The United States or Israel forfeit to attack Iran could give free rein to horrifying consequences amongst them since Iran would certainly hit back. By Iran striking back, this will definitely end up in a third World War in the Middle East. Iran is also in a position to exercise its sway to make life distasteful for the United States troops in Iraq. On the other hand, in case the United States smack Iran, this would only slow down Iran’s programs and rather not obliterate them.
Iran may opt to reckon for Israel hit is expected to be ferocious, multi-split as well as prolonged. Iran may also choose to assail Israel with its missiles, perhaps fortified with radiological, biological, or even with a compound weapon (Amy 3). This kind of projectile bombardment will automatically lead to a dread campaign that can lead to deterioration on the progression of the states and also probable space molests and assails by unmanned Aerial Vehicles could not be feint out. A confrontation between the USA and Iran is a crucial problem of the present times.
Iran may decide to hit back in case the United States or Israel is attacked by Hezbollah, an association of activists that has entirely been re-equipped for the last five years. This was after a conflict with Israel in an undeviating contravention of the united nation. Iran may also choose to challenge its assailants by using the activists who have taken delivery of longer-assortment as well as more fatal Iranian missiles. With the above factors, there is a possibility of menacing more Israeli inhabitants than in the previous war (Ethan 20). The assailants are aware that Iran has also equipped such organizations like Hamas with increasingly complicated long-array rockets and hence, competent in striking Israel’s largest city known as Tel Aviv. Among the options for Iran in case of an attack by the United States or by Israel comprise of:
- Iran would engrave its own oil export to hoist world prices.
Iran may opt to impede its own oil exports, an action that would make an absolute wreck of Iran’s domestic financial system by divesting the country of hard currency. The rising of oil prices will directly interfere with the economy of the United States, a factor that will hinder the administration from concentrating on another issue that concerns the state.
- Iran molesting the United States forces in Afghanistan an Iraq
Iran’s decision to interfere with the United States forces this would peril the united state direct retribution against Iran. Despite the fact that the president would prefer to take out, this increase in hostility in the two states may, in fact, lengthen the United States’ existence in Iraq. It may also bring massive jeopardy for Iran by captivating the United States forces even in a primarily partial way.
- The closure of channel of Hormuz
Although the closure of the channel is on only not practicable but also not prudent for Iran as the United States will rapidly overpower any endeavor to close the passage, this is, of course, a risking assailant from the United States on its land-based services (Ramin 20). This would mean that there will be oil shortages in the United States as Iran’s supply will be deprived, and this would mean that there will be protuberance of oil charges spiking. This is a decision that will greatly interfere with the States economy.
- Iran setting free its activist against Israel
The likely main alternative for Iran is striking back through its activist organizations that include; Hamas and Hezbollah. There are also some acts that show that Iran has a possibility of hitting back, which comprise of; military raids by Hezbollah, salvoes of arms from Gaza, and also from Lebanon as well as amplified uncompromising assails within Israel. Iran will also do this by considerably improving Hama’s missiles’ abilities to offer a larger array and also payload to hit throughout Israel (Lara 16). This choice will mostly obstruct the development in the state and as well hinder the government’s effort in maintaining political stability.
- Iran boosting support for international terrorism
The decision to maintain world-wide assailants against the United States’ aim is open. This terror campaign outside the Middle East is a hazardous choice for Iran. This is dangerous for Iran if it was discovered of its direct and indirect activist tricks. This being Iran’s decision against the United States can be a strong blow to the state.
- Commencing projectile attacks on Israel
Iran will most probably settle on striking back against the definite assailant Israel. Iran is prone to doing considerable harm to Israel by use of its military capabilities as well as its rockets and particularly to residential targets. Before initiating any assailants, Israel should make an investigation on the cost-benefit of what Iran will do once it attains nuclear arms (Jonathan 16). Israel’s own nuclear potential may be at some point be engrossed by express Iranian forces against Israel, including inciting a wider Israel counter smack. Consequently, the radical guards of Israel ought to think hard and extensively prior to setting free its potentials against its oppose Israel.
Adding up to the direct assails on Israel, the Iranian administration is liable to commencing oblique attacks by the use of a wide array of proxy settings. This is possible because the Lebanese activist association created almost thirty years ago by Iran to go against Israel intrusion still obtains support from Iran through:
- Monetary support.
- Philosophical management from Iran’s fundamental government through the radical sentinel.
- Training of the activist organization.
Confrontation of Israel or the United States military with Iran will definitely lead to negative results to Israel as well as to the United States. Among the major costs that the three states will experience include both political and economic. The most challenging cost is political as Israel, and the United States leaders will be politically reluctant to surrender Iran what it would most probably require for confirmable termination of its nuclear mischief. The mischief that the leaders would be expected to execute include:
- safety declaration.
- confirmation of the Iranian government’s right.
- Elimination of approval.
- A more famous responsibility for Iran in the political as well as defense affairs in the Middle East.
Israel and the United States armed forces will also face the cost of compromise. In general, the cost of compromise refers to anything that the leaders would bestow for Iran to confirm to bring to an end any nuclear weapons attempt. The cost of negotiation can be further classified into political and strategic costs (Daniel 18). The tactical cost of concession is high in the incident of dishonesty.
Economically, in case of an argument with Iran, this will lead to the Hormuz oil channels between the United States and Iran being closed. This closure of the passage will lead to the United States expending more to acquire oil from other states and hence its economy will consequently be affected. The United States taxpayers will also experience an additional cost due to the necessity of increasing military procedures in order to cover for the expenses of extra measures against the country.
In conclusion, I believe that there is no such time when a confrontation between nations has solved a problem. Therefore, it is a crucial problem that the United States are in conflict to look for a better way of getting a consensus. As far as Iran leaders argue that nuclear series subsist only for the reason of production, this will make other republics to produce such arms to terrorize others. Political and economical stabilities are among the crucial factors that determines the development of a nation and hence should be put on consideration. I suppose that dealing with such disagreements has unintentional consequences but it is only after the action itself that we come to see them.
It is obviously that no wish for any state goes through the adverse effects that come hand in hand with conflicts. In case of an attack by Israel or the United States to Iran it would take precious time for each of the nation to recover the damage that could be incurred. I would therefore recommend that leaders should improvise superior techniques to resolve grudges among or between nations. This will work out to reduce such instances of costs met on confrontations and at the same time improve corporation among nations a factor that will lead to growth and developments of the whole world at large.
Works Cited
Bronner, Ethan. “Painful Middle East Truth: Force Trumps Diplomacy”. New York Times. 2009. Print.
Marcus, Jonathan. “Israel’s Military Message to Iran”. BBC News. 2009. Print.
Mahnaini, Uzi. “Israel Readies Forces for Strike on Nuclear Iran’’. Sunday Times. 2005. Print.
Mostaghim, Ramin. “Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says Iran, Israel on ‘Collision Course’’ Los Angeles Times. 2008. Print.
Pipes, Daniel. “Arabs Still Want to Destroy Israel’’. Wall Street Journal. 2002. Print.
Setrakian, Lara. “Petraeus Accuses Iran of Aiding Afghan Taliban”. ABC News. 2009. Print.
Teibel, Amy. “Intel Chief: Gaza Rockets Can Reach Tel Aviv”. Associated Press. 2009. Print.