Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, January 20, 2010


James Anderson explains why Israel will ultimately strike Iran's nuclear capability.
Though still hopeful for a peaceful resolution, Israel has clearly stated its willingness to strike Iran's nuclear weapon program, if need be. Many analysts, however, question Israel's capacity to inflict meaningful damage against Iranian facilities. After all, having learned the lessons from Israel's strike on Osirik in Iraq in June 1981, Iran has widely dispersed and buried key elements of its nuclear program.

But what these analysts often overlook or underestimate is that Israel's long-range strike capabilities have also improved since 1981.

Israel has a track record of high-risk operations when its core security interests are threatened, as evident by its daring rescue of hostages at the Entebbe airport in Uganda in 1976, as well as aerial raids against the nuclear reactor at Osirik in 1981, the PLO headquarters in Tunis in 1985, and more recently, a Syrian nuclear facility in 2007. It is difficult to imagine Israel would abstain from striking militarily if the only alternative outcome were a nuclear-armed Iran.

For Israel, the question is not whether it can completely destroy Iran's program - not even a major U.S. strike could be certain of success in these terms - but whether such a strike could buy enough time for some mix of internal and external pressures to change Iran's behavior. The continuing street protests since the fraudulent Iranian elections last June provide some hope that internal opposition forces might eventually gain enough political traction to alter the regime's decision to pursue nuclear weapons.
Read the whole thing.

I'll bet that if there's an Israeli strike there won't be a response from Iran, just like there was no response from Syria. Ahmadinejad cannot send anyone to war because he needs his troops to control his own streets. There might be some response from Hezbullah, but if there is, look for Lebanon to have its infrastructure destroyed quite quickly and then Hezbullah will stop. Hamas is still too weak from last winter to respond heavily.



At 9:28 PM, Blogger nomatter said...

Great article. However without the help of the U.S and possibly Turkey, Israel can not go it alone.

The real problem is the world is not in any hurry to strike Iran. Worse, nor is the world eager to help Israel so we can strike! So can we expect help? Where will we refuel? How can we make it back and forth without refueling?

We must be aware Osirik is not Iran. There lies the rub.

I just found the following on YNET.

I couldn't say this better myself

How sad to be so hailed by the courageous efforts in Haiti and then back to business as usual on the world stage.

At 1:30 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

I think the world is not in a hurry because of fear of the oil flow disruption.
Maybe the way the problem is looked at is wrong, why not go for a change of the leadership?
Why not eliminate them?

At 2:07 AM, Blogger Reid of America said...

Carl says "I'll bet that if there's an Israeli strike there won't be a response from Iran"

If Israel attacks Iran it won't be with fighter jets. It will be with cruise missles and specially modified Heron UAV's. It will be a remote control operation whose goal will not be the elimination of the nuclear program but to change the dynamics of the conflict. Israel will hope that their attack will cause Iran to attack Gulf oil targets which will drag the US and Gulf Arabs into the conflict. Iran's probable response will be to launch as many missles as they can in unison at the Dimona reactor hoping to overwhelm missle defenses and strike a severe blow.


Post a Comment

<< Home