Monday, February 13, 2006
UKT: 10,000 predicted to die in A-plant attack on Iran
A major American attack on Iran's nuclear sites would kill up to 10,000 people and lead to war in the Middle East, a report written by Prof Paul Rogers, below right, says today.
The research coincides with reports that strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for "a last resort" strike if diplomacy fails. Plans for an assault have taken on "greater urgency" in recent months, The Sunday Telegraph said.
Tacticians at central command and strategic command, who report to Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, have been identifying targets and the weapons needed to hit them.
The Oxford report says that Britain could be drawn into the conflict if the Prime Minister allowed American B2 bombers, which can carry 40,000 lbs of precision bombs, to use bases at Fairford, Glos, and on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia.
Precision bombing could put Iran's weapons programme back five to 10 years but within a month the situation would become "an extremely dangerous conflict", says Prof Rogers (of Bradford University, Yorkshire, the leading academic centre for the study of peace and conflict in the world), the report's author.
The attack would result in "a protracted military confrontation" involving Israel, Lebanon and some Gulf states.
More than 100 American bombers, many based on carriers in the Gulf, would take part in a huge simultaneous surprise air attack on 20 key nuclear and military facilities, the report says.
If the targets included the nuclear reactor at Bushehr, which will become fully fuelled this year, a radioactive cloud could spread over the Gulf. Iran's small navy, which includes three submarines, would have to be attacked to negate threats to vital shipping lanes in the Straits of Hormuz.
But Iran could still retaliate with suicide speedboats, possibly leading to crippling rises in the price of oil.
Prof Rogers, department head and professor of peace studies at Bradford University, says that American military action would also have a unifying effect on the rule of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and exacerbate anti-American hostility in the Islamic world.
The report says that a ground offensive in Iran would not be feasible, as it would require at least 100,000 troops - and American forces are already over-stretched with 130,000 soldiers in Iraq and 18,000 in Afghanistan.
Iran would probably withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and speed up its secret nuclear weapons programme.
The report concludes: "A military response to the current crisis is a particularly dangerous option and should not be considered further. Alternative approaches must be sought, however difficult these may be."
In a similar briefing before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Oxford group predicted that Saddam Hussein's regime could easily be overwhelmed but that the country would become a hotbed of insurgency.
Source: U.K. Telegraph.Dave Haigler, Abilene, Texas
lawfirm webpage: www.haigler.info
political blog: http://demlog.blogspot.com
Even the serious contemplation of a preemptive attack on Iran is a virtual war crime. I can't believe that Georgie is so completely insane that he would try such a thing. But maybe he really does believe the Fundy Christian claptrap and wants Armageddon on his watch. We already know that Chuck Cheney is trigger happy. Even the reports of the possibility of war on Iran makes me so sick to my stomach. I want my daughter to have a real world to live in, not the remains left behind by the Bush Nazis.
Links to this post:
Donate to DemLog, a project of Marcus Comton (click on box below to go to PayPal and donate). Thank you very much: