1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

What about the response?

Reader comment on item: Israeli Jets vs. Iranian Nukes

Submitted by Pat (United States), Jun 13, 2007 at 11:31

We can expect that the Iranian government wouldn't just take such an attack, successful or not, on the chin. There would be a counterattack. Gaza is rife with Iranian influences, as is Lebanon. They could attack Israel from either location with little trouble. Iraq may be under American control but the Iranians have had little difficulty in moving about. There is no reason to believe that Iraq would be any kind of buffer.

This is a narrow study and it doesn't answer two or three questions.

1. Why should it be up to Israel to do the world's dirty work for it? The very countries that are threatened by the Iranian nukes are doing little to stop them, even using non-military means. Unless the Israelis believe it is in their own interest to attack the nuclear facilities they might as well keep out. They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. Israeli soldiers undertake a suicide mission and if, by some miracle, they are successful and return home alive then they or their leaders will probably end up in the ICC.

2. What would the Iranian people do? Iran in 2007 is not Iraq in 1981. Israel in 2007 is not Israel in 1981. Would any Israeli jet make it out of Iranian airspace? One Iranian American suggests that "it's payback time" and that Israel actually owes Iran for its past support and so it is Israel's duty to destroy this program. I ask: what have the Iranian people done for Israel while their leaders called it the Little Satan and called for it to be wiped off the map? They cheered their leaders on and expressed pride in their illicit nuclear program. If the Iranians want to be free then let them fight for it themselves.

3. What would the rest of the world do to protect the Israelis? Maybe they can fly along the borders on their way to Iran, but what's to stop Syria, Turkey or Jordan from suddenly becoming territorial about their airspace and shooting down the Israeli planes after the job is done? They score a double. They get rid of (or weaken) the Iranian nuclear program and they also attack the Jewish state, which would appeal to their own populace. Israel assumes all the risk and the world reaps the reward. It can't be argued that this would make Israel any safer. Its neighboring countries remain hostiie, peace treaty or no.

Whether destroying Iran's nukes is feasible or not, Israel should not be the world's sacrificial lamb.

Submitting....

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".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to What about the response? by Pat

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
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 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

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)