Eh.. I’m not overly concerned. Everyone concerned has pretty much ignored them when it’s convenient.
As Clausewitz said, “War is the continuation of policy with other means.” What I’m getting at is that rather than just stick to military tit-for-tat stuff, which I’m sure they could sustain for a long time, we go for more of a knockout blow, with a warning that if they keep up the terrorism, funding of terrorism, and quest for nuclear weapons, that we’ll prevent them from having electricity for the foreseeable future.
I’m not one for pussyfooting around. If we’re going to commit deadly force to this, we should do it with everything we’ve got, save NBC weapons, and we should commit to absolutely crippling their ability to resist our nation’s will in any way shape or form. If we’re not willing to go all-in, we shouldn’t be at the table.
One worrisome thing related to breakout time is the production of sub-bomb grade but enriched U-235 for specialized reactors such as isotope production and research. To be practical in a bomb the 235 content needs to be 80% or more, while specialty reactors can legitimately require the use of 50% enriched 235. So a stockpile of such reactor fuel has had most of the enrichment done already, and would require relatively few enrichment cycles to boost it up to bomb grade.
I suspect that Israel was increasingly concerned about the ongoing progress in the nuclear weapon development in the absence of a treaty backed by monitoring. The most likely answer to “why now?” is probably a secret understanding between Netanyahu and the Orange Doofus.
My only anecdotal experience with Iranians was a couple of brothers who were doing some renovation work for me years ago. They were very skilled and very proud of their culture – when they went out for lunch, they’d bring me back typical Iranian cuisine for me to sample – and it was indeed very tasty. They’re a fine people; it’s their sick theocratic leadership that is at fault. I hope Israel and the US bomb the military infrastructure all to hell and topple the fucking Ayatollah, but with minimal damage to civilians.
This just strikes me as incredibly naive. You really think Netanyahu and Trump have the skills, long-term vision, and character to topple the Iranian leadership (and presumably replace it with something better) without catastrophic collateral damage, unintended consequences, and all the myriad of shitty things that come from wars in the Middle East?
Trump and Netanyahu are thieving NAZI scumbags who would be more than happy to throw Palestinian babies up into the air for uzi practice if golf wasn’t available.
Try diplomacy? It worked for Obama. They signed an agreement, and Iran was abiding by it for 3 years, until Trump tore it up.
Or, hell, just try not bombing them? We’ve done a lot of not bombing Iran, and they still haven’t nuked Israel, despite Netanyahu’s decades of crying wolf about Iran’s nuclear program.
It’s been mentioned in other threads that the answer to ‘why now’ is that Israel has succeeded in degrading Iran’s proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis) allowing Israel to strike Iran with less chance of severe retaliation. (At least in the short term.)
I have a friend who’s half Iranian and has family in Tehran. They don’t support the Ayatollah, but they’re still in danger from the Israeli bombing. And I can’t see regime change happening as a result of these events without a lot more bloodshed. It’s a shitty situation all around.
It strikes me as incredibly naive to imagine that either of them actually has a plan to topple Iranian leadership that isn’t written in crayon. If the plan is bomb them and kill their leadership without putting boots on the ground, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of being successful.
It’s like 2003 all over again. At the time, I was the young, dumb, naive one, foolishly trusting that Bush and his team had a real plan and chance to change Iraqi leadership without catastrophic consequences. But I learned from my mistakes. As bad and dumb as Bush’s team were, Trump’s team is a thousand times worse. How on Earth can anyone who lived through the aughts think that this time, with fucking Trump in charge, it could be better?
Hell, I give Dubya props for having a plan to actually remove Iraqi leadership by physically invading the country. Thinking through what that would actually result in was his problem. TFG making pronouncements demanding UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER before we were even involved in the shooting is his and Netanyahu’s level of imagining they can make the Iranian regime fall.
Sure. Maybe you think a perpetual state of Iran being months from a nuclear weapon is acceptable (and if you’re baffled by how this can be the state perpetually, I refer you back to the concept of breakout time). I don’t. The only reason I see to have supported a deal until now is fear of what Iran could do if they’re just told “no deal, we are destroying your program by force”. By dismantling their proxy network and the very impressive suppression of Iran’s ballistic missiles, Israel has been able to accomplish incredible results at a relatively low cost in terms of Iran’s response. That’s 1,000% worth it, and a much better outcome than Iran continuing to build up their ballistic missile program and actively war against us with their proxy groups while inching closer to nuclear weapons, which was the status quo.
Hamas: The destruction of Israel is in their charter. “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)." - SOURCE
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ): For Iran and its allies, the conflict does not concern borders, refugees, prisoners, settlements, or checkpoints. It is actually about Israel’s continued existence in the Middle East. They contend that Israel has no right to exist on Muslim-owned territory (Waqf) and that it is the responsibility of all Muslims to carry the banner of Jihad in the world toward the objective of wiping out Israel. “Today, dear fighting heroes, the time has come to advance toward opening the gate of Khaybar once again and to work for the eradication of ‘Israel’ from existence.” - SOURCE
Hezbollah: Israel is Hezbollah’s main enemy, dating back to Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon in 1978. … The group reiterated its commitment to the destruction of the Israeli state in its 2009 manifesto. - SOURCE
Iran: “Earlier this month, a tweet posted on Khamenei’s official Twitter account said Iran’s “stance against Israel is the same stance we have always taken. #Israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the West Asian region that has to be removed and eradicated: it is possible and it will happen.”” (from several years ago) - SOURCE
It is worth remembering that 28 of the 193 member nations in the United Nations do not recognize Israel as a county. 25 of the 28 are Muslim nations (Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela are the other three). - SOURCE
If you ran Israel would you let Iran get nukes?
ETA: And let’s not forget there have been at least six full blown military actions (wars) launched against Israel since 1947. Their neighbors tried very, very hard to wipe them off the map.