Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Zack Nguyen

There are two ways for Iran to "save face":

1) Demand that Israel give up its nuclear weapons and engage the U.N. in a drawn out campaign to pressure Israel into doing so while they continue to enrich uranium.

2) Drag all of its choice components into the open and dare Israel to do something about it. This will take away any justification for using tactical nuclear weapons to destroy their program. It will also be an act of war which will allow Iran (and Syria) to retaliate in kind without being labeled as "aggressors". The question on everyone's mind will be, "does Iran still have a nuclear weapon somewhere?" and what will happen to all that oil if a nuclear exchange occurs?

The way I see it, Israel may have room for a conventional strike, with a hair-trigger on the nuclear option if it's not successful and Iran moves to retaliate with a nuclear weapon. I don't believe Iran will pre-emptively strike with a nuclear weapon. Not in a million years. But if Israel pre-emptively tries to destroy their facilities... well, all I can say is, they'd better finish the job.


305 posted on 12/12/2005 12:55:08 PM PST by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Rutles4Ever
There are two ways for Iran to "save face":

1) Demand that Israel give up its nuclear weapons and engage the U.N. in a drawn out campaign to pressure Israel into doing so while they continue to enrich uranium.

2) Drag all of its choice components into the open and dare Israel to do something about it. This will take away any justification for using tactical nuclear weapons to destroy their program. It will also be an act of war which will allow Iran (and Syria) to retaliate in kind without being labeled as "aggressors". The question on everyone's mind will be, "does Iran still have a nuclear weapon somewhere?" and what will happen to all that oil if a nuclear exchange occurs?

The way I see it, Israel may have room for a conventional strike, with a hair-trigger on the nuclear option if it's not successful and Iran moves to retaliate with a nuclear weapon. I don't believe Iran will pre-emptively strike with a nuclear weapon. Not in a million years. But if Israel pre-emptively tries to destroy their facilities... well, all I can say is, they'd better finish the job.

You have it about right - I think Iran will bide for option #1 - While knowing there is no good "military" option for Israel in the mean time - A preemptive nuclear strike by Israel I just don't see happening - The ramifications for Israel would probably result in its own destruction.

This is a much uglier / complicated situation then many seem to rationalize. The fact that there is no real good "military" option greatly heightens the complexities and seriousness of any actions actually taken.

309 posted on 12/12/2005 3:38:10 PM PST by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson