There are six Sunni Arab countries which have declared they will build nukes to offset Iran’s, somthing they did not bother to do when it became accepted that Israel had nukes. They know Israel is really no threat to them if they stop attacking Israel. They are terrified of an aggressive Shi’a revolutionary state in possession of nukes seeking to dominate the region, and who can blame them?

The Iranians have a brief time to overthrow the Mullahs before they are caught in the nuclear crossfire. They put these clowns in power 27 years ago, their consent, tacit or active, has kept them in power, it is their responsibility to be the primary ones to take them down. That’s if the Iranians want to live. If they are content for these suicidal fanatics to take them to Hell, well then they can keep the Mullahs in power longer.

Finally something longer term must be done. Destroying several nuke sites now will buy time but make the Mullahs even more determined to get nukes and gain what they see as their ticket to the Great Power Table. There is no help for it, they must be overthrown sometime soon, by internal revolt or external attack. To paraphrase Michael Ledeen, faster dammit. It has gone on far too long to keep saying please.

But then, with the hatred of the Arabs against Israel as bad as it is, its kinda hard to imagine if an increase to the hatred is actually possible.

“I hate to have to point this out, but this puts the decision on Ehud Olmert, the Israeli who makes Neville Chamberlain look good.”

Heh, no kidding…

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/001010.html

If attacking Iranian nuclear facilities will set off retaliatory strikes by Iranian forces and their allies, I would expect Israel to take out those forces first, thereby leaving the nuclear sites more vulnerable.

If Israel seriously damages Iranian defenses, especially air and naval forces, especially security forces, the Iranian regime would be helpless, and might even be vulnerable to internal dissension.

While we are afraid of Iran taking over a Shiite Iraqi state, Iran itself is at risk with its primary oil fields in ethnically Arab Khuzestan province, whose people might prefer to be part of an Arab state.

In fact, such a strike against Iranian military and security forces would relieve pressure on Iraq by cutting off support for the militias. I wonder if the Iraqis would send a thank-you note. Huh.

I would worry more about Lebanon. The US and Europe are committed to a democratic Lebanon, so a pre-emptive strike against Hizballah is currently a near-impossibility. UN troops are all over the south, and strikes against Lebanese infrastructure were politically problematic the last time.

On the other hand, an attack by Hizballah on Israel might be more than they could get away with, also. This leaves the Diaspora, notoriously security-impaired, as a primary target of the Enemy.

I don’t think we should wait till the war starts to begin praying.

The first is in the Jerusalem Post.

At the end of the day, however, as one former IAF commander involved in the successful strike on Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 points out, it is solely up to the prime minister to decide what course of action Israel will take – military or diplomacy.

Then there’s this one in the Sunday Times of London:

Should the order come from the Israeli prime minister, it will be Shkedi’s job as air force commander to orchestrate a tactical nuclear strike on Iran.

I hate to have to point this out, but this puts the decision on Ehud Olmert, the Israeli who makes Neville Chamberlain look good.

Perhaps the fact that George W. Bush cannot run for election again may mean that he will make a decision.