0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
1,820 $
8 DAYS LEFT UNTIL THE END OF MAY

Is America Trying To Bait Iran Into A ‘Limited’ Nuclear War?

Support SouthFront

Is America Trying To Bait Iran Into A 'Limited' Nuclear War?

Click to see the full-size image

Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

Accusing countries of alleged intentions or ongoing programs to acquire weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) has long been the mainstay of America’s foreign policy. Regardless of whether it was a completely unfounded claim or one based on solid intelligence, the openly imperialist foreign policy of the United States is such that it’s virtually impossible to survive it without resorting to WMDs. North Korea is probably the most prominent example of this, as the small country (relative to its neighbors) was being directly threatened by the US only half a decade ago, while it now fields an arsenal worthy of a “pocket superpower”. Worse yet for the Pentagon, Pyongyang now also has a robust tactical arsenal, in addition to its strategic one that can reach virtually any target in the continental US. Interestingly, this now includes hypersonic weapons, a field in which Washington DC is now lagging behind Pyongyang, Beijing and Moscow.

Ironically, if the US stops complaining about a country having nuclear weapons (or any other type of WMDs), then that country is safe, as Washington DC will know it can’t act with impunity. However, when a country most likely doesn’t have WMDs, the US keeps accusing and threatening it before launching an illegal full-scale invasion. The example of Iraq serves as a painful lesson of that strategy. The whole world remembers the decades of US/NATO aggression in that unfortunate country, as well as millions of dead, wounded, displaced, etc. However, that’s obviously not enough, as Washington DC has been eyeing other countries in the region, particularly Iraq’s neighbor Iran. And yet, the window of opportunity for a successful conventional conflict with Tehran is effectively gone, as Americans are increasingly uninterested in joining the US military and its endless wars in the Middle East and elsewhere.

For decades, the US has been trying to keep Iran as one of its priority targets, with constant accusations that Tehran is supposedly in possession of either a working WMD, particularly a (thermo)nuclear weapon, or it’s allegedly close to fielding one. Virtually the same narrative is being recycled to this very day, which further suggests that Washington DC wants to keep the “bomb Tehran” option relevant for as long as possible. Just last week, the mainstream propaganda machine insisted that “Iran edges close to weapons capability”. Namely, according to Western media, the Middle Eastern superpower has been “edging close” and “it’s about to build [nuclear] weapons” for well over 20 years now. The US has been using this narrative to build capabilities that are part of the Pentagon’s new doctrine that essentially boils down to a rather liberal usage of low-yield thermonuclear weapons.

Such a possibility is quite concerning, particularly against the backdrop of the latest clashes between Iran and Israel. Iranian strikes over the weekend, a response to the previous Israeli airstrike on its consulate building in Damascus that killed several high-ranking officers, showed that Tehran has the capability to strike targets anywhere in the Middle East. And while Israel and its allies insist that the strike was unsuccessful as they’ve managed to intercept 99% of the missiles and drones, the available footage shows that such claims are overoptimistic, to say the least. Either way, Iran demonstrated a very robust long-range strike capability. This further undermines Washington DC’s conventional capabilities against Tehran, as the Pentagon is simply unable to field enough forces for any sort of action against it. However, it should be noted that the US has been threatening Iran well before its latest clashes with Israel.

Namely, on February 4, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan refused to rule out the possibility of strikes inside Iran. US/NATO attacks on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its allied militias in Iraq and Syria were already underway at the time. However, once again, the viability of strikes inside Iran is not the best, as there are close to 90 million people in the country, which also has a very robust domestic military industry, as well as a sizeable stockpile of ballistic missiles and drones, as demonstrated during the latest events over the weekend. In addition, as previously mentioned, the US itself is also a far cry from 2003 when it could muster hundreds of thousands of soldiers, as well as those of its vassals and satellite states. In other words, the Pentagon simply doesn’t have the conventional forces to pull off pretty much anything meaningful against Iran or even its proxies in the area.

So, what option does that leave the US with? Well, WMDs, of course. And indeed, Washington DC has an undisclosed number of W76-2 warheads with an extremely low yield of 2-7 kt (kilotons of TNT). This is upwards of only 10% of the destructive power of the “Fat Man” atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki on August 9, 1945. Basic military logic implies that using such weapons against near-peer adversaries is pointless. For instance, a country like Russia that has multi-megaton monstrosities such as the unrivaled RS-28 “Sarmat” and whose retaliation would devastate the entire NATO, would certainly not tolerate it. Thus, the only viable explanation is that the US wants to use such warheads in a conflict with a non-nuclear power. Faced with dwindling conventional capabilities, America is left with only one way to try to blackmail the rest of the world into accepting its vaunted “rules-based world order” – nuclear war.

This is also completely in line with the overall US military strategy – attack only those who can’t shoot back. For the time being, Iran is the only major rival without thermonuclear weapons (officially at least), making it the “perfect target”. However, this still leaves the obvious question – what if Tehran has thermonuclear weapons? Nobody could blame Iran for wanting to protect itself from any hostile forces seeking to enslave or destroy it, but the prospect of an uncontrollable escalation still remains strong, meaning that restraint should be exercised by all sides and backdoor channels should be kept open at all times. The main issue lies in the fact that the US is desperate to prevent the enlargement of BRICS+, a truly historically unprecedented effort to create a better world in which there’s an actual functioning international law and where (neo)colonialism will be suppressed (if not eradicated once and for all).

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Support SouthFront

SouthFront

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
19 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
hlu

limited nuclear war is a bullshit. it is some old stupid idea from brzezinski or another american genius. maybe not brzezinski but kissinger or another u.s. a-hole. we were very lucky that kennedy stepped on brakes 60 years ago but he was assassinated and since that time everything in america went down the drain. it is not even on america’s decission, israel is doing anything they want.

hash
hashed
Last edited 1 month ago by hlu
hlu

and as i told, iran was very stupid attacking israel when they expected that and were on the high alert. it is just demonstration how low iq have iran leaders. i expect on average 90 or less. they can shake hands with biden, another example of mental retard.

LoveYouLoads

if and when all this spirals out of control, then i’m taking you off my christmas card list.

hlu

and russia will only sit and talk as broken gramophone that all parties should negotiate and keep calm. this is only thing they can do. russia tries to pretend they are superpower, but it is laughable after they didn’t moved a finger when israel attacked syria for years. russian blind eye for israel is to blame for dead iranian generals in damascus. it was putin and his “deals”. again and again and again.

Jsmith

i’m not a putin fanboy but i think he did a pretty good job balancing the tightrope in syria.

iran’s goals in syria and russia’s goals in syria did not line up perfectly, nor did they even align with the syrian govt itself on many occassions.

why would russia care about irgc generals getting blown up, or some syrian air defence system?

Saviour Complex

maybe. as others have pointed out, it looks like the ashkenazi jews want their old khazaria back. hence the blatant depopulation of slavs in ukraine. there are whole villages without men. even women have been conscripted in an effort to depopulate the whole of ukraine from slavs. look up khazaria 2.0 and everything starts to make sense.

Ad Nauseam

exactly! under the guidance of “kagan” and his newland…

Jsmith

skitso much?

hlu

and as i told many times , we are already in ww3 for years. every single day the situation only worsens. everything is prepared for a full scale nuclear war to “clear” the planet form the unnecessary human garbage, so only few elites can have the planet and don’t need to share. this is why rotshilds, soros, zuck and another invested billions of usd to their private nuclear shelters in the remote places of the planet

hash
hashed
Last edited 1 month ago by hlu
Southtrash

nato bots operating in sf

hash
hashed
Crocus Shooting Gallery

it’s about to get very hot in tehran…heheheh

BunkerDwellers

it is the theater prior to the planned release of nukes. nobody takes direct responsibility for planning it, everyone saves an amount of face. if everybody knew they were planning the wars between key players in all governments, they would be hanged or tortured to death.

hash
hashed
Ad Nauseam

absolutely! iran is on the edge to be obliterated and annihilated by the zionist coalition under the guise of thwarting its nuclear capabilities. a “surgical” nuklear strike officially orchestrated by the de facto war criminal “satanyahoo” is in the making as we speak. another so “preemptive” strike.

hash
hashed
Jsmith

“america cannot invade iran, so they are going to nuke it…just trust me bro, there is no other possible explanation for the stockpile of low-yield atomics.”

drago knows this to be false, as it is common knowledge that russia and the americans *both* developed an arsenal of mini-nukes that are intended for a hypothetical scenario where they get used solely on frontline military targets. think fab5000+

hash
hashed
Holy Hacker

the question is not what you have, it’s who you know and what they have. when you venture past the realm of conventional weapons, mother russia has all the help you might need. last i looked, russia and iran had a mutual defense treaty…

hash
hashed
jull

to be so dumb, the author has to be paid for.. usa has no interest been involved in war outside the taiwan straight

hash
hashed
_TomSawyer_

of course we have. we cant compete, but we can lead by keeping everyone else down with wars and sanctions.

are we the bad guys, hans? 🤡 😆😆😆

_TomSawyer_

we american cowards will try to use our jiddish nazis as proxy, we still remember them dancing after 911!

guillable clows everywhere. 🤡 😆😆😆

hash
hashed
Kibosh Warrior

the last time the us used nukes… did they ‘limit’ themselves to using just 1? no. so, from what we know so far about america having no limits as long as it has capacity, bodes badly for the world. jesus save, god have mercy on us.

hash
hashed
19
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x