Posted on 09/03/2012 12:22:45 PM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, the most honest and clearheaded person in foreign policy, is saying that Israel should not wait to attack Iran because Barack Obama will never come to Israel’s aid. In an interview published in Maariv, Bolton stated:
"There is no way at this stage to prevent Iran from going nuclear without use of force. It is very unfortunate in my opinion, but I see no possibility that Obama will use military force, and therefore it falls upon Israel. I think that even though the Administration says that containment is not its policy, it will become its policy the day after Iran possesses nuclear weapons".
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“Better to wait until after the election. If Romney wins, the US will assist Israel. If Obama wins, they can attack the day after the election.”
Your logic makes eminent sense—and the Iranians know this too. Thus, if Israel wishes strategic surprise, attacking before the election may make more sense. If it were a slam dunk that Romney will win, then the case for waiting becomes more compelling (any U.S. assistance in such a strike presumably would outweigh the advantages of surprise from an October attack). The issue therefore is whether the election’s outcome will become so open-and-shut before the end of October that it precludes the need for surprise attack etc.
What element of surprise? I assure you that Iran has a newspaper subscription to Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post.
“I assure you that Iran has a newspaper subscription to Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post.”
I don’t pretend to be a great expert on the history of Israeli military strategy. My impression is that media notwithstanding they previously have managed to achieve strategic surprise in preemptive attacks against their enemies. I myself have no reason to believe they have lost that capability.
Admittedly, attacking Iranian nuclear facilities is a far more complicated proposition than the attack on Osirak or al-Kibar. Thus, an attack of the scale required arguably is much harder to disguise/hide than those other attacks. For example, the U.S. achieved some element of surprise in its attack on Iraq in the first Gulf War even though the build-up for that attack went on for months.
Just think. If 0bama wins the election and Israel attacks Iran’s nukes, what will the markets look like. It will probably close in a couple of hours after falling 10%. The would be Bibi’s way of saying FUBO.
As Israel is indeed alone, they must give up on their long cherished reservations about war.
Assuming that the war will turn into a nuclear war, what hesitation should Israel feel about using chemical or even biological weapons?
Importantly, biological weapons need not be directed at humans, but can be used against crops, animals, and even stored food to great effect. And done so in such a way as to be deniable.
But throughout Iran, people could become sick to any number of contagions. Sick to the point of disability or death. And faster than their doctors and hospitals can respond.
This is end game stuff, and Israel truly is on its own.
They tend to revel in their guilt, real or imagined. But there is no guilt left when your country has been annihilated and you are all dead. So instead, Israel should only feel guilty once Iran is no longer a threat.
Take 50 years to feel guilty. Take 100 years, if you like to revel in your delicious guilt. But do not screw around any longer, because your enemies will celebrate your annihilation, and they will feel no guilt.
And if Israel must do this, then Israel should share the wealth, by smiting every one of their enemies at once.
Leave Mecca destroyed with a filthy nuclear weapon, so that it cannot be used for 10,000 years. Wipe out Damascus, Baghdad, Cairo, Beirut, Amman, Tripoli, etc., along with Tehran and Iran’s other cities.
Let Muslims feel the price for all their hate. For their endless, barbaric aggression. Exterminate much of the ummah.
If you can find a single one that has not called for the destruction of Israel, spare them. But none ever has.
And I also assure you that the Iranians have read this in June.
***
***
"The best way to get that message across is to make it very clear that if Israel is faced between an Iran nuclear bomb, or having to launch a preemptive nuclear strike to prevent that eventuality, it will opt for the latter......The world must be told loud and clear by Israel that the only way to avoid the first nuclear strike by a nation since Nagasaki is to take whatever actions are required to ensure Iran doesn’t get the bomb, and to prevent an Iranian conventional weapons build up to the point where a preemptive nuclear strike becomes the only option for dealing with the rogue ayatollah regime."
"Israel Needs A Preemptive Nuclear Strike Against Iran"
http://www.israelnewsagency.com/iranisraelnuclearariel3890624.html
The most likely scenario if Israel attacks Iran before Election Day:
Obama gives the minimal possible assistance possible to the Israelis and then rides that scanty assistance to four more years in the White House, with the loving assistance of the Mainstream Liberal Media.
Regardless, I beleive that Israel will go to any lengths to prevent it's total extintion - including, if it has to - the use of Israel's neutron b's.
Remember, and this is an absolute irrefutable point and that is that either Israel totally and completely prevents an Iranian 1st nuclear strike on Tel Aviv / Israel or Israel - "faces being Gone!" It all boils down to this now! I say Israel will not risk being Gone!
nope....reght after the election, Obama is still in power...have to wait until January if Romney wins.
Oh I forgot, Obama still going to be in the WH until 1/20/13.
Upchuck, you’re very astute. What is your take on my posts #27 and #29.
Luke ch 17 Jesus replied, “Just as the gathering of vultures shows there is a carcass nearby, so these signs indicate that the end is near.”£
Exactly.
Thank you for the kind words.
IMHO, the Jews have always been God's chosen people. I doubt the Israelis want to use a nuclear weapon, although they might be forced to use a low-yield nuclear bunker buster against Iran.
I've always thought a non-nuclear EMP weapon might be best. It could be launched from the Arabian sea. And it could be shaped to cause minimal damage to neighboring countries.
But even an EMP weapon might not be effective against Iran's deeply buried nuclear facilities. However the EMP would disrupt the surrounding infrastructure so that the buried facilities would, in effect, be rendered useless.
Iran could rebuild from an EMP attack. It would take them several years I suspect.
Iran could not rebuild from a nuclear attack.
Excellent post, thank you.
No power, no computers. No computers, no nukes. No nothing. Israel could set Iran back a hundred years.
This from earlier today:
U.S. Tells Iran: We Won’t Join Israeli Attack
Monday, September 03, 2012 7:16:25 AM · 24 of 46
MestaMachine to Eleutheria5
If Netanyahu ‘disappears’ and can’t be found for a day or so, then ‘reappears’ as if he had never been gone, start the countdown. What Israel does then will surprise the world.
************************************
Israel has a surprising ace in the hole. Take it to the bank.
Iran would have to rebuild their entire electrical infrastructure. Plus every every electrical gadget in the country would be worthless. I question whether Iran has the financial wherewithal to bear this burden.
Of course, the price of oil and probably gold would go nuts. Gas here in the US could easily hit $6 a gallon. But that would be temporary.
I’ve read interesting hypotheses about Israel launching an EMP attack against Iran. Without causing serious death/destruction from a traditional attack or - worse - a WMD (nuclear, chem, biologic) attack, EMP would theoretically render Iran’s military, industrial, nuclear facilities useless.
I’m far from an expert in this area. It does seem intriguing though and the type of bold and unique approach that the Israelis seem to be attracted to, especially in this situation in which Israel has been (as we all expected) thrown under the Obamabus and Iran has significant military capabilities (which could be used against Israel and us in retaliation).
Anyone in Freeper-land with any expertise in this area? Is such an approach feasible?
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.