Posted on 01/25/2006 6:56:43 AM PST by Dark Skies
Before the founding of the modern State of Israel, the anti-Semitic view of the historical role of the Jew was that of half-willing victim. Jews were supposed to wait patiently while the Poles, Tartars, and Cossacks threw the bones to see who got to burn down the village this time. Many of us thought this subjection ended in 1948 and would never again disgrace humanity.
Discussions surrounding the Iranian nuclear threat suggest this judgment may have been premature. Talks concerning Iranian nuclear programs between Iran on one hand and Britain, France, and Germany on the other exhibit the nature of a ritual shadow play, one that consistently overlooks what should be the most salient fact: that Israel itself possesses nuclear weapons.
You’d think this would lend some sense of urgency to efforts to defuse the crisis, but you’d be wrong. The Jews are once again expected to wait while the dice are being tossed, this time until Tel Aviv and Haifa vanish in blinding flashes of fire. Israel has a nuclear arsenal estimated at two hundred bombs. These have never been tested, but with the state of nuclear technology, that’s not a necessity. As Ted Taylor, the late senior U.S. bomb designer, once put it,
“No nuclear weapon ever designed has failed to go off.”
These bombs are evidently compact enough to be deployed on any of the fighter-bombers that comprise Israel’s Air Defense Force. A possibility also exists that Israel possesses long-range cruise missiles – the Israelis were pioneers in the field of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s). No nation has been more discreet in its possession of nuclear weapons than Israel, which has never acknowledged having any such weapons at all. Nor has it ever explicitly threatened any of its neighbors with the nuclear stick. Iran, on the other hand, has done little else in recent months. The behavior of the country’s rulers, both political and religious, has been such that it would cause alarm even without the nuclear capability. By now Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s new president, has become a nearly iconic figure. Each succeeding item that comes to our attention about this man makes it difficult to believe there can be anything worse to come. But there always is. Consider his membership in Pasdoran, Iran’s version of Hitler Youth, whose uniform he still occasionally wears. Consider his commitment to Mahdaviat, which Daniel Pipes translates as,
“belief in and efforts to prepare for the Mahdi.”
The Mahdi is the Twelfth Imam, supposed to return at the End of Days in the Shi’ite version of Revelations. The more fanatical “Twelvers” believe that they have a duty to create worldwide chaos to hasten the day of return.
Back in the mid-80s, it was common to come across distraught American Leftists convinced that Ronald Reagan had placed fundamentalist Christians in the Defense Department for the purpose of bringing about the Rapture. It would be nice to see something matching that level of concern today. Ahmadinejad’s commitment to Mahdaviat is easily gauged. While mayor of Tehran, he had a broad avenue built to welcome the Mahdi. As president, he began a railroad to the town of Jamarkan, where the Mahdi is alleged to be biding his time in a well awaiting the great day. He spent seventeen million for an elegant mosque in the same area. Pipes tells us Ahmadinejad also had his list of proposed cabinet members dropped into the well for the Mahdi’s approval. The story of Allah’s intervention at the UN is worth contemplating. According to Ahmadinejad,
“...I was placed inside this aura. I felt it myself. I felt the atmosphere suddenly change, and for those 27 or 28 minutes, the leaders of the world did not blink…. And they were rapt. It seemed as if a hand was holding them there and had opened their eyes to receive the message from the Islamic republic.”
This is the man who repeatedly denied that the Holocaust ever occurred. Who has refused to curtail developments that can only be utilized to obtain nuclear weapons. Who has stated that Israel must be “wiped off the map.” (And not only Ahmadinejad – ex-president Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, a supposed “moderate,” used exactly the same words a few months previously.) The criteria for a preventive nuclear war have never been codified, simply because such an alternative is too ghastly to contemplate. But the possible need for such an action is in little doubt. Few would argue against the necessity of a preventive strike against a nuclear-armed Hitler. In 1948, Bertrand Russell, godfather of the peaceniks, publicly suggested such a strike against Stalin’s USSR (he went to great pains in later years to deny ever saying any such thing, but the printed record doesn’t lie). For that reason, it’s difficult to say what factors are required to justify such an action. But the case of Iran – a demonstrable record of bloodthirstiness and callousness, an expansionist messianic ideology, a foreign policy based in large part on anti-Semitism, rule by a hallucinatory fanatic, explicit threats of a nuclear first strike – pushes any conceivable envelope. Taken alone, each of these factors would be a matter of concern. Together, they make it extremely difficult to deny that Israel is being forced up against the wall. The Europeans appear proud of the fact that they’ve muddled along for two years, as if diplomacy was simply a matter of delaying the inevitable. Now, with a nearly audible sigh of relief, they have handed the matter over to the UN. The UN of the “Zionism is racism” decree. The UN that welcomed an armed Yasser Arafat. The UN that abandoned its peacekeeping posts in the Sinai in 1967 at Egyptian demand – without notifying Israel. The UN whose head a few weeks ago sat beneath a huge wall map featuring a boldly labeled ‘Palestine’ without any sign of discomfort. These are not actions designed to defuse a crisis.
An acute observer might well think that everyone involved was trying to ease the way for a strike to be carried out – by the U.S. or Israel or both. It really wouldn’t matter so long as the EU and the UN were not involved. (The French nuclear threat only highlights this point – it’s best read as a statement intended to direct Iranian intentions elsewhere.) Israel, after all, does have a history of the coup de main, the all-or-nothing strike such as occurred in 1956, 1967, and 1981. Look at the situation from Israel’s point of view to grasp how far it may be forced to go. This is the state founded in the shadow of the Holocaust, as a lifeboat for oldest surviving nation on Earth. The only people the world ever consciously tried to destroy.
To the Israelis, a hostile Middle Eastern state gaining nuclear weapons renders the level of risk effectively infinite. They will be facing not defeat, not humiliation, but effective annihilation. Under these circumstances, any level of response is justified. In the past week, two prominent Israelis, Benjamin Netanyahu and chief of staff Lieutenant General Dan Halutz, have both publicly stated that “the threat to Israel is existential.” On January 21st Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz went even further: the Iranian people face “havoc and destruction” if their government fails to stand down. They should be taken as meaning what they say.
Those words may be the only warning anyone ever gets. There was a point during the Yom Kippur War of October 1973 when it appeared that the Egyptians had broken though Israeli lines in the Sinai at the same time the Syrians were about to drive across the Golan. Although never verified, it’s been reported on some authority that Moshe Dayan placed the Israeli nuclear strike force on full alert, the planes at the ends of the runways with their engines hot, their weapons armed, ready to head for their targets.
The “go” phrase was, “The Temple has fallen for the third time.” It didn’t happen then. And I think it can taken as a given that the Temple will not fall this time either. Apart from that, everything else is up in the air. Except for the jets – and they’re always ready to go. Among many other things, J.R. Dunn was the editor of the International Military Encyclopedia for twelve years.
I can see Israel delivering such a back-channel maessage.
An Iranian nuke fired against Isreal is counter-productive.
To begin with, any destruction of Isreal is bound to result in the destruction of the "Palestinian Authority" that all Muslim countries have championed for 60 years. It would kill far more Muslims than it would Jews. It would demonstrate, once and for all, that the Muslim solidarity behind support for the Palestinians was always rhetoric.
The blast, and the fallout, would pollute or destroy Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Turkey virtually forever. Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and parts of Iran itself would also be contaminated, if not destroyed. Great way to maintain good relations with your Islamic brothers.
Teh resulting devestation and fallout would shut down a signifigant portion of the world's oil production, wrecking every economy on the planet, but hurting the Muslims the most. Iran cannot continue to prop up it's Fundamentalist Potemkin village with oil revenues. It will be ripe for conquest or internal revolution without them.
No, Iran is not seeking nukes to wipe Isreal off the map, even if that is the stated goal. The real goal is to create a new center of Islamic power. The choice used to be between Saddam and the Ayatollahs. The list just got shorter. What the mullah-cracy intends to do with it's new-found influence and power is harder to discern.
With the Iranians boxed in between United States forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Russians to the north, Chinese to the East and India to the south(all non-Islamic, nuclear powers with much greater conventional military strength than the Iranians), the threat of nulear annhilation is the only weapon that might actually guarentee Iranian security while they create their new, Islamic Reich.
Doubtful W will really tour Pakinstan in March as announced.
"I can see Israel delivering such a back-channel maessage."
Yep.
The Dems would cry and crow: "Be should have had a plan" (for unauthorized airspace incursions). Remember John Swiftboat Kerry in 2004--every word out of his mouth was "Bush had no plan." The Dems love plans. They just don't like action.
Sorry, the "splainin" is obvious. I would start by saying that Iran has been at war with the US since 1979 (remember the hostages?). They have engaged in various acts of war against the US since then. Besides that, who does the US have to explain things to? The Russians? The Chinese? The French? Even the French have threatened Iran with nuclear retaliation.
Your second point, I think the US should participate or be the lead in this operation.
It's nice to debate these points and ask questions of each other, but events are proceeding rapidly and I think all these questions will be moot in about 60 days.
Back in 2004 I convinced myself that the West (to include Russia) was going to attack Iran in mid-November 2004, having waited til the US presidential election was over. Of course, that didn't happen.
I applaud the recent French bellicosity. Now we just need to sit back and let the Israelis do it, or the West needs to get serious.
"The Dems would cry and crow: "Be should have had a plan" "
Let 'em cry. Doesn't guarantee political victory. There is a limit to how much the Democrats will be able to complain about allowing the Israelis to take out the Iranian nukes.
Speculation he was talking about use of Turkey's US base for airstrikes against Iran. Could it be possible that he was asking Turkey to permit Israel to use it?
The referral to the UN and the Security Council is a necessary charade. No sane person thinks that will have any real effect on Iran.
I am confident there will be a strike if no one puts a bullet in Adminijad's (whatever) head in the next two or three months. The question is US alone, Israel alone, or a joint strike?
Final question; are there others that might join in the strike?
The Moussed (sp) have these things marked out and the IDF has them marked. They know EXACTLY what to hit and when, and I'm with them 100%.
Every time I see Jews being slaughtered during WWII by the Nazis I cry, and I scream, "why didn't you FIGHT! Fight to the death!". Israel has learned it's lesson....."Never Again". That eases my sorrow, and it dries my tears. They will take care of the business that the stinking UN won't, and the US can't.
Israelis, look back in your history when Iran threatens, look back and see the railroad cars, the "showers" and the ovens. You have your own nation, and you have defended it for almost 50 years....50 years of freedom. I don't doubt that you will defend it again, brilliantly, but don't let the UN push you into another rail car. The sign over the UN should read "Arbeit macken Frie". That's not where you want to go, you chose freedom and sovereignty.
Why do you think Israel is going to use jets?
Why is it that so many on this thread think Israel would still load nukes onto jets?
Do you think that if the US were to use nukes, that we'd load them on a jet?
Think about it.
Nuclear bunker busters with 1 megaton nuclear weapons.
Not to mention that our troops in the region come under the same grave threat.
How about loaning the Israelis some F-22 Raptor fighters (Or use US pilots with Israeli markings on the F-22's)
I agree, but it might not be if it wasn't for Jimmah Carter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.