As you probably already know, there is some question as to the translation of the Dreaded Threat. Now, I have little Latin, no Greek, and squat Arabic, so I cannot offer a definitive opinion, but there is enough “out there” to give me pause.
And just as I pointed out upstream, Russia threatened to “bury” us. There was a long history of subterfuge and deceit between us. They supplied arms and training to regimes actively killing our soldiers. Oh, and just to top it off: we’re talking H-bombs, which make A-bombs look like Nerf balls.
And yet, somehow, perhaps by the grace of the Goddess, we managed not to annihiliate each other. Personally, I think that’s a positive result. May I make so bold as to recommend it?
See, what we are saying is: Give peace a chance. Sorry if we seem tiresome and/or naive on the subject, but we are in dead earnest. In a manner of speaking.
The difference is that the leaders of Russia didn’t believe in a religion that mandated the destruction of America. Iran’s leader seems to genuinely believe that Israel should be destroyed, not for mere political purposes but because it is God’s will. I’m sure he would have no problem at all if his entire nation’s population were nuked in response to the Iranian destruction of Israel - they would all be martyrs for the cause, in his eyes.
Then why hasn’t he already done so? If, as you seem to imply, he is beyond all reason and dissuasion, and cannot be deterrred by the same rational approaches we used with the Soviets…why hasn’t he simply launched an attack anyway? Whats holding him back, if he’s as bloodthirsty as you say?
It’s unclear to me how Israel intends to attack Iran. It’s out of range of it’s fighter jets, meaning that any attack will requiring refueling. The problem is that this will have to occur with the permission of Iraq, Turkey, or Saudi Arabia. I can’t see any way that those countries will give that permission. Any ideas on how Israel would actually attack Iran?
Well, it is and it isn’t within range. If the planes fly at a high altitude, it’s well within range. Of course, flying at altitude means that they’ll be spotted very early. If they fly at very low level, they’ll escape Iranian radar but need to refuel.
Hmm… maybe they intend to sneak in underneath a 747 or similar?
Because I know the definition of “rhetoric.” And because a nuclear strike on Israel by Iran would be suicidal. And because I am confident the Iranians are not suicidal.
Look; it is not “anti-semitic” to try to understand Iran’s perspective.
George Bush labeled three nations as members of the so-called “Axis of Evil”: Iraq, North Korea and Iran.
Iraq, which had no nuclear weapons, was quickly invaded. North Korea, which does have nuclear weapons, was not. Instead, North Korea got food supplies and negotiations.
What lesson should Iran’s leadership draw from this?
Now Iran finds itself with US troops on two borders, and at least one presidential candidate “joking” that he wants to “bomb, bomb Iran.” (Maybe just more rhetoric, but you certainly seem to take rhetoric seriously. Should you be surprised when Iran does?)
Would the US, or Israel, bomb Iran if it had nuclear weapons with which to retaliate? Nope. Iran, no doubt, sees the deterrent value of these weapons. Don’t you?
*As the Bush administration consistently points out, Iran is ultimately run by unelected, clerical leaders, and Ahmadinejad is not one of them. President Bush’s opposite number in Iraq is really the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini. Khameini makes the final decision on all matters of security and foreign policy — including and especially the nuclear issue — although he typically abides by the consensus of the National Security Council. The Council is led by Ali Larijani, appointed by and answerable to the Supreme Leader, and a man who also ran for president against Ahmadinejad.
It is Larijani rather than Ahmadinejad who is managing the negotiations over the nuclear program. Ahmadinejad has only one vote — out of around a dozen — on the Security Council. So as much as he rattles his saber at the West, the President is in no position to act on any of this threats. He has to lobby for his position within a power structure in which his is not the dominant voice. And while Ahmadinejad thunders against compromise, Larijani and other elements of the regime have made clear that Iran still seeks a deal , preferably in direct face-to-face talks with Washington.*
Sorry, that link is a little out of date. Larijani is no longer the head of the National Security Council. He resigned in October. He is now speaker of the Parliament.
When you’re the PRESIDENT of a country and you continuously talk about wiping out another country that’s not a “so what”. That’s a threat.
Lets look at that reality of that threat from the perspective of intent. Iran directly funds Hezbollah who in turn launched rockets into Israel a year ago. Not 1 rocket, not a hundred rockets, THOUSANDS of rockets. That would qualify as an act of war by any standard. This is made worse by the fact that Hezbollah is trying to take over the government of Lebanon.
Ahmadinejad is only a couple of key military people away from wielding power. If the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei were to have an accident than a vacuum is created which will be filled by someone with a plan that fits religious dogma. Take Ahmadinejad’s belief that the 12th Imam’s arrival is imminent and you have an excuse to build an elite secrete police to make things happen. All that’s necessary is a fall guy to take the blame for a bad economy or the general evils of the world.
Let’s recap:
Articulate charismatic leader who hates Jews
Country based on fundamental religion
Well funded terrorist wing that has attacked Israel (Satan).
Single religious leader surrounded by a council
Economic problems
Change the word Hezbollah to “Secret Police” and you’ve got the potential for a Hitler-style coup complete with Jews.
And what is it when the President of Israel publicly urges the President of the US to attack a third nation?
War with Iran will not make Israel more secure, but less so. Gradually and grudgingly, the Islamic world is coming to accept the existence of Israel. You can measure the safety of Israel by the number of its sworn enemies, which are fewer now than before.
War will not eliminate Israel’s enemies, it will multiply them. Read the instructions of the packet of dragon’s teeth: Do Not Sow.
Custom-rigged unmanned plane fitted with extra fuel tanks and couple of bunker-buster bombs, applied kamikaze-style maybe? At least it’s how I would do it.
But we’re not talking about war. We’re talking about Israel destroying a nuclear facility. And if they managed to capture any of Hezbollah’s rockets that could just return them to their rightful owners.
And I’d like to point out again that the president is not the one in control.
If Israel didn’t attack Iran then, why should they now, after the cease-fire in Lebanon?
So Israel should attack Iran because Khamenei might have an “accident,” then Ahmadinejad might step into the power vacuum, vanquish his rivals, and use Hezbollah members as a secret police force to consolidate power? The reasoning for an Israeli attack is becoming more and more baroque.
I’d like to point out that Iran already supports Hezbollah who has attacked Israel. Their actions are in line with the President and parliament’s continued call for the death of Israel.
Israel should defend itself against a country whose President and parliament actively promotes it’s genocide, is developing nuclear weapons, and is funding an army that has actively attacked it with thousands of missiles using ANOTHER country as a battlefield.
Do you not understand that Israel was attacked by thousands of missiles? Do you see this as a minor event?
and what cease-fire? I wasn’t aware Hezbollah pulled it’s army and weapons out of Lebanon so “cease-fire” is just another word for restocking ammunition. Nothing has changed in this situation.