Posted on 05/30/2009 7:52:04 AM PDT by Strategy
Israeli government ministers and Knesset members who will help make the decision about whether to attack Iran's nuclear facilities do not have to wait any longer for a preparatory briefing by the Israel Air Force.
They can read about all the possible scenarios for a strike on Iran, and about the potential risks and chances of success, in a study by Abdullah Toukan and Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
(Excerpt) Read more at haaretz.com ...
Here’s how Israel would destroy....
“Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom!”
It is clear to everyone that no one will dare attack Iran once it possesses nuclear weapons.
On the face of it, that seems to not necessarily be so. America, which has a nuclear arsenal, was attacked.
Bump for later read!
Written in April 2006 by Mark Steyn
Facing Down Iran-Our lives depend on it.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008231
I believe it goes like: Boom. Boom. POW! Boom. Boom. POW!
empty promises about the ability of the Arrow missile defense system to contend effectively with the Shahab-3Who wrote this article, Barry Obama?
Oh... Israel’s version of the NYSlimes.
Obama will react the same way all democrats do.... with a sternly worded letter.
Interesting analysis, but boy do I disagree with the following:
*******
This is the place to emphasize Israel’s mistake in hyping the Iranian threat. The regime in Tehran is certainly a bitter and inflexible rival, but from there it’s a long way to presenting it as a truly existential threat to Israel. Iran’s involvement in terror in our region is troubling, but a distinction must be made between a willingness to bankroll terrorists, and an intention to launch nuclear missiles against Israel. Even if Iran gets nuclear weapons, Israel’s power of deterrence will suffice to dissuade any Iranian ruler from even contemplating launching nuclear weapons against it.
It is time to stop waving around the scarecrow of an existential threat and refrain from making belligerent statements, which sometimes create a dangerous dynamic of escalation. And if the statements are superfluous and harmful - then this is doubly true for a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
*****
Given the theology of the whackjobs in Iran (Putin was stunned after his visit with Ahmadinenutjob) the thinking that MAD or some variant thereof is a real deterrent is to me at least a real mistake. These guys believe they can survive at least partially an all out nuke exchange with Israel and in the process wipe Israel out to the extent it ceases as a nation. It’s an easier assumption to make when you’re sitting in Washington.
Underestimating the hatred and radicalism of an opponent in a situation such as this can have disasterous consequences.
Excerpt from http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008231
Back in his student days at the U.S. embassy, young Mr. Ahmadinejad seized American sovereign territory, and the Americans did nothing. And I would wager that’s still how he looks at the world. And, like Rafsanjani, he would regard, say, Muslim deaths in an obliterated Jerusalem as worthy collateral damage in promoting the greater good of a Jew-free Middle East.
The Palestinians and their “right of return” have never been more than a weapon of convenience with which to chastise the West. To assume Tehran would never nuke Israel because a shift in wind direction would contaminate Ramallah is to be as ignorant of history as most Palestinians are: from Yasser Arafat’s uncle, the pro-Nazi Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the British Mandate, to the insurgents in Iraq today, Islamists have never been shy about slaughtering Muslims in pursuit of their strategic goals.
Israeli deterrence in the face of an Iranian nuclear threat has a good chance of succeeding precisely because the Iranians have no incentive to deal a mortal blow to Israel.”
*******
Seems to me the incentive is to bring about the appearance of the 12th Imam. How much the Mullahs go along with the whack job on this is open to debate. The authors are attributing to Iran’s current leadership more rationality than I believe is warranted. Again, these are very risky assumptions if you’re Israel, not so much if you’re a remotely located third party.
Agreed, Muslims slaughter one another when there’s no infidels handy or they’ll gladly use fellow Muslims as fodder (including women and children) if it gives them any type of advantage against the infidel.
These authors are making the same mistake that many have made in the past dealing with tyrants. That somehow they’re just like the rest of us and if we continue to appease and give them what they want they can ultimately be reasoned with. This seems to be the path this administration is taking and is asking Netanyahu and Israel to take.
You need to give this more thought. An EMP attack is only good against someone vulnerable to one...a society that is dependent on electronics and micro-circuitry for its necessary infrastructure, like the US or Europe...I dont think Iran, a society where people still live in mud and straw brick homes and use oil lamps, fails into that catagory.
The point I poorly made is that there are many ways to attack, not all of them obvious enough to be actionable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.