The only area of disagreement is the question of unintended consequences. I agree it’s a perfectly legitimate concern but I would disagree that the publicity surrounding this incident will encourage more governments to try it, for the simple reason that I think they are motivated by their own, private assessment of the effectiveness of this method, and not by its public impact.
The public impact could only deter them, not spur them on; for example, the publicity surrounding assassinations (or deaths through E-attacks) could, in some cases, deter governments from using that method (though I admit its deterrent ability has been slight so far).
Of greater moment on the detriment side of the cost-benefit equation is the increase in sense of paranoia and isolation on the part of the victim Iran.
Ok, the unintended consequences were more than just the first use problem. Your last statement illustrates one of those unintended consequences very well.
Is the delay in the development of the Iranian nuke (everyone believes that this action set them back, but cannot actually prevent them, from developing one) worth the increase in alienation on the part of Iran?
There is a wide range of legitimate opinions on this. A good case can be made that mere delay isn’t really worth much. OTOH, at the other end of the spectrum, some may argue that Iran simply could not really be more “alienated” than it already is - so alienating them further isn’t a significant cost.
Well that’s what unintended consequences are about. We don’t know the answer to the question. The UC concept is often misused in cases where the result can be managed, but when dealing with Iran, we haven’t been able to manage the situation at all.
As for Iran being more alienated, it’s more than that. There’s a problem government there that has had diminishing popular support, and the populace is not as antagonistic towards us as the government. More alienation could shift that in favor of the Iranian government.
The question is, do the Iranian people believe their government? The Iranian regime is blaming Israel for ruining its computers; but then, the Iranian regime blames Israel for everything, including sunspots. Why should the man on the street give more credence to their claims than usual?
My point is this: a military attack would certainly energize the populace, but all this sort of low-key computer sabotage does in this regard is make the Iranian government look incompetent.