NOTE: My web host, Hostgator, suspended my site for what seems like the tenth time over the weekend. These stoppages are agonizing and inexplicable to me. I apologize for the inconvenience to you.
Former Mossad chief, Ephraim Halevy, has–unlike some relatively new converts to the cause like Benny Gantz, Tamir Pardo, Yuval Diskin and Meir Dagan–been an Iran contrarian for years. While opposed to Iran attaining a nuclear weapon, he never believed it would be an existential threat to Israel. He never believed attacking Iran was a viable method for stopping Iran’s nuclear program. Although not opposed to sanctions, he never believed that any single method like a strike or sanctions could work absent real diplomatic engagement.
In that sense, Halevy is a throwback to a more pragmatic era in Israeli intelligence work. His assessments were not ideological like so much of which emanates from today’s Israeli political leadership. If any intelligence operative could be said to be operating out of a set of values, rather than political blinders, it would be someone like Halevy. Not that I mean to romanticize him, because Israeli cloak and dagger has had a strong element of amoral skullduggery no matter who was running it. But Halevy, today, does seem almost quaint in his strict adherence to humility and apolitical pronouncements.
That’s why his interview in Haaretz is so important. Unlike his colleagues who are a more rough and tumble lot, Halevy doesn’t seek to demonize anyone. Not Netanyahu nor the Iranians. More than anything he appears to want to present rational, reasonable alternatives to those who’ve gotten caught in the thicket of their own delusions:
“What I have to say is complex…I do indeed argue that a nuclear Iran does not constitute an existential threat to Israel. If one day we wake up and discover that Iran has nuclear weapons, that does not mean the start of the countdown to the end of Israel’s existence. Israel need not despair. We have deterrent capability and preventive capability. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, Israel will be able to design a true operational response that will be able to cope with that. We will be able to prevent a Hiroshima in Tel Aviv and we will prevent a Hiroshima in Tel Aviv; so we must not talk about a Hiroshima in Tel Aviv, because prophecies like that are self-fulfilling.
Halevy cuts to the quick of the Netanyahu rhetoric in this powerful critique of the Churchillian pretentions of the prime minister:
The true Churchillian way is not to talk about the possibility of a second Holocaust, but to ensure that there will be no holocaust here. I was a boy in Britain during the Blitz. I remember vividly Churchill’s speeches blaring from the radio. He did not talk about the possibility that Britain might not survive. On the contrary: even in the direst straits he said that Britain would have the upper hand. He promised that whatever happened, come what may, in the end Britain would win. Anyone who purports to be Churchill needs to talk like Churchill and project self-confidence.
“I am absolutely appalled when I hear our leaders talking as though there were no Israel Defense Forces and as though there were no State of Israel and as though Auschwitz is liable to be repeated. As I see it, the message we should be conveying to the Iranians − and to ourselves − is that we will be here in any event and in any scenario for the next two thousand years.
I’ve noted in my own posts that the ultranationalist line of reasoning posits an Israel that is eternally threatened, eternally beset by Jew-hating genocidaires. Theirs is an Israel constantly on the brink of annihilation. You cannot build a state on such negativity. You cannot build a future when you anticipate the worst.
Churchill believed in England as a real nation and in England as an eternal value. He could never foresee either being wiped out. Nor would he ever allow his own personal pride or his faith in his country even to hint that it might. This is where Bibi differs. He lacks such self confidence either because he knows somewhere deep down that his cause is profoundly flawed or because Jewish history has so warped him that he cannot ever imagine an Israel safe, secure and at peace with its neighbors.
Halevy also warns against the false “bomb or bombing” dichotomy:
“Going to war is an absolute and irreversible act that entails high costs. Accordingly, before using force, we need to exhaust all the other possibilities. To the best of my knowledge and to the best of my assessment, the other possibilities have not yet been fully exhausted. Some of them have not even been tried. The simplistic equation of bomb or bombing led to a mistaken focus on bombing as the only response to the bomb. But the truth is that a situation is possible in which there will be both bombing and a bomb. A situation is also possible in which there will not be a bomb without bombing…
“I also think that it is right to create a bombing capability and threaten with a bombing capability. But what I am suggesting is to step out of the box now and stop thinking in binary terms, and…stop the Iranian nuclear project without engaging in an all-out war. Because an attack on Iran is liable to foment a generations-long war with Iran, it is our duty to do all we can to prevent a bomb and prevent bombing and resolve the crisis creatively.”
In the following passage, the former Mossad director does something unthinkable in the current overheated environment. He suggests actually trying to understand the psychology of Iran’s leaders and the nation. I know: it’s hopelessly reasonable and common-sensical and so will never be respected by any policymakers either in Israel or the U.S. The more’s the pity, as war will bring the devastation of which he warns, while engagement would bring a positive outcome for both sides. All the more reason for the extremists on both sides to choose to ignore principled thinkers like Halevy:
“What we need to do is to try and understand the Iranians. The basic feeling of that ancient nation is one of humiliation. Both religious Iranians and secular Iranians feel that for 200 years the Western powers used them as their playthings. They do not forget for a moment that the British and the Americans intervened in their internal affairs and toppled the regime of Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953. From their perspective, the reason why, to this day, there is no modern rail network and no modern oil refineries in Iran is that the West prevented that. Thus, the deep motive behind the Iranian nuclear project − which was launched by the Shah − is not the confrontation with Israel, but the desire to restore to Iran the greatness of which it was long deprived.
“I believe that if the West could find a way to propose to Iran alternative methods to acquire that sense of greatness, Iran would forsake the nuclear road. If Iran were offered trains and oil refineries and a place of honor in regional trade, it would consider this seriously. You say carrots? The carrots offered to Iran until now were not big enough.
…If Israel had adopted a creative, active policy, and if the international community had held up to the Iranians a far richer package of threats and enticements, I think there would have been a chance to dissuade the Iranians from embarking on the dangerous road they have taken.
…”If instead of focusing on a military solution, Israel were to succeed in mobilizing the international community for complex and sophisticated political-economic action, I believe that the results might be surprising.”
The tragedy for Israel at this stage of it’s tenuous existence is that this man, who represents intelligence and balanced discourse on this subject, is ignored by virtually anyone who has real power.
Netanyahu in all his monomaniacal megalomania treats U.S. politics as if it were his personal plaything, rather than something that involved the fate of the nation. He naively believes he can play off a supposedly hostile American president against a pliantly pro-Israel Congress. He even imagines that he may serve as the decisive force in bringing a victory for Mitt Romney. All this would be merely delusional if it were merely his own fate in the balance. But when it’s the nation’s fate too, then it becomes an even more serious matter:
it is clear that he [Halevy] is very worried. He does not like Netanyahu’s intervention in U.S. politics, and he is apprehensive about the interface that has been created between the Iranian issue and the U.S. elections this November. He thinks that Israel must on no account be perceived as having contributed to the election of one candidate or torpedoed the candidacy of another. His evaluation is that a combination of a Holocaust-influenced frame of mind and the desire to promote the election of the next American president is dangerous.
…We need to remember that we are very much dependent on the United States and not utter boastful slogans that we are sovereign and therefore will take our fate into our hands.
Here is a final bit of supremely lucid, and therefore utterly irrelevant to current decision-makers, analysis:
“What I recommend is trying to calm the Iranian-Israeli conflict and not escalate it. It is possible that, in the end, we will have no choice and will be forced to attack…But before venturing on such an extreme and dangerous action, I suggest making a supreme effort to avoid it. We must not hem the Iranians in and we must not push them into a corner. We have to try to give them an honorable way out. It’s always worth remembering that the greatest victory in war is the victory that is achieved without firing a shot.”
Bless the fact that Israel has such intelligence among it’s citizens, but curse it for ignoring them.
RE: “Netanyahu in all his monomaniacal megalomania treats U.S. politics as if it were his personal plaything, rather than something that involved the fate of the nation. He naively believes he can play off a supposedly hostile American president against a pliantly pro-Israel Congress. He even imagines that he may serve as the decisive force in bringing a victory for Mitt Romney.” ~ R.S.
ALSO SEE: “Is There a Way Beyond Israeli Madness?” [Will the Chosen People and the Exceptional People Go Down Together?] ~ by John Grant, Counterpunch, 8/31/12
ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/31/is-there-a-way-beyond-israeli-madness/
* P.S. Personally, I believe Israel’s Likudniks consider (at least subconsciously) Iran’s nuclear program to be a potential breach in Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall.
P.P.S. ALSO SEE: “PM tells US ‘time has run out’ on Iran diplomacy'” ~ By JPost.Com Staff, 08/31/2012
Source tells ‘Yediot Aharonot’ that Netanyahu initiates shouting match with US Ambassador Shapiro on Obama’s Iran policy.
ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?ID=283353&R=R1
* P.P.P.S. Boy am I glad that Israel is practically on the other side of the globe from us. I certainly wouldn’t want to be in the Europeans’ shoes.
We need to get that European missile defense system up and running to help protect Europe from Israel’s nukes!
P.P.P.P.S. RE: “a nation’s [Israel’s] narcissism” & “the Israeli narcissistic and arrogant mindset” ~ John Grant
FROM WIKIPEDIA [Narcissism]:
SOURCE – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism
P.P.P.P.P.S. RE: “Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. . . Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage. ~ from the above Wikipedia excerpt on Narcissism
I REITERATE: “Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu got into a diplomatic shouting match with US Ambassador Dan Shapiro over US President Barack Obama’s handling of Iran’s nuclear program, saying “time has run out” for diplomacy . . . The American ambassador is said to have responded politely but firmly . . . At that point, diplomatic sources told the paper, “sparks flew” in an escalating shouting match between Netanyahu and Shapiro as the stunned congressman watched. . .” ~ by JPost.Com Staff, 08/31/2012
SOURCE – http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?ID=283353&R=R1
Israel is waiting for more then 10 years for the world to do something about that issue. We got a final confirmation last week with 120 countries and the general secretary of UN showing up in Iran to support them. Also the last report of the nuclear agency showing the Iranian is pushing even harder now to reach their ultimate goal, a bomb.
Same as the world cannot do anything about Syria and other countries that asked for assistance for years (Kosovo, south Sudan, Rwanda etc… ) Israel has to count only on its self against a regime that clearly and loudly inform of the UN secretary that it want to destroy the Zionist country.
This is why the attack is unavoidable, no one will do the job for Israel, and actually no one really care at the moment if Iran will have nuclear power. 120 countries will even like it.
Same as president Peres with its dream about new middle east that exploded in his face, same as Ari Shavit (Military journalist in “Haaretz” newspaper) that regret now his approach about giving back the Golan heights to Syria Halevi is going to regret this opinion. Hope he will have a good excuse later on.
Fred Plester says
I’m afraid that you are conforming, exactly, to the mindset described in the above article.
And the world’s reluctance to intervene in Kosovo wasn’t entirely unjustified: NATO does seem to have handed the Albanian mafia its own state and that’s a definitively bad thing: even if getting rid of Milosevic opened the way for a better Serbia (and I think it has), it hasn’t actually led to a better Kosovo, just a kleptocracy instead of a foreign occupation. Kosovo was where Serbian culture and civilization actually started, it’s just that they’d mostly moved into what is now Serbia and demographic trends within Kosovo had created a large ethnic Albanian population who were comprehensively excluded from the political process.
The world isn’t doing what Israel wants, because Israel wants endangers the entire world, for no gain to anyone, not even Israel. The proper use of war as an instrument of policy is to resolve something which cannot be resolved any other way and cannot simply be lived with. An Israeli attack on Iran will actually create a situation that will be impossible to resolve for many years. The article above suggests that Israel can live with the potential of a nuclear Iran, and perhaps even that a more powerful Iran would be less likely to lash out randomly as it has done in the past.
This is a little problematic: Germany in 1914 was a lot more powerful than Germany in 1872, but that didn’t stop Germany attempting a frankly prehistoric style of blatant aggression for material gain against France and Belgium.
I think Iran should be allowed to feel more confident, but in a way which ties her in to peaceful trade much more and wild paranoid rhetoric much less. So perhaps better transport infrastructure with neighbouring states, rather than allowing them to succeed in territorial claims against the Gulf Arabs, for example. The carrots referred to above must be linked to the right sort of positive behaviour, and absolutely must not come at the expense of any of Iran’s neighbours, because that would simply sow the seeds of a different sort of conflict in the fairly near future.
הכל פקספקטיבה חברתית , ידוע מאוד בישראל , השתייכות לקבוצה כלכלית כזו או אחרת , השתייכות לחברה בעלות דעה פוליטית כזו או אחרת ,לצורך כבוד פרנסה וכו’,
עיתון הארץ, הוא עיתון שמאלני מובהק, וכן כך העיתונאים שעובדים אצלו, גם אם חושבים אחרת , זה לא יעבור אצל העורך הראשי, ואם הם רוצים לעבוד , הם צריכים לשנות דעה או להיות כפשוטו דו פרצופיים.
ביננו , אתם הרי כבר משתוקקים שניתקוף, אתם גם מתפללים לכמה פריימים טובים יש ילדים פצועים , ותוכלו למחות דימעה ולחשוב כמה אתם הומאנים , איזה רוצחים הציונים , בעצם היהודונים האלה.. זה כבר השלב הבא שלכם קצת אחרי התקיפה.. וכמובן תעשו הכל לגנות את ישראל לייצר ולעודד שינאת חינם כנגדבישראל ,, אבל כמה חשוב להטיל וטו באום… חלאס נימאסתם שונאי ישראל…
תתעסקו ב body count שלכם באפגניסטן ועירק ותעזבו אותנו בשקט… אין לכם מספיק מדינות להתעסק בהם.
ולכותב הבלוג או כותבת מה שלא אתה.. כנראה יהודי או בעצם אנטי יהודי… תתבייש לך לחפש לראות ,בישראל נופלת…
יום יבוא וזה לא עוד הרבה זמן שיזכרו שאת\ה יהודי ושיגרשו אותך בבושת פנים ,ותאמר אבל אני חלק מימכם אני אמריקאי פטריוט , יצחקו ויגידו לך , אתה יהודי , תשאר יהודי, ותמות יהודי אם לא תלך … ושתבוא לארץ, אנחנו ניקרא לך שונא ישראל גוי.. כך יהיה לאדם שרוצה בהרס עמו.
“Bless the fact that Israel has such intelligence among it’s citizens, but curse it for ignoring them.”
Not: Bless Israel for having such intelligence among its citizens, but curse it for ignoring them.
Not: Bless the fact that Israel has such intelligence among its citizens, but curse the fact that ignores them.
You bless the fact, but curse the country. I think this sentence contains the truth about how you feel. Am I wrong?
Richard Silverstein says
What do you think this is? Pilpul? I meant exactly what I said in the way I said it. Should you maul or mangle my meaning that’s your problem, not mine.
I find it somewhat strange that, from my point of view at least, the Israeli government is hell bent on its path to destroy Israel as nation and its penultimate purpose for its coming into being – the safe harbor for jews all over the world.
In order to accept and understand as to why I consider the destruction of Israel inevitable in case of an attack, two fundamental assumptions have to be shared.
Assumption one:since its inception Israel has needed the political and material backing of the West to ensure its survival. This need will not go away in the near future. The preferential trade agreements with the EU and North America, the political backing from the US in particular, the payments (donations, charities, pension and WWII payments) and the provision of heavily discounted military equipment are a vital contribution to Israel’s economy. An Israeli attack on Iran would be interpreted by most of the West as a deliberate attack on their economies and their future well-being (rising oil price in a global economy teetering on the verge of a global depression), thus ensuring the accelerated erosion of this vital backing.
Assumption two: while the state of Israel is generally rejected by the populace in the ME, this antagonism is not of an outright belligerent nature at the moment. An attack on Iran, regardless of whether the ensuing violence might be contained, will further increase the feelings of enmity and create an unforgiving adversary with 75 million more inhabitants for decennia to come. Considering the changing dynamics in the ME, due to the waning dominance of the US and Europe, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and Jordan might see added benefit in changing their outlook towards Israel in the next 10-15 years.These countries wouldn’t even need to attack, creating obstacles for Israeli trade routes or putting some embargoes in place is more than sufficient.
Thus, while enmity towards Israel would rise considerably, an attack would not also weaken its backers substantially and ensure an erosion of the backing it so vitally needs.
Thus the whole hoopla about attacking Iran may be built on Israeli paranoia ‘The Iranians are craaazy’ or a calculated means to divert from the fact that the two-state solution is irrevocably dead. Whatever it is, European and the US governments are getting mightily annoyed (their populations already are. Just look at the comment sections of news sites in Europe and the US).
If Netanyahu and Barack are not going to back down and let the issue slide, the phrase of an ‘existential threat’ might5 become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
David Nelson says
“As I see it, the message we should be conveying to the Iranians − and to ourselves − is that we will be here in any event and in any scenario for the next two thousand years.”
It is good to hear someone in Israel is thinking along such an extended time frame.
I find many things Mr. Halevy says objectionable and racist (for instance, offering iran railways in exchange for Iran’s ceasing development of nuclear energy is a good deal in whose book?), but rather than get lost in those Enlightenment ideals, I will agree with Mr. Halevy that the larger vision should include a discussion of the 2000 year peace between the nations in this vital region.
Questions for Israel:
Israel’s strategy thus far has been to try and dominate the region through military superiority. In their attempts at attaining these objectives, the Israelis have repeatedly violated the hopes and aspirations of all their neighbors.
In this 2000 year peace, beginning here at the Information Age, how realistic is it for such a small nation such as Israel to dominate its region of 400 or 500 million people*, especially considering the methods for attaining this domination are the opposite of peace?
The 2000 year peace will not be realized unless Israel gives up its delusions of ever having military superiority in the region. Effective national defense is much more than a military solution and in Israel’s case involves ceasing behaviors that anger its neighbors. Duh.
This peace is not complicated, but the burden of change clearly falls on Israel, the belligerent newcomer.
(*once you start counting up Turks, Iranians, Arabs, Kurds and all the other ethnic groups that make the Near East such a colorful and textured place)
David Nelson says
Other things i wanted to add include the fact that Iran has been clear they do not intend on developing a nuclear bomb, Iran has been clear they do not intend on initiating a military strike against Israel, and have said the solution there is not military in nature, and Iran has also been clear that they will accept whatever compromise or deal that the Palestinians accept.
The Iranian “threat” is a figment of the Israeli imagination.
Hisbballa !! Ever herd that name before !
Iran clearly said that the first chance it gets it will destroy israel , and saying that any chance it gets
David Nelson says
Distraction!! I have herd that game before !
Make peace with your neighbors and your neighbors attitude towards you will change. The Golden Rule, ever heard of it?
I have heard of the golden rule but I doubt Israel will follow it do to it’s Christian source.
The only way Netanyahu’s plan would have worked (an unilateral Israeli attack dragging the US in immediately) has now been CHECKMATED by Obama and Iran
Ready to rock and roll?
These back channel US-Iran negotiations are a great sign of increased cooperation AGAINST Israel and with this new info Dempsey’s remarks suddenly all becomes much more clear – THIS is what Gen Dempsey’s very public remarks to Israel about not being ‘complicit’ were all about: Iran and the US have a DEAL to stop Netanyahu’s attack.
Iran may have even insisted that Dempsey make the deal public -in order to gauge his sincerity.
We can be assured that Netanyahu and Israel WILL NOT ATTACK Iran if they know they and they alone will reap the whirlwind of such an attack, sans the US.
This is what is STOPPING the Netanyahu attack and this is why the entire Israeli security, military, and political echelons are unanimously and vehemently opposed to Netanyahu carrying out his in-motion plans
This is a brilliant move and the necessary and sufficient step to force Netanyahu to abandon his already in-motion attack plans –
Obama has split Israel from Netanyahu – it’s absolutely brilliant – and he also split the American Middle Class and Economy from Romney’s Neocons and Israeli policy at the same time.
Obama to Tehran – we will not back Israeli strike on nuclear facilities as long as Iran refrains from attacking American facilities/carriers in Persian Gulf
David Nelson says
great run-down, thanks bluto. here’s to hoping the latest news is as significant as that:)
No, no the main goal is to split the Iranian people from this horrible regime – a liberation act that parallels what happened with the Germans in WW2 (and that is how THEY then saw it). The Iranian people deserve better than a military dictatorship and a fanatic theocracy (“Death to the dictator” all those brave people chanted from the rooftops in Teheran before brutally suppressed by the Basij). Israel is not against the Iranian people, not at all, and don`t delude yourself – there will be no US deal with this regime.
Richard Silverstein says
Yr fictional portrayal of Iran is instructive as to your own delusions, but not much else. Iran is not a dictatorship, military or otherwise. Interesting that you portray Iran harshly but maintain eyes firmly shut as to Israel’s swiftly retreating democracy.
I wouldn’t trust yr predictions about whether a deal will be struck as far as I could throw ’em.
Well, let`s keep a cooler head here. if you add up things it begins to be clear that bombing nuclear sites in Iran is not on Israel`s mind (and indeed it is not supported by the US). It is hard for Israel to execute and cannot achieve much. The US is determined to prevent Iran from going nuclear – it that happens would be a disaster not just for Israel but also for its main regional allies, the Gulf-states – and it is far better poised to do that (even in the very last minute) as no physical fortifications can stop its hugely advanced penetration means.
What may be on Israel`s mind is a cyber-war, which this time will not be restricted, as hitherto, to nuclear related installations but will be directed against the various power centers of the regime as well as economic assets of the military clan that runs the country. The main goal would be to bring down the present regime (which is likely to be helped from inside due to the local discontent) or, at the minimum, bring about delays in the nuclear program. A key advantage is that physical fortifications don`t help here and in general the Iranians may not know how to defend against the unknown. The historical parallel is the “new tool” in WW2 that brought it to a swift end (which is ironically the subject matter now – but already the “old tool”). Importantly, this more restrictive type of action lacks the brutality of bombing and the associated human casualties and the perpetrators are harder to be identified and therefore violent counteracts cannot be easily justified. In addition, for the very same reason, it would also enable the US to help as much as it can – as starkly different from participating in physical violence and bombing). In case Iran responds with physical violence against Israel then Israel will feel justified to respond in kind and that is why it has to keep those capabilities ready too.
All in all we are facing the potential prospect of the first cyber-war – a technological spectacle that is “electronics” centered: communication, TV, computers, all the gamut, but not firepower and bombs as in the past. An altogether new development in historical terms and one that is entirely compatible with the technology emblem of our era – a “sterile” war, possibly without a single shot or casualty (or, perhaps very few – by “special forces” operations, etc.). Conflicts and wars are never desirable but this is still an advance of sorts.
Halevy gets Iranians’ intent and desire regarding the civilian nuclear technology achievement 100% By examining Iran’s history, he has already digested a few major events that support why Iranians would think this way. If one were to look closer, they’d find horrifying VOLUMES of instances, events, and happenings that show, beyond the benefit of a reasonable doubt, that Iran has been targeted SPECIFICALLY to set back its progress.
What kind of humiliation is this? Google Iran Air 655, for instance. That’s the type of thing Iranians have swallowed and still repute themselves to be majorly and significantly an American-loving people (and they are).
“Both religious Iranians and secular Iranians feel that for 200 years the Western powers used them as their playthings. They do not forget for a moment that the British and the Americans intervened in their internal affairs and toppled the regime of Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953. From their perspective, the reason why, to this day, there is no modern rail network and no modern oil refineries in Iran is that the West prevented that. Thus, the deep motive behind the Iranian nuclear project − which was launched by the Shah − is not the confrontation with Israel, but the desire to restore to Iran the greatness of which it was long deprived.”
Halevy is surrounded by men who also get war. Benjamin Mielkowski or Netanyahu (whateva) is a used furniture salesman from Philadelphia and not one of them.
Is Bibi Netanyahu going to send his son, Benzion, to die for his Iran war as well or does Ehud Barak’s willing sacrifice of 300 Israelis not include him?
Don’t worry, Israelis, Iranians will kill Benzion first. There is no joking around when it comes to attacking Iran without justification.
Consider, over the past six years:
1- Israel has used cluster bombs on civilians. Iran has not;
2- Israel has used white phosphorus weapons in civilians, Iran has not;
3- Israel has planted extensive numbers of land mines in neighboring nations, Iran has not;
4- Israel has targeted and killed UN observers, Iran has not;
5- Israel has conducted assassinations in foreign nations, Iran has not;
6- Israel has exploited alliances to forge passports, Iran has not;
7- Israel has killed thousands of civilians since 2006, Iran has not;
8- Israel has been allowed to hold a large undeclared nuclear arsenal for decades, Iran has not even come close to wanting them;
9- Israel has, beyond a reasonable doubt, significant influence as to what appears them in the Western media, Iran does not; and,
10- Israel thought 9/11 was good for Israel, Iran held spontaneous candlelight vigils on 9/11 and filled the entirety of Tehran Stadium on 9/12.
Good list. Hang in there.
Gene Schulman says
Let us not forget that it is the US that wants regime change in Iran. Israel is only its bulldog, doing a good job yapping and keeping everyone on the edge of their seats.
These individuals in the Israeli elite are weaker than a used furniture salesman from Philadelphia?