Scott Ritter on Guy James show: Dien Bien Phu possibility

[teryang]

Scott Ritter outlined the unrealistic neo-con plans and preparations for attack on Iran and how they could potentially result in a military catastrophe for our forces in Iraq by endangering the lines of logistic support from Kuwait through Shia controlled areas in southern Iraq to the "Sunni triangle."

He's projecting that air support logistics alone will leave the American forces in the Sunni triangle isolated and cut off from adequate resupply and support.

On an earlier post, I noted that the Azerbaijan prong of the Iran attack plan is subject to similar limitations and risks as having no blue water or adequate land based infrastructure support. I guess the neo-con arm chair generals who favor Air Force concepts of force projection and understand little of ground warfare believe that two wrongs will make a right.

The rest of the plan sounds a little like the "greeting us with flowers and song" boner that the neo-cons fell into in Iraq.

How many remember the Bay of Pigs?

[Zuni]

1. completely impossible

I don't think anyone (even this WH) could imagine invading Iran, a country several times the size of Iraq and with far more people with the number of troops we have now. It is a complete logistic impossibility

[Postman]

2. You're not paying attention.

to you and me, yeah, its ridiculous considering what has happened in Iraq.

Better listen to what Scott Ritter has to say.

[liberalnurse]

3. Scott had his pulse on the *bush agenda

the summer before the Iraq War. He took an incredible beating from the right wing media then too!

[billbuckhead]

4. Hopefully the Iranian election put a chill on things but I surely doubt it

I bet war games on this proposed war aren't pretty at all, not that Dear Leader would ever find out.

Believe it or not Iraq has been fighting the US with one arm tied behind it's back. When the Shia who have been sitting on the fence for most of this ordeal start to engage the US in battle it could go very badly. We haven't faced very many modern antitank missiles let alone cruise missiles. They could knock out every Abrams tank in Iraq before we could resupply. They could sink American ships. They could turn the "green" zone into a bullseye.

[liberalnurse]

7. This administration has such denial and arrogance....

that we better play closer attention to brave men such as Scott Ritter when they speak out....I emphasize WHEN since they are strategically "set-up" on the cable circuits. Scott shared that experience on the Guy James Show tonight.

[teryang]

5. Divisional level forces in Azerbaijan

When I first heard Ritter saying this I said the same thing. What divisional level forces are available? Why and how could they be posted to such a remote and precarious location?

This war game that he apparently heard of from sources at some Defense College (correct me if I am mistaken) could be calculated disinformation to intimidate Iranian leadership. Or else possibly give false encouragement to whatever elements the neo-cons think would rise up in response to the "window of opportunity" provided by Americans bombing their country.

Ritter did emphasize that whomever thinks that Iranians would favorably greet a US attack doesn't know much about Iran. Also, the concept of invasion is ridiculous in light of the size and population of Iran.

That doesn't mean that white collar neo-cons aren't imagining it. It's the old strategy of tension. See how far you can take it? Maybe they'll give up the Sudenland, Rhineland, and Austria without a fight. That is the same improbable thinking we're dealing with.

[doublethink]

9. Oil ... In Azerbaijan ...

specifically Baku ... as to why they (troops) military equipment would be posted there.... read through this article ... http://www.counterpunch.org/dickinson06042005.html

The Bush administration first recognized the pipeline's potential in May 2001, when an energy policy review spearheaded by the vice-president, Dick Cheney, said the Kashagan oilfield in Kazakhstan was capable of exporting 2.6m barrels a day if pipelines like the BTC were operational.' snip

During World War 2 Hitler was convinced that if he could take oil-rich Baku, he would win world domination. It seems that certain power-crazed maniacs have the same idea today. -snip-

Anyway the timing is very precarious, and since the US Government spends over $430 Billion a year as compared to Irans $4 Billion on Defense.... Well I think you get the picture why the Bush Regime feels they have the upper hand no matter what. Scott Ritter is a very well informed individual. I hope this time he's wrong, but ... PNAC, geesh ... and on and on .... Peace.

[LiberalAndProud]

8. True. Unless they are insane enough to exercise the nuclear option.

I, for one, have no question concerning the sanity of this regime. No question whatsoever.

[Yavin4]

6. For The Neocons it's easy for them to advocate for a war that

they, and their children, will never, ever have to fight.

[lovuian]

10. I think Scott is right on with the exception Syria is next to attack too

they need that ocean front property and Syria is sitting so ready to be taken over... Israel will probably take care of that one and also Bomb Iran because of the nuclear option...

its a done deal but low troops number is a problem!!! But I guess they are hoping the Iraqis will fight for them WOW what a long shot there!!!

[Octafish]

11. Nixon wanted U.S. to nuke Dien Bien Phu...

... as a favor to DeGaulle and the colonialists.

LIST Nuclear Crisis #5 in Year: 1954
Name of Crisis: VIETNAM I (Dien Bien Phu)

Threatened use of nuclear weapons by: USA

Target: Vietnam; later, China and USSR

Crisis starts: 8 March 1954, 3,000 French surrounded at Dien Bien Phu

Crisis ends: 19 June 1954

Duration: 3 months

Threat of nuclear attack: Implied; U.S. nuclear-armed navy carrier force near Vietnam to launch Operation VULTURE, using atomic bombs against Viet Minh forces. The Strategic Air Command BASIC PLAN will use 735 bombers to attack the USSR and China using 1750 atomic bombs.

At issue in Crisis: "A-Day", the last day on which the USA could launch a nuclear attack on USSR without fear of a response, is the probably the real issue, with the threatened fall of the Vietnam "domino" only a pretext.

BACKGROUND: In WW-II the Japanese easily captured the French colony of Vietnam, and the only opposition was from the Communist Viet Minh under Ho Chi Minh. In 1945 Japanese surrendered Vietnam to the British, and the French resumed control, but the Viet Minh opposed the return of their run-away colonial masters. France waged a long, failing war against Viet Minh guerrillas. In January 1954 French established a key base at Dien Bien Phu, deep in Vietnam, but the Viet Minh "do the impossible" and bring in heavy artillery.

CRISIS EVENTS: 1954, March: Dien Bien Phu under siege, heavy Viet Minh shelling.

-8 March: French General Ely in Washington asks for U.S. help.

-25 March: U.S. Army G3 Section proposes use of atomic weapons in Vietnam.

-7 April: Eisenhower's "Domino Theory": If Vietnam is lost, all Asia follows.

-10 April: President Eisenhower sends Secretary of State Dulles and Admiral Radford to Europe to push Operation VULTURE, which Prime Minister Churchill opposes (and disagrees with the Domino Theory).

-23 April: French Foreign Minister Bidault refuses Dulles' offer of 2 atomic bombs

-27 April: Dulles falsely hints to French that Eden of UK supports Operation VULTURE

-30 April: Eisenhower to Cutler of NSC, "We might give the French atomic bombs."

-8 May: Viet Minh capture Dien Bien Phu.

-25 May: NSC and Admiral Radford advise atomic bombing China if Chinese troops support the Viet Minh drive on Hanoi.

-19 June: Eisenhower, "atomic bombing China means atomic bombing the USSR What would the USA do with destruction extending from the Elbe to Vladivostok?". China does not intervene and the Crisis ends.

OUTCOME: The USA first became involved in Vietnam.

SOURCE:

http://vicpeace.ca/centre/readings/nukeuse.htm#crisis4

Later on, when he finally was "real" preznit, Nixon told his people to tell the North Vietnamese that he was "crazy" and would use the bomb. "Funny" thing was the Soviets were on heightened alert, ready to nuke us at the same time. That would've been bad. Real bad.

[necso]

12. A few points.

1) There may well be a range of plans for attacks on Iran (from air/missile attacks on up), and more than one of these plans may have been war-gamed. (And I wouldn't be surprised if the military planners of, and participants in, these games were pressured into creating and running unrealistic games that gave (very) unrealistic favorable outcomes.)
2) Mr Ritter is doing his level best to stop any attack on Iran (which would be an (another) unmitigated and quite unnecessary disaster), and if he is (and others working towards this end are) successful, then it may make him look like he was completely off base... And I am confident that he realizes this, but there are times when you throw concern about your personal interests to the winds.
3) When the intended Northern offensive in the current Iraq "war" (this isn't how you make war -- at least not when you want to win -- ask any trustworthy, honest person who knows) collapsed, with it effectively went the northern supply route, leaving only a tactically and strategically vulnerable southern supply route. If the neocons are going to attack Iran in any form (even air attacks), then it is a military necessity to open a more secure supply route and bring it to a working capacity sufficient for all current and any projected future supply needs (real needs, not the typical neocon delusional ones). Doing anything less will risk an unprecedented disaster for our armed forces, who are already hampered by widespread war-profiteering in the form of the overuse of contractors in critical military roles (etc).
4) Given the damage done already to our military and the precariousness of our economic situation (and therefore the very real possibly that in real, fixed-value dollar terms, the money to repair this damage may be hard to come by), attention must be fixed on stewardship of the military as an institution, an organization and a military force (and a body of fellow citizens). Because new, real threats will inevitably arise -- and old ones may come back to life.

[teryang]

13. Well said n/t