Iranian Forces Go On War Alert!

[DontSayBanana]

"Many foreigners are leaving Iran ... I suspect that there will be military action ... we will become another Iraq," said architect Mahsa Sedri, 35. "Obviously something is going on ... otherwise the foreigners would not leave Iran."

"We are going to be attacked ... I sense it ... I am pulling out my money from the bank to have cash in hand in case of an attack," said government employee Hassan Vosughi. "I and all my friends have stockpiled goods at home."

Of course, foreigners leaving in droves couldn't possibly be due to Iran being run by xenophobic fucktards with a terrible case of jingo.

[fhdz]

The biggest problem with the Iranians is they aren't all on the same page.

Yeah, there's a significant population of educated, reasonably well-off non-fundamentalists in Iran.

They're similar to Iraq in that way.

[Ideologue]

And yet they abide the excesses and overlordship of their theocratic, evil masters.

Arthur Harris knows their hearts.

[crazy canuck]

The biggest problem with the Iranians is they aren't all on the same page.

Yeah, there's a significant population of educated, reasonably well-off non-fundamentalists in Iran.

There used to be.  A lot of them live around these parts now.

[Sheilbh]

How did she "invite" them?  was punch served?

We used to have a small South Atlantic fleet (maybe just 2-3 ships I think) that largely protected the Falklands.  Thatcher cut it, the Argies invaded believing that was a signal that we weren't willing to defend them.

I expect this has something to do with the split between Khamenei and Ahmadinejad somehow. Does anyone have links to decent analysis on the situation?

This isn't to do with that but seemed interesting, from about a week ago:

Is Iran Already Under Attack?
International
Dec 2 2011, 8:28 AM ET Adam Chandler, the Goldblog deputy-editor-for-monitoring-Iran-obsessively-even-though-Goldblog-himself-also-monitors-Iran-obsessively, pointed out to me the other day that perhaps the West has already begun the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, that perhaps we ought to reframe this issue a bit. The attacks he mentioned are not the usual sub-rosa, eyebrow-raising tech and computer virus sort of attacks, but outright physical attacks. This is more a semantic issue, I suppose (and yes, I realize the Iranian regime is virulently anti-semantic), but operations against Iran are seeming to move away from the pure Mossad-in-the-70s-style attacks to straight-up military confrontations. I don't know if this is a sign of escalation or desperation or both, though it seems fair to say that less subtlety on the part of Israel, the U.S. and whoever else is doing this suggests that the previous tactics were deemed insufficient.

Following a (perhaps not-so-mysterious) explosion on a military base last month that took with it the life of Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam--one of the Iranian missile program's most distinguished OGs--comes news of a second explosion in Isfahan this past Monday, which according to sources "struck the uranium enrichment facility there, despite denials by Tehran."

Of course, accurate news out of Tehran is hard to come by, but if you want to take this a step further, one might consider Tuesday's (perhaps not-so-spontaneous) storming of the British embassy by Iranian "students" to be quite an effective smokescreen in keeping news of this second explosion from making serious waves. If you've had a lot of coffee, it's also worthy to note that on Monday evening, following the explosion in Iran, four missiles fired from southern Lebanon struck Israel--the first such incident in over two years.

I'm not entirely convinced, but it's not unreasonable to group these recent explosions with the Stuxnet virus of last summer that haywired an uranium enrichment facility in Natanz; last October's explosion at a Shahab missile factory; the killing of three Iranian nuclear scientists in the past two years, last November's attempted assassination of Fereydoun Abbasi-Davan--a senior official in the nuclear program -- and rumblings of a second supervirus deployed this month as proof that the West's war on Iran's nuclear program is getting less covert by the minute.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/12/is-iran-already-under-attack/249284/

[Razgovory]

That's hardly an invitation.

[fhdz]

There used to be.  A lot of them live around these parts now.

There's still a significant number there, like Lebanon (despite Syria's meddling) and Iraq (despite...well, despite the big mess we helped create).

[The Minsky Moment]

I expect this has something to do with the split between Khamenei and Ahmadinejad somehow. Does anyone have links to decent analysis on the situation?

I would question whether even regime insiders know clearly what is going in there now.

[Admiral Yi]

Would make an interesting 3 player wargame.

[Josquius]

How did she "invite" them?  was punch served?

Major defense budget slashes including removing the naval presence from the South Atlantic and a complete failure to react to the rumblings that an invasion was on the cards- during Callaghan's term there had been a similar scare, they let it be quietly known to the Argentines that a British nuclear submarine was lurking in the area and an invasion would be a very bad idea.

[Razgovory]

How did she "invite" them?  was punch served?

Major defense budget slashes including removing the naval presence from the South Atlantic and a complete failure to react to the rumblings that an invasion was on the cards- during Callaghan's term there had been a similar scare, they let it be quietly known to the Argentines that a British nuclear submarine was lurking in the area and an invasion would be a very bad idea.

That still doesn't seem to be an invitation to attack.  What do they want the goddamn islands for anyway?

[Josquius]

That still doesn't seem to be an invitation to attack.  What do they want the goddamn islands for anyway?

I said practically, not she actually did send them an invitation.
Silly nationalism.

[Razgovory]

I know you don't like Thatcher, but I don't see how she could be culpable in causing the Argentines to invade.  It's not like Argentina was some hostile communist state.  They were suppose to be on our side.

I am reminded of some claims that the US encouraged Iraq to conquer to Kuwait, which is nonsense.  Iraq was making some noises about settling the border dispute militarily (and if they just siezed some oil wells nobody would have cared that much.  Except Kuwait), but nobody expected Saddam to take the whole country.

[Josquius]

I'm not implying she deliberately goaded them into it- though I'm surprised there aren't people who do believe that- however she certainly deserves a lot of blame for the war; which makes it particularly annoying that the war worked out so damn well for her politically.

[Sheilbh]

I know you don't like Thatcher, but I don't see how she could be culpable in causing the Argentines to invade.  It's not like Argentina was some hostile communist state.  They were suppose to be on our side.

I am reminded of some claims that the US encouraged Iraq to conquer to Kuwait, which is nonsense.  Iraq was making some noises about settling the border dispute militarily (and if they just siezed some oil wells nobody would have cared that much.  Except Kuwait), but nobody expected Saddam to take the whole country.

Communism or not's got nothing to do with it though and 'our' side was different when it comes to Argentina.

Your comparison doesn't work though.  Everyone knew Argentina wanted the Falklands.  They were sabre rattling and had been for fifty years or so.  Also it's not the equivalent of whatever the US did in Kuwait because the US is a third party.

In this case you've got a piece of land which two countries claim.  One is thousands of miles away and has mostly forgotten about it but keeps a vessel just pootering around.  The other's far closer and has used jingoism attached to reclaiming the islands as a propaganda boost.  When the ship gets pulled out I think it's almost inevitable that the other country's going to take that as an invitation, it's a sign that there's no commitment to the islands.

As Tyr says this all came up under Callaghan.  I think the Treasury or MoD suggested cutting that South Atlantic commitment because it was quite expensive and Callaghan vetoed because he thought the Argies would take advantage.  So Thatcher's decision and the Argie response didn't come entirely out of the blue.