Iran first?
I received this in response to my previous message entitled "Iran's proxies":
______________________________
Dear Jack:
If Iran is pulling the strings, what is the point of attacking the puppets? They will also be regarded as martyrs, and new puppets will replace them. Why not launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran, before it has a nuclear arsenal, and send them an e-mail that that's just a taste of what they are going to receive from Jews if they don't cut out all the shenanigans and killings?
Israel has every right to defend itself. No one criticized the US when we attacked Germany or North Korea. If Israel is a world power, then it needs to demonstrate that. It seems like Israel is always on the defensive, despite overt aggression that no strong country would ever tolerate from its enemies.
May the Force beat swords into plowshares only after the war is won.
All best. Frank
_______________________________
Dear Frank:
The answer (to why we should attack the Iran proxies first) is that it is both necessary and easier. Israel absolutely should not allow itself to be hit by rockets and have its people killed, injured and terrorized. We must re-establish our military credibility. So we should definitely take care of Hamas in Gaza. The IDF is certainly powerful enough to do that. But Iran is another matter, it is a nation of 68 million people, ten times the size of Israel, and although I am sure we can discount the difference when it comes to the efficacy of armed forces, nevertheless Iran has an army of ca. 1 million, and is a huge country. For Israel to attack Iran is inviting a terrible war. The only advantage is that Iran is quite far away while Hamas is right here. So if we hit Iran before it has nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver warheads, then we may be able to prevent a preemptive attack. But, their nuclear facilities are dispersed all over the country. But, lets say that with stealth fighters (which we don't yet have) and bunker-buster type bombs (that we do), we could destroy the most important sites. Nevertheless, Iran can be expected to respond all over the world. They could hit Israeli and Jewish targets all over as well as specifically initiating attacks by Hizbollah in Lebanon and Palestinians on the West Bank. Although the Sunni Arab states fear Iran and hope that Israel would "win," nevertheless don't expect any support from them. The Saudis, Egypt and so on would probably support the Iranians on the grounds that anybody that fights Israel deserves their support. The EU would remain neutral, Russia and China would criticize Israel, and only the US might give actual support (although not military support). So when Iran counter-attacks what should we do? That's the problem!
Best
Jack
___________________________________________
Dear Jack:
At one time control of the skies was deemed pre-eminent for military success. I don't know if that is still true. I would assume that Israel's airpower would trump Iran's at this point, but possibly not in the future. Iran has an army of 1 million. But how does it get that Army to Israel safely, particularly if Israel has air superiority?
The issue it seems to me from the safety of my home in Potomac isn't who is closer and more convenient but rather who/where/what is the greater threat. Time is on the side of Iran, as it was for Germany and Japan. When nothing is done, dictators take advantage of the prevailing vacuum. Time is not on Israel's side.
Iran can hit Jewish targets all over even today. Iran needs money to purchase the equipment and supplies for nuclear activities. Where does that money come from? If it comes from oil, then take out the oil wells. Iran has basically declared war on Israel by pledging to destroy the Jewish state. A state of war exists. Israel has not sought the demise of Iran, does not supply terrorists to attack Iranian citizens, and does not seek to use its nuclear capability for offensive purposes.
Here's what concerns me. Do we currently have a modern interpretation of Jewish attitudes prevalent in Germany prior to and even during the early stages of the Holocaust -- rationalization of events, Jewish desire not to cause problems or bring attention to Jews, a burning desire to be accepted by the gentile world, a long history of suffering that Jews seek to always avoid, etc? Is the Iranian nuclear threat against Jews assembled in the equivalent of a modern ghetto (Israel), the new version of a Holocaust?
All best.
Frank
_________________________________
Frank
Today the price of crude oil went up $10 a barrel because Shaul Mofaz, current Israeli Minister of Transport and former Chief of Staff and Defense Minister, stated that Israel will have to destroy Iran's capabilites because of the nuclear threat. Well, there are no doubt other reasons for the price of oil to rise, but you see how sensitive the whole situation is. Iran is ca. 1,000 miles from Israel, and although the IAF controls the skies, and the Iranian air force is not expected to be a great factor, nevertheless for the IAF to fly so many missions that distance is far from easy and would cost a lot in money, men and materiel. Israel will not act peremptorily and initiate a Middle East war, even though Iran is already fomenting one, because the price of oil will skyrocket and will cause an international financial crisis, even if the IAF doesn't hit the Iranian oil fields (which I hope they will). Israel will only initiate such an attack when it is sure (from intelligence) that Iran has reached the point of no return in developing either nuclear capability and/or the missile capability to deliver it. According to reports this might be within a year or two. At present expect more comments from Israeli sources indicating that the attack on Iran is imminent, and this will provide the US with further means to pressure the EU, the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians themselves, that to avoid a disastrous war and the consequent disruption, they must stop their nuclear development. If this doesn't suceed then expect an Israeli attack.
But, before this will happen it seems that the Israel Govt. has finally wound itself up enough to attack Gaza in force and hopefully destroy or at least diminish Hamas. This is what Defense Minister Barak implied two days ago after the attack from Gaza that killed a man in Nir Oz. At least all rocket firings onto Israel territory must be stopped (something the IDF failed to do in Lebanon in 2006). What will Israel do once it has captured part or all of Gaza? Will it simply withdraw again (under UN pressure) or will it hold the areas and return them to the Fatah PA Govt. of Pres. Abbas. This is what Abbas wants, to control Gaza, but can he afford to be tarred with the Israeli brush? Now that the prospect of an agreement, so far unimplementable, between Israel and the PA has been broached, maybe he can finally afford to actually cooperate with Israel. That might alter the situation fundamentally. But, the destruction of Hamas might also activate Hizbollah and Iran in ways that are unpredictable.
Best
Jack
______________________________
Dear Jack:
If Iran is pulling the strings, what is the point of attacking the puppets? They will also be regarded as martyrs, and new puppets will replace them. Why not launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran, before it has a nuclear arsenal, and send them an e-mail that that's just a taste of what they are going to receive from Jews if they don't cut out all the shenanigans and killings?
Israel has every right to defend itself. No one criticized the US when we attacked Germany or North Korea. If Israel is a world power, then it needs to demonstrate that. It seems like Israel is always on the defensive, despite overt aggression that no strong country would ever tolerate from its enemies.
May the Force beat swords into plowshares only after the war is won.
All best. Frank
_______________________________
Dear Frank:
The answer (to why we should attack the Iran proxies first) is that it is both necessary and easier. Israel absolutely should not allow itself to be hit by rockets and have its people killed, injured and terrorized. We must re-establish our military credibility. So we should definitely take care of Hamas in Gaza. The IDF is certainly powerful enough to do that. But Iran is another matter, it is a nation of 68 million people, ten times the size of Israel, and although I am sure we can discount the difference when it comes to the efficacy of armed forces, nevertheless Iran has an army of ca. 1 million, and is a huge country. For Israel to attack Iran is inviting a terrible war. The only advantage is that Iran is quite far away while Hamas is right here. So if we hit Iran before it has nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver warheads, then we may be able to prevent a preemptive attack. But, their nuclear facilities are dispersed all over the country. But, lets say that with stealth fighters (which we don't yet have) and bunker-buster type bombs (that we do), we could destroy the most important sites. Nevertheless, Iran can be expected to respond all over the world. They could hit Israeli and Jewish targets all over as well as specifically initiating attacks by Hizbollah in Lebanon and Palestinians on the West Bank. Although the Sunni Arab states fear Iran and hope that Israel would "win," nevertheless don't expect any support from them. The Saudis, Egypt and so on would probably support the Iranians on the grounds that anybody that fights Israel deserves their support. The EU would remain neutral, Russia and China would criticize Israel, and only the US might give actual support (although not military support). So when Iran counter-attacks what should we do? That's the problem!
Best
Jack
___________________________________________
Dear Jack:
At one time control of the skies was deemed pre-eminent for military success. I don't know if that is still true. I would assume that Israel's airpower would trump Iran's at this point, but possibly not in the future. Iran has an army of 1 million. But how does it get that Army to Israel safely, particularly if Israel has air superiority?
The issue it seems to me from the safety of my home in Potomac isn't who is closer and more convenient but rather who/where/what is the greater threat. Time is on the side of Iran, as it was for Germany and Japan. When nothing is done, dictators take advantage of the prevailing vacuum. Time is not on Israel's side.
Iran can hit Jewish targets all over even today. Iran needs money to purchase the equipment and supplies for nuclear activities. Where does that money come from? If it comes from oil, then take out the oil wells. Iran has basically declared war on Israel by pledging to destroy the Jewish state. A state of war exists. Israel has not sought the demise of Iran, does not supply terrorists to attack Iranian citizens, and does not seek to use its nuclear capability for offensive purposes.
Here's what concerns me. Do we currently have a modern interpretation of Jewish attitudes prevalent in Germany prior to and even during the early stages of the Holocaust -- rationalization of events, Jewish desire not to cause problems or bring attention to Jews, a burning desire to be accepted by the gentile world, a long history of suffering that Jews seek to always avoid, etc? Is the Iranian nuclear threat against Jews assembled in the equivalent of a modern ghetto (Israel), the new version of a Holocaust?
All best.
Frank
_________________________________
Frank
Today the price of crude oil went up $10 a barrel because Shaul Mofaz, current Israeli Minister of Transport and former Chief of Staff and Defense Minister, stated that Israel will have to destroy Iran's capabilites because of the nuclear threat. Well, there are no doubt other reasons for the price of oil to rise, but you see how sensitive the whole situation is. Iran is ca. 1,000 miles from Israel, and although the IAF controls the skies, and the Iranian air force is not expected to be a great factor, nevertheless for the IAF to fly so many missions that distance is far from easy and would cost a lot in money, men and materiel. Israel will not act peremptorily and initiate a Middle East war, even though Iran is already fomenting one, because the price of oil will skyrocket and will cause an international financial crisis, even if the IAF doesn't hit the Iranian oil fields (which I hope they will). Israel will only initiate such an attack when it is sure (from intelligence) that Iran has reached the point of no return in developing either nuclear capability and/or the missile capability to deliver it. According to reports this might be within a year or two. At present expect more comments from Israeli sources indicating that the attack on Iran is imminent, and this will provide the US with further means to pressure the EU, the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians themselves, that to avoid a disastrous war and the consequent disruption, they must stop their nuclear development. If this doesn't suceed then expect an Israeli attack.
But, before this will happen it seems that the Israel Govt. has finally wound itself up enough to attack Gaza in force and hopefully destroy or at least diminish Hamas. This is what Defense Minister Barak implied two days ago after the attack from Gaza that killed a man in Nir Oz. At least all rocket firings onto Israel territory must be stopped (something the IDF failed to do in Lebanon in 2006). What will Israel do once it has captured part or all of Gaza? Will it simply withdraw again (under UN pressure) or will it hold the areas and return them to the Fatah PA Govt. of Pres. Abbas. This is what Abbas wants, to control Gaza, but can he afford to be tarred with the Israeli brush? Now that the prospect of an agreement, so far unimplementable, between Israel and the PA has been broached, maybe he can finally afford to actually cooperate with Israel. That might alter the situation fundamentally. But, the destruction of Hamas might also activate Hizbollah and Iran in ways that are unpredictable.
Best
Jack
posted by Jack Cohen at 9:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home