Pragmatism happens.
MAD works quite well with rational actors. Israel is a rational actor by any definition. Iran? That remains to be seen. While I wouldn’t classify Ahmedenijad as the most “rational” human being on earth, he doesn’t have command of Iran’s (potential) nuclear forces. Ayatollah Ali Khameni has that dubious honor. So then the question becomes, how rational of an actor is Khameni?
If the Russians are serious, and let’s say they sign an agreement with Iran to the effect of a defense treaty, that would very likely preclude Israel from any pre-emptive attack, in which case they’ll continue with what they’re doing now, strategic assassinations of key nuclear program personnel.
Then what would the Iranians do? Or more to the point, what would Ayatollah Khameni do? Would he go full out with an attempted nuclear attack, or would he realize he’s now sitting pretty, and largely immune to any negative consequences of his nations nuclear program, which at that point could ostensibly continue (well, provided they don’t continue losing their nuclear scientists). It’s no secret Khameni has in the past put the smackdown on Ahmedenijad, and there are reports of a good deal of dissatisfaction with Ahmedenijad on Khameni’s part.
So, this is the key question: Is Khameni a rational enough actor to accept the basic operating principle of MAD? The answer to that question is the whole enchilada. Would he authorize a nuclear attack on Israel, knowing full-well that Israel easily has a considerable retaliatory capability?
Of course, the only downside I’ve always seen with MAD is the potential for a nuke as a terrorist weapon. If the terrorist are smart, they won’t claim responsibility, which leaves the aggrieved party’s options limited.
The Israelis would do well to say that if any nuclear attack is visited upon them, they would automatically hold Iran fully responsible, regardless of who does (or doesn’t) take responsibility for such an attack, and will respond accordingly (i.e., nuclear retaliation).
A pre-emptive attack against Iran should’ve been done several years ago....around 2007, I’d say. For reasons best known to themselves, the Israelis didn’t do so. To be honest, I don’t think they will. I think they’ll continue on their current covert operations, which they likely perceive as being preferable to an all-out shooting war.
OK.
Here’s answer to question, though. US blows up Russia and Russia blows up US.
No, he is not.
He is an irrational religious nut ball that thinks that his god (allah) has given him direct dispensation to destroy any and all opposition to his nut ball, moon-god worshiping, pedophilia-practicing idiotic religion.
He is of the firm belief that MAD does not include him and his goat screwing followers.
The best thing we can do for that bunch of nut jobs is to turn the whole damned place into a parking lot for the King of Saud's Mercedes collection.
Which is, of course, intended as a diversion whilst we work at getting rid of his "royal" ass.
>>>>The Israelis would do well to say that if any nuclear attack is visited upon them, they would automatically hold Iran fully responsible, regardless of who does (or doesn’t) take responsibility for such an attack, and will respond accordingly (i.e., nuclear retaliation).
What if the hypothetical terrorists who attack Israel with Nukes, were to get their weapons from Pakistan? Would Israel be justified in its attack on Pakistan?
America and Israel are worried about Islamic extremists in Iran acquiring Nukes, yet, they show no concern over the fact that Islamic extremists in Pakistan have easy access to Nukes.
We know that there are large numbers of people in the Pakistani military and intelligence services, who were supporters of Osama Bin Laden, and are supporters of the Taliban. Why are we not worrying about THEM?