has since been updated using post-Iraq war information on the performance of U.S. forces. Meanwhile, Air Force planners have modeled attacks against existing Iranian air defenses and targets, while Navy planners have evaluated coastal defenses and drawn up scenarios for keeping control of the Strait of Hormuz at the base of the Persian Gulf.
A follow-on TIRANNT Campaign Analysis, which began in October 2003, calculated the results of different scenarios for action against Iran to provide options for analyzing courses of action in an updated Iran war plan. According to military sources close to the planning process, this task was given to Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, now commander of CENTCOM, in 2002...
The day-to-day planning for dealing with Iran's missile force falls to the U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha. In June 2004, Rumsfeld alerted the command to be prepared to implement CONPLAN 8022, a global strike plan that includes Iran. CONPLAN 8022 calls for bombers and missiles to be able to act within 12 hours of a presidential order. The new task force, sources have told me, mostly worries that if it were called upon to deliver "prompt" global strikes against certain targets in Iran under some emergency circumstances, the president might have to be told that the only option is a nuclear one...
On the surface, Iran controls the two basic triggers that could set off U.S. military action. The first would be its acquisition of nuclear capability in defiance of the international community...
The second trigger would be Iran's lashing out militarily (or through proxy terrorism) at the United States or its allies, or closing the Strait of Hormuz to international oil traffic. Sources say that CENTCOM and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have developed "flexible deterrent options" in case Iran were to take such actions.
I'm betting on the third scenario:
In a world of ready war plans and post-9/11 jitters, there is an ever greater demand for intelligence on the enemy. That means ever greater risks taken in collecting that intelligence. Meanwhile, war plans demand that forces be ready in certain places and on alert, while the potential for WMD necessitates shorter and shorter lead times for strikes against an enemy. So the greater danger now is of an inadvertent conflict, caused by something like the shooting down of a U.S. spy plane, by the capturing of a Special Operations or CIA team, or by nervous U.S. and Iranian forces coming into contact and starting to shoot at one another.
It would be easiest to arrange the "inadvertent conflict" (sic) pretext. Thus, following the "keep it simple, stupid" maxim--the smart money would be on the United States taking that route to our "kinetic" future.
As game time approaches, details of TIRANNT have been leaked to the intrepid defense analyst William M. Arkin.
The core TIRANNT effort began in May 2003, when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran. TIRANNT has since been updated using post-Iraq war information on the performance of U.S. forces. Meanwhile, Air Force planners have modeled attacks against existing Iranian air defenses and targets, while Navy planners have evaluated coastal defenses and drawn up scenarios for keeping control of the Strait of Hormuz at the base of the Persian Gulf.
A follow-on TIRANNT Campaign Analysis, which began in October 2003, calculated the results of different scenarios for action against Iran to provide options for analyzing courses of action in an updated Iran war plan. According to military sources close to the planning process, this task was given to Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, now commander of CENTCOM, in 2002...
The day-to-day planning for dealing with Iran's missile force falls to the U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha. In June 2004, Rumsfeld alerted the command to be prepared to implement CONPLAN 8022, a global strike plan that includes Iran. CONPLAN 8022 calls for bombers and missiles to be able to act within 12 hours of a presidential order. The new task force, sources have told me, mostly worries that if it were called upon to deliver "prompt" global strikes against certain targets in Iran under some emergency circumstances, the president might have to be told that the only option is a nuclear one...
On the surface, Iran controls the two basic triggers that could set off U.S. military action. The first would be its acquisition of nuclear capability in defiance of the international community...
The second trigger would be Iran's lashing out militarily (or through proxy terrorism) at the United States or its allies, or closing the Strait of Hormuz to international oil traffic. Sources say that CENTCOM and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have developed "flexible deterrent options" in case Iran were to take such actions.
I'm betting on the third scenario:
In a world of ready war plans and post-9/11 jitters, there is an ever greater demand for intelligence on the enemy. That means ever greater risks taken in collecting that intelligence. Meanwhile, war plans demand that forces be ready in certain places and on alert, while the potential for WMD necessitates shorter and shorter lead times for strikes against an enemy. So the greater danger now is of an inadvertent conflict, caused by something like the shooting down of a U.S. spy plane, by the capturing of a Special Operations or CIA team, or by nervous U.S. and Iranian forces coming into contact and starting to shoot at one another.
It would be easiest to arrange the "inadvertent conflict" (sic) pretext. Thus, following the "keep it simple, stupid" maxim--the smart money would be on the United States taking that route to our "kinetic" future.
posted by Effwit at 10:45 AM
9 Comments:
It's like this buddy Effwit and like this fits into scenario 3 which you say you're betting on:
Genocide George's vision has Iran being massively attacked - with Biblical apologetics and rationales in the subservient wings. Play-a-long Generals of divergent stars will be many-enuff to execute the dreams of the Delusional One. (Of course dissenters will crawl out of the ash in 4 years time and voice their adversity as they always procrastinatingly do.)
All trepidly begging elsenesses, including Ivy League-ish wordy strategms, are immediately destined to fall into corresponding line. (Don't try to understand this sentence...I hardly do myself)
Sure - we talk of Genocide George as the puppet dangling beneath the evil rheumatoid fingers of greedy puppeteers....but he is also the convenient puppeteering Puppetmaster and this particular presidential puppetmaster wants massive American mightiness to apocalyptically rain down upon Iranian defiance in lieu of other trumping defiance...(and screw the innocence of ubiquitous collateral death 'cuz it just doesn't correlate with the Hollywoodish 95 minute End of Time-ishness narrative that is part and parcel of Genocide George's guiding vision.)
And who can blame Genocide George - there is a poetry in his vision that is shared by the trans-fat choking collective of Occidental brotherhood. The man gives voice to our atheroscleroticOne-ness. George is the drunkard in the corner that mumbles of the imminent arrival of God's son...or so we corruptedly surmise.
Pray Laura will blow Genocide George in a way that finds him discovering the eternal beauty beheld a simple thing such as a rejected lover's scribbled stanza.
And you know...I actually think Laura understands what's at stake and is doing her damn-dest to blow the frenzied fuck outta Genocide George's Condy-fied cock before he kills Laura's fuckwitted and frollicking gimpish daughters and treasured greenhouse Gardenias.
Blow Laura blow!
You just know it's gonna go down in a few months time. Even the wisest of you starched-collared WaPo reliants gotta figure this sooner before later.
Merry Bethlehem Manger Bunnies!
M1:
Magnificent comment, per usual.
Enough database triggering codewords to keep Ft. Meade busy all night long.
Your long-published Iran game plan is becoming the conventional wisdom among well-connected Washingtonians.
Your June (code name: CLEAVER) forecast is proving that many--normally confident--national security weather-watchers don't know which way the wind blows.
Per your "Ivy League" mention, I'm beginning to think you may be a fellow Russell Truster.
"I am the Eggman" should be sufficient Easter skullduggery reference.
If not, Happy Easter!
LMAO
I'm butta drunk just drunk outta his shrinking and shrunk mind - as always, I fear.
Stay strong. Stay brave.
Until Toledo, dear Effwit. Until Toledo,
M1
Oh, and btw...Russell Truster - absolutement (or as close to trusting as a meatball can be)
M1:
I shall try to keep a requisite magnanimous attitude.
Re: Toledo. The cathedrals there bore me. The bullfights are unspeakable. The taverns are the only saving grace.
Oh yeah, the Guardia Civil are no fun either.
M1:
We Russell Trusters best not risk our annual annuities by speaking too freely about these matters.
...and to think I was referring to the Toledo of Ohio. You insufferable Eurosnob!
Inadvertent conflict. You know, I really hate it when those happen. They're just so...so...inadvertent.
Or not.
Got a friend who's a Lt. Colonel in the USMC. He had been involved in Middle East war planning up until about 18 months ago. Then got re-deployed to the Pacific to work on war planning for Korea. Hmmmmmm.
DrewL:
Interesting about your friend.
It wouldn't surprise me for there to be a lightning strike on NK.
Everyone has been assured that N. Korea has 2-8 nukes, but I have it on pretty good info that they don't actually have any nukes.
The tell is supposedly the fact that China isn't jumping through hoops to accomodate U.S. concerns, any more than the (IMO rather accomodating) way they have tried to arrange diplomatic niceties between the U.S. and NK.
The other (bigger) giveaway about a N. Korean weapon will be when Japan suddenly decides to weaponize nukes. At that point one should believe that the North Koreans have built a bomb. Not before.
Post a Comment
<< Home