A Candid Review of the Iranian Threat to America

Iran represents the greatest potential threat to America's most vital strategic interests.  However, no American politician or major media source has made any serious attempt to describe the totality of the Iranian threat to the American people.  Without a full understanding of this threat, it is impossible for American voter to make an informed decision about the necessity of continuing to support the USA's military presence in Iraq.  

Please consider the following data points regarding Iran:

• The President of Iran is an Islamic fanatic with a messianic complex.  He believes it is his destiny to lead Iran into a victorious war of civilizations with America.  He has made a relentless stream of threats to the USA and to Israel.  He is also a Holocaust denier who's stated goal is to wipe Israel off of the map and bring America and Britain to their knees.
• The Iranian people do not appear to share the President's desire to pursue a war of civilizations, but they are severely repressed by the Iranian military and the Revolutionary Guard.
• The Iranian President was swept to power in 2005 with a promise to improve the living conditions of poor Iranians.  Since coming to power, the Iranian economy has deteriorated significantly despite the fact that crude oil prices have risen dramatically.  His administration has been a disaster for the Iranian economy.  Perversely, this may make it more likely that he would pursue an attack on America to avoid his political defeat in 2009.
• The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamanei, appears to have grown weary of the President's poor performance on the economy as well as his caustic threats against America and Israel.  However, it is important to note that their strategic differences appear to be more of style than substance.  The Supreme Leader supports the goals of destroying Israel and the USA, but he would prefer less incitement from the Iranian President.
• Iran possesses about 10% of the world's known oil reserves, and about two thirds of the world's oil reserves are located in the Persian Gulf area. 
• The Iranian army is far larger than the Gulf States which rely on the USA, and their own air superiority to deter Iranian aggression.  The Iranian air force is small and not technologically sophisticated, but the Gulf State air defenses could be very vulnerable to a ground attack on their airbases that are in easy striking range of Iran.
• Iran's population is almost three times as big as Iraq, and its military leadership and armed forces are far more capable than Saddam's were at the time of the 2003 invasion.  Saddam's army and his economy had been devastated by the first Gulf War and by 12 years of sanctions and his soldiers were not highly motivated to fight for his tyrannical regime.  By contrast, the Iranian army possesses significant quantities of high tech weapons that it has bought from Russia and China along with a highly motivated and professional  officers and enlisted men that would be anxious to fight for the regime.  The difficult Israeli experience with Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006 could be an indication of the fanatical zeal of Iran's military under war conditions.     
• Iran has only one oil refinery and must import up to 75% of its refined product requirements.  This and its almost complete reliance on crude oil exports to drive its economy are its biggest strategic vulnerabilities.
• Iran is positioned along the eastern shore of the Persian gulf which includes the narrow Straits of Hormuz where about 40% of the worlds oil production passes on its way to markets around the globe.  A closure of the six mile wide strait would cause world oil prices to skyrocket, and would likely ignite a worldwide economic depression.  Iran is well positioned to stop traffic through the strait in a war situation.  Offsetting this concern is the reality that Iran's exports would be largely cut off during a war, and a protracted conflict would devastate the Iranian economy, and potentially creat civil unrest.  This is the biggest deterrent to Iranian aggression, but it could be overcome with sufficient religious and/or nationalist fervor.
• The Iranians are believed to possess Chinese "Silkworm" and possibly Russian "Sizzler" anti-ship missiles that could be very effective against tankers or U.S. warships operating in the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Sea.  At least one of these missiles was delivered by Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon, and it was successfully used against an Israeli warship during the 2006 Lebanon conflict. 
• The USA has huge technological, navy, armor, satellite and air force advantages over the Iranians, and the ability to annihilate Iran with its strategic missile and bomber force.  The Democrats appear willing to risk America's future on the USA's ability to deter Iranian aggression without a large ground force presence in Iraq.  However their assumptions may be very dangerously flawed when the following factors are considered:
  • The U.S. Navy has not demonstrated its ability to defend against the Russian "Sizzler" missile which has the ability to attack warships at three times the speed of sound at very low altitudes that would make it difficult to detect as it approached.  If that missile is effective, and if the Iranians have acquired significant quantities of the missiles, the American navy could be rendered almost useless in a conflict with Iran, and many U.S. sailor's lives could be in severe jeopardy.
  • The U.S. air force is far larger than Iran's, and much more technologically sophisticated.  However, the U.S. air force is only as strong as its airbase support system, and all of the U.S. airbases in the Middle East could be overrun by a concerted ground attack by the Iranian army.  This would become an even greater concern if the Democrats force a withdrawal of U.S. ground forces from the region, and Iraq joins an alliance with Iran and Syria to seize the Middle East oilfields.  The attack could shut off U.S. access to airbases in the region and severely limit the effectiveness of the U.S. air force. 
  • The U.S. strategic missile and bomber force is very formidable and it has long range capability, but its effectiveness against Iranian military targets embedded in Gulf State population centers is limited, and it probably would not produce a reversal of the Iranian led attack.  A nuclear response is politically impossible, and strategic bombing failed in Vietnam.  It is hard to envision the U.S. bombing Iranian cities to stop an Iranian attack on the Middle East.  Such attacks would be condemned by the world community, and the Democrats would never support the policy even if it resulted in a cut off of oil that would collapse the American economy.
  • The Iranian ground force military has about two thirds as many soldiers as the USA, and they are all concentrated in the Middle East while America's forces are scattered all over the globe. America also has defense responsibilities all over the world while Iran is only concerned with the Middle East. 
  • Within the Middle East, the Iranians currently possess at least a 6 to 1 manpower advantage over USA ground forces in the region.  That ratio will dramatically increase to Iran's advantage if the USA reduces its force commitment in Iraq as suggested by the Democrats, and/or joins forces with Syria and Iraq after an American retreat.  Iran also has a 10 million man citizens army with basic military training that can be called on to defend Iran if it is attacked.
  • The USA has technological advantages in its armored divisions, but Iran has greater quantities of tanks and artillery in the region, and the USA's armored reserves have been severely degraded by the Iraq war.  Iran's armored forces would be vulnerable to America air power, but an early loss of airbases in the region and U.S. carrier capabilities would increase the effectiveness of Iranian armored units.  Defection of Iraqi army units to Iran could also be an issue that would limit the USA's armored units.
  • While many Iranians hate their repressive regime, a majority voted their radical President into office.  Most Iranians are also very nationalistic as evidenced by their overwhelming support for Iran's nuclear program in the face of international opposition.  An attack by the USA on Iran could create a groundswell of nationalism to resist the attack that could include vigorous resistance by Iran's 10 million man citizens army. 
  • The Iranians have a strategic alliance with Syria, and the new Iraqi government is lead by Shiites that spent decades in exile in Iran and Syria.  There may be a very real danger that Iraq could turn to an alliance with Iran to suppress Sunni extremists within Iraq if the USA abandons the Iraqi people to their fates at the hands of bloodthirsty Al Qaeda and Iraqi Sunni insurgents.
  • Iranian logistical disadvantages could be offset by refined product imports from Russia.  Russia could also provide Iran with military satellite access to observe U.S. military activities.  Russia would like nothing better than a war that would cut off Middle East crude oil shipments and cause the value of their own crude exports to skyrocket.  They also bear resentment against the USA's world supremacy, and would revel in America's strategic defeat.
• Potentially, all Iran needs to do to seize the Middle East is:
  
  • wait for the Democrats to force an American withdrawal from Iraq
  • form very plausible military alliances with Syria and Iraq
  • have the Iraqi government ask Iranian forces to enter Iraq to suppress violence after the American retreat
  • secretly expand its logistical and military equipment relationships with Russia and China
  • develop the political will and the skill to execute an attack on all the key air bases in the Middle East
  • potentially seize the considerable air force capabilities of the Gulf States
  • neutralize the American navy with "Sizzler" missiles
  • leave America with nuclear attacks or strategic bombing as its only alternative to respond
  • allow international and anti-war pressure to prevent a nuclear or strategic bombing attack   
• Added to this scenario are the realities that:
  • The USA imports almost two thirds of its daily crude oil consumption.
  • The USA consumes over 25% of the world's daily oil production.
  • The USA has only 2% of the world's known oil reserves within its borders.
  • An Iranian takeover of the Middle East oil reserves would mean that over 80% of the world's oil reserves. would be under the control of Iran, Russia and Venezuela.
  • A cut off of access to crude oil at reasonable prices would collapse the U.S. economy very quickly.
    

Summary

No one in American politics or the media has defined this very plausible Iranian threat to the American people.  The Democrats, the media and the Anti-War Movement are vigorously facilitating this potential scenario while the Republicans refuse to make the case.  If America does not 1) recognize this threat, 2) stop its self destructive political warfare, and 3) support maintenance of a strong ground force deterrent in Iraq,  Americans could be facing a complete failure of the U.S. political system, and a collapse of the American way of life.