In the winter of 2002-03, supporters of regime change in Iraq were upbeat in their vision of the post-invasion phase of the war. Anyone who suggested that what is happening today was a likely scenario was criticized as being a pro-Saddam appeaser, anti-American, or both. Yet a sober assessment of the difficulties ahead would have helped to avoid many of the mistakes that have proved to be so costly in terms of American lives and resources – not to mention the suffering of Iraqis.
Now some voices in the United States and elsewhere are proposing military action against Iran. So it is logical to ask: what are the realistic scenarios concerning the consequences of such an intervention? Are there any plans regarding how to handle the post-strike situation?
Without doubt, those willing to strike – either alone or in a coalition – have a range of options, ranging from naval and air blockades to targeted raids, sabotage inside the country, and massive attack from without. But the Iranians also have cards up their sleeve – some predictable, some wild.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
The Russian state’s ideological madness and reversion to warlordism have been abetted by a religious fundamentalism that openly celebrates death in the name of achieving a god-like status. As Vladimir Putin’s propagandists are telling Russians, “Life is overrated.”
traces the religious and intellectual roots of the Kremlin’s increasingly morbid war propaganda.
It is hard to reconcile the jubilant mood of many business leaders with the uncertainty caused by the war in Ukraine. While there are some positive signs of economic recovery, a sudden escalation could severely destabilize the global economy, cause a stock market crash, and accelerate deglobalization.
warns that the Ukraine war and economic fragmentation are still jeopardizing world growth prospects.
Log in/Register
Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.
In the winter of 2002-03, supporters of regime change in Iraq were upbeat in their vision of the post-invasion phase of the war. Anyone who suggested that what is happening today was a likely scenario was criticized as being a pro-Saddam appeaser, anti-American, or both. Yet a sober assessment of the difficulties ahead would have helped to avoid many of the mistakes that have proved to be so costly in terms of American lives and resources – not to mention the suffering of Iraqis.
Now some voices in the United States and elsewhere are proposing military action against Iran. So it is logical to ask: what are the realistic scenarios concerning the consequences of such an intervention? Are there any plans regarding how to handle the post-strike situation?
Without doubt, those willing to strike – either alone or in a coalition – have a range of options, ranging from naval and air blockades to targeted raids, sabotage inside the country, and massive attack from without. But the Iranians also have cards up their sleeve – some predictable, some wild.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Subscribe
As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.
Register
Already have an account? Log in