Khuzestan

I know that we have a grave and gathering threat now that Iran can make glowing Mickey Mouse watches, but I don't know why conservatives are so willing to take Iran on their word ON THIS POINT despite calling them liars on EVERY OTHER ONE. Some reporters are actually reporting this story, while their counterparts on the editorial page are ignoring the facts and parroting fearmongering spin.

And way outside the bubble, The Asia Times reported a few weeks ago what the real bounty in Iran might be to the war planners agitating for attack:

In the overdrive run-up to the attack on Iraq in 2003, the ultimate neo-conservative mantra was "Real men go to Khuzestan." Indeed, some of of these "real men" may already have been there. The Iranian government is convinced US, British and/or Israeli special ops have been conducted on Iran's western and southeastern borders, at least since early 2005.

Significantly, the new US budget calls for additional funds to special operations and psy-ops (psychological operations) in Iran, in addition to the US$75 million the administration of President George W Bush wants to spend to advance "regime change". For their part, the US marines have commissioned Hicks and Associates, a subsidiary of Science Applications International Corp, one of the biggest US defense contractors and heavily involved in the Iraq invasion, to carry out in-depth research into Iranian ethnic groups.

The ultimate prize is Khuzestan province, where 90% of Iran's oil is located and which provides the country with 80% of its funds from oil production. In January, Tehran announced it had evidence of British special ops and bombings in Khuzestan, starting last year. Two Iranian Arabs were hanged in public for bombing a bank in the provincial capital Ahvaz in January. Three others were executed in a local prison.

So we're either already at war or laying the groundwork for it in Khuzestan, an oil-rich province which is the planned site of Iran's second nuclear reactor. I don't put anything past the neocons who believe that if we're not projecting American power somewhere in the world, we're not doing our job. However, with the idea that "we'll be greeted as liberators" in Iraq shown to be ridiculous, I can almost not believe that they'd be willing to make the same guess about Khuzestan. The story goes that the Arabs in Khuzestan will welcome the opportunity to be folded into Iraq, will separate from Iran and drain them of their oil resources, and that all of this will happen without a fight. Here's what the author suggests is the reality of the situation:

The crucial fact remains that any US interventionist dream of the "real men go to Khuzestan" kind is doomed. It will generate even more passionate Iranian nationalism, not to mention a nationwide and potentially bloody backlash against Arab Iranians, who will then be inevitably regarded as traitors in collusion with the Anglo-Americans.

But yes, this could shockingly be the plan, as this Washington Times article lays the groundwork. The collective stupidity on Iran, after being struck in the face on Iraq, is mind-boggling. I agree with John at AmericaBlog. It's incredibly dangerous to let this bunch launch another bungling war based on these false premises about the outcome. They have no credibility, no proven acumen in dealing with threats of this type, and no idea how to wage a campaign successfully. It's absurd to think that Iran would turn out any different.