46 thoughts on “Who’s Right About Iran Attack: Doomsayers or Naysayers? – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. It will happen before the November elections in the year 2012 or SOONER-!!

    Michael Santomauro
    New York City

  2. As strategies go, the “let’s rattle the sabres coz’ that’ll spook ’em!” gambit is exactly the same one that Nasser adopted in May 1967.

    It didn’t turn out at all well for the Red Rattlers, if I remember right….

  3. The real question is: if they do attack Iran and one or more of the fighter-bombers is shot down and a pilot survives to be interrogated live on Iranian TV, what then? Some sort of commando raid? More bombings, which might create more captive pilots? Or do they avoid all that and just use drones (and risk having advanced technology fall into Iranian hands?)

    None of it seems worthwhile, so why are they planning a war they will either lose or draw?

    1. They aren’t planning to fight the whole war: they are planning to START a war, which the USA, Saudia Arabia, the UAE and possibly even the UK and France, will be forced, by indiscriminate Iranian retaliation in all directions, to finish for them.

      As a mechanism for reversing US public attitudes to Israel and bringing about the election of an anti-Israeli US President, this couldn’t be bettered.

      If the Iranians were somewhat more selective about their threats of retaliation, they could isolate Israel quite easily.

    2. Your question gives me hope that they are positively not planning war but only rattling sabres. Bibi and Barak are surely not that stupid?

      I would like to think that if Iran is to go weapons nuclear then Israel would counter only by elecronic or cyber warfare.

      1. Russia delivers radar jammers to Iran. Actually seems that Russia has already delivered some of them. When calculating and trying to undermine Israeli casualties it should be wise at this stage to estimate the Iranian civilian casualties and environmental catastrophe this kind of attacks will produce.

        Lieberman said finally what actually has been relevant for the last two decades: Iran poses most dangerous threat to world order

        World Order, not World Peace. Israel is ready to kill tens of thousands and ignite wars to preserve the old world order.

        Indeed a strong Iran would change realities in the oil and gas trade, flow of capital in the world, etc. To become strong and rich Iran needs simply time and peace, not nukes. Iranians and the Israeli political/military elite know that. Israeli masses not.

        Present days Israel is a too dangerous country for the whole world, not only for the region. If a serious big war starts and the world economy collapses totally do you Shmuel believe that the worlds population will blame Iranians for that?

      2. “Bibi and Barak are surely not that stupid?”

        Want to bet on it? They’ve rattled the sabre enough that if Tehran does not pucker up and kiss Tel Aviv’s arse, they will have to go to war or lose too much face.

        1. @Fred Plester
          My conception of this conjectural conflict was a limited air war only, not a Middle Eastern replay of WWI. I can see how this could snowball quickly with the players you mentioned, which goes back to my “why fight this?” point. There is more risk than reward in a Israel-Iran war and the repercussions to the rest of the world would probably not weigh in Israel’s favor. They may do it, but it seems like an avoidable fiasco to me.

  4. “Yes, it’s true that China might be concerned that its energy supplies could be cut off in the event of an Iranian shut-down of the Straits of Hormuz.”

    Realistically, this is not only a problem for China. 40% of the traded oil goes through the Straits of Hormuz. So on the short term this would devastate the world economy.

    Consider the effect that even small and temporary shutdowns, like a hurricane in low-oil producing areas, have on global oil prices. A reduction of 40% would probably increase the price of oil 4x. This doesn’t include the price jump due to the massive uncertainty that this would create, which would jack the price even more. $500/barrel oil would be totally reasonable. That would destroy the world economy (or whats left of a world economy, anyway).

    With respect to US Support, regardless of how bad for the US an Israeli strike on Israel would appear to be, it is a foregone conclusion that the US would support Israel in this endeavor once it starts. First, politically this is just what is done in the US. The Lobby has these monkeys in DC in their pockets. Democrats and Republicans notwithstanding, there is, apparently, only one real party in Washington DC, and it is the Likud. Second, it is possible that despite the warnings that the US is giving Israel about going it alone, the US (or at least a large part of it) appears to want a war with Iran, regardless of the consequence. Sanctions have not worked and never will. China and Russia will never let any military response make it through the UNSC, so the US needs some mechanism to start a war where we look like the victim. One needs to look no further than the ridiculous Saudi assassination plot that was hatched up by the CIA/Mossad/Saudi Intelligence (pick one…) as a testimony to how desperate they are to get this ball rolling. Coming to the aid of our ‘great ally’ would certainly allow for political cover in the US and let us get down to the business of destroying what is left of civilization.

  5. “the IDF has shown itself in the past to be quite good at improvisation and taking audacious risks”

    I don’t know if I can think of any examples that weren’t probably lies, propaganda or “Hollywood” style PR efforts by the same State and same cast of characters that now runs it. There wasn’t a lot of improvising going on then, and there isn’t a lot of improvising going on now.

    As for audacious risks, the IDF owns all meaning of super-chutzpah… iberchutzpah, if you want to see me get all yiddishdictionaryonline.com on you.

    A 1000 man navy that went 100 miles out to international sea and executed Turkish and American activists before the world’s eyes proved that Israel via its IDF just doesn’t care what crimes it commits, how many innocent civilians are killed, or what not.

    It even calls its missions into the ghetto prison enclave it has strangled over years, “Cast Lead”, and thinks the world opines highly of Israel.

    This is why I don’t believe the IDF of yore either. I think there is a lot of deception and the IDF has always taken on historically weaker foes. Many of the conflicts it claims it did not start were in fact started by Israel, including the war of 1967.

    So, there is really nothing nice to say about it. 98% of the world was born after the Holocaust, and the basic premise of putting Europeans on a land where others have built homes for centuries via violence and forceful/hostile actions like a unilateral “League of Nations” mandate. Why was there a need for a separate nation then? Why not just a Palestine with a strong Jewish population who considered it their homeland and Israel as well? It’s not like the Palestinians hadn’t been converted before by other Empires. The integration then would have worked, but instead, it has been an example of colonialism. Unfortunately, this is where it comes down to, and if Israel attacks Iran, it is to create circumstances under which Israel’s borders will eventually grow and capture more vital resources like water, etc. Israel has no intention of honoring a two state solution either, and never will.

    Do I sound like Helen Thomas? Maybe. But after 64 years, if a South African like re-integration doesn’t occur, then it’s time to separate the Afrikaaners from the Blacks and to thoroughly level the playing field by strong sanctions against the former, including expulsion.

    1. “He who lives by the sword; SHALL DIE BY THE SWORD.” Prophetic words or just pure, timeless wisdom?

      Israel is the bully that must be taught the lesson the hard way. On the ground, in the US, there are hundreds of protestors who do not read the Israeli influenced media. Instead, they follow Chris Hedges, PressTV (yep, it’s a counter-narrative at least to the bovine excrement we get from CNN et. al.), etc. An Israeli attack on Iran would ignite the anti-war sentimentality all across the Occupy Movements. Oh ya, and they’re world wide. Want to polarize the entire world against you? Attack Iran. Do it. The lesson will be a valuable one.

    2. “He who lives by the sword; SHALL DIE BY THE SWORD.” Prophetic words or just pure, timeless wisdom?

      Israel is the bully that must be taught the lesson the hard way. On the ground, in the US, there are hundreds of protestors who do not read the Israeli influenced media. Instead, they follow Chris Hedges, PressTV (yep, it’s a counter-narrative at least to the bovine excrement we get from CNN et. al.), etc. An Israeli attack on Iran would ignite the anti-war sentimentality all across the Occupy Movements. Oh ya, and they’re world wide. Want to polarize the entire world against you? Attack Iran. Do it. The lesson will be a valuable one for Israel to the benefit of all that is innocent, good, and kind to life.

    3. “the IDF has shown itself in the past to be quite good at improvisation and taking audacious risks”

      The last “real” war that Israel fought was probably the 2006 conflict with Hezbollah, and in that conflict the IDF time after time launched “audacious” attacks that simply did not work.

      They made a lunge (several, in fact) against Bint Jbeil, and each time came away with waaaaay too many casualties.

      They launched a commando assault on a hospital in Baalbek, only to come out with……. five “tasty fish” who turned out to be Lebanese civilians.

      Post ceasefire they tried to sneak IDF men deep into the Bekaa Valley disguised as Hezbollah militants, then had to risk the entire ceasefire deal to extract them when they were discovered.

      Where there was little or no opposition the IDF was more than happt to apply brute force, and then crowed about it. But there is nothing “audacious” or “improvisational” about using a sledgehammer against a walnut.

      This IDF is rubbish, and it continues to live on past glories.

      1. The IDF has spent decades as policemen, using tanks to roll over homes and cars and F-16’s to bomb defenseless civilian targets. Even an army with no armor sent them home the last round in Lebanon. The IDF is really armored policemen with “bunker busters” that will not help them at all.

  6. Israel does what it can to maintain control of the American political institutions, over which it currently has a very firm grip, and through which it receives endless billions of dollars, both directly and indirectly, and preferred status in any number of organizations.

    Will the war on Iran tighten control over America, or loosen it? That is part of the discussion, and there’s a case to be made on both sides.

    At the end of the day I see a military action against Iran initiated by Israel, but limited in such a way so that the Iranian response, any Iranian response, will be painted as an unreasonable escalation and ‘the’ cause of the resulting more general war which the US, Canada, France, and Britain will immediately join.

    Historically necessary? No, another war of choice, rooted in the analysis that the degradation of the Iranian economy is always a good idea, and that further military actions will cement, for another generation or two, the polarization that unifies the American public with Israel.

    The long-term prognosis: the continuing moral and financial decline of an aging Anglo-American empire, a clarity in Asia that its future is at odds with the (so-called) “democracies” and the continuing fusion of Judaism with racist Israeli right wing nationalism.

    Everyone loses.

    If you don’t think that’s the direction headed, name me one prominent Israeli who is arguing for a rapprochement with Iran based on an honourable two state solution for the Palestinians, a shared Jerusalem, a nuclear free Middle East, fixed borders for Israel and a return of the Golan.

    1. The Iranians measure their actions. I don’t think Israel will be able to coax Iran into a strategic error. Indeed, I think everything has been done to cause Israel to make one.

      1. Iran’s already made a huge strategic error, as Fred Plester pointed out in a comment to a previous post:

        “The repeated suggestion that Iran will retaliate against the US for anything that Israel does, in all circumstances, is a grave mistake on Iran’s part, because it denies President Obama the option of leaving Israel to stew in its own juice if it attacks Iran unilaterally and cannot handle the backlash.”


        If the IAF goes in, the US will follow, and the Iranian statements of linkage will be how that gets justified. Iran’s saying such things is as foolish as when Hitler unilaterally declared war on the US on Dec. 8, 1941, when keeping quiet would have made it much harder for FDR to get to his goal of militarily intervening in Europe. As it is, the Guardian story yesterday about leaked British war prep to aid a US response shows that Obama’s already getting ready. The Brits wouldn’t have leaked that if things weren’t afoot.

        1. “Iran’s already made a huge strategic error”

          Unless this is Iran’s version of the Psyops that Israel *may* be engaging in as well. I tend to agree that Iran is not suicidal and will not simply attack the US interests directly unless it is clear that the US was directly involved.

          Personally, I do believe that this is indeed all saber rattling. If Israel was going to attack they would need it to be a surprise. Why posture like this and tip your hand? It is just plain stupid.

          The same goes for that ridiculous article in the Guardian. The US and UK and Israeli military are *always* preparing for war with Iran. Then re-preparing, and re-preparing yet again. They run zillions of simulations over and over. And none of them end well for an attack against Iran. They simply are too large, have too many proxies, and too many wild cards to play in an already incredibly fragile region and in an already fragile economy. And all of this with a relatively low upside.

          We have proven over and over that we do not go to war with capable opponents. We pick on the sick and dying, or topple them from within. The risks for Israel are, of course, even higher as they are within easy striking distance of Iran, geographically small, and used to a pretty cushy lifestyle. Any real, sustained conflict with an actual enemy that can attack Israel and cause real damage would scare many Jews out of Israel for good and further exacerbate their demographic problem. All of this for what? What would Israel get out of this war? A continued lock on the regional hegemony that they have now? It seems to me that unless this is an easy victory, Israel will not take this risk. And an easy victory this will not be.

        2. I don’t agree with Fred Plester whatsoever.

          The repercussions of neocon stupidity had to be written on the wall for all to read. A statement that Iran will defend itself does not paint Obama into any corner: simply do not attack Iran so that it will have to do that.

          You are suggesting that Iran bend over backwards. Iran drew a line in the sand and said, “BRING IT!” This stance exhibited Israeli and US inaction. You have inverted all logic here. This is why Iran is a regional superpower and the US/Israel on their way out (and desperate).

          1. You’re too emotional and thus not thinking clearly. This is a life-or-death-stakes poker game which Iran has to play ice-cold to survive, particularly since Iran is as outgunned as it is. You also mis-state what the Iranian spokesmen said. They were quite explicit in threatening to retaliate against US interests if Israel attacked them. That was gratuitous and quite ill-thought-out, given that the US has 2 very vulnerable troop deployments on either side of Iran, has a large segment of its decision-making apparatus thirsting to avenge the 1979 Hostage crisis, and has overwhelming aerial firepower which is essentially unused and rested (unlike our ground forces.) All in all, foolish and not up to the high level of the normal performance of the Iranian National Security team. They’ve essentially given Netanyahu the key to his strategy as an unforced error/own-goal.

          2. I’m actually being quite logic. I think history has proven you wrong as well. Is Iran more powerful now in the region or in 2003? If they had not toed the line in the sand with the threats they were facing, and instead kowtowed, there soft power would have vanished overnight. Iran’s power is in being the counter imperial narrative that the Israeli led West proposes.

        3. “The repeated suggestion that Iran will retaliate against the US for anything that Israel does, in all circumstances, is a grave mistake on Iran’s part, because it denies President Obama the option of leaving Israel to stew in its own juice if it attacks Iran unilaterally and cannot handle the backlash.”


          Suppose Netanyahu launches his attack based upon that very assumption.

          At which point Obama will await the Iranian counter-attack on US forces before pitching in alongside the Israelis.

          What if at THAT point the Iranians play their ace in the hole i.e. they say to Obama “just kidding, dude” and retaliate against Israel alone.

          Dear me, Netanyahu will be left with his sorry arse flappin’ in the breeze, because I can’t see Obama throwing his hat into the ring merely because the Iranians *had* *been* threating to attack US military assets.

          He’ll jump in if they make good on those threats, but he won’t jump in if the Iranians explicitely say this:
          Since Israel went it alone then they have no quarrel with him.

          1. I agree with John and Fred, the ‘linkage’ is an error and free gift to the Israeli hardliners, whose strategy depends on bringing in the US in large part to ‘finish the job’ (and take a good share of the heat/blowback). Iran should say it will only retaliate against the actual aggressor(s), the weaker party should NEVER play into the hands of the stronger, or overplay its hand, it’s the way they always lose, from the Kaiser to Gaddafi. Iran is getting close to being a smoking crater, they have to be super careful, and give Obama every inch of out they can, he is over a barrel on this as it is. Threats to the US will only backfire, it is not afraid of Iran, could annihilate it 100 times over without losing a man, and is full of those who are itching to push the button.
            It’s not about power now but survival (and the ‘power’ came from acting cautiously and reaping the benefit of others’ errors not bluster and brinkmanship).

  7. “There are a considerable number of Middle East analysts and bloggers who dismiss the idea that Israel will attack Iran.”

    Very many people, including professionals who should know better, make the mistake of assuming that Netanyahu and fellow travelers are more or less like themselves, sharing core values with some other unfortunate stuff wrapped on to the outside. This is a dangerous assumption.

    Just because someone wears a suit and tie, went to graduate school in America, and can banter back and forth well in English doesn’t mean that they are like you on the inside. I think many American Jews are learning this hard and painful lesson now as they awaken to the vast gulf between their own enlightened and civilized values and the racial supremacism that utterly permeates Israeli institutions and society.

    “My good friend Max Blumenthal doesn’t believe it for a minute. He says there’d be too much ‘blowback.’ ”

    This is a case in point. “Too much blowback,” for whom? Israeli radicals are in their eyes playing for the highest stakes. Gradualist ethnic cleansing has failed. They fully realize that they will not succeed in eliminating their ‘(Palestinian) demographic problem” without a punctuated ethnic cleansing event dwarfing those that have accompanied all their other wars.

    The major worry they have about blowback is that there won’t be enough against Israeli Jews to provide a thick enough veneer of justification to paralyze Western response to wholesale expulsion of Palestinians across the Jordan River.

    They are as perfectly willing to sacrifice Israelis today to secure their vision of the future as founding Zionists like Ben Gurion were to sacrifice Jews of their time to establish the state of Israel. It should not need to be pointed out how the rest of us rate, including ‘unascended’ American and European Jews.

    Netanyahu and fellow travelers aren’t worried about minimizing blowback. They are concerned with one thing only, finishing the ethnic cleansing ongoing since 1948 and getting away with it with the foreign trade agreements necessary for Israel’s survival intact. They figure if they can keep Israel’s economy from collapsing in the short term after expelling all non-Jews from Eretz Israel, in the long term limited attention spans and mutually profitable commercial relations will normalize a new status quo. They may be right.

  8. Let’s refocus on the Palestinian issue. This is a diversion tactic. Iran will fend for itself in the case of an attack. Let Israel commit suicide, it would be right in line with every other irrational action it commits.

  9. Here we go again with the October, November and December surprises. And when those dates pass another “all options on the table” scenario will be dreamed up to cover the embarrassments.

    The US cannot afford another war and that’s regardless of what Israel does or doesn’t do. Its one thing to look the dunce and fool in front of the entire global community due to divisive politics. Its quite another to launch a Jim-dandy of a “strategic disaster” that will make the previous one look like toddlers playing with rubber duckies in a bathtub.

    Iran can’t be just simply attacked. It will have to be invaded, conquered and every square inch of it will have to be occupied for 50 or 100 years. Anything less means certain defeat on a far grander scale than previous FUBAR’s.

    Israel can huff and puff all it wants, but unless Iran attacks first the US won’t have any part of it.

  10. This is real, israel will attack Iran in the coming of 3 months.

    First off, Israel have wanted to attack Iran for atleast a decade back, they want to see the demise of Islamic Republic no question about it.
    And by this time they in fact (unfortunately) have great time to strike Iran of several various reasons.

    1. Israel/Palestine conflict:
    Since the days of Gazawar 2008 and especially since the Freedom Flotilla Israel have been pressured to accept (like the rest of the world) the two state solution.
    They have refused over and over again. Instead they have killed the palestinian ‘peace offenisve’ by more frequent Gaza attacks, by more landgrab, by more annexation of palestinian land.
    To shift attention away from all this and to kill or delay the palestine question several years or permanently they see its chance to strike Iran. By striking Iran they not only shift attention away from the
    peace process and their occupation, they also think that with an attack on Iran Hamas and other palestinian groups will attack Israel and when that occur Israel have a pretext to invade Gaza and
    kill the palestinian resistance for good. So Israel want to lure palestinian into the conflict. Israel will act as a agent provocateur. At the same time Hizbollah might send missiles into Israel and
    Israel get the chance to strike southern Lebanon to to end Hizbollah for good. Remember the Winograd report that Israel failed to accomplish its goal 2006 in Lebanon, they want to redo that, pretty much like
    they failed in Gaza since Hamas although lost alot of people and got its land bombed, it didnt end Hamas resistance, it only grew.

    With an attack on Iran, they also kill the resistance movement and then palestinians have no weapons to defend itself with especially if Syria also fall.

    2. Shalit deal:
    The only reason keeping Israel not to bombard Gaza again were due the fact that they might kill Shalit or Shalit might have been killed by the palestinians in case of Israeli invasion. Since Shalit is gone Israel could now again
    thinking to invade Gaza again without killing anybody from their own ‘ethnicity’. At the same time they have in this case nothing to fear to attack Iran, because if Shalit was still in captive and Israel would have attacked Iran, Shalit
    might have been killed. By letting Shalit go, palestinians and iranians pretty much opened for the door for the murderer.

    3. Netanyahu low approval and Obama’s low approval:
    In Israel netanyahu face demonstrations and to gain popularity he would start a war. At the same time Obama have lost the jewish vote and at the same time he need to gain more approval too since its very low. To be reelected he must
    do the israeli lobby bid and keep warmonger and eventually attack Iran. Remember when Israel attacked Iraq in 1981 to probably secure the israeli PM in the next election.

    4. The uprisnings in the Arab world:
    One thing Israel loves is to see its neighbour states weak with internal domestic problem because then they will be busy themselves and doesnt possess any threat against the israeli occupation. The arabspring have indeed
    de-powerized the most important iranian ally – Syria. At the same time Israel have lost its Egypt with Mubarak and they fear the coming of total isolation with islamic governments around them. What if Jordan falls next year?

    Israel cant wait any longer, they could strike now or never (in their perverted mind of course) because in one year those uprising states might be in tight collab with Iran etc and wont accept israeli strikes or war.

    5. Next IAEA report:
    It seems that next IAEA report will show that Iran might be experimenting with nuclear weapon technology (who wouldnt with a neighbour like Israel and their constant warstarter US?). That report will then be propagandized by Israel
    and US to warmonger and scaremonger about Iran and how the world must attack Iran. Iran wont abide to politicised sanctions and israel know this even if Russia and China maybe wont use its veto for further sanctions it will change nothing.

    The israeli historian Martin van crevald puts it very good:

    6. The pseudo-talks with Iran:
    Note how Iran is always said to be in breach with NPT and is not accepting IAEA demans, this is while Iran offer over and over again to meet those demans that EU/US put forward, but everytime Iran do that, notes what happen – the goalposts are constantly put forward by US/EU on behalf of israeli/lobby interest. In short EU/US on behalf of aipac/israel doesnt want to see an end this pseudo-fabricated-conflict with Iran. They want to use all these nuclear, human rights, terrorism issues as justification to bring down the iranian goverment, they have no interested in solving the so called conflict Iran. Just imagine if the nuclear issue would be solved tommorow, does anyone really think US/Israel would stop bothering Iran? Of course not, then US/EU/Israel start to bother Iran with human rights, terrorism etc. This is an never ending assault on Iran that stops first when the iranian goverment have been toppled. It seems that some people belive the israeli/US version, namely that Iran is such a defiant state and US/israel wants peace and are so kind to Iran and so on. If US/EU/NATO/Israel really were interested in solving this conflict they should urge first and foremost Israel to give up its nukes which the whole region have urged for decades, it is Israel that have triggered the arms race in the region but this is obviously something the hypocrites in washington, paris, london, tel aviv want to admit.

    With that being said an attack on Iran will not go through UNSC it will start by a sudden attack on Iran by Israel, Iran will respond, US, UK and NATO will help. While Iran have no chance to survive a sudden strike or counter-attack, they do have a chance by the fact that US/NATO will have no possible chance to bring regime change to Iran, that must be accomplish with a occupation which US/NATO again, never could win. So what an attack would generate is in fact that Iran actually want to acquire nuclear weapons. Pretty much as Saddam and the attack on Osirak 1981, first after this attack were Saddam interested to get nukes for deterrence.

    It makes no sense that even if Iran had nukes it wouldnt attack anybody – its just ridiculous to even raise such a scarmongering scenario. Iran would possess them for detterence against aggressive US and israeli polycies. Anyone with half a brain would know that anyone that attack Israel will be a dustland in a matter of hours. Why would Iran commit suicide? It makes no sense and netanyahu/obama etc know this very well but they want to sell this ‘iranian will nuke the whole world’-story so they could be justified to attack the state.

    Also, on – Russia and China, they wont help Iran, no way. They will get supplied with oil from the corrupt GCC gulf regimes. What we will have is first and foremost a regional war Iran and a weak Syria and Hizbollah on one side with various shia groups in Iraq, Afghanistan, Jordan(?) against Israel/US/NATO/GCC

    1. I tend to agree there are a lot of things that make one think that whether it’s this year or next they will try to do it, as they see it it’s now or never on a number of fronts, one of which might be a mass expulsion from the West bank to “solve” the problem once and for all under cover of war. There is such a drumbeat of not merely rumours but war-supportive measures (like convenient plot revelations and the IAEA findings), coinciding with the weak position of Obama and the upcoming election year that at the very least it would seem they are trying to get into a position of at least being able to strike if things are opportune. People should take this seriously, the less they do the more likely it is to happen, Netanyahu would sure like to pull it off if he could while he can, otherwise his whole ideology will fall apart once the chance is lost.

      1. Only Kim Jong-il can come close to being the global threat that Netanyahu is, but then he doesn’t have HUNDREDS of nuclear warheads, the 4th largest military arsenal, a radical base egging him on to provoke a war at any moment that will decimate the world economy and cause unimaginable destruction or the U.S. covering for him.

        So, tell me, who is more dangerous than Netanyahu in your opinion???

        1. Why is it so important to you to quantitive the comparative danger that Bibi poses to the world? To me it suffices to say he poses a great danger and that he’s one among many dangerous leaders in the world. That’s enough for me.

          1. “he’s one among many dangerous leaders in the world”

            So again you evade the question. Never mind; I know why you’re avoiding it.

            The fact is, the truth is that he IS the most dangerous man on the planet because he’s been on an insane mission for years to get the U.S. to attack Iran, and you know it. When A Clean Break (precursor to Pnac) was drawn up in ’96, Netanyahu argued that the priority for aggressive regime change should be Iran rather than Iraq which was at the top of the Neocons’ list. He stated: “The most dangerous of these regimes is Iran”


            It’s his obsession and it’s his reason for being, and he’s very close to unleashing that insanity bypassing the Administration’s green light just to drag the U.S. into it, because he knows that this Congress is favorable and loyal to him and he may never get this opportunity again, since his butt is in the fire with social unrest at home and he doesn’t want to risk handing this mission over to a successor. This is his moment, his last Texaco in the desert and he’s not going to let it pass without doing everything to realize his mad dream. And the reason he’s so dangerous is because through Aipac he’s got Congress in the palm of his hand. NO ONE ELSE HAS THAT KIND OF POWER RIGHT NOW, NOT EVEN OBAMA!

            But again, you don’t want to believe that someone from the tribe is close to putting the planet in jeopardy. Again, you are so limited by that “attachment” that you can’t even admit that I’m right on this.

          2. you don’t want to believe that someone from the tribe

            I have only approved this offensive comment to inform you that your anti-Semitism is unwelcome here & to explain what specifically earned your new status. You have lost your comment privileges.

  11. Bibi knows that he cannot realistically attack Iran for a number of reasons ( I doubt that if he realistically could he really would but that is a different story) .

    1) The sheer unpredictability of the venture.The saying that “you know how a war starts but you
    cannot know how it will finish” is apt in the case of an attack on Iran.The Iranians have
    prepared themselves for this dangerous transitional phase before they have an operational
    bomb and have made any preemptive strike too risky to seriously contemplate.

    2) Lack of support from the defense establishment in Israel.

    3) Lack of support from President Obama who at heart is not a warrior and is uncomfortable
    with a risky venture before his reelection.

    So what is left to bIBI is to huff and puff like a frustrated child which incidentally also serves a number of purposes.

    1) It improves his popularity among the ever increasing right wing in Israel.

    and as Jackson Deihl points out in his Washington Post article ….


    2) It refocuses attention on the Iranian threat.

    3) It detracts from from the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations.

    4) It raises the pressure on the United States and its allies to increase sanctions and other nonmilitary pressure on Tehran.

    So once again Bibi has shown himself to lack the qualities of true leadership which are so desperately needed as Israel bobs about on the tides of regional events.

    1. …The saying that “you know how a war starts but you cannot know how it will finish” is apt in the case of an attack on Iran…

      That’s true for any and all wars past, present and future.

      Netanyahu’s jingoism and posturing is a desperate attempt to checkmate and gain momentum against Abbas decisive actions at the UN and UNESCO, which long term could prove more deadly than HAMA’s impotent suicide belts and Qassam firecrackers.

      The current imbroglio is between Fatah and the US. Palestinian actions are causing humiliation and real harm to US interests economic and strategic due to the catch 22 it currently finds itself in. The UN and all international organizations are US creations of the American Era, and such are vital elements udergirding US influence and global power. Finding itself being forced by laws promoted by Likudnik sympathizers, Zionist and Christian fundamentalists into defunding and naked coercion against these institutions is causing stasis within the US national security state.

      As I have understood for sometime the Palestinians are getting smarter and the Israelis exponentially dumber.

      1. The stupidity of the US law is now so naked, so plain. Just as you say, it undercuts further American interests and influence for a very unproductive purpose. Without $200 million, the PA can just give up its part of security “arrangements” with Israel and be justified. Without the Palestinian tax money collected by Israel but the property of the PA just draws attention to the other thefts perpetrated against Palestinians by Israel. Add to this the privacy foisted on two ships in international waters which posed no “security” threat and you have a grand show of stupidity and arrogance by the US and Israel for all the world to enjoy this weekend. Nobody can view these things with anything other than incredulity and, yes, pure wonder. Wow! These two states make North Korea look like an island of sanity and rationality by comparison.

  12. IMHO, all the Naysayers’ arguments are speculative – how crazy Bibi really is; or what would the real outcome be if and when….; or to what extent does he (and Barak of course) realize this.
    I think the only real reason why not (I’m one of the naysayers) is: if the B&B would really mean to start the show, they wouldn’t let the story leak. They still have means to do that. Moreover, they’ve let this be published in mainstream Israeli press, which is totally under control of military censorship (at least).
    Therefore, I’m pretty sure (and really hope) they’re leaking all this as a red herring, for whatever reasons they’ve got, however stupid or insane they may be.

  13. Good report Richard, and yes the nay sayers are speculating.

    I concur with Max Blumenthal whom I rarely disagree with anyway, as I don’t for a minute believe either Israel or the USA will attack Iran.

    Max Blumenthal is the best authority on Israel in the USA. No wonder the right wing are terrified of him.

    If anyone can wipe the floor clean with the Zionist rightists, it is him, he makes them all look like the blubbering spectacularly ignorant, buffoonish lying hypocritical sanctimonious two faced fools that they are. They’re facing the death throes of their insiduous cult, like everything evil it will end.

    If one country has nuclear weapons all of them have the right to do so.

    I support the right of Iran, UAE, Saudi Arabia Lebanon, Jordan, Syria to go nuclear as soon as possible. I mean right now, not in the future where they definately will be nucear powers.

    After Iran, it will be Saudi Arabia who becomes a nuclear power.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link