By Ted Belman
Barry Rubin, Why Israel Shouldn’t Attack Iranian Nuclear Installations–Unless It Has to Do So, thinks not at least until an attack by them seems immenent. I told him that I tend to agree with him except that I believe the purpose of the attack should be to bringdown the regime. He agreed and said he intended to write a follow up.
The Oxford Research Group, which promotes non-violent solutions to conflict, said military action should be ruled out as a response to Iran’s possible nuclear weapons ambitions.
Daniel Pipes arguesHow to Save the Obama Presidency: Bomb Iran.
Sarah Palin agrees.
U.S. fnds Iran greatest danger to Iraq
-
Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of the shrinking U.S. expedition in Iraq, says that Iran-backed militias in Iran now pose a greater threat to the military and political security of Iraq than does al-Qaeda.
Hi Joy, missed you!
Yea dense! I’m almost speechless. Do you believe he could be a hologram? Every time I see him or hear him I am reminded of how coaches direct the QB’s in football by remote radio to speakers in QB’s helmet. I get the distinct feeling that he is controlled. If so then by whom? He doesn’t seem to have a handle or understanding about anything. When speaking unscripted he is as slow and incomprehensible as Stepin Fetchit
My first second and third reaction after reading the conclusions of this group was that it is imperative that Israel nuke Tehran figuring that it’s probably too late to get their nuke program, which in any even it probably in the middle of Tehran by now. When the Iranian people realize their government can’t defend them they might just put the vermin out of their misery. We call it regime change.
Hello, Yamit.
I just heard on the radio that Obama has told associates he doesn’t think Iran is acting in good faith and he’s now open to using military force to stop the nuclear program. If true, my reaction is that he’s frighteningly dense.
Who’s behind the curtain at the Oxford Research Group?
One of the group of antisemitic Global Elders
Director of the Nazi-obsessed HRW, London
First Israeli female Brigadier General and advocate of the suicidal Geneva Accords
Pseudo-intellectual, self-loathing Jewish ambassador to Israel
Maniacal Hamas supporter
Sleazebag British diplomat who never met an Islamist he didn’t get hot and crazy for
Iranian nuclear scientist returns home to a hero’s welcome Read More
What the hell is going on?
What non-violent solutions are there to be had in dealing with those who want to kill you? Idiots! Typical tripe from intellectuals sitting in their ivory towers.
Also I’m surprised at Barry Rubin’s view on attacking Iran. Israel is supposed to wait until Iran has nuclear weapons and is about to launch them and only then Israel should attack Iran? This is crazy.
The Biggest threat to Israel is still Egypt.
Israel should use Iran to destroy Egypt our most dangerous enemy. Israel shares a political common ground with Iran: both need to do away with Egypt and Saudi Arabia. As far as Israel is concerned, US military aid allowed Egypt to develop a relatively agile modern army, and Saudi Arabia has both a huge conventional arsenal (which it can loan to Egypt) and nuclear weapons (developed by Pakistan with Saudi money). For Iran, Egypt is a major contender for regional influence, and Saudi Arabia is the oppressor of the Shia population conveniently, settled in the Saudi oilfield region.
Israel should prefer Iranian Shiite dominance in the region to Egyptian Sunni dominance. Egypt will soon become even more radicalized than Iran, after the Muslim Brotherhood takes power. Iranians are disenchanted with the mullahs but Egyptians are all for the Muslim Brotherhood. So it’s not a choice between a peaceful secular Egypt and the Ahmadinejad state, but between two heavily armed Islamic fundamentalist states. In such an outlook, Iran is preferable, as it has not started any wars in its recent history—unlike Egypt, which has attacked Israel continually, and continues to do so through its Hamas-Muslim Brotherhood proxy.
Whatever we do will threaten us. If Israel attacks Iran’s nuclear facilities and suffers massive retaliation, it would only clear the way for Egyptian dominance. Egypt will continue building a conventional army, to be inherited by the politically victorious Muslim Brotherhood, and would likely develop nuclear weapons, feeling that the US Camp David guarantees protect it from Israeli reprisal.
The Biggest threat to Israel is still Egypt.
Israel should use Iran to destroy Egypt our most dangerous enemy. Israel shares a political common ground with Iran: both need to do away with Egypt and Saudi Arabia. As far as Israel is concerned, US military aid allowed Egypt to develop a relatively agile modern army, and Saudi Arabia has both a huge conventional arsenal (which it can loan to Egypt) and nuclear weapons (developed by Pakistan with Saudi money). For Iran, Egypt is a major contender for regional influence, and Saudi Arabia is the oppressor of the Shia population conveniently, settled in the Saudi oilfield region.
Israel should prefer Iranian Shiite dominance in the region to Egyptian Sunni dominance. Egypt will soon become even more radicalized than Iran, after the Muslim Brotherhood takes power. Iranians are disenchanted with the mullahs but Egyptians are all for the Muslim Brotherhood. So it’s not a choice between a peaceful secular Egypt and the Ahmadinejad state, but between two heavily armed Islamic fundamentalist states. In such an outlook, Iran is preferable, as it has not started any wars in its recent history—unlike Egypt, which has attacked Israel continually, and continues to do so through its Hamas-Muslim Brotherhood proxy.
Whatever we do will threaten us. If Israel attacks Iran’s nuclear facilities and suffers massive retaliation, it would only clear the way for Egyptian dominance. Egypt will continue building a conventional army, to be inherited by the politically victorious Muslim Brotherhood, and would likely develop nuclear weapons, feeling that the US Camp David guarantees protect it from Israeli reprisal.
Without the Sinai and the West Bank, Israel is a beach approximately sixty miles long by fourteen miles wide. The Negev is uninhabitable, and the Galilee is densely settled by hostile Israeli Arabs. A country sixty by fourteen miles cannot survive. We can effectively increase its size by attacking preemptively far outside of our borders. Short of that, Israel needs strategic cooperation with Iran.
Professor Barry Rubin know all of this doesn’t he?
ROTFL 🙂
America’s Muslim allies would love to see Iran bombed. Saudi Arabians fear nuclear Iran not because it would attack the Saudis—Iran has never attacked anyone in modern history—but because its growing stature would stir up the Saudi Shia population, which dwells in the oil field region. Saudi Sunni Wahhabites stole oil from Saudi Arabia’s Shia citizens, and might be forced to give back the hoard if Iran goes nuclear. Is that good or bad news for international oil interests? Probably good, because Saudi oil production is state-owned and foreign corporations there receive moderate service contracts but not windfall concessions. If, under Iranian influence, Saudi Shia pockets become semi-independent, they would grant concessions to international oil corporations to make foreign governments accede to their autonomy. This is similar to Kurdistan. Instability in the Middle East generally, and particularly in Saudi Arabia, would send oil prices through the roof, contributing handsomely to corporate profits. Therefore US oil corporations prefer a nuclear Iran, even if it means war.
An Israeli-American operation against nuclear Iran would close it to Western oil corporations!!! This is what drives American policy with all American administrations and especially the current one.
Barry Rubin the wise professor understands the ME? Doesn’t he?