web analytics
January 29, 2015 / 9 Shevat, 5775
 
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Dead in the Water: Obama’s Military and Iran

It is unconscionable of Obama to handle the sequestration threat the way he has - crippling our ability to readily strike Iran.
U.S. Navy officer during training. Nearby U.S. military units were not sent into Benghazi for at least 8 hours.

U.S. Navy officer during training.
Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo by Capt. Greg Lundeberg

The global-airpower bombers – the B-2 and B-52 – would take big hits from the sequestration cuts scheduled for 2013, and that’s bad news for DOD’s readiness to perform a strike campaign against Iran.  If the local nations around the Persian Gulf don’t allow U.S. forces to launch from our bases there to conduct such a strike, a conventional strike is impossible without sufficient long-range bombers and Navy carrier air wings.  The sequestration cuts, assuming they occur, will eliminate that package of options.

The cuts – and budget uncertainty in general – will also raise the cost of expending resources on a strike against Iran.  Replacements for some Tomahawk missiles or Air Force C-ALCM missiles may simply not be manufactured, for example, as procurement orders decline.  If USS Harry S Truman has to be rushed to the Persian Gulf for a rapid response – the readiness promise made when her deployment was cancelled – the dent that that will put in her nuclear-reactor life will be an important problem in the future, especially considering that the reactor recoring for her sister ship, USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) has already been delayed indefinitely.  Overuse and deferred maintenance cascade into big availability shortfalls down the line, a problem for all the services’ major weapon systems.

We are already having to make decisions that will produce shortfalls in the future.  What has been less discussed is the shortfall our decisions today are creating for potential nearer-term requirements.  Assuming the sequestration cuts go through, it will not be an “ops normal” action, from the standpoint of force use, to conduct a strike campaign against Iran.  Even three years ago, at this time in 2010, it could have been done on that basis.  That is no longer the case.

The hands that are tied by this reality are Obama’s as commander-in-chief.  He can’t just order the strike.  He’ll have to ask Congress for additional funding just to get extra forces to the theater – and that’s before funding the strike itself, which will be very fuel-intensive.  He will have to consider, moreover, the force-wide impact of putting the funds into a strike on Iran.  What will he have to give up in U.S. force readiness in the Pacific, the theater to which he says we are shifting emphasis?  What about defense of the continental United States? – the fighter-interceptors on alert, the ground-based ballistic-missile interceptors in Alaska and California, both of which defense systems the Air Force foresees shortfalls in operating, if the sequester kicks in?  What about Afghanistan, where we still have tens of thousands of troops on the ground?

These are the questions raised by an Israeli television report from Monday (which, of course, may or may not be valid) stating that the Obama administration will tell Israel next month that it is gearing up for a “window of opportunity” to strike Iran in June.

Gearing up with what?  The carrier that isn’t deployed?  The Air Force aircraft that will run out of flying hours in May?

We don’t have the forces deployed to conduct this strike campaign, nor can they be deployed – assuming the sequester kicks in, and/or that there is no comprehensive continuing resolution agreed to in the next couple of months – without Obama making a big political noise, by running the whole plan through Congress and asking specifically for money to fund it.  What are the chances Obama is going to do that?

I’m betting Benjamin Netanyahu doesn’t think he will.  If the report really did come from the Obama administration, it is an egregious instance of promising to do something we obviously are making no preparations to do.  (I am reminded – painfully – of a press interview Obama did almost exactly a year ago, when he said, on the topic of the Iran nuclear threat: “As president of the United States, I don’t bluff”).

Even if the claim about the U.S. administration’s intentions in Israel is invalid, the report is as good a pretext as any for making it clear to the American people that our defense situation has already changed.  We cannot do today what we could have done three years ago.  As long as Obama makes no provision for conducting a crippling strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the threat of doing so carries no weight.  That is today’s reality – and it is Obama’s legacy.

About the Author:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

4 Responses to “Dead in the Water: Obama’s Military and Iran”

  1. If another country is doing what Israel is doing to Palestinians America and it's allies could have already used military force to oust the regime, but because Israel is working along America policies they keep quiet about WHY IS THIS THIS HAPPENING ISN'T ANY ONE WHO CAN VOICE OUT THIS ISSUE? Now there is oppression in Saudi Arabia again because Bahrain is going along US and Britain policies they keep quiet about it but because Assad doesn't support Israel or US policies they fund terrorists to put him down I love Russia, China and Iran stance they are practicing real democracy because WAR WILL NEVER BRING PEACE BUT DAMAGES OF PROPERTY AND DEATH OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. SHAME ON U US, ISRAEL AND ALL YOUR ALLIES DON'T LIE TO PEOPLE THAT U WANT PEACE IN THE WORLD IT'S A MERE LIE YOU FOLLOW WHERE YOUR OWN INTERESTS ARE FAVOURED.

  2. If another country is doing what Israel is doing to Palestinians America and it's allies could have already used military force to oust the regime, but because Israel is working along America policies they keep quiet about WHY IS THIS THIS HAPPENING ISN'T ANY ONE WHO CAN VOICE OUT THIS ISSUE? Now there is oppression in Saudi Arabia again because Bahrain is going along US and Britain policies they keep quiet about it but because Assad doesn't support Israel or US policies they fund terrorists to put him down I love Russia, China and Iran stance they are practicing real democracy because WAR WILL NEVER BRING PEACE BUT DAMAGES OF PROPERTY AND DEATH OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. SHAME ON U US, ISRAEL AND ALL YOUR ALLIES DON'T LIE TO PEOPLE THAT U WANT PEACE IN THE WORLD IT'S A MERE LIE YOU FOLLOW WHERE YOUR OWN INTERESTS ARE FAVOURED.

  3. Charlie Hall says:

    The Republicans have made their choice: Protecting the wealthy from tax increases is more important than the security of America or Israel. Democrats in the Senate got a majority for ending the sequester yesterday, but the Republicans are filibustering it there and won't even bring the plan for a vote in the House.

  4. Charlie Hall says:

    And in any case military action against Iran would require a tax increase, with or without the sequester. Unfortunately we are unlikely to get enough votes in Congress for a significant enough tax increase until after the 2016 election, and Iran might have the bomb by then.

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
Hezbollah rocket headed for Haifa in the Second Lebanon War in 2006.
Israel Won’t Go to War against Hezbollah because It Can’t Win [video]
Latest Indepth Stories
Prophet Mohammed on Jan. 14, 2015 edition cover of  Charles Hebdo..

Many journalists are covertly blaming the Charlie Hebdo writers themselves through self-censorship.

New York Times

Why does the Times relay different motivations and narratives for jihadists in Europe and Israel?

syria_iran_map

To defeat parasites-the hosts of terrorists-we need to deny them new people, potential terrorists

game-figure-598036_1280-810x540

Combating Amalek doesn’t mean all who disagree with you is evil-rather whom to follow and to oppose

Desperate people take what they can, seizing opportunity to advance their main goal; the Arabs don’t

There was a glaring void in the President’s State of the Union speech: Israel.

Let’s focus not on becoming an ATM for that little bundle of joy, but on what you can save in taxes.

Since the passing of the Governance bill legislation on March 11, 2014, new alignments have become to appear in Israeli politics.

Israel has some wild places left; places to reflect and think, to get lost, to try to find ourselves

The British government assured Anglo-Jewry that it is attacking the rising levels of anti-Semitism.

Obama’s Syrian policy failures created the current situation in the Golan Heights.

Our journey begins by attempting to see things differently, only then can we be open to change.

Despite Western ‘Conventional Wisdom&PC,’ the Arab/Israeli conflict was never about the Palestinians

Confrontation & accountability, proven techniques, might also help dealing with religious terrorists

In fact, wherever you see soldiers in Paris today, you pretty much know you’re near Jewish site

Inspired by the Perek Shira pasuk for “small non-kosher animals” we named the bunny “Rebbetzin Tova”

More Articles from J. E. Dyer
Steven Joel Sotloff as a hostage of ISIS, before his beheading.

In his travels as a journalist in the Islamic world, Sotloff never referred to his Jewishness.

ZIM Piraeus in happier days. (Image: ShipSpotting.com user b47b56)

ZIM Piraeus isn’t Israeli-owned or flagged, incidentally, it is Greek operated.

Obama is transparent, if you read his oracular signs with the right key.

ISIS has no intention of “marching on” Baghdad. The Sunni affiliates of ISIS are going to disrupt life there.

Oslo’s moment of unchallenged American supremacy and the illusion of unforced global stasis, passed.

Could the Obamas be any more “let ‘em eat cake”?

The Obama administration wants to take over the short-term financial services industry.

The topics are “The Reagan Strategy,” and the “Iran Time Bomb.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/analysis/j-e-dyer/dead-in-the-water-obamas-military-and-iran/2013/03/01/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: