Israeli assault on Iran is contrary to U.S. interests
From The Christian Science Monitor:
Senior Pentagon officials are making no secret of the fact that despite the apparent stepped-up drumbeat to war with Iran, they believe a strike on the country is “not prudent” right now.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, put this view – held by many in the Department of Defense – in perhaps the strongest terms yet this week.
True, Israel could bomb Iran and delay the country’s ability to create nuclear weapons “probably for a couple of years,” General Dempsey told CNN Sunday.
The problem is that many of the Iranian targets – buried deeply underground – would be “beyond the reach” of the Israeli military, in what Dempsey called a “zone of immunity.”
… Equally important, senior defense officials emphasize, while it’s clear that Iran aspires to nuclear technology, it is far from certain whether the country is intent on actually weaponizing this technology,
This was the finding of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI)’s recent assessment on security threats facing the United States. Right now, Iran is “more than capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon if its political leaders – specifically the supreme leader himself – chooses to do so,” DNI head James Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee February 16.
Yet so far they do not appear to have made that choice, Lt. General Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told lawmakers in the same hearing.
“The agency assesses Iran as unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict,” he said, concluding that though the possibility of Iran building a nuclear weapon is “technically feasible,” it is “practically not likely.”
It’s interesting: People who would ordinarily insist that politicians “listen to the generals” are themselves turning a deaf ear to the generals, preferring not to hear their advice in this particular adventure.
It’s also interesting to see it argued that a U.S. president ought to “get right” with a foreign country and in effect allow that foreign country — in this case Israel — to dictate U.S. diplomatic and military policy in a strategically critical area, even to the detriment of U.S. interests.
And no, U.S. interests and Israeli interests are not somehow cosmically aligned in perfect parallel to each other.
Finally, it’s downright fascinating to see the same people who were beating the war drums so loudly over Iraq, blind to the consequences of their preferred course of action, once again pounding out statements and op-eds demanding military solutions. The wonder isn’t that those people haven’t changed — they are who they are. The wonder is that they are still heeded.
If you want $6-a-gallon gasoline, Iraq up in flames and a lot more trouble in Afghanistan, with the lives of U.S. troops put at greater risk, then sure, an unprovoked assault on Iran is just the thing. If all that and more is worth a two-to-three-year delay in Iran’s nuclear program that a successful strike might produce, then make that argument.
Me, I’m not convinced.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2012 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
252 comments Add your comment
Midori
February 21st, 2012
7:22 am
FIRST!!
Mick
February 21st, 2012
7:23 am
Well, when it comes to israel with the cons, they prefer them to be in the drivers seat. Israel can, and probably will over reach and then obama and the US will get the fallout. It’s a perfect plan to sabotage obama as an aside…
Stevie Ray
February 21st, 2012
7:26 am
JAY,
Howdy. I wish we would simply get out of the Middle East and stop borrowing money from China to send there. We got nothing from IRAQ, Pakistan, and other investments….heck we don’t even get preferred oil pricing. Let the Zionist finally fight there own battles if they choose. Clearly, what we’ve been doing since 1948 ain’t working..
Midori
February 21st, 2012
7:30 am
yeah Stevie – let them keep “leading from behind” :eyes roll:
where would some of you be without Hannity?
Mick
February 21st, 2012
7:33 am
Someone is always itching for a fight, it’s been my experience that most fights end up with a “lose, lose” outcome…
Bill Orvis White
February 21st, 2012
7:35 am
Wrong, pure and simple. We, along with the Israelis need to join together in an all-out 72-hour aerial assault on Teheran. On the 73rd hour, we put boots on the ground to kill the ayatollahs, dictators and assorted thugs. Once in there, we dismantle the covert nuclear program, build a democratic government and keep a U.S./Israeli contingent in place in Teheran.
If we do not act now, I’m afraid we will see the anti-American caliphate stretching from Tripoli to Teheran — that folk like Liberal Jay, Nanny Pelosi and other useful idiots come to fruition.
Now, we are seeing high gas prices which will go up to $6 a gallon, due to this installed-”president’s” massively failed foreign policies — especially in the Straight of Hormuz. This spinelss “leader” is allowing Ahmadinejad to call the shots in that area thus leading to skyrocketing prices which will stifle any hope for growth in Obama’s recession. Plus, Obama cannot stare down OPEC which is another pillar in this useful idiot’s hall of shame.
Deficits are exploding, taxes are sky-high and unemployment is much higher than what the gov’t is telling us because so many, many people gave up looking for work and are not reporting anything.
Amen,
Bill
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
February 21st, 2012
7:35 am
Fox reference in only 4 posts….A record?
Granny Godzilla
February 21st, 2012
7:36 am
“Finally, it’s downright fascinating to see the same people who were beating the war drums so loudly over Iraq, blind to the consequences of their preferred course of action, once again pounding out statements and op-eds demanding military solutions.”
Which is why as they beat the drums….every statement by these hawks must be questioned, checked and double checked.
We must not allow ourselves to be lead into a foolish war ever again.
…
Preferred Oil Pricing?
If you buy your groceries at Kroger or Ingles you can get that!
Sean Smith
February 21st, 2012
7:36 am
I grew up in washington DC and we lived with the threat of nuclear war with Russia for along time. However we knew that if they attacked us there would be a devastating response.
Israel has plenty of nukes, if Iran attacks them they could devastate Iran, obliterate Tehran.
Why doesn’t this threat work for today the way it did and does between us and Russia????? Why do we need to pre-emt Iran???
Fred ™
February 21st, 2012
7:36 am
Nuke them til they glow and shoot them in the dark.
Let’s noodle this out are and have ALWAYS been our friends in the Middle East? The Iranians? or the Israeli’s?
Mick
February 21st, 2012
7:37 am
bill
Yes, everything has worked out so well in iraq. I think we would be better off following george washington’s advice warning us to stay out of foreign entaglements. For your information, pakistan a muslim country, already has the bomb, should we invade them too?
Fred ™
February 21st, 2012
7:38 am
WHO was left out of that sentence……….. Well the word who and the period that should have gone before it……..
Let’s noodle this out. Who are and have ALWAYS been our friends in the Middle East? The Iranians? or the Israeli’s?
Midori
February 21st, 2012
7:38 am
knee jerk response in 7 posts.
alas, my record is broken.
Fred ™
February 21st, 2012
7:39 am
yo Bill. My pipes are stuffed. Since you have so much time why don’t you drive over and give me a hand……..
Granny Godzilla
February 21st, 2012
7:40 am
Israeli PM Netanyahu attacks Gen. Dempsey as Servant of Iran
http://www.juancole.com/
Midori
February 21st, 2012
7:41 am
I seriously think Bill is messing with you guys.
sorta the poor man’s Redneck Convert……
Stevie Ray
February 21st, 2012
7:43 am
MIDORI,
What in my post had anything to do with reference to ST Bernard idiot Hannity? Looks like you may watch him…or you prematurely postulated.
Mick
February 21st, 2012
7:43 am
midori
Of course he is, but underneath all that ignorance are some core beliefs…
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
7:48 am
It’s a no-win situation because there is little we can do to control it. If we back down on the anti-nuke stance then some in this nation will say we’re weak. If we double-down then we’ll have the $6 a gallon price within days – that is a lose/lose to me so better to take the path of least resistance for an opportunity to change things in the future.
Stevie Ray
February 21st, 2012
7:51 am
MIDORI,
Actually, maybe it’s best to see conflict push our gas prices to $6. That’s really the only way something meaningful will get done relative to becoming self sufficient or developing real practical technology unlike the crap out there now….
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
7:55 am
Oh, and one more item to add. Although some think that the MAD position that worked during the Cold War wouldn’t work with Iran. I disagree. If Iran knows that if it were to launch a nuclear weapon at any of its neighbors (not just Israel) it would receive a response of 10 fold then I think that would deter anyone, even the crazy ones running that government.
Brosephus
February 21st, 2012
7:59 am
F-o-t-W
I agree with the lose/lose thing. There are bunker busters out there that could theoretically reach the Iranian compounds, even though they are reportedly buried under mountains. My only question is that, if we’re supposedly friendly with Saudi and a few other ME countries, why are they (OPEC) giving Iran such clout on oil prices? Seems like they’re benefitting from Iran’s sabre rattling, and don’t have any qualms over the surging price of oil. Once it gets to the point where only the top 10% or so can afford to buy gas, it will be too late to reverse the effects on the worldwide economy.
barking frog
February 21st, 2012
8:00 am
Israel has nukes, India has nukes, Pakistan has nukes, after
that Iran has nukes doesn’t sound so bad….for a while.
Granny Godzilla
February 21st, 2012
8:01 am
Fly
I can’t agree.
Idle threats won’t deter an ideology that reveres the suicide bomber.
Quick
February 21st, 2012
8:01 am
concluding that though the possibility of Iran building a nuclear weapon is “technically feasible,” it is “practically not likely.”
That is badly out of context. He was answering whether they could build a nuclear weapon this year.
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
8:02 am
Stevie,
I agree that it would be a good incentive to get to a more self sufficient position but I believe that the short term damage would be far too great to effect the change we need. What needs to happen is the price keeps going up slowly so we can feel some pain but also have time to change. Given the current weakness of the world economy I don’t think it can stand the shock something like this.
I wish it were otherwise because I’ve been telling my conservative friends and co-workers for years that if they want to thumb their noses at the Mideast oil then the best and only way is to improve conservation and build an economy that is not dependent on oil. Once something like that happens then those nations will go back to being the 3rd world countries they really are and what better revenge then that. Did they ever agree with me? Nope – they just couldn’t understand the peaceful path to victory.
jconservative
February 21st, 2012
8:03 am
War with Iran and the resulting gas prices should be receiving the support of those who argue that high gas prices will finally get the US off of its duff and finally doing something to gain independence from foreign oil.
HDB
February 21st, 2012
8:04 am
To attack Iran would not just adversely affect the US economy…but the WORLD economy!! A thoughtful response is required here…not a knee-jerk reaction as the conervatives in Congress ae espousing!! If this is the catalyst to make the US finally become energy independent…and focus on expanding alternative energy and nuclear power resources…then this would be the start of something good for the nation!!
FOTW…..you got it right!!!
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
8:05 am
Granny,
It’s kinda hard to carry a nuclear device big enough to do any damage when it is strapped to your check. Iran may have the ability to weaponize their nuclear material but to miniaturize it – that is a totally different technology and they are no where near that. Iran wants the bomb in a big way not a little way. If Iran wanted to create a dirty bomb then they could have done that years ago.
I think you’ve seen too many Hollywood movies.
Brosephus
February 21st, 2012
8:06 am
Actually, maybe it’s best to see conflict push our gas prices to $6. That’s really the only way something meaningful will get done relative to becoming self sufficient or developing real practical technology unlike the crap out there now….
Nobody heeded the message in the 70’s, and it doesn’t seem like many felt the urge after 2008. Look at the proposal for the T-SPLOST as an example. That’s the perfect opportunity to develop alternatives to cars that would help alleviate some of the sting of $6 gas. I’m of the opinion that I hope it gets so damn high that the people who demagogue public transit get down on their knees an fellate their entire lineup of elected officials in an attempt to get transit to their area.
AmVet - Just say no to the War Pigs.
February 21st, 2012
8:07 am
I just posted this downstairs but it fits in nicely with the chickenhawks and cowards that define today’s GOP, also known as the Party of Permanent Contrived Wars.
The dual threats of the cancer (it would be nice if it were just a fungus!) called neo-conservatism are…getting thousands of more US men and women killed needlessly so they can feel good about themselves.
No sale.
And why it appears that they are going to once again just give the White House to Obama…
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
8:09 am
One interesting thought would be – what would happen to the supply of oil if there were a nuclear exchange in the Middle East? Also, what would happen to the oil itself? What if the oil supply was contaminated and made radioactive such that it could not be refined?
That is a scenario that would not be good for anyone right now. Interesting to speculate but that is just all theory and stuff for Hollywood.
godless heathen
February 21st, 2012
8:10 am
If Iran hits Israel with a nuke, there won’t be any Israel left to retaliate. Israel doesn’t have nuke armed subs lurking around. They were the big threat to the Ruskies and the ChiComs. They never know where they are at. Even if they obliterated the US, they knew their subs could perform massive retaliation. If the Iranian whackos wiped Israel off the map, would the US retaliate on Israel’s behalf?
What scares me about the Iranians is the potential for them to provide a weapon to a terrorist organization. And I disagree with the Obama administration that Imanutjob is going to behave rationally. These are religious zeolots and therefore not governed by rational thought processes.
AmVet - Just say no to the War Pigs.
February 21st, 2012
8:12 am
Although some think that the MAD position that worked during the Cold War wouldn’t work with Iran.
Of course it worked. But you left out one very important letter – the proper acronym is MADE.
Mutually Assured Destruction of Economies.
The Soviets went bankrupt and for the very same reason, it appears we’re not that far behind.
Who needs, schools and bridges and roads and critical infrastructure when we can spend gazillions of dollars every single year on ever more expensive/corrupt weapons systems?!
No matter, the men who General Electric and General Dynamics are thrilled…
Keep Up--Te gusta losing numb nutz?
February 21st, 2012
8:14 am
Listen to the Generals, Listen to the pundits, Listen to the chicken hawks — for some, unless you “listen” and hear the answer they want, you will always be wrong.
barking frog
February 21st, 2012
8:14 am
Is the BP well that contaminated the Gulf producing or is
it still capped ?
Brosephus
February 21st, 2012
8:16 am
godless
Israel has Patriot Missiles, and it would be almost impossible for Iran to lob missiles at Israel without them being detected. The Patriot is a pretty good missile intercept system, but I don’t know what would occur with an interception of a missile with a nuclear warhead attached. Israel always stay on alert, so I’m also confident that any missile attack would occur an all out response even before the first missile got near Israeli airspace.
That said, I think Iran is crazy enough to lob missiles, but I don’t think their entire population wants to martyr themselves in the process. I think there would be a violent overthrow of the government if any attempt was made to send nukes towards Israel.
Recon 0311 2533
February 21st, 2012
8:19 am
If we can succeed in blocking Iran’s nuclear ambition through economic and covert action warfare we should continue that strategy. General Dempsey and the other arm chair generals in Washington, however, should keep their mouths shut. Signaling to Iran that we’ve removed the military option from consideration won’t help us to achieve success through means other than a live fire all out war. Additionally, it won’t help us convince Israel that an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities won’t succeed long term. Unfortunately, war with Iran is probably inevitable at some point.
Granny Godzilla
February 21st, 2012
8:20 am
Fly
Yes, Fat Man and Little Boy won’t fit in a members only jacket pocket.
You miss the point.
You will not strike fear into the hearts folks who will blow themselves up for what they want by threatening to blow them up.
Bet you have the full CD set of the first year of “24″
godless heathen
February 21st, 2012
8:21 am
Bro,
I hope the Patriots have been improved since the first Gulf War. Didn’t Saddam get a few scuds through? And it would only take 1.
carlosgvv
February 21st, 2012
8:22 am
The truth is we have no say so in this matter at all. Israel will attack Iran if they think it’s necessary regradless of what the US thinks or what negative effects it will have on our gas prices and lives of our soldiers. America, for various reasons, MUST support Israel fully with funding and weapons. This will never change.
Butch Cassidy
February 21st, 2012
8:23 am
” Only two things scare me, and one of them is nuclear war”
-Austin Powers
Ivan
February 21st, 2012
8:23 am
“Nobody heeded the message in the 70’s, and it doesn’t seem like many felt the urge after 2008. Look at the proposal for the T-SPLOST as an example. That’s the perfect opportunity to develop alternatives to cars that would help alleviate some of the sting of $6 gas. I’m of the opinion that I hope it gets so damn high that the people who demagogue public transit get down on their knees an fellate their entire lineup of elected officials in an attempt to get transit to their area.”
Right. Screw the economic recovery. All the people just now finding work should be pouring more money into gasoline. Not to mention the effect it would have on the price of just about everything else to live.
All so that you can sit at home and take pride that more people are forced to take the urine intoxicated MARTA system.
SMDH
Brosephus
February 21st, 2012
8:24 am
godless
I haven’t read up on them in years, but just about every weapon system we have is continuously updated and improved as technology advances. I don’t see why it would be any different with the Patriots.
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
8:25 am
I don’t think the Iranians are as crazy as we are led to believe. That government craves power and attention and by threatening the use of the bomb they get all of that. But they know that if they use it against Israel or against Saudi Arabia (they hate them just as much) they will receive the wrong type of attention – in the form of retalitaion and not even Russia or China can protect them from that.
That government stays in power because they control the oil assests of the nation. The more oil costs the more money they have to stay in power. The current program of the US and Europe is to weaken their hold on their own people and let more moderates gain control. If we were to attack then the entire country would unite behind their leaders, just as we would. So we need to suffer some pain in the hope that we can effect change from within Iran.
barking frog
February 21st, 2012
8:25 am
The oil producing nations of the middle east realize they
can manipulate national economies and the world economy
but with the oil coming from Russia and Africa that won’t last
long. Impounding the assets of Iran by the Obama administration
is producing the same reaction from the Iranians that it did in
the Carter days but instead of Embassy hostages they are
holding oil.
AmVet - Just say no to the War Pigs.
February 21st, 2012
8:25 am
Bro, it only takes a ballistic missile about 11 minutes to fly from Iran to Israel.
http://trueslant.com/nealungerleider/2009/09/21/united-states-israel-rehearsing-for-iranian-missile-attack/
Note this sentence: The radar, which was sent to Israel last October as a parting gift from US President George W. Bush…
Your tax dollars, hard at work…
Keep Up--Te gusta losing numb nutz?
February 21st, 2012
8:26 am
General Dempsey and the other arm chair generals in Washington, however, should keep their mouths shut. Signaling to Iran that we’ve removed the military option from consideration won’t help us to achieve success through means other than a live fire all out war.
I continue to be amazed daily by the quality of the informed posters here who have access to all sorts of high level information and strategies that know that something is or is not a signal or to understand that signal if it was being made. They must have that inside information from the State Department and other areas too. It just is simply amazing, and even more, because with all that “genius” inside info, they share it here on this top secret secure website as if it were “facty” with all semblence of “truthiness”.
Granny Godzilla
February 21st, 2012
8:27 am
Fly-on-the-Wall
February 21st, 2012
8:25 am
I don’t think the Iranians are as crazy as we are led to believe.
Well, aren’t we all relieved
Adam
February 21st, 2012
8:27 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iKuMVqht4U