Posts
This offer may seem like a "pro-Israel" maneuver, but will likely be made within the context of Israel giving up its own nuclear arsenal. For Israel, this is the worst sort of Trojan Horse imaginable and should be resisted to the bitter end. No US administration can be depended on to act in Israel's defense (nor should it be put in a binding position to do so) with nuclear weapons, especially not an unproven Obama administration. Any such agreement would not be worth the paper it is written on... it is designed entirely to neutralize and disarm Israel from its only deterrence in the hopes of reaching a worthless agreement with Iran to halt its own nuclear program at Israel's expense and long-term survival prospects.
Israel needs to aggressively develop its own powerful second strike capability for its own deterrence and that's where the US can be of help if we are sincere. With one or two nuclear weapons, Iran could wipe tiny Israel off the face of the earth, as it openly expresses its desire to do. An Obama "umbrella" will carry about as much credibility as an "umbrella" from Jimmy Carter, Hans Blix or from Neville Chamberlain, who famously carried an umbrella wherever he went.
Iran needs to know with absolute certainty that should a nuclear device explode in Israel, all of its major cities will be destroyed immediately. Iran needs to know that there will be no hiding behind a shadowy third party. Any nuclear device, no matter where it comes from will be presumed to be Iranian and will result in the immediate destruction of Tehran, all of Iran's major cities and the death of the entire Iranian leadership and their families. All of Iran will be turned into an uninhabitable, radioactive parking lot for a hundred thousand years. They should get that message every morning when they wake up and get out of bed; and for the sake of their own families they should pry to Allah every evening when they go to bed that Israel is safe.
Unfortunately, deterrence is not necessarily a guarantee of stability when dealing with Iran. Many in its leadership talk openly of the glory of martyrdom in the name of Islam; and have talked openly of a willingness to exchange millions of Muslims for the death of Israel. Therefore, the far better policy would be to preemptivly eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat NOW before it's too late all of this becomes necessary.
The only way a US nuclear umbrella for Israel makes any sense is if it is extended unconditionally and unilaterally by the United States as a message to Iran. Otherwise, Israel should reject this proposal as a joke and political gimmick, and concentrate on building up a massive second strike capability.
3 hours ago
In addition to Carter, Blix and Chamberlain you could add el Baradei.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Obama can be trusted on any defense related policy. If it comes down to it I believe his jelly of a backbone will come in to play.
I don't regard him as a man of principle, instead he is just another political opportunist that cast his die at the right time. It seems the planets have aligned against the conservatives for awhile.
Dear me, you haven't had a 'man of principle' in office since Ike, so don't hold your breath on that one! You've had some good presidents though, such as Kennedy and Clinton who knew their arse from a hole in the ground, just not so flash on where other parts of their anatomy went.
ReplyDeleteAs far as defence goes, well you BADLY need someone who doesn't rattle trillion dollar sabres - you can't afford it in either sense of the word and, Matrix, I'm surprised at you; You haven't already got your collective tail singed from making pre-emptive strikes?! What you're proposing doesn't just hurt the Islamocratic govt. There's a lot of innocent people who would get hurt if you just attacked Iran on the basis that the govt wants to obliterate Israel. It's every bit as bad as an act like 9/11 where civilians are killed because of the perceived acts of their govt.
Not a road we want to go down at all.
Do some basic research. Iran's nuclear facilities are mostly nowhere near major population centers and could be taken out with minimal lose of innocent life. In any event it is Iran who are putting people at risk with their program to begin with. Try not to blame the US first at every opportunity.
ReplyDeleteIsreal has more than enough deterrent with a few SLBM nukes on submarines to do the job except a deterrent only works against sane people amd not so much against nihilistic loons that think Armeggedon will bring forth their mythical thireenth prophet or some such crap.
ReplyDeleteUmbrella is pretty cool - in the Otto v. Bismarckian concept of an over arching platform
ReplyDeleteto build regional coercive diplomacy.
Also, Little Satan could actually do quite a bit of damge to Iran's enrichment chicanery and WMD plans and plants.
http://greatsatansgirlfriend.blogspot.com/2008/06/strike-package.html
Which brings up what all could happen if Great Satan hooked up with Little Satan in a strike.
And it may not be for enrichment interruptus - it could easily be a decap strike like a regime killing regime change.