I never thought I would write these words, but Barry Rubin over at Pajamas Media is wrong in his effort to reassure us that Israel will not attack Iran’s nuclear program. Rubin is a perceptive and courageous analyst of the Middle East and its problems. But this piece is merely a rehash of “realist” pap about how Iran is so well protected that an Israeli or US attack “will not stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons.” There is also the usual stuff about how Iran’s leaders can’t really be as crazy as they sound, and how deterrence just might work on these 12th-Imam fanatics.
Now, we’ve been hearing about Iran’s invulnerability for years. Yes, we know that some of Iran’s facilities are deep underground. We’ve been hearing that for years from those urging inaction.
Fact: In May of 2006, James Fallows wrote in the Atlantic: “Now that Iran unquestionably intends to build a nuclear bomb, the international community has few options to stop it—and the worst option would be a military strike.”
Fact: In 2009, Defense Secretary Gates, obviously speaking at the president’s direction, has announced that the US has no military ability to destroy the fast-developing Iranian nuclear program. All we would do would be “send it further underground.”
Fact: In May of 2011, The AP reports that “Iran has moved some of its centrifuge machines to an underground enrichment site that offers better protection from possible airstrikes, the country’s vice president said Monday.”
Questions: If they’ve been so bloody invulnerable for so long, why are the Iranians suddenly burying them? Continue reading ‘Barry Rubin is wrong!’
Military Options Are Not Hopeless
Published January 30, 2012 Iran , Israel 2 CommentsTags: appeasement, Commentary, Contentions, genocide, Holocaust, Iran, Jonathan S. Tobin, Obama
Jonathan S. Tobin, writes in Commentary blog Contentions: Echoes of 1967 in Israel’s Iran Dilemma. This is a refreshing counter-point to Barry Rubin’s depressing piece (cited below).
I myself don’t know what Israel’s leadership should do. I have no inside information on Iranian defences or Israeli military options.
But I like what Tobin is saying. He simply argues that the military option is not hopeless. Iran is not invulnerable. This doesn’t sound particularly controversial until you consider how many supposed “realists” treat with the contrary proposition as a default axiom, a matter that must be taken on faith.
Tobin also points to the similarity with 1967, when world opinion was united in urging Israel not to take preemptive action against Egypt’s planned holocaust.
What is most surprising is today’s “realist’s” claim that an Israeli strike would turn Iran into an implacable enemy of Israel! Have these guys been listening to Iran’s leaders lately? It’s worse, more openly genocidal, than anything Nasser ever spouted.