SOLEIMANI’S THREATS. DID HE SAY TOO MUCH?

            Yesterday, my pitch was based on the ever changing actions and words of the Iranian General who spent most of his life in the background of politics and his warning to the US. I commented a few of his statements had implications that most may have missed. So, let me go take a look at those statements and lets see what might have taken place.

Did he say Too Much?  
           

            Cool and calculating. Those are accurate words when it comes to the Iranian general, at least they were in the past. It’s also well known that most military leaders in the Middle East tend to make flashy statements and threats without a great deal of research. An interesting point given most Arabs pride themselves in “talking between the lines………..the message inside the message”. It’s a trait I learned over there years ago. So, what was said by Soleimani that should have caught the ear of those that know how to listen and you can bet the intelligence community heard him, or at least I hope they did!  Look. Here is the deal. In most “modern militaries”, official statements by senior leaders are well scripted and analyzed by very complex groups of both political leaders and historical experts. By the time someone like the US Secretary of Defense, although he has been known to say some interesting things, makes a public statement, what was meant and what the possible outcomes of that statement may become have all been reviewed over and over again. The bad news is, even then, they often have second and third order effects that no one truly anticipated.

The Red Sea is not safe:

The Red Sea is not safe with the US in the area? Okay, now that is one of the two statements Soleimani put out there I found disturbing. The Iranian threat has always been the movement of oil from the region, but historically, the area of concern has been the Strait of Hormuz. Over the past few weeks, the threats coming from Iran have been geared towards the Strait, or at least that is what many assumed. Then, two ships are fired upon off the coast of Yemen and the weapons that were used were provided by the Iranians. Does Iran think for a second everyone doesn’t understand what took place here? They threaten, and then one of their proxy fighter groups attacks. Who is the center element of the protection for these ships? The US and Iran knows it. So, the statement is, the Red Sea is not safe with the US in the area. Is Iran truly trying to signal to the US they may be pushed out of the area? Really? Now, earlier, I made the comment leaders like Soleimani often don’t review what they are going to say with the intent of not saying too much. If there is one way to get great intel out of the Middle East, it’s getting someone to talk too much. Come to think of it. It’s a great way to get intel out of DC. Did Soleimani intend to play his card this way? Did he intend to send a message the attacks on the two ships was Iran’s doing? If he did, he didn’t think that one through very well. Saudi “Temporarily” stops movement by ships. Did it impact the price of oil and gas that much? Perhaps for a day or two. Is the increased price of gas and oil a good thing for those that support Iran…..Russia? yes, but not at the cost of something that can become very….very reckless. Did Soleimani have the blessing of Moscow on the words he used? I would love to know the answer on that one, but my hunch is no. The Red Sea becomes the threat and the Iranian general seems to have placed the blame on the US. I have to wonder, just how does Soleimani think the US will respond to this threat? Oh, by the way. It appears the general is now speaking for the Iranian Navy. Didn’t know that was a job for the Quds. Perhaps Soleimani didn’t review his speech with his counterparts in the Navy?

We are closer to you than you think?

            That was the second statement that caught my attention. What? What does that mean? Now, that’s one the intel folks will have a field day with. Why, I can see it now, dozens of PowerPoint slides and hours of Rock Drills / Rehearsals at all levels. I bet that one statement alone cost the US Taxpayer about a million dollars in salary / manhours. Closer to the US where….how……with what? The US may start the war, but Iran will end it? I bet the doomsday club inside the intel world ordered 500 pizzas over that statement alone, not to mention the legions of contractors who will get paid by the word to analyze what that statement could mean. Yep, guys like Soleimani speak and people see dollar signs. Okay. Back to the statement. Again, the question becomes, did the general say too much? Did he let his grandstanding overload his brain? It happens all the time over there, but this guy is different, at least he used to be. What did he mean? What was he referring to? Fast Boats that are tucked away along the coastline? Boats that can launch ship killers? Do the Iranians really think we don’t know where these boats are? Do they understand that if they truly start such an operation, the Iranian Navy will no longer exist? Can that threat be tied to his Red Sea statement? I don’t think so. The ability for Iran to block the Strait or any other area in the “Red Sea” is limited and the price they would pay is beyond anything any Iranian military leader is willing to suffer. Yes. There is the issue of “tension” between the Iranian regular military and the IRGC / Quds.

            If the statement about how close they are is not tied to the ability to block shipping, then where else is this comment possibly pointed to? Could it be, the cool, calculating Soleimani is no longer just that? Did he say too much and give away something the US will dig for answers on? When you tell the intel community they may have “missed something” it drives them crazy. Did he mean to drive them crazy with a statement that has no meaning?

            Prepositioned. Is the general hinting, perhaps by accident, that Iran has prepositioned assets? The US has known for years Hezbollah has been active in Central and South America, but the theory, one I didn’t agree with, was it was based on fund raising. Not everyone believed that analytical line, but the final verdict usually revolved around money. Now what? With the statement, what does the Intel world go back and look at? Remember what I said about being told they overlooked something. I can just see the gears turning in any agency that has dealt with Hezbollah in Central and South America. Let’s just hope someone doesn’t get too paranoid. The next thing you know, there is a Qud / Hezbollah Cell behind every palmetto in South America. Funding. Boy would that be a funding bonanza for a few groups I know.

What does it all mean?

            Some will be charged with looking into what Soleimani said and why. Some will be tasked to see who he talked to before and after the speech. Some will be tasked with looking through every possibility based on what he said. The fact of the matter is, the general maid some very unusual comments in conjunction with an attack on two oil tankers. Oh ya, and now I hear the rumor of the US planning a strike on Iran’s nuclear locations. Funny. Two can play the game of words. Moscow’s media mouthpiece ran the story about the “pending attack” and you can bet that had the phones ringing in Tehran. As for the general. He is not the man I once studied. He has changed and I have to wonder if he is as skilled at messaging as he was at avoiding being in the spotlight?