Iranian general threatens pre-emptive strike against Israel, American bases

posted at 2:01 pm on September 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Hey, don’t worry about a “senior commander” of the Revolutionary Guard threatening to start a war with Israel and the US.  It’s just noise, after all:

Amir Ali Hajizadeh, a brigadier general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, made the comments to Iran’s state-run Arabic language Al-Alam television.

“Iran will not start any war but it could launch a pre-emptive attack if it was sure that the enemies are putting the final touches to attack it,” Al-Alam said, paraphrasing the military commander.

Hajizadeh said any attack on Iranian soil could trigger “World War Three”.

“We can not imagine the Zionist regime starting a war without America’s support. Therefore, in case of a war, we will get into a war with both of them and we will certainly get into a conflict with American bases,” he said.

“In that case, unpredictable and unmanageable things would happen and it could turn into a World War Three.”

For those unfamiliar with the Iranian mullahcracy’s theology, a World War Three would be a feature, not a bug.  It’s unlikely to unfold in that manner, however.  Few nations will be encouraged to join in a shooting war against the US in the Persian Gulf on behalf of Iran.  None came to Saddam Hussein’s aid despite his long client relationship with Russia and China, as well as with certain European friends of ours who enriched Saddam while enriching themselves through massive corruption in the UN’s Oil for Food program, n’est-ce pas?  They’ll stand on the sidelines and cluck their tongues, but they’ll see their national interests best addressed by having American power tied up in a fight with the IRGC and the mullahs instead of in Europe and the western Pacific.

However, National Journal believes we’re definitely on a glide path to war with Iran, as the Obama administration has rejected “containment” as an option:

In an endless campaign season filled with forgettable speeches and debates, few Americans will recall March 4, 2012 as particularly noteworthy. On that Sunday afternoon President Barack Obama appeared before the America Israel Public Affairs Committee, where he was expected to give a boilerplate talk about close U.S.-Israeli ties. Instead Obama announced a new policy that put the United States and Iran on a collision course from which neither side has veered.

Declaring that an Iranian nuclear weapon would be intolerable to Israel and run counter to U.S. security, Obama offered Tehran a stark choice: the regime could abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program and “choose a path that brings them back into the community of nations, or they can continue down a dead end,” said Obama, who then went further than any previous president in describing what lay at the end of that road. “Iran’s leaders should understand that I do not have a policy of containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. And as I have made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests.”

In a stroke, Obama took off the table the policy of “containment” and deterrence of a new nuclear power that the United States adopted in response to the Soviet Union, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea all crossing the nuclear threshold.  Either Tehran would have to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program, or the president was all but pledging a preventive war to destroy it. Seemingly disparate headlines of recent weeks – increasingly frenetic shuttle diplomacy to try and restart stalled talks with Iran over its nuclear program; an unusually public spat between Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over “red lines”; the deployment of the largest U.S. naval armada to the Persian Gulf in years, to include two aircraft carrier battle groups – are all indications that Iran continues to hurtle down that dead end.

Be sure to read it all; Dennis Ross thinks Obama is serious about this, but color me skeptical.  It’s one thing to give a speech to a group that clearly wanted to hear that, but it’s quite another to put that policy in place.  Obama ran in 2008 declaring containment to be his preferred option, comparing Iran today to the Soviet Union during the Cold War in reference to the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction, which has the oh-so-perfect acronym of MAD.  The problem with applying MAD in this instance is that the Iranians aren’t pursuing rational objectives; they are clearly pursuing non-rational objectives (the return of the Mahdi) in a rational manner (provoking the worldwide conflict that leads to their theological outcome).

Perhaps Obama has learned this after taking office.  However, his policy of appeasing the mullahs during the ill-fated 2009 Green Revolution and his refusal to specify any red lines on Iranian action suggest less of a commitment to prevention over containment and more of a policy of hedging one’s bets.  That may not be a bad policy to pursue, but it has the major defect of giving the initiative to one’s potential enemy — and it sounds as though Iran won’t be shy about using it when the time comes.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Well, apparently, Obama bumping Ammadinnerjacket from the short one’s scheduled visit to The View has consequences.

coldwarrior on September 24, 2012 at 2:04 PM

It is not belligerence when Muslims do this. Or something like that.

pat on September 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

That Movie must be really critical of Mohammed to cause this.

Bishop on September 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Make it clear that the retaliation will consist of reducing the entire Middle East sans Israel to glowing green glass.

They can’t bring about their Mahdi if they’ve been burned to ash.

MelonCollie on September 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Hey, Shoeib (Ahmadinejad) is the Mahdi’s military commander. He will hand Jerusalem (al Qods) to the Mahdi after conquering it with fire and sword.

So, you know, like, get ready and stuff.

J.E. Dyer on September 24, 2012 at 2:06 PM

This is just a bump in the road.

/O

Red Cloud on September 24, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Good Lord. It’s not so much I fear for the Israeli nation as much as I fear some world catastrophe will pre-empt the November election.

President Obama forever.

somewhatconcerned on September 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

You can’t believe anything he says. However, you can look at his record and draw some conclusions.

a capella on September 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

The Iranians better do some software checks prior to using it to launch ANYTHING.
Would not be surprised to see all kinds of wacky things happen.

Jabberwock on September 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Iranian general threatens pre-emptive strike against Israel, American bases

…time for JugEars to go to Vegas!

KOOLAID2 on September 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

OY!

workingclass artist on September 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

From orbit,..just to be sure.

a capella on September 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

…as the Obama administration has rejected “containment” as an option:

Yeah, in favor of a new apology ad campaign starring Hillary and Rice.

Curtiss on September 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

America can absorb a few attacks from Iran
-B. Hussein Obama pbuh

tom daschle concerned on September 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Semantics, it would be either WWIV or V, III was the Cold War. You could make a good argument that GWOT was IV. Of course, for those that got or are going to get killed, is a moot point.

El Coqui on September 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

So, you know, like, get ready and stuff.

J.E. Dyer on September 24, 2012 at 2:06 PM

You mean…. gird our loins?

Actually, Biden was kind of right about the “Gird your loins” comment, except that instead of something happening in the first 6 months if 0bama’s Presidency, it’s happening in the last 6 weeks of it.

UltimateBob on September 24, 2012 at 2:13 PM

They have the right “man” in the WH to be able get away with it.

Joe Mama on September 24, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Pre-emptive? You wanna see pre-emptive? We’ll show you some pre-emptive shit…

Mitoch55 on September 24, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Just noise dude, just noise.

sentinelrules on September 24, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Yet, Obama said yesterday “does Romney want to start a new war in the ME?”

Orwell, Pinocchio, Muenchhausen, Machiavelli and Goebbels had another exciting moment in their graves.

Schadenfreude on September 24, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Iranian general threatens pre-emptive strike against Israel, American bases

At another time and place this would be considered a provocation worthy of a significant display of military force. Like say 60 or 70 additional naval vessels visiting the Persian gulf.

Perhaps tactical maneuvers involving lot and lots of target practice taking place within visual range of Iranian beaches. Lots of bright flashes and big booms at night just off shore…

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

The only MAD these crazy Mullahs would recognize is if Mecca and Medina are the on the target list. “Yeah, ya’ll go ahead and launch a nuclear strike, we know you won’t care when we reduce Teheran to glowing glass, but also know that Mecca and Medina will be visible at night from space. For a long time”

That might give them some pause.

AZfederalist on September 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Dennis Ross thinks Obama is serious about this, but color me skeptical. It’s one thing to give a speech to a group that clearly wanted to hear that, but it’s quite another to put that policy in place.

If Dear Liar’s internal poll numbers show him in trouble, get ready for an October Surprise.

rbj on September 24, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Sure Obama said it, but also sure he didn’t mean it.

ChristianRock on September 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? What a tiny, tiny man…

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on September 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

OT: Benghazi Coverup crumbles

Hillary Clinton Aide Tells Reporter To “Fuck Off” And “Have A Good Life”

As the State Department’s story about what happened in Benghazi crumbles, Clinton’s personal spokesperson, Philippe Reines, loses his temper. “Have a good day. And by good day I mean Fuck Off.”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/hillary-clinton-aide-tells-reporter-to-fuck-off

sentinelrules on September 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

AZfederalist on September 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

What I would do, if it ever came down to it, is pop Medina but hold Mecca a perpetual hostage.

Liam on September 24, 2012 at 2:21 PM

You know, dead bodies are just bumps in the road. Don’t roll over them too fast though or you’ll lose control of your vehicle.

NotCoach on September 24, 2012 at 2:21 PM

The Iranians better do some software checks prior to using it to launch ANYTHING.
Would not be surprised to see all kinds of wacky things happen.

Jabberwock on September 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

This. Syria, Iran, and Greece all use the same SAM missile bundle for air defense and attack. Greece gave the IAF full access to war game their SAM systems 6 months before the IAF took out Assad’s baby reactor.

You do what you must, Persia, but remember that “Off We Go Into the Wild Blue Yonder” has one helluva drum roll in it.

Limerick on September 24, 2012 at 2:22 PM

One thing is for sure–Obama will make the wrong decision.

txhsmom on September 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Here is an intelligence briefing that Obama missed on Iranian war training

faraway on September 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM

I prefer a meteorite impact direct from Allah. It would solve a few problems and put the most populous Muslim nation, Indonesia, on notice.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on September 24, 2012 at 2:22 PM

That’s strange, your link gets redirected to the Department of Justice 404 page…

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on September 24, 2012 at 2:22 PM

The already have one meteor to whorship at, you want to give them two?

Limerick on September 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM

the Obama administration has rejected “containment” as an option

And we can so rely on what the Obama administration says.

The Rogue Tomato on September 24, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Iranian general threatens pre-emptive strike against Israel, American bases

EMP?

Nah.

That’s crazy talk…

Bruno Strozek on September 24, 2012 at 2:28 PM

There are people who think Obama wants a war to start before the election because America always rallies behind the President in times like that. Does that apply when the idiot in the White House is the one who CAUSED the whole thing because he is a freaking moron? I say we send him to Israel to block any missiles with his supershield of denial and narcissism.

Night Owl on September 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Perhaps tactical maneuvers involving lot and lots of target practice taking place within visual range of Iranian beaches. Lots of bright flashes and big booms at night just off shore…

SWalker on September 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Or a well placed sonic boom right over the presidential palace.

CurtZHP on September 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Can Obama’s march speech pandering for the jewish vote be Obamaturisim of All Time That Will Get Us All Killed Special Edition?

Mord on September 24, 2012 at 2:31 PM

“Oh, let’s be nice to them.”

mankai on September 24, 2012 at 2:31 PM

“Just a bump in the road” if they attack . . . Oblama

PastorJon on September 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Just sayin!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WVTSHeL6Xo

faol on September 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

color me skeptical

To say the least

tom on September 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Nuke’s make noise too…

PatriotRider on September 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Oh boy. A strike on a US base. The world could use more green glass. That is, if Barry has tbe guts to issue the order.

Philly on September 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Oh boy. A strike on a US base. The world could use more green glass. That is, if Barry has tbe guts to issue the order.

Philly on September 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

As dreadful as this is to say, if there were ever a time for an “Oops! You actually said do NOT fire? I’m so sorry…” incident to happen, that would be the hour.

But that would require a heroic sacrifice worse than death from the persons responsible, as everyone from Muslim apologists to the Coward-in-Chief would want their hides. They’d be hunted men and/or women with hardly anywhere safe on the planet for them.

I’m not completely sure I could ask that from our armed forces.

I’m not completely sure I’d have the guts to do it myself.

MelonCollie on September 24, 2012 at 2:53 PM

However, his policy of appeasing the mullahs during the ill-fated 2009 Green Revolution and his refusal to specify any red lines on Iranian action suggest less of a commitment to prevention over containment and more of a policy of hedging one’s bets.

If the video of Neda coughing up blood after being shot in the chest wasn’t enough to spark a guy to give a wet sh!t about what is going on in Iran, then nothing is. Life matters not to this guy—liberty matters less, and freedom….eh..…it’s a punchline.

He should be fired.

ted c on September 24, 2012 at 2:53 PM

We can absorb it.

Fallon on September 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

America can absorb a few attacks from Iran
-B. Hussein Obama pbuh

tom daschle concerned on September 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Aw, dammit.

*Check before posting, not after…*

Apologies.

*deep bow*

Fallon on September 24, 2012 at 3:29 PM

rbj on September 24, 2012 at 2:18 PM

I’ve been thinking along the same lines.

antisocial on September 24, 2012 at 3:34 PM

“In that case, unpredictable and unmanageable things would happen and it could turn into a World War Three.”

It would probably just solve a few foreign policy issues for us, actually. Fix a few sticky wickets. Unless QE∞ has made it impossible to fly aeroplanes and we’re reduced to sticks.

Axe on September 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Sink the Kilo – as a message.

mojo on September 24, 2012 at 3:48 PM

It’d almost be worth taking an attack from Iran just so we could collectively spit in the faces of every paleocon crank.

MadisonConservative on September 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

A lot of good Obama has done. For a guy who’s all about peace and thinks that everything’s going to be rosy with the new apologetic America, Obama is instead destabilizing the whole world, and bringing us that much closer to all out war. Scary.

anotherJoe on September 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

“Iran will not start any war but it could launch a pre-emptive attack if it was sure that the enemies are putting the final touches to attack it,”

Will someone explain how Iran thinks that a pre-emptive attack on US interests doesn’t amount to starting a war?

Of course if he’s talking about pre-emptively attacking Israel Obama will think we should wait until we’re sure it wasn’t an accident before we do anything.

katiejane on September 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

This is the result of American Agression in the region and our nuclear chickens are coming home…TO ROOST!!

/Dante

CorporatePiggy on September 24, 2012 at 4:27 PM

You know, dead bodies are just bumps in the road. Don’t roll over them too fast though or you’ll lose control of your vehicle bus.

NotCoach on September 24, 2012 at 2:21 PM

FIFY.

unclesmrgol on September 24, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Hey, don’t worry about a “senior commander” of the Revolutionary Guard threatening to start a war with Israel and the US.

Yeah! Don’t they know only America can act on its imperial desires and attack nations that haven’t attacked us! They need to just sit back and accept our war actions.

How dare they!

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Will someone explain how Iran thinks that a pre-emptive attack on US interests doesn’t amount to starting a war?

Of course if he’s talking about pre-emptively attacking Israel Obama will think we should wait until we’re sure it wasn’t an accident before we do anything.

katiejane on September 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Can you explain how our actions against Iran over the past 30 years doesn’t amount to war?

Dante on September 24, 2012 at 5:48 PM

It’d almost be worth taking an attack from Iran just so we could collectively spit in the faces of every paleocon crank.

MadisonConservative on September 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

IMO, it would be ENTIRELY worth it for our nation to declare all-out war, including rationing and the draft.

Either one of two things would happen:
—Neocons would get what they thought they wanted and go “Hey wait a minute! This sucks!”
—The rest of the nation would be infuriated at having to directly and undeniably pay for the Neocon agenda*, and rise up as one to vote you out of power for the next 50 years.
*Instead of indirectly, semi-invisibly paying with normal taxes only.

But frankly, I don’t know a single politician with the guts to push for such a thing. They’d rather have the half-baked mess we’ve got now because the media blackout basically relieves them of any responsibility. Start a full-scale war and their flowery keisters might just be held responsible by voters when Jamel Crackhead got his draft notice and Wahneysha Welfare got her check cut to bare-subsistence levels.

MelonCollie on September 24, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The idea of Iran starting a war is frankly laughable. A single aegis cruiser could take their entire air force and navy without breaking a sweat.

The thing is, we kind of are at war. Sabotage, killings of scientists, cyberwarfare. It might be a semi-cold war, but it’s clear that we are already fighting.

Hal_10000 on September 24, 2012 at 7:38 PM

It’s for the oil.

{^_^}

herself on September 25, 2012 at 4:00 AM

Semantics, it would be either WWIV or V, III was the Cold War. You could make a good argument that GWOT was IV. Of course, for those that got or are going to get killed, is a moot point.

El Coqui on September 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Who started that assumption anyway? I’m sorry, but one or two pundits applying the “WWIII” label to the Cold War does not mean we have to all accept that definition, in my opinion.

I’m pretty sure there would have to be many full-scale blood-and-bullets military conflicts in many parts of the globe, all sharing a common objective, for it to qualify as a “world war”.

TMOverbeck on September 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM