Virtual Iran Attack

The Brookings Institute recently held a virtual Iran war game. The scenario has Israel attacking Iran and blowing up nuclear facilities. We are familiar with this possibility.

Iran keeps popping its head up into the vast misery channel that occupies the course of American politics. Its important to remember that a large portion of the right would be more than pleased to push the US into an invasion of Iran.

Chris Matthews recently correctly identified Palin as an empty vessel, meaning she will do the bidding of her puppet masters. From the foreign policy point of view, that would be the neocons.

I would suggest that someone do the virtual war game again, but this time take it from the perspective of how the USA economy would fair. Would our present two war, fragile recovery, massive debt, and massive high unemployment improve with the addition of a major war or would it falter even more. More importantly would our limited democracy hold up or would the imposition of more totalitarian activity strangle the society further with another major war.

McClatchy: War game shows how attacking Iran could backfire

But what happens next isn't pretty.


The U.S. president and his National Security Council try to keep the crisis from escalating. That sours U.S.-Israeli relations, already stressed by the fact that Israel didn't inform Washington in advance of the strike. The White House tries to open a channel for talks with Iran, but is rejected.


Instead, Iran attacks Israel, both directly and through its proxies in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. It misinterprets U.S. actions as weakness and mines the Straits of Hormuz, the world's chief oil artery. That sparks a clash and a massive U.S. military reinforcement in the Persian Gulf.