I missed the initial uproar yesterday as the headlines blared that Israel has plans drawn up to nuke the Iranian nuclear research/development sites (and Israel has subsequently denied that they have any such plans). Frankly, this isn't the story that folks are making it out to be.
For starters, should this be this a surprise to anyone? Not to me it isn't. Indeed, Texas Rainmaker points out that the same paper made similar statements in December 2005 that Israel was preparing for strikes against Iran's nuclear capabilities.
What exactly do war planners of all countries do in their off time (when they're not actually fighting wars)? They work out scenarios that are foreseeable and game them to maximize their nation's capabilities and minimize the losses that might result. In Israel's case, that includes the potential of an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel, which is an existential threat that few truly understand since it wouldn't take more than a handful of nuclear weapons to destroy Israel's major population centers and kill millions of Israelis.
Given that fact, what do you think the Israelis would do to prevent such an occurrence? Sit back and take it or launch a preemptive strike of their own? It would be irresponsible to the point of incompetence for the Israelis not to have some form of plans to deal with the existential threat posed by Iran. That includes various types of air raids on the nuclear sites, up to and including nuclear weapons in support of those strikes or as the weapon needed to strike at the hardened sites.
The Israelis have repeatedly shown themselves willing to preempt threats that were imminent. Witness the lightning attacks at the outset of the Six Day War or the raid on the Osirak reactor in Iraq that set back Saddam's nuclear weapons programs considerably. The Osirak reactor strike is a model studied around the world on how to go after nuclear weapons facilities, but also got Iran, North Korea and others in the region to reconsider how and where they built their nuclear facilities. Iran has turned to building them in reinforced bunkers and deep underground so as to reduce the likelihood of a successful air raid.
Iran has surrounded its nuclear facilities with air defense systems and isn't doing so because it wants to protect a civilian nuclear program, but because Iran's endgame is to rain hell on Israel. Iran has already said that Israel will regret any attack- and I read that to mean a resumption of Hizbullah's war in Lebanon against Israel potentially supplemented with additional weaponry (potential WMD included) smuggled in via Syria combined with an escalation of attacks from Gaza.
Ahmadinejad has been explicitly clear as to Iran's intentions: he wants Israel annihilated. He wants the West destroyed and subjugated to Iran's Islamic visions. Yet, the supposed leak of a nuclear strike against Iran's own nuclear facilities is the factor ratcheting up the tensions in the region?
Israel is playing a calculated game of showing that it is not above acting crazier than the Iranian mullahs in hopes that Iran might back down. The problem with this strategy is that Iran's visions for the region aren't based solely in politics, but in a religious ideological view that is firmly enmeshed in Iran's political structure. Blue Crab Boulevard concurs. This may simply be designed to make Ahmadinejad and the mad mullahs show their hand. It may simply force an acceleration of Iran's nuclear gambit, but that runs into the technological challenges of assembling the needed nuclear materials for weapons. Israelis believe that Iran is two years from a nuclear weapon while others give them 2-5 years before having nuclear weapons capabilities.
Some wonder whether we should support Israel if they use nuclear weapons against Iran. I wonder if they consider the possibility of supporting Israel after it has been immolated by Iranian nuclear weapons because Israel and the rest of the world refused to take action to force Iran to eliminate its nuclear weapons programs. Macranger takes that view to task. Don Surber thinks that Israel is doing the job that the UN wont do. Canaries in the mines and all that. He's right. Israel is doing the job that the West wont do because it can't or wont.
UPDATE:
Others blogging this so-called breaking news: AJ Strata, who thinks that Israel is doing the right thing; Pajamas Media wonders about the source of the news reports; Rick Moran lays into the obliviousness of Cenk Uygur's Huffpo piece referenced above; Wizbang has a great roundup of news; Outside the Beltway; Stop the ACLU; FFDB (who has lots of satellite imagery and other background); Bill's Bites; and Decision 08.
Joe Gandelman wonders about the breathless headlines associated with this story. Indeed, he doesn't think it much of a story yet.
Reliapundit has some good observations.
No comments:
Post a Comment