if they have the capacity (most ppl think they have) israel should attack and "take out" iran's suspected nuclear facilities soon (as in before end of year). imo they probably will.
there are several reasons.
but what will be the consequences of that attack, on the rest of the world?
that will depend on rationality of iran's leaders. if they are sensible to their own interests, rest of the world has not much to fear.
in that case, iran will not attack americans directly, or close the straits of hormuz given the likely terrible repercussions on themselves (such actions and american response will be costly to americans too, but iran will get the worst of it in the end). in this scenario iran will fire off several missiles at israel and will stop at that. (it is already helping terrorists to attack israel and americans so there wont be any increase in that front anyway).
worst that rest of the world will have to suffer, will probably be a week of very high oil prices. in fact imo attack will be beneficial in the sense it will take away one cause of instability (i.e. constant speculation about the israeli attack - iran's missile tests increased oil price by $6 on last thursday) in the region for some time.
of course if iran's leaders act like crazies all bets are off. but that is unlikely. for one thing, iran is not quite a dictatorship, it is a theocratic oligarchy. more people there are in leadership, less crazy and thankfully more selfish decision making will be.
will israel's leaders have the balls to do what is in their best interests? we will soon see.
ps
iran and nuclear weapons
i was deliberate in avoiding the question of moral right (so to speak) of iran to have nuclear weapons in main post.
in the opinion of most, nobody (including usa) has a moral right to n-weapons. but that is irrelevant and naive. in reality it is in best interests of usa to have nuclear weapons given world history and politics. similarly, it is in best interests of iran to try to have them, and of usa and israel to try to prevent iran having them.
most of rest of the world's (i.e. those who value democracy and capitalism, aka individual political and economic rights - including sri lanka and me as an individual) interests coincide with usa's for the most part, and to a lesser extent with israel's.( however there is no harm in playing iran against others to milk both sides, as sl already do).
there are several reasons.
- obviously attacking after iran has developed a nuclear bomb is silly.
- waiting for "diplomacy" to succeed has failed, again obviously. while usa and rest can take the risk of waiting, israel cannot. iran's n-bomb = bye bye israel (sooner or later).
- high probability (65% chance according to futures market prices) of obambi winning and thus putting even more pressure on israel to fruitlessly wait than bush administration.
- iran's present capacity to respond will only cause limited damage to israel itself. iran's missiles (it has them, silly photoshoping was just to show it has more) are inaccurate and targets in square kms not meters. as such with conventional warheads they are less lethal than terrorist suicide bombers; a threat israel is well used to.
but what will be the consequences of that attack, on the rest of the world?
that will depend on rationality of iran's leaders. if they are sensible to their own interests, rest of the world has not much to fear.
in that case, iran will not attack americans directly, or close the straits of hormuz given the likely terrible repercussions on themselves (such actions and american response will be costly to americans too, but iran will get the worst of it in the end). in this scenario iran will fire off several missiles at israel and will stop at that. (it is already helping terrorists to attack israel and americans so there wont be any increase in that front anyway).
worst that rest of the world will have to suffer, will probably be a week of very high oil prices. in fact imo attack will be beneficial in the sense it will take away one cause of instability (i.e. constant speculation about the israeli attack - iran's missile tests increased oil price by $6 on last thursday) in the region for some time.
of course if iran's leaders act like crazies all bets are off. but that is unlikely. for one thing, iran is not quite a dictatorship, it is a theocratic oligarchy. more people there are in leadership, less crazy and thankfully more selfish decision making will be.
will israel's leaders have the balls to do what is in their best interests? we will soon see.
෴
ps
iran and nuclear weapons
i was deliberate in avoiding the question of moral right (so to speak) of iran to have nuclear weapons in main post.
in the opinion of most, nobody (including usa) has a moral right to n-weapons. but that is irrelevant and naive. in reality it is in best interests of usa to have nuclear weapons given world history and politics. similarly, it is in best interests of iran to try to have them, and of usa and israel to try to prevent iran having them.
most of rest of the world's (i.e. those who value democracy and capitalism, aka individual political and economic rights - including sri lanka and me as an individual) interests coincide with usa's for the most part, and to a lesser extent with israel's.( however there is no harm in playing iran against others to milk both sides, as sl already do).
6 comments:
You can't really believe that America would stay out of an altercation between Israel and Iran.
"Je vois plus que jamais qu'il ne faut juger de rien sur sa grandeur apparente." - Voltaire
We should be careful what we assume about Iran, or any country.
Puor bien savoir les choses, il en faut savoir le detail, et comme il est presque infini, nos connaissances sont toujours superficielles et imparfaites.
Unfortunately, what we do know is that the Bush administration cannot be trusted to do what it says. Iraq taught us that lesson. Many experts have long been predicting that Bush would invade Iran before he leaves office. But of course, the Bush administration would never admit to such a thing.
On ne donne rien si liberalement que ses conseils.
But it is the man who follows his own counsel, he's the one that should lead.
Israel has been trouble ever since
it was formed after the war.
They are rabid warmongers, learnt
knothing from the Holocast, have
concentrated on producing weapons,
and are a damn nuscience to themselves and the world..
For those who think that attacking iran is a good thing, i think you are all crazy and are not being responsible towards the future of our planet which is already a mess with pollution, war and hunger. Now, you want more war, more mess than the one we are in? I hope the person who said this crazy thing is a teenager or a child.
I don´t think it is Iran who should stop making bombs but countries like US which have always used them to make chaos wherever they go.
Thanks,
Miguel
Last I heard, the US spoofs put out a report saying that Iran is not perusing nuclear weapons.
It is Iran's right to have nuclear use for civilian purposes. I don't see why someone should bomb Iran over an alleged nuclear weapons programme. Of course, Iran could make life much easier if they just allowed foreign officials (NGOs?) to visit these sites etc...
how obviously brainwashed you are.
israel is an intolerant country similarly like sri lanka. tamils in colombo are afraid to go to kataragama for g'sake because many policemen just kill or at least hit random young tamil men. i've seen it with my own eyes and my camera was taken by the police. who wants to be a minority in such a country. just plain sick the attitude some buddhists from the south especially have towards all tamils. same like nazis. my wife is singhalese buddhist and even she sometimes says "better to kill all tamils" even though i told her she shouldn't think so about any group of people.
kris (who is leaving dozens of comments on old posts under various names today) is obviously a nutter totally unhinged by terrorists defeat and imagining things( he even think he has a wife)
Post a Comment