Putin is warning US/Israel not attack Iran because Russia wants to halt the expansion of US interests throughtout Middle East, and the world for the
matter. So Putin is speaking on behalf of Russia. But the fact is, that in the long term Putin's warning is also for the benefit of the US itself.
Why? Because attacking Iran might only solve some short-term problems for Israel and US, but will create far bigger long-term problems.
Lets start out by saying this - US/Israel cannot possibly invade Iran. Iran is a huge country, multiple times the size of Iraq both in territory and
population. Without a total war (against both government and population), a country like Iran cannot be defeated - history has proven this in every
So if an attack on Iran is to happen, it will be a limited strike from the air against critical targets, such nuclear technology facilities and less
likely but possible government and defense facilities. So what will such an attack accomplish? Iran's nuclear program will be set back by a few
years. Iran has the money and the resources to pump back into the program and to accelerate it even further, so you will be back where you started
very soon. And what then? Is the US/Israel going to continue strikes against Iran every few years? That will equate to an ongoing warfare as far as
Iran is concerned, and Iran will make every effort to get back at the US/Israel.
And Iran does have methods to hurt both - don't be mistaken. Nuclear technology is not its only option. Iran can easily flood Iraq and Afghanistan
with government-sponsored insurgents. That will pretty much bury any objectives the US has for its missions in Iraq and Afghanistan - and the efforts
of the last 7 years will be as good as wasted completely.
As far as Israel goes, Iran would only be too happy to have a reason to increase funding for Hezbolah and possibly Hamas. More importantly, if it is
Israel who carries out the strike against Iran, it could reunite the splintered interests within the Muslim world. Currently Iran, Syria, and Lebanon
all have some differences between them and cannot be considered as cooperating with one another. This makes it easier for Israel to deal with each of
them. An attack on Iran, could be seen as a threat by Syria and Lebannon, and could push them to create a defense pact. This could be a nightmare
for Israel's military strategy.
Furthermore an attack like this could finally convince Russia that Iran and Syria really do need the advanced weapons systems such as the S-300, for
self-defense. Currently Russia is holding back the sales of these technologies, but an attack on Iran could reset its priorities. In fact, if this
allows Iran to get its hands on the S-300, Iran will be even better off in case of an attack - it might stand to benefit more than to lose in that
Also another critical issue must not be ruled out - the consequences of an attack for Iranian internal politics. As we saw in the recent
"election", Iranian totalitarian government is beginning to show first cracks. It no longer has the tight grip on society that it once had, and
there is even dissent among the politicians themselves. The whole government structure in Iran has already started to rot from the inside out. Give
it another decade or so (if not less), and it could very probably implode onto itself.
But an attack on Iran would change all that. In fact the hardliners in Iran's government are likely hoping that an attack like this comes - because
it could very well be their saving grace. It would give the Iranian leadership a reason to rally the population behind them, and to assume more
control over society. The hardliners in every dictatorial and authoritarian regime thrive on threats of war. And it is the same in Iran. US's and
Israel's continued threats against Iran are doing nothing but empowering the Iranian government.
The Iraq-Iran war played right into the hands of the Ayatollahs. It renewed the reason for their existance, and it strengthened their position more
than anything else could. A preemptive strike by US or Israel would do exactly the same thing - at exactly the time when the Ayatollahs need it
Clearly every bit of logic speaks against such an attack. So why is the US/Israeli government so steadfast in its aggresiveness? Surely the
strategists there understand the points I just made even better than me. Pentagon and the US military machine is not run by idiots. No - it is run by
businessmen. And here lies the biggest problem of all. Businessmen are the ones behind the Iraq war. Businessmen are the ones behind US's close
relations with Saudi Arabia.
And that is what an attack on Iran will bring - immense profits for certain interest groups. It will not prevent Iran from getting nukes - in fact it
will encourage it even more so. It will not help bring democracy to Iran. It will not make Israel safer or Middle East more stable.
Eisenhower explained the problem better than I or anyone else ever could, perhaps because he knew more about its origins firsthand and knew the system
"A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential
aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic,
political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for
this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very
structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or
unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let
the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable
citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security
and liberty may prosper together."
President Eisenhower's Farewell Address (1961)
[edit on 12-9-2009 by maloy]