Avner Cohen is an Israeli political scientist, currently at the Monterey Institute of International Affairs. He is considered to be the world's foremost expert on the Israeli nuclear program. His work is so accurate and authoritative, in fact, that he has come close to being arrested when returning to Israel.
Cohen has an extremely important column in the November 13 issue of Haaretz, in which he demolishes the myth that the Israeli attack on the Iraqi reactor in 1981 was a success, let alone that it should serve as a model for a similar attack on the Iranian nuclear program.
Cohen demonstrates that even the 1981 Israeli attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor was strongly opposed by many of Israel's top military and intelligence officials, who in fact--despite the widespread view to the contrary--were proven right. That is, while the attack seemed at the time to be a "success," in fact the consequence was that Saddam Hussein redoubled his efforts to get nuclear weapons, hid most of the program underground, and was on the verge of producing nuclear weapons until the 1991 Gulf war essentially ended the Iraqi program.
An Israeli attack on the Iranian nuclear program, even if the United States joined it--which seems (let us hope) inconceivable--would have even less chance of succeeding in disarming Iran, and would be far more likely to result in catastrophic consequences for Israel and perhaps the entire region; indeed it cannot be ruled out that Iran would find a way to attack our own country.
Almost certainly the primary purpose of the Iranian nuclear program is deterrence, not aggression--as has been the case for every other nuclear state. There is not the slightest evidence to support the supposed Israeli fear that, out of the blue, Iran would launch a nuclear strike against Israel--in the full knowledge that the entire country would be literally annihilated by Israeli nuclear retaliation.
The supposedly more worrisome problem is that Iran might covertly give nuclear weapons to terrorists, who might believe they could use them against Israel and escape retaliation, as it might not be clear who originated the attack and where it came from. However, that possibility is remote, since Iran would have to assume that it would be blamed for any nuclear attack on Israel and would be destroyed in retaliation--even if it hadn't been the source of the attack.
No doubt in part for similar reasons, to the best of our knowledge no nuclear power has ever given nuclear weapons to terrorist groups--not even the most extremist or supposedly the least rational states, like North Korea and Pakistan. Still, however remote the possibility, it is sufficiently worrisome to make serious efforts to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, as in fact the world is doing now--but almost no military experts, including most of Israel's own top intelligence and military officials, believe that a military attack has any chance of meaningful success.
In that light, one would assume--or would like to assume--that the current Israeli threats are bluffs, designed to induce the international community to step up economic sanctions against Iraq. Nonetheless, the level of Israeli irrationality, as demonstrated on an almost daily basis, is so deep that nothing can be taken for granted.
Obama must be told that no matter how far he is prepared to go in capitulating to Israeli madness, he cannot put at risk our own national security. A simple but blunt statement by the president that Israel must in no circumstances attack Iran would almost surely prevent it from doing so.
Obama has an absolute obligation to act--and right now.
This is a crosspost from Jerome Slater's site.
Is this the bomb-in-a-suitecase scenario that Fox and Jack Bauer like to tout?
My problem with these types of explanations is that they are rarely supported by scientific fact.
Does anyone know of an unbiased, scholarly research that supports these claims? I know political pundits and alleged “experts” like to opine on such matters, but how much of this is actually based on fact?
The other question that needs to be asked is exactly which country will be investing billions in a nuclear weapons program and then simply selling a bomb to Terrrrrrists? And what kind of Terrrrrists will be able to afford to purchase such a weapon?
Again, how will these Terrrrrists deliver the nuclear weapon? Surely even Hizbollah’s rockets can’t carry such a nuclear warhead. Will they load it up into a van and drive it to the heart of Tel-Aviv? How exactly will they get there? I mean, nuclear bombs are supposed to be quite heavy, right? So, they’re just going to cross the border into Israel (somehow undetected) and then proceed to merrily drive to their destination?
You see, the problem is that people just don’t ask the important and relevant questions anymore. They just accept things as given and move on.
Hezbollah will have no problem delivering the nuclear bomb Iran will give them. All they need to do is blow it up on the Israeli-Lebanese border to make large parts of the Galilee uninhabitable for years or obliterate Kiryat Shmona.
You of course believe they will never do that, but most Israelis are not willing to take this chance.
And destroy entire Lebanese and Palestinian towns and cities in the process. Sure. You bet. Aha.
I’m curious, were you born dumb or did you have to work at it to get that way?
Hmm. Bomb Iran for real, with real consequences, because Iran might build a bomb that it might give to Hezbollah that it might detonate on the Israeli border making large parts of northern Israel – and southern Lebanon – uninhabitable for years. Had gadya, had gadya.
You guys are so sure you can predict the future. Your arrogance is amazing. Hezbollah is based on the culture of martyrdom. Martyr’s are honored and looked up to. Why wouldn’t they think the price may be worth it as long as Israel is hurt badly? Why wouldn’t they be tempted by the theory that Israel is a one bomb country? Imagine they had a big enough bomb. They could easily contaminate Haifa, it is less than 25 miles as the crow flies to the Lebanese border.
You are just irresponsible, or don’t give a shit about Israelis.
Hezbollah is based on the culture of martyrdom. Martyr’s are honored and looked up to. Why wouldn’t they think the price may be worth it as long as Israel is hurt badly?
i suggest you review this this comment from tree
>> eee @ 11:56: You guys are so sure you can predict the future. Your arrogance is amazing.
Funny stuff, coming from an arrogant Zio-supremacist who predicted the future only one hour earlier:
>> eee @ 10:56: Hezbollah will have no problem delivering the nuclear bomb Iran will give them.
What a joker.
You guys are so sure you can predict the future. Your arrogance is amazing… You are just irresponsible, or don’t give a shit about Israelis.
Talk about projection. You don’t need to be clairvoyant to see that an Israeli attack on Iran would have dire consequences for Iranians, Israelis, and beyond. Such an attack is justified by the perceived need to prevent a far less certain chain of events based on a considerable amount of speculation.
So who is arrogant and irresponsible and/or doesn’t give a shit about Israelis – or Iranians, or Lebanese, or Palestinians, or anyone else for that matter?
And maybe you should read link to en.wikipedia.org
where it says:
“A prominent Hezbollah poster at a May 2009 rally had an image of a mushroom cloud along with the message, “OH ZIONISTS, IF YOU WANT THIS TYPE OF WAR THEN SO BE IT!”"
Look, we know you don’t care about Israelis. So stop the charade.
Shmuel,
If an Iranian bomb means a 1% chance of northern Israel contaminated, the attack on Iran which certainly would be costly for all involved is justified. People are just not good at estimating black swans. How many people in 1935 would have given even a small chance that the Germans would attempt to exterminate all the Jews of the world in the near future?
You are asking Israel to take an unreasonable risk.
You are asking Israel to take an unreasonable risk.
Right back at ya.
“OH ZIONISTS, IF YOU WANT THIS TYPE OF WAR THEN SO BE IT!””
oh eeeeeeeee, i think the meaning of “if you want this type of war”, means “if you attack us we will respond in kind”.
You guys are so sure you can predict the future. Your arrogance is amazing.
so let me get this straight. are you critical of israel’s threat of a pre emptive strike because no one can predict the future? is that what you’re saying here. we shouldn’t try to predict the future?
because it seems to me you’re always defending israel and a pre emptive strike is predicated on the assumption iran will attack israel when they have made no such threat sans qualifying it as a response to an attack.
so i find it rather odd someone who supports a state making threats of preemption would accuse others of ‘predicting the future’.
eee wrote:
“You guys are so sure you can predict the future. … Hezbollah is based on a culture of martyrdom.”
Hi eee. I have to say that I do think people can get overly certain about such things, and also think you make a valid point about people who have no risk in a game just naturally discounting if not dismissing the amount of risk involved.
On the other hand your comment about the “culture” that Hezbollah is based on interestingly brings up a little debate that’s recently been had here (on another thread) concerning such observations, because it seems to me one might argue that Israel is based on certain cultural characteristics as well.
For one, while indeed Israelis may validly feel that it’s superficial for lesser-involved parties to discount the risk of Iran’s nukes, it does raise the question then as to why, given the great fear you say they have, the general political scene in Israel simply hasn’t seen what would seem the reasonable reaction of striving like crazy for a peace deal so as to lessen the hostility and thus risk to them. Or to just simply return the West Bank, go along with a UN declaration of a Palestinian state, or even to just stop building settlements? E.g., … *anything* to reduce the great risk you say they perceive?
How, given all this, can Israel escape the conclusion that *it* is based on a culture of … expansionism, or entitlement, or etc.? After all at the very least it would seem legitimate to say that despite all its fears it still values West Bank land more than it values lessening that risk, no? Or in the alternative, if one argues that it doesn’t see any of that reducing its risk, irrational paranoia at the very least?
And what about what would seem the complete answer to this Iran issue which is Israel agreeing to a Nuke-Free ME Accord, which it has rejected so categorically and completely that it isn’t even ever mentioned as a possibility?
Given Israel’s nukes, and that the only logical conclusion to this is that Israel values dominance over an utter lack of worry about a nuclear attack, in line with what you’ve observed might it not be argued that Israel is based on a culture of dominance, superiority or etc.? (Utterly scotching that paranoia hypothesis too.)
That lack of talk about a Nuke Free ME Accord really bothers me, esp. in light of Israel not only clearly having the U.S. on its side providing it a mammoth conventional edge, but indeed securing an express guarantee in U.S. law *requiring* the U.S. to provide it with vast conventional superiority.
Annie,
“if you attack us we will respond in kind”
Yeah sure, that is what the Hezbollah poster means. You are an expert on Hezbollah mentality. It is a clear threat to Israel that Hezbollah would use nuclear weapons in a war.
Saying for certain that something that has a non negligible chance of happening will not happen is attempting to predict the future. I am not saying Hezbollah would for certain would use a nuclear bomb against Israel. I am saying that there is a chance of that and to mitigate that chance I think a preemptive attack is worth it even though the attack in itself will also harm Israel. It is just that this harm is a reasonable price to pay to lessen the chance of a nuclear catastrophe.
So no, I am not trying to predict the future, you are. I acknowledge there are risks involved, you don’t. You are 100% sure there is no risk involved to Israelis in letting Iran get to a nuclear bomb.
Sin Nombre,
The Hezbollah and Iranian position is that they would reject any peace deal with Israel.
link to en.wikipedia.org
As for the West Bank, why is at all relevant? Do you think Iranian attitude would be different if the Six Day war never happened or if Israel would have returned the West Bank right after the war?
And as for a nuclear free middle east, why would we trust the Iranians to keep their side of the bargain? They are already signed to the NPT so what is a signature on another treaty worth?
>> “if you attack us we will respond in kind”
>> Yeah sure, that is what the Hezbollah poster means. You are an expert on Hezbollah mentality. It is a clear threat to Israel that Hezbollah would use nuclear weapons in a war.
Earlier today, eee predicted the future, and now he is also an expert on Hezbollah mentality! The guy is amazing!
If Hezbollah’s threat of retaliation actually hides an intent to use Iranian-supplied nuclear weapons against Israel, eee’s constant threats of retaliation can only mean that he will use Israeli- or American-supplied nuclear weapons against the entire Middle East!!! 8-o
What a buffoon.
Gee I dunno. How about we start with the fact they have never mnade a nuke and Israel has?
They signed the NPT and have stuck to in to the letter, which is what the latest IAEA Report states – ie. hence the verified non diversio of any nucelar material. Thus it cam be concluded that their signature on another treaty is legitimate.
It’s Israle that tears up agreements eee, not Iran.
Let’s see here…
-In the states we honor our martyrs on Memorial Day. Of course we call them fallen instead of martyrs.
-Hezbollah is not the NSDAP and Lebanon is not Germany. Newsflash: Hezbollah is not an invading army. It defends its country from invasion. Newsflash: Hezbollah hasn’t advocated any anti-Jewish measures in Lebanon. Maybe I should start killing art school dropouts one-by-one. There’s no reason to believe they’ll become another Hitler, but with the survival of the Jews at stake, can you really afford to take that chance?
Okay, this is a serious question now: Has Iran provided Hezbollah with the hardware necessary to fight a conventional war or even overfly Israel? Does H possess Iranian fighter jets? So how likely is Iran to hand out nukes in the event of producing any?
“…why would we trust…?”
And that, in a nutshell, is the essence of the Zionist pathology. Change that, and you may get everything you claim you want.
Andrew,
“Okay, this is a serious question now: Has Iran provided Hezbollah with the hardware necessary to fight a conventional war or even overfly Israel? Does H possess Iranian fighter jets? So how likely is Iran to hand out nukes in the event of producing any?”
What good would airplanes you cannot hide do for Hezbollah? Airplanes need an airport and are easy targets for Israel. All Hezbollah’s weapons are ones they can hide. The fact Iran has not given Hezbollah airplanes is irrelevant to the issue whether it will give them nuclear weapons.
Such ignorance.
Hezbollah is based on the culture of independence and refusal to be occupied and subjugated. The culture of dying free as opposed to living under slavery I’d not unique to Hezbollah.
here’s what hezbollah is about:
link to mleeta.com
or this might be more to your liking:
link to mleeta.com
Hezbollah is not Palestinian. link to en.wikipedia.org
no its unlike you were not stupid and know unlike you thre are more factors than being bad for Israel in the equation and they scream don’t do it. only people who do care about the consequences for their actions like Israelis would ever do something like that.
“most Israelis are not willing to take this chance”
Why stop at Hezbollah when conjuring up threats to Israel’s security? Anti-Zionist Neturei Karta is pretty chummy with Ahmadinejad. And how about the Jewish Taliban and its growing influence in Israel, including the military. Would they have a problem “delivering the nuclear bomb Iran will give them?” All they need to do is blow it up on Tel Aviv to eliminate those crazy secular Jews and the lunatic left who thinks women can sit wherever they want in a bus. Of course you believe they will never do that. But are most Israelis willing to take this chance?
Antidote,
If you cannot see the differences between Hezbollah and Neturei Karta, you are really quite out there. Neturei Karta have never raised a weapon against anybody in their life. They don’t have tens of thousands of missiles. They do not want Jews or anybody dead.
eee, how can you be sure that Hizbullah is not assembling some kind of bomb right inside Israel now? Nasrallah promised that the next war will be starting in TA and you know that he doesn’t lie. If you live anywhere near TA, you should move.
Walid,
Nasrallah is a huge liar. He has not done anything about the Sheba Farms since 2006, over 5 years. He promised to free the farms but he is not doing anything about it.
I do live very near Tel-Aviv but I’ll take my chances. I have an excellent bomb shelter like most Israelis. You, like most Lebanese do not have one. Oh well. The next showdown between Lebanon and Israel will surely come sooner or later. Why speculate or talk trash? We will see what the results are in due time.
And by the way, congratulations on your country’s vote in support of the Assad regime in the Arab League.
He promised to defeat Israel and he did it twice. Israel promised to destroy Hezbollah twice and failed. I’d say that mames Israel far greater liars.
I’m, sure you;d be safe regardless. It’s not lie you have to worry abotu the IDF bombing civilians infrstructure like they did in Dahiya.
“I have an excellent bomb shelter like most Israelis.”
“like most Israelis”? Well, one can only commend the Israeli regime for it’s completely secret construction campaign to provide “most Israelis” with “excellent bomb shelters”.
Good point Mooser,
Obviously the Israelis in Haifa don’t count.
EEE
“If you cannot see the differences between Hezbollah and Neturei Karta, you are really quite out there. Neturei Karta have never raised a weapon against anybody in their life. They don’t have tens of thousands of missiles. They do not want Jews or anybody dead.”
Of course I can see the difference. I absolutely prefer the approach of NK to the approach of Hezbollah and the IDF (or Irgun etc). You don’t. though, because you are “really quite out there”. You are pro Irgun/IDF and against Hezbollah. You are also against NK. You wrote in April 2010:
“What is wrong with Neturei Karta?
I will leave that as homework for you.”
“Hint:”
link to failedmessiah.typepad.com
So you object to NK talking to and embracing Ahmadinejad. Does this still hold? And why do you object to this approach of peacemaking? I think recent suggestions by Ron Paul and others also point in that direction: let’s talk to Iran, rather than exchange threats, be it more sanctions or a military strike. Don’t bother repeat the charge that Israelis can’t trust Iran. There’s no reason why Hez or Iran should trust Israelis either.
You also wrote (March 2011):
“Non Zionist Jews like Phil and Neturei Karta are a small insignificant fringe. In a few more years, the majority of Jews in the world will live in Israel. The non-Zionist Jews like Phil and Tony Judt have very few offspring that identify as Jews relative to the religious Jews in the US. In short, the trend is clear and unstoppable. In a generation or two, Zionism will be part of Judaism for all practical purposes.”
So Jewish pacifists will be outbred by self-defending and self-determining Zionists, and that’s a good thing? What if the belligerent Zios unleash a nuclear holocaust and Israel perishes in the process? Who will get the Darwin Awards? You’ll be incinerated with all your offspring in the ME, including Iranian Jews, and the doves abroad will live on in their more modest numbers. Better than nothing, I’d say. Unless you Zios take the privilege to turn off the lights for all of us. Is that what you’re advocating?
You also wrote (May 2010):
“Blankfort,
You are one sick individual painting all the Haredim with one thick brush. You know that there are Haredim that serve in the IDF? [link]
I have had business interactions with quite a few and they do not think other Israelis are not human. Of course there rotten apples in their society like in any society. There are radicals like neturei karta but most are pragmatists and are de-facto zionists.”
So the IDF (including the haredi ‘bad apples’) are pragmatists and NK peacemakers are ‘radicals’? You”ll forgive me for siding with Phil, Judt, Blankfort and NK. I don’t want a bloodbath anywhere either.
And you wrote (April 2010):
“Mooser is not a liberal Jew in my opinion. More likely he is Neturei Karta.”
Now I know why I always liked Mooser ;)
Please clarify what’s wrong with talking to Ahmadinejad.
Antidote,
I am against NK like Phil is against neo-cons. I am against Hezbollah like Americans were against Germans in WWII. You have done a fine job of conflating the two.
In the future, almost all Jews will be Zionists because the vast majority of world Jews will be in Israel. That is a simple fact. In itself it is not good or bad, it just is. I think it is a pity that the Jewish community in the US is assimilating. You may think that is good.
What is wrong with talking to Ahmadinejad? Nothing, the UN representative and Europeans do it all the time. What is wrong with what NK is doing is that they are talking to an enemy in order to facilitate his ability to win over the community that they are part of. they are not talking in order to create a constructive solution.
“like most Israelis”? Well, one can only commend the Israeli regime for it’s completely secret construction campaign to provide “most Israelis” with “excellent bomb shelters”.
Secret construction? What are you babbling about? It is part of the construction code in Israel. And yes, most Israelis have access to excellent bomb shelters including of course the people in Haifa.
link to en.wikipedia.org
I am against NK like Phil is against neo-cons.
really? where is your blog? if you are against NK like Phil is against neo-cons how is it we’ve been on the same blog for years and i never realized that? iow, coulda fooled me.
In the future, almost all Jews will be Zionists because the vast majority of world Jews will be in Israel. That is a simple fact.
you sound like the christiefundies. i think you’re wrong. i think the diaspora is growing an has more potential to grow. and i hope they do. i hope my son marries his girlfriend and i become the grandmother of jewish children. why not? i like her…and she likes…passover. her dad owns a divebar in rural wash state and that’s cool w/me. heck..right up my alley. she’s coming for thanksgiving and she’s sweet, innocent and doesn’t take any shit from my son who can be a real sarcastic AH when he’s in the mood. she handles him which i like.
you don’t know shit. you can’t speak for all the jews in the world. they ain’t all moving to israel and why the f should they? life is good here and it would be a massive bummer if they all just took off. seriously, you are delusional.
ciao
The simple fact is that Iarael is living on borrowed time and won’t be around much longer. Once things turn sour, allrhise Israelis applying for foreign passports will use them and not come back.
That’s why Bobbi is so afraid of an Iranian nuke. He’s not afraid Iran will use it, he’s afraid an Oranian nuke will dissuade Jews from making Aliyah – he told as much to Jeffrey Goldberg.
It won’t take much for these turn of events to happen and Israel will be over.
“And yes, most Israelis have access to excellent bomb shelters including of course the people in Haifa.”
… unless, of course, the Israelis are Palestinians in which event, they are entitled to ZERO shelters as was seen in the 2006 war when the million Israeli Jews of the Galilee fled to shelters since they some or to points south but thePalestinian-Israelis had to stay in their villages because they had neither shelters or places to go to.
It was later discovered and written about by Jonathan Cook, that the Israeli army had set up artillery batteries in close proximity to Palestinian villages and the barrage of Hizbullah katyushas hitting these villages and accidently killing some Palestinians happened because Hizbullah had been aiming at military instalations using the Palestinian villages and its people as human shields. When Hizbullah expressed regrets at having inadvertently killed Palestinians, the Palestinian villagers said they had forgiven Hizullah but not the Israel army that had used them as human shields.
I’d trust Jonathan Cook more than I’d trust Israelis. He wrote:
“… As a first-hand observer of the fighting from Israel’s side of the border last year (2006), I noted on several occasions that Israel had built many of its permanent military installations, including weapons factories and army camps, and set up temporary artillery positions next to – and in some cases inside – civilian communities in the north of Israel.
Many of those communities are Arab: Arab citizens constitute about half of the Galilee’s population. Locating military bases next to these communities was a particularly reckless act by the army as Arab towns and villages lack the public shelters and air raid warning systems available in Jewish communities. Eighteen of the 43 Israeli civilians killed were Arab – a proportion that surprised many Israeli Jews, who assumed that Hezbollah would not want to target Arab communities.
In many cases it is still not possible to specify where Hezbollah rockets landed because Israel’s military censor prevents any discussion that might identify the location of a military site. During the war Israel used this to advantageous effect: for example, it was widely reported that a Hezbollah rocket fell close to a hospital but reporters failed to mention that a large army camp was next to it. An actual strike against the camp could have been described in the very same terms.
It seems likely that Hezbollah, which had flown pilotless spy drones over Israel earlier in the year, similar to Israel’s own aerial spying missions, knew where many of these military bases were. The question is, was Hezbollah trying to hit them or – as most observers claimed, following Israel’s lead – was it actually more interested in killing civilians?
… Nonetheless, new evidence suggests strongly that, whether or not Hezbollah had the right to use its rockets, it may often have been trying to hit military targets, even if it rarely succeeded. The Arab Association for Human Rights, based in Nazareth, has been compiling a report on the Hezbollah rocket strikes against Arab communities in the north since last summer. It is not sure whether it will ever be able to publish its findings because of the military censorship laws.
But the information currently available makes for interesting reading. The Association has looked at northern Arab communities hit by Hezbollah rockets, often repeatedly, and found that in every case there was at least one military base or artillery battery placed next to, or in a few cases inside, the community. In some communities there were several such sites.”
link to antiwar.com
Annie,
The facts are simple:
link to jewishvirtuallibrary.org
The Jewish population in the US is shrinking. But let’s assume it is stagnant. Since the population of Jews in Israel is growing at 1.9% annually, and there are about 5.9 million Jews in Israel, in 25 years there will be 9.45 million Jews in Israel and only about 5 million Jews in the US (under the conservative no change assumption).
Walid,
Cook is an idiot. The reason most Arabs do not have shelters is that they don’t abide by the construction code or their houses were built before the code was in force. As for Hezbollah aiming at military “bases” that is one of the best jokes ever. The whole Lebanese Israeli front is about 50 miles over which during war many army units are dispersed. Obviously, they are “near” ALL civilian settlements both Jewish and Arab. That is just the lay of the land. Hezbollah don’t really aim their rockets. They point them in the general direction of Israel and shoot.
Hezbollah don’t really aim their rockets. They point them in the general direction of Israel and shoot.
unlike israel which deliberately targets civilian infrastructure.
The Jewish population in the US is shrinking.
according to whom? are you counting people who self identify as jewish or those the rabbis acknowledge? or the synagogues acknowledge or are a member of organized jewry?
The reason most Arabs do not have shelters is that they don’t abide by the construction code or their houses were built before the code was in force.
What, no new towns or neighbourhoods in over 60 years, no cheap ILL/JNF lands, no subsidies or incentives, no favourable kibbutz-style rezoning, no public housing or public shelters? Wonder why. I bet Jonathan Cook knows. I bet you do too.
“… their houses were built before the code was in force”
That would put it before the creation of Israel, wouldn’t it?
What a pitty there wil be no Idrael in 25 years.
But eee, you said all Israelis had bomb shelters. Are you flip flopping?
And it just so happens that Israel won’t issue them building permits to build or rebuild. Just back luck I guess.
yes they will becasue:
a) the is no nuclear bomb
b) Iran wouldn’t gove ti to them anyway.
c) deliverying it a nuke would be entirely futile and self defetaing. It’s Isral that has the Massada complex eee, not Lebanon.
“Hezbollah will have no problem delivering the nuclear bomb Iran will give them.”
So you would have us believe that Iran is willing to be literally wiped off the map by a US and Israeli nuclear response. This extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence, which of course, you don’t have.
But to make it simply requires extraordinary paranoia, ignorance and racist belief in the expendability of Arab lives.
that’s because most Israelis are just as out of touch with reality as you are. no arab or muslim country or group will ever nuke Israel. Israel nuking them is a real possibility though
I agree with much of this post, except two points.
The first has to do with nuclear proliferation. Iran might not willingly give nuclear material to extremist groups, but parts of the military establishment might do so anyway, if there is a genuine crisis or somekind of non-nuclear conflict between Iran and the West in which Iran is severely bruised. Extremist groups within the Islamic world is not like within the Western world.
Remember that many of the Islamic terrorists were often upper-middle class and from the higher stratosphere of society.
There is incessant integration of extremists in the establishment and those outside of it. Pakistan is a case in point.
Also; just because Pakistan and North Korea has not done this yet(although I deem it much more likely in the case of Pakistan) does not mean it isn’t a significant risk. Remember that nuclear experts from Pakistan have helped both Korea and Iran to develop their nukes. This is, in a way, nuclear proliferation as well.
The second point is Obama’s way to proceed. It’s probably true that the recent drumbeating is mainly a way to pressure the (Western) world into going down on Iran much harder. But I do believe that Israel means it when they want to strike Iran. It’s not inevitable(nothing ever is) but the risk of a Israeli strike(which would instantly be joined by the U.S, which the Lobby would make sure of, whatever Obama wants or not) is real.
And if Obama went out and stated that under no consideration would Israel get it’s strike, then the credible threat of a military option would vanish, and so too would an important incentive for Iran to scale down or at the very least slow down it’s nuclear program(or be forced to by the fear of an Israeli-led strike).
You know what might also happen? An asteroid 100 miles wide could hit the Earth.
And since you’re on a roll with your hypotheticals, why not bring in laser beams and Death Rays into the argument?
Right. They’re ‘special’ in that Islamic type of way. Aha
So?
Yeah, and so is Israel with its bleeding heart liberals like Avigdor Lieberman, Ehud Barak, Shimon Peres, Netanyahu and that fascist who only a few days ago said that Israel should destroy an entire neighborhood in Gaza in retaliation for every rocket.
Yeah,who are the real extremists?Can the world vote?
Wouldn’t a world democracy overwhelmingly oppose these extremists?No wonder the real extremists hate the UN.
Or at least the UN of the past,as bribery seems to be working on the current crop of world leader pretends.
Israel broke the Palestinians in 1948. It broke Nasser in 1967 . It broke Iraq in 2003 . But it is playing a geopolitical game of thwack the mole that it has no hope of winning on a population base of 5.5 million and a belief that Moshiach cares.
“will Obama capitulate to that as well?” Let us know when is the last time Obama did NOT capitulate to Israel.
Will Obama capitulate to that as well? Is the Pope a Catholic? If the attack is done before the 2012 election (and it bids fair to be done, if at all, early in January when the USA’s no-fly is ended in Iraq), and it Obama still lusts after AIPAC’s largesse (blood-money), then the USA’s attack-dog-for-hire will capitulate and quite possibly participate. The Republicans [I wish I were as sure of anything as they are sure of everything] will be shouting for it and making it a litmus test for presidential cojones.
Avner Cohen doesn’t mention in his Haaretz article the most important fact. That the Osirak reactor was a small light water research reactor, built by the French and under IAEA supervision. Producing enough plutonium for a nuclear bomb with that reactor would have been impossible and Israelis knew that. Osirak was a Israeli message to the Arab world – “We do not allow you to become industrially and technologically developed”. Operation Opera (Osirak bombing) was a as heroic military operation as the bombing of Lebanese dairy plant (Liban Lait) was. The defence around the reactor was primitive and almost not existing. Operation Opera was a great military victory only in the Israeli Jewish folklore and propaganda.
Claiming that Iran would give nuclear materials to terrorist organizations is rather absurd. What guaranties does the world have that Israeli nuclear materials do not get in the hands of extreme Jewish terrorist organizations. What is the guaranty that if a peace is achieved through a two state solution the settlers “brown shirts” do not leave a nuclear “price tag” greeting. None – especially when those religious/nationalistic extremists have members on every level of the “system”.
I worry about the privatization of the military with all these blackwater types getting their hands on nukes far more than I worry about the alleged terrorists,as the those criminals are fanatics for Beezlebub.
“The defence around the reactor was primitive and almost not existing. Operation Opera was a great military victory only in the Israeli Jewish folklore and propaganda.”
And in the American mainstream, including the so-called liberals, even when they write to oppose an Israeli attack–David Remnick, for instance, in the recent New Yorker piece discussed at Mondoweiss recently. (The piece is
link
Especially seeing as:
1. it was a French build civlian research reactor
2. was not being used to produce nukes
3. the attack actually convinced Saddam to pursue nukes so it wouldn’t happen again
As usual, Jerry Slater makes a central point:
An attack won’t succeed. So why are the pro-Israel forces, including their allies here on Mondoweiss, even suggesting one?
Because what Slater is saying is not accurate. There is a good chance that an attack will delay the Iranian program by several years.
It’s laughable to hear you claiming to have any regard for accuracy when you don’t even have evidence there is a nuclear weapons program in Iran.
well yeah only because it doesn’t exist.
“An attack won’t succeed. So why are the pro-Israel forces, including their allies here on Mondoweiss, even suggesting one?”
Israel is a cowardly nation that would never attack Iran unless it had the assurance that the US would join in the attack. And the US has neither the will nor the capacity to attack Iran at this time and has opted instead to instigate and finance civil wars within countries it wants to see changed such as in Libya, Syria, Iran and to a certain extent, Lebanon.
Israel is full of hot air about hitting Iran and is just playing to have other countries beg it to not do it. Probably doing it to mooch some more freebies out of the Americans; it worked before.
true Israel has never fought a war where the overall advantage was in their favor. they’d probably lose any actual fair fight.
“evidence there is a nuclear weapons program in Iran.”
I have come to think that such is the ignorance about and prejudice towards that part of the world that if they do anything except herd camels or knit rugs, it will be looked on as suspicious. That the Iranians have high-tech industrial manufactures can only be related to producing an Islamic doomsday weapon, and any other explanation must be spurious. I mean do Iranians do anything except sit around and plot how to win the clash of civilisations?
Mooser: This is terrific!!
(Can’t you teach Richard Witty how to be (intentionally) funny once in awhile?)
Can’t you teach Richard Witty how to be (intentionally) funny once in awhile?
I thought he did OK with the “anti-Ziocaine”, today. Got a chuckle out of me :-)
Pause for thought.
This business has nothing to do with nuclear weapons. The great game is about U.S./Israeli hegemony.
Regime change/control of Iran is motivated by Iran’s strategic position – in control of the Straits of Hormuz.
Iran can pinch off a large part of the World’s traffic of energy products:
“Located between Oman and Iran, the Strait of Hormuz connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. Hormuz is the world’s most important oil chokepoint due to its daily oil flow of 15.5 million barrels in 2009, down from a peak of 17 million bbl/d in 2008. Flows through the Strait in 2009 are roughly 33 percent of all seaborne traded oil (40 percent in 2008), or 17 percent of oil traded worldwide. ”
link to 38.96.246.204
Iran manufactures its own Sunburn Missile. As of a couple of years ago when I last researched it, it could penetrate the U.S. Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System and take down a carrier. It can be launched from the heavily wooded Iranian slopes that front the Straits of Hormuz at its narrowest point – 12 miles wide at that point if memory serves me.
Politically, if you follow my drift, the Straits of Hormuz are pivotal in the coming face-off between the Left (China/Russia) and the Right (Israel/U.S.).
Same old shit – left versus right, cooperative versus competitive – the never-ending story of our civilisation.
If this is a little abstruse to some, I can elaborate.
Please do not dismiss this as just another “its all about Oil profits” argument. Its not. Profit is not the motive. Price don’t matter when you need the stuff to fight a War or, as the current crop of Neo-con, right wing thinkers would have you believe, prevent one.
There’s also the shift from petro dollars to petro Euros and the US hammer that comes down on a regime when it tries to do it. Saddam and Gadafi went for it and now they are both history; Chavez too but he somehow bounced back but you still have Iran that doesn’t want to sell its oil in US dollars.