MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 1 year 1 week ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 2 weeks ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 3 months ago
Hits of the Day
- Doctor Cleveland (50)
- Deadman (5)
- Doctor Cleveland (5)
- PeraclesPlease (4)
- artappraiser (4)
Thinking About the Unthinkable: An Israel-Iran Nuclear War
By Lurker on Thu, 09/17/2015 - 1:05pm |The writer claims that an Israeli nuclear strike on Iran is now likely, even inevitable.
An Israeli nuclear pre-emption is thus eminently thinkable. Every other option has been stripped away by Obama's decision, concealed from Israel, Congress and our allies until it was too late to challenge....
The die is now cast. Nuclear pre-emption becomes attractive to a nation in
extremis, where Israel is now
I'm not familiar with this author or this publication, but he seems to have a lot of technical knowledge, and has worked for the US government.
URL:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/thinking_about_the_unthinkable_an_israeliran_nuclear_war_.html
- Add new comment
- 7460 reads
Comments
Israel has not advertised what is in their armory.
Having a deal go forward that may or may not change the conditions of war between Israel and Iran is certainly a matter of discussion. But cancelling the deal on the basis that it gives a green light to the most extreme response by Israel is not an argument in their favor but a moral condemnation of them.
My brain hurts.
by moat on Thu, 09/17/2015 - 7:43pm
'Every other option (but nuclear war) has been stripped away by Obama's decision,'
The every other options being exactly WHAT? He mentions none. It seems nuclear war or the unanimous Security Council Agreement are all there are.
We can have a nuclear war anytime I guess, but it would seem best not to be hasty.
I think his Dad wrote a piece on Star Wars in the 80's. In a government job.
by NCD on Fri, 09/18/2015 - 12:56am
He mentions a lot of other options short of a nuclear attack, and explains why they wouldn't work. Among them: "special-operations and cyber forces that Israel would use", which Obama has now pledged to help Iran defend against.
Other options he considers: "conventional weapons or sanctions", hard-target munitions, staged-warhead penetrators, electro-magnetic pulses, high-power microwaves....
by Lurker on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 12:57pm
If the sanctions agreement is just a trick to allow Iran to eliminate Israel, then it is not just about making the weapon to do it; it is signaling to the world that nothing else matters to them, including their own survival.
Nothing that we or Iranians would recognize as Iran would survive such a war.
The article's emphasis on what it would take to blow up a bunker is not a good measure of the two sided sword of mass destruction.
by moat on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 7:17pm
It was actually the author himself who worked on the Ronnie "Raygun" SDI in the 1980s that has milked billions of "black-project" dollars out of tax-payers pockets for this...
Two-minute video: https://youtu.be/MmkYcEcSLvA
~OGD~
by oldenGoldenDecoy on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 1:31pm
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 4:16pm
I've seen this movie before.
~OGD~
by oldenGoldenDecoy on Fri, 09/18/2015 - 2:51am
I have to snicker at the reference to Israel as "frighteningly vulnerable". The military powerhouse of the Middle East, which could defeat all of its neighbors at once? The only state in the region with nuclear weapons? Come on.
by Aaron Carine on Fri, 09/18/2015 - 8:35am
Israel might defeat its neighbours in a conventional war; it has done so in the past. But once Iran gets the bomb, the situation changes. I guess it boils down to: do you believe Obama's claim that the treaty will prevent Iran from getting the bomb? And for how long? Will Israel's leaders be willing to bet its existence on Obama's claim? Should they?
by Lurker on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 1:08pm
So far we have a Security Council unanimous agreement with Iran to not make a bomb, and we have nuclear war.
So what is the other option? Another war where guys like you tally up casualties and try to make political points it was worth it, or if clearly another fiasco like Iraq, it was all the fault of Obama?
by NCD on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 1:23pm
This sounds like a Chicken Little paranoia fest to me. The Israelis may be nuts but they don't seem to be insane or to want Armageddon just yet.
There does seem to be a growing group of truly insane writers and commenters who can't wait for Doomsday and seem to hope the Izzis or the Amerikans will get on with it.
by Peter (not verified) on Fri, 09/18/2015 - 11:28pm
I doubt that this kind of rationalization of a first strike is taken seriously among the political class in Israel. But if it is it nixes the idea that Israel can be trusted with nuclear weapons.
by ocean-kat on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 12:51am
Unlike, say, North Korea, which can? Unlike, say, Iran, which can be trusted to monitor its own behaviour and report any breaches to the UN?
by Lurker on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 1:01pm
The inspection agreement is one of the tightest ever negotiated. You are blathering the usual right wing propaganda.
by NCD on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 1:29pm
It's a fair cop, guv! You've caught me reading well-known right wing propagandists, like:
Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/11/us-iran-nuclear-parchin-exclusive-idUSKCN0RB2D420150911
The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/08/19/the-latest-iran-revelation-is-utterly-humiliating/
NBC News: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iran-nuclear-talks/side-deal-allows-iran-inspect-its-own-military-site-n412786
AP: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e40803924a8ab4c61cb65b2b2bb3/ap-exclusive-un-let-iran-inspect-alleged-nuke-work-site
CNN: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/19/politics/iran-nuclear-deal-inspections-parchin/
And, of course, The Wall Street Journal: http://www.wsj.com/articles/irans-secret-self-inspections-1440026399
by Lurker on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 6:24pm
So what's the right wing option? Invade, occupy and have an election? And I trust the Int. Atomic. Energy commission more than the blowhards at your links.
by NCD on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 7:32pm
That's a silly response. Conventional "wisdom" is that North Korea and Iran cannot be trusted with a nuclear weapon while Israel can. I'm simply saying that if a significant portion of the Israeli political class is seriously considering rationals for a first strike imo that's convincing evidence that the conventional wisdom on Israel is wrong. I'm also saying I doubt articles like this are taken seriously by the vast majority of the Israeli political class. I really hope I'm right about that. Even the vast majority of the US far right aren't talking about first strike nuking our enemies.
by ocean-kat on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 6:37pm
I hope very much that Bosma is wrong. I hope very much that Israel's leaders find some other option.
He does sound convincing, though.
by Lurker on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 7:42pm
When the US had a nuke and the Soviet Union didn't we could have made a equally convincing case that we had to bomb any site in Russia making a nuke. In the end the only option was MAD and learning to live with it. There were some scary years back then as we over reacted. I remember drills in school going into pipe filled tunnel deep under the elementary school
It would be easier to keep all nukes out of the Middle East if Israel didn't have nukes. When Israel decided to join the nuclear club it made the choice to accept that only option as well. I think Pakistan is a more unstable country and a greater nuclear risk to Israel than Iran would be if it got a bomb.
by ocean-kat on Sun, 09/20/2015 - 1:32am
Remember "Protect and Survive"? Backyard fallout shelters? But MAD doesn't work if your enemy is looking forward to the Apocalypse.
I might be wrong about this, but I think the Russian nuke came as a complete surprise to the US, and so your case is moot. If the US had known about Soviet nuke sites, they might well have bombed them.
Pakistan did not develop the bomb because of Israel; it was responding to India's bomb. I agree that Pakistan is unstable and dangerous.
US intelligence services seem to have a perfect record of missing foreign nuclear developments. Presumably, they are too busy monitoring political opponents of the administration. Now we are supposed to trust them about Iran....
by Lurker on Sun, 09/20/2015 - 6:33pm
India and Pakistan were developing nukes simultaneously. Yes the arms race was between India and Pakistan but Pakistan is still a unstable Muslim country that hates Israel. I'd be more worried about them than Iran. Just as India's bomb may have accelerated Pakistan's program isn't it likely Israel's nukes accelerated Iran's program?
I actually have the harshest views of Muslims here on dagblog and some here have even accused me of Islamaphobia. Yet even I don't believe the theocrats leading Iran are apocalyptic. They seem quite happy being in control of a country and it's people. Iran is fairly stable and well run even in the face of the misery of the sanctions. While they might finance acts of terror I don't see them as suicide bombers.
The status quo will not hold. Proliferation will continue until we seriously pursue disarmament. Eventually the large nations will have to reach agreements to decommission more and more nukes followed by smaller nations including Israel reaching agreements to decommission their nukes or proliferation will continue and Israel will find itself pointing it's nukes at several other middle east nations with nukes pointed at Israel. Israel is foolish if it thinks it can maintain it's position as the sole nuclear power in the middle east. In fact that position is already gone.
by ocean-kat on Sun, 09/20/2015 - 11:56pm
(Accidentally sent this twice.)
by Lurker on Sat, 09/19/2015 - 7:44pm