Most people outside of Washington DC probably don’t hear about the neoconservative Heritage Foundation very often. It’s true that the “golden age” of neoconservatism is long gone, so groups like theirs sometimes have to resort to extraordinary and often spectacular measures for their work even to get noticed.
I would like to believe that the two Iran-related reports they released today fall into that category.
The first, by Jim Phillips, talks about the implications for the US of an Israeli strike against Iran. He argues that, since we’ll be blamed for an Israeli attack anyway, the US might as well get in on the fun from the beginning:
Given that the United States is likely to be attacked by Iran in the aftermath of an Israeli strike anyway, it may be logical to consider joining Israel in a preventive war against Iran.
But since that isn’t likely to happen as long as the White House values peace and stability over war and chaos, Phillips’ fall-back plan is for the US to just wait until Israel attacks, and then go ahead with a plan to bring about WWIII in the MidEast…
In the event of a conflict, Iran’s nuclear facilities should be relentlessly targeted until all known nuclear weapon-related sites are destroyed completely. Perhaps the preparations for such a war, combined with the knowledge that Washington will not restrain Israel, would enable cooler heads to prevail in Tehran before Israel is forced to take action to defend itself.
The second report, which looks at how Russia complicates the Iran issue for the US, also employs the think-tank equivalent of an angst-y teen’s cry for attention:
The U.S. should deploy a visible deterrent, including overwhelming nuclear forces near Iran, on surface ships, aircraft, or permanent bases. These offensive forces should be designed to hold at risk the facilities that Iran would need to launch a strategic attack, thereby making any such attack by Iran likely to fail.
Just to clarify: this author is talking about brandishing US nuclear warheads in the Persian Gulf, on US bases (likely in Qatar or Kuwait), and on aircraft flying overhead one of the world’s most volatile regions. He is suggesting that we wave these missiles in front of Iran’s face, knowing full well that Tehran and its proxy allies will not sit idly by as the US makes such a thoroughly provocative move. And he makes the ludicrous suggestion that the thing the Middle East needs more than anything else right now is more Weapons of Mass Destruction.
This report insinuates nothing less than a preemptive nuclear attack on Iran.
As Matt Duss would say: “these are the Iran war drumbeats that liberals are just making up in their heads.”