About Just a bluff? Fears grow of Israeli attack on Iran
|May 13th, 2012||#2|
| || |
I see a lot of rhetoric and saber rattling but Israel without an enemy is a country without an income so at this point I still believe there is no immediate threat.
We are more often treacherous through weakness than through calculation. ~Francois De La Rochefoucauld
|May 13th, 2012||#3|
| || |
There is no immediate threat for Iran from U.S or Israel. Lets face some facts: Israel can not carry out an air raid of Iran's nuclear facilities by itself. It would need another Arab country and/or U.S help (either strategic bombers or in-flight fueling). Israel alone don't have the logistics. If it do it, it is bound to fail.
U.S may say "all options open", but Obama and his administration knows the chances of us carrying out such an attack is minimal. We could do it, but we won't unless we see no other option.
Only the fanatical Israeli's (Netanyu's boys), actually speak of striking the Iranian nuclear facilities. He is doing is causing problems for U.S in the talks with Iran. The former Israeli President himself said such a strike should not occur unless it all options are exhausted.
In short, Israel don't have the military capabilities and as long as the Obama administration is in control, a strike on Iran is very far off. I can't say what will happen if the republicans win control of the office again though.
|May 14th, 2012||#4|
| || |
In the event of an Israeli attack, Washington would surely be accused of colluding with Jerusalem, severely damaging the United States' position in the region while provoking a ferocious Iranian response in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, and southern Lebanon and the last thing the US needs is another war that may blow up in its face.
Another oft-overlooked aspect is the absence of public pressure in Israel for military intervention or of a supposed Iranian threat featuring as a priority issue for Israelis. The pressure to act is top-down, not bottom-up. And to the extent to which there is trepidation among the public, that is a function of fear at the blowback from Israeli military action, rather than fear of Iranian-initiated conflagration.
Finally, Israel's leadership is aware that its nonmembership in various nuclear accords and its assumed weapons-of-mass-destruction capacity will be dragged more harshly into the spotlight following an Israeli strike, not something that is likely to lead to precipitous Israeli disarmament, but unwanted, unpleasant, and unpredictable, nonetheless.
|May 14th, 2012||#5|
| || |
This is old news (february 5). Things have changed in the past few months.
Sanctions are working. Iran is back at the negotiating table. The threat of an Israeli attack is diminishing.
I do think that Israel wanted an attack on the nuclear sites of Iran but wouldn't (couldn't) do it alone. If Iran would have only one nuclear site, Israel would have already attacked.
But the threat to Iran is not over yet. Arab states are almost massively upgrading their attack capabilities so they are ready in case Iran is very close to building a bomb.
If an attack comes, my opinion is it is still at least a year away.