Iran’s leaders would do well to rethink their gamble and suspend their nuclear program. Bar this, the best they could hope for is that Israel’s conventional air assault will destroy their nuclear facilities. To be sure, this would mean thousands of Iranian casualties and international humiliation. But the alternative is an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland. Some Iranians may believe that this is a worthwhile gamble if the prospect is Israel’s demise. But most Iranians probably don’t.
Can anyone really be swayed by the conclusion that a nation should accept that its only options are to allow Israel to murder thousands of its citizens now or to allow Israel to murder millions of is citizens later? I mean, really. “I was skeptical of the Iranian threat at first, but Benny Morris makes a compelling case for attacking Iran now—just in case they really will become a worse threat—that I think we, or Israel as our proxies, should do it!” What nonsense.
I hope Morris’s editorial represents a desperate plea on the part of the capriciously warring class because they sense they are losing their best opportunity.
There’s that “they’re completely irrational, unlike the USSR” line again. Ugh.
by JH—Jul 20, 08:19 AM
And given as fact, too, along with the flat-out lie, “Every intelligence agency in the world believes the Iranian program is geared toward making weapons, not to the peaceful applications of nuclear power,” which is contradicted by none other than the CIA.
Yglesias noted last week that bombing Iran is “policy proposal walking around in search of a solution“—though surely he meant “in search of a reason to exist,” since the proposal itself seems to be as resilient as zombies, and as soulless. Morris’s represents just one more reason.
While looking for that last link, I discovered that Morris’s op-ed appears to be deeply inspired by John Bolton.
by greg—Jul 20, 09:43 AM