Iran may be the most challenging test of the Obama administration’s focus on new, cheap technologies that could avoid expensive boots on the ground; drones are the most obvious, cyberweapons the least discussed. It does not quite add up to a new Obama Doctrine, but the methods are defining a new era of nearly constant confrontation and containment. Drones are part of a tactic to keep America’s adversaries off balance and preoccupied with defending themselves. And in the past two and a half years, they have been used more aggressively than ever. There are now five or six secret American drone bases around the world. Some recently discovered new computer worms suggest that a new, improved Stuxnet 2.0 may be in the works for Iran.
“There were a lot of mistakes made the first time,” said an American official, avoiding any acknowledgment that the United States played a role in the cyber attack on Iran. “This was a first-generation product. Think of Edison’s initial light bulbs, or the Apple II.”
Not surprisingly, the Iranians are refusing to sit back and take it ”” which is one reason many believe the long shadow war with Iran is about to ramp up dramatically. At the White House and the C.I.A., officials say the recently disclosed Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States ”” by blowing up a tony Georgetown restaurant frequented by senators, lobbyists and journalists ”” was just the tip of the iceberg.
“Iran may be the most challenging test of the Obama administration’s focus on new, cheap technologies that could avoid expensive boots on the ground; drones are the most obvious, cyberweapons the least discussed.”
==========================================================
This gives me a feeling of “deja vous all over again.”
Some people have made parallels between President Obama’s actions and those of President Carter with regard to the current president’s approach to national security issues and the probable long-term effects of his handling of these issues.
And this statement,
“Iran may be the most challenging test of the Obama administration’s focus on new, cheap technologies that could avoid….”
brings back a rush of memories regarding Carter’s emasculation of the CIA’s human intelligence capabilities (HUMINT) and his replacing them with “spy in the sky” “technologies” that could see a great deal about the capabilities of a potential adversary but which couldn’t tell us hardly anything about the actual ‘intent’ of those adversaries.
This emasculation effort was led by Carter’s buddy, retired Admiral Stansfield Turner whom he placed in charge of the CIA.
Our lack of HUMINT, that is a network of human intelligence operatives, in the Middle East contributed vastly to many of the post-Carter problems that we have encountered there and have caused us to take sub-optimal national security actions in that region.
I don’t think #1 is wrong(thank you, AF) and this sort of lame head-in-sand stuff is playing with fire.
[i]Iran may be the most challenging test of the Obama administration’s focus on new, cheap technologies that could avoid expensive boots on the ground[/i]
A set of tactics in search of a strategy?
Ever since we first elected Bill Clinton to the Presidency we have not had a President who could develop a clear, strategic reason for going to war and then stick to it until the strategic objectives are successfully obtained.
No matter how rich a nation is, this can’t be sustained forever.
[blockquote]Our lack of HUMINT, that is a network of human intelligence operatives, in the Middle East contributed vastly to many of the post-Carter problems that we have encountered there and have caused us to take sub-optimal national security actions in that region.[/blockquote]
I think in Iran the situation has improved considerably since the mess of things after the Shah was overthrown. As well, cooperative (that’s a relative term) Arab regimes help us in other places.
I would posit that at this time it’s as much a lack of good options for policy than wanting intellegence.