Iran and Israel - when and how
An interesting analysis by John R. Bolton.
The fact that we did not confirm his posting to the United Nations is one of this country's greatest mistakes. The guy is a major asset and he would have gone a long way to cut through the bullshit at the U.N.
From the
Wall Street Journal:
What If Israel Strikes Iran?
The mullahs would retaliate. But things would be much worse if they had the bomb.
Whatever the outcome of Iran's presidential election tomorrow, negotiations will not soon -- if ever -- put an end to its nuclear threat. And given Iran's determination to achieve deliverable nuclear weapons, speculation about a possible Israeli attack on its nuclear program will not only persist but grow.
So what would such an attack look like? Obviously, Israel would need to consider many factors -- such as its timing and scope, Iran's increasing air defenses, the dispersion and hardening of its nuclear facilities, the potential international political costs, and Iran's "unpredictability." While not as menacingly irrational as North Korea, Iran's politico-military logic hardly compares to our NATO allies. Central to any Israeli decision is Iran's possible response.
Israel's alternative is that Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs reach fruition, leaving its very existence at the whim of its staunchest adversary. Israel has not previously accepted such risks. It destroyed Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981 and a Syrian reactor being built by North Koreans in 2007. One major new element in Israel's calculus is the Obama administration's growing distance (especially in contrast to its predecessor).
Mr. Bolton then cites six possible outcomes of an Israeli attack and gives an analysis of the outcome of each one. The next ten years are going to be "interesting" indeed...
Posted by DaveH at June 11, 2009 2:36 PM