What if Israel Strikes Iran?
….. the Obama administration’s increased pressure on Israel concerning the “two-state solution” and West Bank settlements demonstrates Israel’s growing distance from Washington. Although there is no profit now in complaining that Israel should have struck during the Bush years, the missed opportunity is palpable. For the remainder of Mr. Obama’s term, uncertainty about his administration’s support for Israel will continue to dog Israeli governments and complicate their calculations. Iran will see that as well, and play it for all it’s worth. This is yet another reason why Israel’s risks and dilemmas, difficult as they are, only increase with time.The mullahs would retaliate. But things would be much worse if they had the bomb.
by John Bolton, Wall Street Journal, June 11, 2009
Whatever the outcome of Iran’s presidential election tomorrow, negotiations will not soon — if ever — put an end to its nuclear threat. And given Iran’s determination to achieve deliverable nuclear weapons, speculation about a possible Israeli attack on its nuclear program will not only persist but grow.
So what would such an attack look like? Obviously, Israel would need to consider many factors — such as its timing and scope, Iran’s increasing air defenses, the dispersion and hardening of its nuclear facilities, the potential international political costs, and Iran’s “unpredictability.” While not as menacingly irrational as North Korea, Iran’s politico-military logic hardly compares to our NATO allies. Central to any Israeli decision is Iran’s possible response.
Israel’s alternative is that Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs reach fruition, leaving its very existence at the whim of its staunchest adversary. Israel has not previously accepted such risks. It destroyed Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 and a Syrian reactor being built by North Koreans in 2007. One major new element in Israel’s calculus is the Obama administration’s growing distance (especially in contrast to its predecessor).
Consider the most-often mentioned Iranian responses to a possible Israeli strike: (Continue Reading this Article)
I find this an absolutely masterly analysis of the situation
Bolton spells it out. Nobody wants a war with Iran but unfortunately knowing the nature of Jihad there is no alternative. He makes this very clear.
He spells out in detail the repercussions. I find this masterly.
He includes one vital point often misunderstood. The effect of an Israeli strike on Iran if delivered along with vital propaganda to win the youth against Jihad could pose big problems from those youth for the Mullahs. The Islamist supporting Left and Right distort this.
Bolton omits one aspect and it is a key aspect. He separates the Iranian issue out from the Jihad as a whole, especially the Jihad against Kosovo, and the Jihad against Bosnian Christian Serbs
Perhaps he omits this because Bush and the Republicans also were heavily implicated in linking up with and supporting the Jihad against the Christian Serbs because there was a socialist and communist aspect to the war against Milosevic.
He leaves out just one other thing.
That is the role of the American Jews and other Jews like Yamit82.
At another level the silence of Israpundit including Belman in the face of Yamit82 slanderous attacks on Serbs so assisting the Jihad in general.
They all served to isolate Serbia and so in effect to assist the Jihad. Along the same lines he omits the reality that American Jews today are supporting the Jihad against Judea, the land of the Jews, AIPAC deciding to campaign for a Jihad in the form of Palestinianism.
Comment by Felix Quigley — June 11, 2009 @ 4:34 pm
A very clear, direct essay eschewing the usual varnish of political, self-protecting nuance. However, there is one consideration left unspoken, namely that the Obama administration may choose to prevent Israel from attacking Iran by physical or technological means. The United States controls the sky and the electronics between Israel and Iran.
Comment by abrahamseneor — June 11, 2009 @ 5:51 pm
Comment by Bill Levinson — June 11, 2009 @ 5:54 pm
When somebody demonstrates (1) the means and (2) the intention of killing you, you are generally justified in killing him first (under the laws of most U.S. jurisdictions). This is known as “reasonable and necessary force.”
It’s not reasonable or necessary if he has the means to kill you (e.g. a hunter or a police officer with a firearm) but obviously has no intention to do so. The same applies if he threatens to kill you but lacks the means (although laws against terroristic threats might apply to his conduct). He must display both the means AND the intention.
The instant he says he is going to kill you–and Ahmadinejad has already stepped over this line–AND brandishes a deadly weapon or otherwise demonstrates to a “reasonable person” that he has the means to put his words into effect, you can kill him on the spot if that is what it takes to neutralize the imminent and deadly threat to your safety. Extension of this doctrine to international relations suggests that a first strike, with nuclear weapons if necessary, would be justified were Israel to be “reasonably sure” that Iran was about to acquire any weapon of mass destruction, noting that Ahmadinejad has already said he will use it.
Comment by Bill Levinson — June 11, 2009 @ 6:07 pm
In case anyone is interested, “a moderate Muslim is one who has run out of ammo”. That is a similar quote from another.
I, at this time, don’t know if it is feasable to attack Iran. The time is late and Obama controls the ability to strike. If at all possible, with the knowledge of success, it should be done soon after the Iranian elections. Circumstances ain’t gonna get better.
Comment by Ed D — June 12, 2009 @ 12:15 am
A moderate Muslim is a dead Muslim.
Comment by NormanF — June 12, 2009 @ 5:16 am
Another possibility that John Bolton does not address is a regime change.
What if Israel decides that cutting off the head of Iran is the best way forward? Removing the ayatollahs who keep Iran on the straight and narrow path of islam would change the entire complexion of the Middle East. Without their strangle hold on the country and the chaos that would fallow, who knows what would happen.
Iran’s nuclear program is funded at the expense of the people, if the ayatollahs were not there to insist on the money being spent that way, the people could actually elect a person that would improve the economy. He could promise to bring back some of the late Shay’s policies. In fact, it was these kind of promises that got the Ayatollahs in power in the first place. An elected person that followed through could set Iran back years, and this would be a very good thing for everyone.
Comment by SarahSue — June 13, 2009 @ 9:23 am
and what role is that Felix. what role did I have? What role did American Jews have? sounds a lot like Antisemitic innuendo to me? I think you had better explain yourself on this one.
Felix it’s only slanderous if it is malicious and untrue. Prove it was either or shut up. Since you are such a Che Guevara revolutionary why are you hiding out in Spain instead of leading the revolution on the ground where real bullets are fired. Arm Chair revolutionaries are a dime a dozen. By the way I can get you a good deal for all the Che Guevara T Shirts you want. Big discount for brother Trotskyites. Let me know if your interested.
Comment by yamit82 — June 13, 2009 @ 7:28 pm
SarahSue:What if Israel decides that cutting off the head of Iran is the best way forward? Removing the ayatollahs who keep Iran on the straight and narrow path of islam would change the entire complexion of the Middle East. Without their strangle hold on the country and the chaos that would fallow, who knows what would happen
……………………………………………………………………………
Response
Iran is ruled by THE SUPREME LEADER together wirh a council of clerics collectively referred to as the Mullahs.
Problem: With the best intelligence agencies available in the West, no one but no one has been able to identify the names of the Mullahs, their exact numbers and where or when they meet. Sue your idea is good but I am sorry to inform you, it is not practical. It would be very helpful if we knew our enemy.
Source -Stratfor intelligence service.
Comment by h peskin — June 14, 2009 @ 1:18 am
Levinson:The instant he says he is going to kill you–and Ahmadinejad has already stepped over this line–AND brandishes a deadly weapon or otherwise demonstrates to a “reasonable person” that he has the means to put his words into effect, you can kill him on the spot if that is what it takes to neutralize the imminent and deadly threat to your safety. Extension of this doctrine to international relations suggests that a first strike, with nuclear weapons if necessary, would be justified were Israel to be “reasonably sure” that Iran was about to acquire any weapon of mass destruction, noting that Ahmadinejad has already said he will use it.
______________________________________________________________________
RESPONSE
We all know that the president of Iran has no jurisdiction in the area of foreign affairs. He might make any outrageous threats he wishes and it means nothing, since he is powerless to implement his threats. The Mullahs have sole powers to make decisions relating to waging war or negotiating with outside powers.Iran has shown a history of acting pragmatically.They have not shown the reckless poor judgement in providing millions of dollars worth of arms and support to a group of Islamist fanatics that would ultimately turn on them and wreak havoc worldwide, as the Americans and Saudis did during the Afghan war against the Soviets.
Iran has not been reckless enough to attack and occupy the most xenophobic nation on earth as America has in
in Iraq.
Iran was practical enough to negotiate agreements with America in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and has restrained both Hamas and Hizbollah when it was deemed necessary.
Iran is a threat because of its growing strength and influence throughout the middle east. Its tenticles have spread to Syria,Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Kurdish Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states , and in parts of Africa-Sudan, Yemen, Somalia.
What has disturbed Israel is Iran’s support of Hamas and Hizbollah. The nuclear issue is not what it seems. Iran knows full well that a nuclear confrontation with Israel isn’t winnible.The Iranians are quite aware that Israel would massively retaliate with their own nuclear weopons snd everything that Iran has worked so hard to win would be lost. There is no evidence at all that Iran wishes to commit suicide.
Comment by h peskin — June 14, 2009 @ 2:50 am
Levinson: post 4
We all know that the president of Iran has no jurisdiction in the area of foreign affairs. He might make any outrageous threats he wishes and it means nothing, since he is powerless to implement his threats. The Mullahs have sole powers to make decisions relating to waging war or negotiating with outside powers.Iran has shown a history of acting pragmatically.They have not shown the reckless poor judgement in providing millions of dollars worth of arms and support to a group of Islamist fanatics that would ultimately turn on them and wreak havoc worldwide, as the Americans and Saudis did during the Afghan war against the Soviets.
Iran has not been reckless enough to attack and occupy the most xenophobic nation on earth as America has in
in Iraq.
Iran was practical enough to negotiate agreements with America in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and has restrained both Hamas and Hizbollah when it was deemed necessary.
Iran is a threat because of its growing strength and influence throughout the middle east. Its tenticles have spread to Syria,Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Kurdish Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states , and in parts of Africa-Sudan, Yemen, Somalia.
What has disturbed Israel is Iran’s support of Hamas and Hizbollah. The nuclear issue is not what it seems.This may be a transitory problem since there is finally a concerted effort to solve the Palestinian question. Iran knows full well that a nuclear confrontation with Israel isn’t winnible.The Iranians are quite aware that Israel would massively retaliate with their own nuclear weopons snd everything that Iran has worked so hard to win would be lost. There is no evidence at all that Iran wishes to commit suicide
Comment by h peskin — June 14, 2009 @ 2:58 am
We all know that the president of Iran has no jurisdiction in the area of foreign affairs. He might make any outrageous threats he wishes and it means nothing, since he is powerless to implement his threats. The Mullahs have sole powers to make decisions relating to waging war or negotiating with outside powers.Iran has shown a history of acting pragmatically.They have not shown the reckless poor judgement in providing millions of dollars worth of arms and support to a group of Islamist fanatics that would ultimately turn on them and wreak havoc worldwide, as the Americans and Saudis did during the Afghan war against the Soviets.
Iran has not been reckless enough to attack and occupy the most xenophobic nation on earth as America has in
in Iraq.
Iran was practical enough to negotiate agreements with America in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and has restrained both Hamas and Hizbollah when it was deemed necessary.
Iran is a threat because of its growing strength and influence throughout the middle east. Its tenticles have spread to Syria,Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Kurdish Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states , and in parts of Africa-Sudan, Yemen, Somalia.
What has disturbed Israel is Iran’s support of Hamas and Hizbollah. The nuclear issue is not what it seems. Iran knows full well that a nuclear confrontation with Israel isn’t winnible.The Iranians are quite aware that Israel would massively retaliate with their own nuclear weopons snd everything that Iran has worked so hard to win would be lost. There is no evidence at all that Iran wishes to commit suicide
Comment by h peskin — June 14, 2009 @ 3:04 am
We know! We know also where their kids go to school as well!!
source Yamit82
Comment by yamit82 — June 14, 2009 @ 6:37 am
Tens if not hundreds of posting have been posted here on Israpundit on this subject. You ignore virtually all of the opinion and facts and choose instead opinion not supported by any facts except your own opinion warped and colored by nothing more than who and what you are; we all know by now what that is: echhhhhhh!
recent examples: Your Bible the NYT is Bankrupt ever since they went radical left. It’s not even quoted by any serious researcher today. You are still living in the Past circa, 1964. Peace!!
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=13798
http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/israpundit/40672d3d8527c693cc9db93267334953
Comment by yamit82 — June 14, 2009 @ 6:56 am
Yamit:Re your posts 11-12
Is that the best that you can do?
I am not panicking yet, but based on your recent performance, I have the distinct feeling that you Yamit,
have LOST YOUR MOJO.
Comment by h peskin — June 14, 2009 @ 12:50 pm
Peskin Mojo shmoojo, at least I am not posting somebody else’s talking points. No matter what any of us say or produce to support what we think and say You, like the pygmy you are, never deviate from those talking points. We get more sense and intelligent responses from the local pigs and monkeys. That said, I must confess that our pigs and monkeys are more intelligent than you. I think it has to do with their larger brains. Stick to your mediocre poets who write even more mediocre poems. That seems to reflect pretty much who you are. What you are is outside of the parameters of civil discourse. If you really really want to hear what I think you are just say yes.
Comment by yamit82 — June 14, 2009 @ 1:15 pm
Yamit:
Mr. copy and paste artiste. You haven’t had an original idea in decades. You have spent zillions of hours reproducing and transmitting (to our dismay) your quotes from old and new testaments, tanach, rambam, and any and all holy books ever written. You are the living, breathing, walking personification of an exhibitionist-pure and simple. Give us all a huge break-AND SHUT OFF YOURT COMPUTER. You are wasting energy!!!!!!!.
Comment by h peskin — June 14, 2009 @ 2:40 pm
Peskin:
I see you are keeping track of my hours. Your life must really be boring Peskin. As an ex Bookkeeper I can understand. Not much excitement or action there, But it’s a safe job not much chance of physical harm or having to use a basic human characteristic known as imagination. Numbers are numbers, Debits and credits and looking at you all that shows are debits. But who ever considers bookkeepers as human anyway. Peskin stick to your fagot poetry it really does suite you. Peace brother!!! I would say make love not war but then I would be suggesting you know what? well each to his own preferences
Comment by yamit82 — June 14, 2009 @ 3:45 pm
As the United States called upon Israel to become their virtual protectorate during Operation Desert Storm, the European Union will offer Israel guarantees of peace and security. Europe, not the overextended and highly inflated United States, will take out Iran.
Europe to Take Out Iran For Jerusalem
Comment by David BenAriel — June 15, 2009 @ 3:37 am