"Bomb Iran=A Nuclear Armed Iran?" Topic

"Iran hawks are playing with fire. We are close to a nuclear deal with Iran, but opponents continue to step up attacks aimed at torpedoing efforts to reach a settlement. They insist that we must walk away from the negotiating table, and that there's a better deal to be had.

That belief is a fantasy.

The reality is that if negotiations with Iran fail, the wreckage will leave the United States without any good options. "If we undermine negotiations now, we'll have only two choices — Accept the reality of an Iranian nuclear bomb, or use military force to attack Iran's nuclear program," former Sen. Carl Levin wrote in a recent op-ed for U.S. News & World Report…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Accepting a deal makes it a certainty as well.

IMHO there is no good solution here. It's either hope the negotiations result in something, or invade. All bombing will do is kick the can down the road a few years, where we'll be talking with alarm at how close Iran is to a bomb, and start the next round of air strikes…

Damon.

It hit me today, the US State Dept. might actually be smarter than anyone gives them credit for. Close a deal with Iran, let them start developing nukes. EVERYONE in the middle east freaks out and gangs up on them. Western civilization sits back and watches the fireworks, then sweeps in and picks up the badly charred pieces.

Nah, probably not.

The problem is that the current POTUS appears to be burning bridges with several of our Middle Eastern "allies".

And Israel cannot afford for Iran to develop a nuclear program. Their national "paranoia" that the Germans gave them back in the 1940s means that they take any politician's statements about destroying "ze ebbil Jooz" as honest statements of intent. Not as propaganda intended for internal consumption. Not as a politician talking out his ass.

As a cold, hard, threat to their existence.

Existential threats are, by definition, a matter of "either they kill me, or I kill them."

And I have no doubt that the Israeli nuke program has figured out how to hit every single government HQ and nuclear facility in Iran.

Why would an Iranian bomb be a threat? More like a politician's propaganda tool (Israeli and Iranian). Muslim Pakistan is reported to already have 120 nukes. Israel didn't get nuked. Israel has up to 400 bombs and definitely more advanced one than Iran could hope to build in the next 50 years. MAD still works. If an Iranian bomb goes off anywhere(even if used by a 3rd party), Iran will no longer exist. While many will point to nut job terrorists doing suicide bombings, you will notice the leaders of said terrorists don't commit suicide. In fact, it might be a good tactic to let the Iranians waste all the energy and money in building bombs they will never use rather than spend that same money on mischief that might actually hurt someone.

Isreal Isreal Isreal…

Some of you guys don't seem to understand what is actually going on.

Iran wants nukes to dominate the Moslem world. Isreal is used as justification to get a bomb. The ones truly scared are the Arabs.

With how fast events are happening in Yemen, you can't figure out how worried the Arabs are about Iran expansionism?

The West is involved because they don't want a nuclear arms race in the Middle East among the Arabs and other moslem nations.

I agree cwlinsj … But I'm afraid that sooner or later … the Persians will get deployable nucs. And that will probably incite a regional nuc arms race. Not to mention the increased probability of one of the many rogue/terrorist/jihadi islamists factions getting hold of one. Or two ? And I have a tendency to believe nothing good could come of that.

The Saudis have already said they'll go nuclear, and the Pakistanis have said they'll aid them, so…….

Can you imagine Hezbollah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, AQ, or ISIS with nukes, let alone the Iranians?

MAD relies on rational actors, and even then (as Robert McNamara notes) reason may not save us. Self-interested, reasonable people make mistakes. Irrational, scared people can make GIGANTIC mistakes.

Why would an Iranian bomb be a threat?

Carefully re-read Lion in the Stars' comment. He is correct.

Israel cannot take Iranian "we are committed to destroying Israel" rhetoric as merely propaganda, even if one were to disregard every other act including the formation of proxy armies (Hezbollah, Hamas, et al) aimed at destabilizing Israel.

Look carefully at a map of Israel and overlay some blast radii. It doesn't take much to exterminate pretty much everyone.

So while you, resting comfortably in Maryland, may not take Iranian threats seriously, Israel doesn't have that luxury.

That means that even if the Iranians are completely joking when they say "We will kill you all" while holding a nuclear arsenal and the means to deliver it, the Israelis can't really play around and may just nuke the hell out of Iran over a misunderstanding.

The Pakistan argument is a strawman as well. The Pakistani government isn't making repeated death threats to Israel, nor do they have the motive or even reliable means to obliterate Israel. They have much scarier nuclear neighbors to worry about.

Didn't the Middle East nuclear weapons race start with Israel getting their own in December 1966, after more than a decade trying, and after getting lots of help and uranium from France?

Aren't current conservative estimates of Israel's arsenal at 80+?

There will be a time when the only way Israel will be able to prevent a ME neighbor from developing their own weapons will be for Israel to take care of it itself. Even if it stands alone.

Dan
TMP link

Aren't current conservative estimates of Israel's arsenal at 80+?

Most estimates I've read put it at more like 200 warheads.

There will be a time when the only way Israel will be able to prevent a ME neighbor from developing their own weapons will be for Israel to take care of it itself. Even if it stands alone.

That time started back in 1981, when the Israelis destroyed the containment building of the Osiraq reactor in Operation Opera.

The Israelis have a harder time dealing with the Iranian reactors, because the Iranian reactors are about twice as far away as the Osiraq facility.

But I suspect that the Israelis have developed a plan to deal with the issue.

Oh, and as a reminder, the US went to war over suspected WMDs because we "didn't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud" as was said at the time.

At the time, we had the "luxury" of a conventional war against the suspected nation. Israel cannot do the same, so would be compelled to choose to prosecute that war by other means.

Again, I'm not saying they would be right in doing so, I'm saying it's all-too-easy to be wrong and still be in a nuclear war with a theatrical, nuclear-armed (or potentially nuclear-armed) Iran.

And I apologize for the tone of my previous response – I was inappropriately snarky.

Lion: "That time started back in 1981"

But the U.S. "looked the other way" back then. I'm afraid they might really have to go at it alone now.

Dan

While I agree that Iran wants Nukes to dominate its Muslim brothers (a new Persian Empire?), what better way to demonstrate their willingness to use them then by Nuking Israel? Does not bother their Muslim brothers very much (probably get accolades from most) but does send a "warning" shot across everyone else's bows. But this is all foolishness. Once one Nuke goes off in the ME, many more will follow. At least this Nuclear winter won't be our fault. Of course we will still get the blame. Not that many people will be left to accuse us.

"Not that many people will be left to accuse us." self solving problem. Next issue.

Also, the Saudi threat didn't mean much. It is believed they have already purchased 3 to 6 Pakistani bombs.

The argument about single Iranian bombs destroying Israel doesn't pass the smell test. A first Gen bomb is in the 20 to 50 kt range and pretty darn big. Maybe Haifa gets it, but not the whole country. And that pretty much requires movement by ship. Even if they had enough and a delivery system, Israel has plenty of bombs out of country to cover that scenario. Still a glass Iran.

Terrorists get one from them? I'm more worried about Pakistan. Still, bombs have a signature of where they were made. Again, end game for Iran.

Can you imagine Hezbollah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, AQ, or ISIS with nukes, let alone the Iranians?

And that is the Big Fear, the nightmare scenario, etc. … If those who believe in martyring themselves in the name of their God, is the right thing to do. And will get them to paradise/heaven.

What EJ said. Nukes leave fingerprints. Any nuke used by a terrorist means a world of hurt for the state that supplied it, even accidentally.

Also, Iran would be the last group on earth to give ISIS, Muslim Brotherhood, or AQ. Iran is Shia. Any of these groups would use it on Iran, first. They hate Iran far more than even Israel or us, particularly with the sectarian "fun" going on in Iraq. Now, once again, nobody says a word about the Sunni basket case, Pakistan, that is sitting on over 100 nukes and does sell weapons and technology (Saudi Arabia so far).