If Israel Is The Tumor Then Iran Is The Metastasizing Cancer Part II

'The Metastasizing Cancer Cell'

To catch up, from If Israel Is The Tumor Then Iran Is The Metastasizing Cancer Part I:

If "Israel is the Tumor", as is claimed according to the hysterical and deranged "Thug-In-Chief" Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then Iran is the Cancer and it's metastasizing.

The Thug-In-Chief recently called for Israel to be wiped off the map, moderated his position. In a spirit of statesmanlike compromise, he now wants Israel wiped off the map of the Middle East and wiped on to the map of Europe.

The perfect solution to the "Middle East peace process": out of sight, out of mind. And given that Ahmadinejad's out of his mind, we're already halfway there.

Israel will have to strike Iran, and soon. Here is why.

The Iranians have long said that a few nuclear bombs on Iran would still leave an awful lot of Muslims in the world- even in Iran- whereas one nuclear bomb on Israel would render the state completely unviable, since most of its population would have been already wiped out. Iran would gain enormously in stature in the Muslim world if they could pull such a thing off, even if it meant the deaths of several million Iranian "martyrs."

Given all of the above, Israel obviously has to go in there if the US won't. The problem is that, unlike the Osirak bombing in 1981, it would a) probably require ground troops as well; b) require a large number of planes- much larger than the Osirak business- because Iran is on alert and waiting for such a thing. Also, Israel as a state would have to be able to survive such an attack: that is, it could not send all of its fighter planes over, because it could not afford to be left exposed and defenseless if too large a proportion of its air force were shot down.

Logistically, there are other nightmares involved, such as:

a) Israel's planes would need to fly around Arabia, and refuel at least once each way- and the more planes there are, and the farther one must fly, the greater the chance of detection. Also, since the US is very much present both on land and sea in the Gulf area, what would happen when they detected the Israeli force? Would they shoot them down? Would a Muslim sympathizer notify the Iranians or some other Arab country which would then put the Iranian on alert?

b) The Iranians deliberately built many of their facilities under densely populated areas, and especially under buildings that would make Israel look like the international villain if those were destroyed: hospitals, old age homes, etc. Could you imagine what a field day the UN would have after an Israeli strike ended up causing collateral damage among Iranians (from Iranian nuclear fallout or from the Israeli explosives) in the tens or even hundreds of thousands?

Note the Iranian testing a couple of weeks ago, of its land-sea missile. Israel's second strike capability is based upon its 3 Dolphin submarines; Iran is obviously aiming to neutralize that capability as well.

And Israel's testing a few weeks ago of the Arrow anti-missile defense system. The big question is, how reliable is that system? If it only intercepts, say, 9 out of 10 missiles, that is not good enough. And, of course, "Star Wars" technology would be no help at all if the Iranians were simply to give a nuclear weapon to Hizbullah to launch from Lebanon or, even simpler, to hand over to a Palestinian suicide bomber to detonate in downtown Tel Aviv.

In short, Israel really has no choice, and I think the Iranians know this. No matter what happens, they will come out looking like winners in the strange calculus of the Muslim world and the international treatment of Israel as "the Jew among nations." If they manage to get the bomb and wipe out Israel, as they have so kindly informed everyone that they intend to do, they are the heroes of the Islamic world. If Israel attacks them, the UN and Europe will surely make political hay out of the inevitable civilian casualties sitting on top of those nuclear installations, perhaps even crippling Israel so much by international sanctions that she can then be finished off by conventional methods. Any way you slice it, the Iranians gain politically by such a conflict.

Remember, none of the wars the Arabs began with Israel, with the possible exception of the actual 1948 war around Israel's declaration of independence, made sense in the eyes of secular Westerners who think Muslim values must surely resemble those of the denizens of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Obviously, if one changes the values, the political calculations shift accordingly.

We know already that ISRAEL’S armed forces have been ordered by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, to be ready by the end of March for possible strikes on secret uranium enrichment sites in Iran, military sources have revealed.

The order came after Israeli intelligence warned the government that Iran was operating enrichment facilities, believed to be small and concealed in civilian locations."

David Bernstein @ The Volokh Conspiracy agrees: "I predict that Israel will strike Iran within the next few months, with the goal of disrupting or terminating Iran's nuclear program". Heh.

The Confederate Yankee: "The Iranians certainly know this, which is why they've entered into a deal to buy 29 TOR-M1 mobile air defense missile systems (another source strongly suggests that the actual number is actually 32 TOR-M1 systems, or the equivalent of two regiments)."

From Sigmund Carl & Alfred: "A remarkably candid account of Saudi worries about a nuclear Iran can be found here: Is Iran Serious About Hitting israel?

The Iranians have unleashed a genie that can't be rebottled."

Over @ Israpundit there is a reality check.

Jeff Goldstein has some ideas on the way forward, rather similar to mine, although in my dark moments I favor the 'dropping a nuke' solution...just kidding and checking that you are paying attention there.

UPDATE: Gina Cobb has the latest on Iran having gone nuclear. Fasten your seat belts:

"According to an Iranian resistance group, citing "reliable sources" within Iran, underground nuclear weapons facilities have been built in at least 14 sites near Tehran, Isfahan, and Qom.  Mohammad Mohaddessin, chairman of the opposition National Council of the Resistance, said at a news conference in Paris that the tunnels "are particularly used for hiding research centers, workshops, nuclear equipment, and nuclear and missile command and control centers."  Building the tunnels reportedly started as early as 1989. 

According tin Mohaddessin, some tunnels have been dug into mountains and then separate into several smaller cavities. Some go down vertically into the ground and branch out at a certain depth. Others are trenches cut into the surface of the ground and covered with cement and camouflaged to resemble hills.  Lead has been used to line the tunnels to stop any leakage of radiation and sound to the surrounding environment and to prevent detection by IAEA investigators, Mohaddessin said."

Related posts on ATB: If Israel Is The Tumor Then Iran Is The Metastasizing Cancer Part I Can We Get Over It Already The Enemy Within'   Extraction Of The Stone Of Iranian Madness 'The Islamofascist Manifesto'   'Secular Democracy Held To Ransom'

Comments

[MarcH]

sigmund, carl and alfred - that's an interesting theory on Sephardi politicians, but I can't agree. I don't think that the policies advanced thus far by Silvan Shalom (as Foreign Minister) and Shaul Mofaz (as Defense Minister) indicate that they are more or less tough than Ashkenazi politicians/officials.

[weekenderman]

Why would you say something as ludicrous as that, Ghost?

There is a madman in control of the government in Iran, and our President is doing well to warn that fool that an attack may be imminen if he continues with his nonsense (threats of nuclear weapons, etc.).

What course would you suggest as an alternative? Because simply coming on here and saying that our GOP administration has weakened our hand with Iran means nothing to the more intelligent posters here.

[Ghost Dansing]

Unfortunately, the incompetence of this Republican administration has actually weakened our hand in dealing with Iran.

[MarcH]

Buddy Larsen wrote, "The problem with 'bravado' is that sooner or later, the armed guys guarding your office start looking at you differently after awhile--if all you seem to be doing is talk. And you walk past them a dozen times every day."

Unfortunately, many leaders don't seem to care what "gun-carriers" think of them. Presidents Carter and Clinton managed to walk past their Secret Service and Marine details throughout their terms without, apparently, feeling the least embarrassed about their lack of effective action concerning the attacks on the U.S. in Iran, Somalia, Kenya/Tanzania, and Yemen (USS Cole).

[sigmund, carl and alfred]

Sharon's departure poses an interesting possibility- sooner or later, there will be a Sephardic Israeli Prime Minister- one who grew up in an Arab country and understands Arab Muslims very differently than his European countrymen.

In fact, I believe it is precisely because of that impending reality that both Libya's Qaddafi and Syria's Assad have made public overatures to Jewish communities everywhere.

The fear is that an Israeli prime minister that grew up in Syria, and spent his life hearing his parents were treated and how the cemetary where his grandparents are buried, might not really give a rats ass about Arab sensibilities.

The Arab fear of that truth might be the first and only time Arab political analysis doesn't backfire.

Woe unto any Arab leader that thinks a Sephardic Prime Minister won't kick back. After a few centuries of oppression, Sephardic Jews relish the the notion of payback.

As noted, Sephadics speak Arabic, in every sense of the word.

[Joshua Minton]

I think that Sharon is on his way out. With his recent health issues, I think that is a signal that more moderate leadership is about to be put in place which will go along with the waves of commerce now centered around the Middle East.

The important thing here is the asset security of the oil resources. I feel more secure knowing that they're in Western hands, regardless of who controls the land covering them.

I would look for a significant shift in the political dialogue towards the moderate in the next six months and I would also look for an Sharon exit from world politics--he's far too divisive and he's getting in they way of money being made.

[Buddy Larsen]

The problem with 'bravado' is that sooner or later, the armed guys guarding your office start looking at you differently after awhile--if all you seem to be doing is talk. And you walk past them a dozen times every day.

[sigmund, carl and alfred]

I really believe that much of what comes out of Iran nowadays is bravado.

Most of the mullahs- but not all- understand that if they deploy a nuclear weapon against Israel, Tehran and much of the rest of the country, would morph into a glass parking lot.

That said, however, the danger posed by a nuclear Iran isn't nullified. All it takes is one crackpot mullah or nutjob who has bought into the anti Israel/anti Semitism as being an islamic virtue, and the region goes up in smoke.

Further, a remarkably candid account of Saudi worries about a nuclear iran can be found here.Is Iran Serious About Hitting israel?

The Iranians have unleashed a genie that can't be rebottled.