69 million page views

If Israel is not for Israel, then who?

Reader comment on item: A Quiet Clash at the Swedish Foreign Ministry

Submitted by Michael S (United States), Apr 4, 2015 at 13:18

Hello, Daniel. You said,

  1. If an outside power attacked the Iranian nuclear sites, this would counterproductively cause Tehran to get really angry and decide to build The Bomb.

    My response: The notion that striking the installations would inspire the Iranians to proceed is precisely backward. Also, recall that both the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear programs collapsed after being struck by Israeli jets.

Indeed, the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear programs did both collapse after the Israeli strikes. I suspect that the Iranian program would as well. Yes, they are still left with the technical know-how to re-start the program; but I doubt that the Iranian people would be willing to foot the bill. After an Israeli (or other, but probably Israeli) strike, the main concern of the Ayatollah would be saving face after a tremendous blow to Iranian pride.

In the case of Iraq, the Israeli strike against the Osirik reactor in 1982 happened during the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam Hussein's immediate concern at the time was not retalliation against Israel, but defeating the Iranians. After defeating them, he sought to save lost face from Osirik by invading Kuwait. That badly backfired for him, and he never fully recovered.

In the case of Syria, The Israeli strike in 2007 came after Hizbullah had been effectively neutralized the year before in Lebanon by the IDF. The US fully supported Israel at the time, and was at the height of its military power. The 2011 "Arab Spring" demonstrations, and the resulting debilitating civil war in Syria have left that country unable to restart its nuclear program.

The main difference between Iran and the above two countries, is that the Iranians have had so much lead time to work on their nuclear program, thanks almost entirely to the counterproductive pressure from George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama. In practical terms, this merely means that the Israelis must strike a few more targets in order to be effective. They do not need to wipe out Iran's program: They merely need to knock out some major links in the chain. The very fact that they will be able to attack Iran with impunity, will accomplish 90% of what they need to accomplish. Israel needs to strike when:

  1. the rest of the world is preoccupied with other pressing matters. Right now is actually such a time, with the Russians and Americans bogged down in the Ukraine (and in financial trouble), the EU faced with internal attacks from Greece and the UK, and China fully engaged in Xi's "anti-corruption" purge of his rivals.
  2. striking Iran would not convincingly implicate Israel as the aggressor. Right now is probably NOT the best time to strike on these grounds. This summer, after the Iranians have proved that they are not interested in holding up their end of any sort of agreement, would be a better time.
  3. Israel can be assured of acquiescence by her Arab neighbors. Fire away! That obstacle was cleared away long ago. In fact, if the Iranians continue to resist Saudi Arabia in Yemen, a full-blown Saudi-Iranian war would make the perfect backdrop for an Israeli attack (as it did in 1982 at Osirik).

Once Iran is de-fanged of its nukes, I expect Turkey to take up the anti-Jewish standard. Israel can handle them, provided they first bloody the Iranians. If they do not do that beforehand, though, and soon, the Turko-Iranian alliance will eventually form anyway, and be a formiddable and nuclear threat to Israel.

PM Netanyahu has been talking strongly lately; but unless he backs this up with effective action, Israel will be in an extremely dangerous situation. I know God loves and protects Israel; but it is not good to tempt Him, nor to expect him to help when the Jews won't help themselves. To paraphrase Hillel, "If they don't help themselves, who will?"


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submitting....

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (32) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
If Israel is not for Israel, then who? [639 words]Michael SApr 4, 2015 13:18222643
Israel strikes back at Sweden's Failure [14 words]PezDispenserDec 8, 2014 16:36219685
2Swedes torturing children [166 words]Michael SDec 26, 2014 08:08219685
3Progressive Lutheran Anti-Semites [63 words]DaveNov 25, 2014 18:21219470
1How different is it here? [37 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
JeffNov 19, 2014 12:58219388
Thank you [12 words]jeffNov 21, 2014 09:34219388
4Polish people in Cieszyn do not agree with Sweden [43 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
CzeslawNov 19, 2014 06:09219381
5Sweden and Islam. [95 words]Tom DundeeNov 18, 2014 15:45219374
2Folke Bernadotte [24 words]TimNov 15, 2014 16:59219323
Fumes of Fantasy [71 words]NickNov 15, 2014 09:08219319
7why does Sweden have a policy position toward Israel at all? [159 words]mythNov 15, 2014 07:47219318
5Sweden should look at what is going on inside the country [30 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Henry LawNov 15, 2014 06:40219317
1Oh, you really tickle me these days Dr. Pipes!! [30 words]kmanNov 14, 2014 23:48219315
3FEAR & GREED [29 words]Uncle VladdiNov 14, 2014 22:32219314
8Sweden knows the truth, they just can't openly admit it [153 words]BriannaNov 14, 2014 22:29219313
1What's the problem with "settlements"? [174 words]Julius O'MalleyDec 6, 2014 22:32219313
2Link to Swedish Domestic Politics? [76 words]AlexNov 14, 2014 16:47219311
2Let's Not Be Naive [27 words]Gary SackNov 14, 2014 16:34219310
5Reality is a touchstone which. . . [103 words]Doug MayfieldNov 14, 2014 15:14219309
1deliberate blindness [56 words]Mohammed Waza Khiddif Id'ullahNov 18, 2014 01:10219309
4Sweden Does Israel A Favor [86 words]DaveNov 14, 2014 14:56219308
1Agreed except...... [284 words]SoloviewNov 14, 2014 10:50219306
2Who is naive? [68 words]George KeselmanNov 14, 2014 10:18219303
11Lies and brainwashing take their toll [107 words]Michael Hanni MorcosNov 14, 2014 09:49219302
3The Root of the Disagreement [76 words]Brad BrzezinskiNov 14, 2014 09:47219301
7Swedish comments: Naive or Deceitful? [83 words]G MarcusNov 14, 2014 09:44219300
Or Vice Versa [66 words]The BaronNov 25, 2014 01:44219300
The reason for WWII [218 words]Michael SJan 2, 2015 18:54219300
3Jewish state [108 words]Jean GranvilleNov 14, 2014 09:16219299
The leftist mind (and brain) [185 words]Allen F MackenzieNov 14, 2014 09:14219298
A Map? [26 words]Wayne SchmittNov 14, 2014 08:16219297
Accepting reality [73 words]VijayNov 14, 2014 08:07219296

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to If Israel is not for Israel, then who? by Michael S

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2018 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes