Israel/Palestine

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts) Sat Mar 17, 2012, 05:42 AM Mar 2012

Analysis - Eyeing Iran, Israel focuses on the day after

(Reuters) - Although Israel can expect a barrage of missiles from various fronts if it attacks Iran, the response might be less catastrophic than some predict, with Middle East turmoil distracting old foes.

There is also a gathering view in Israel, expressed with growing insistence by senior officials, that the resulting conflict would be a price worth paying for stymieing Iran's nuclear programme.

An increasingly tough-talking Israel is threatening to take military action, with or without U.S. support, if the Iranians continue to defy pressure to curb their contested projects.

The question of what follows such a strike is becoming ever more central to both public and private discussions, suggesting that Israel's security elite is now looking well beyond the initial operation to evaluate a strategy for the fallout.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/03/09/uk-israel-iran-idUKBRE8280IP20120309

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Analysis - Eyeing Iran, Israel focuses on the day after (Original Post) dipsydoodle Mar 2012 OP

As well it should - focus on the day(S) after Owlet Mar 2012 #1

Israelis want to drag the US and the west into the next 3,500 year-long blood feud. leveymg Mar 2012 #2

either way with or without direct US involvment azurnoir Mar 2012 #3

Not really oberliner Mar 2012 #4

ya your right never mind the cost of actually deploying it azurnoir Mar 2012 #5

Owlet

(1,248 posts)

1. As well it should - focus on the day(S) after

Reply to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 06:41 AM

Mar 2012

This, if it happens, is not going to be a one-day event, IMHO.

"We face a war for generations to come, which would be justified only if we are really convinced that the future of Israel was in danger," said Yehuda Lancry, a former Israeli ambassador to France and the United Nations."

Here is the issue in a nutshell, pun intended.

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly equated Iran's nuclear programme with the Nazi Holocaust, making clear he sees it as an existential struggle -- and one Israel can win."

Really? Iran getting a nuclear weapon is the same as the Holocaust? Doesn't that seem like a bit of a stretch?

"Defence Minister Ehud Barak has gone so far as to predict that 'maybe not even 500' civilians would die in the wake of a strike on Iran. Fewer than 50 Israeli civilians died in the 2006 Lebanon war and 2008-09 Gaza Strip conflict. Around 1,400 Palestinians died in the Gaza hostilities."

Well, that's reassuring, isn't it, unless you or a family member is one of the 500.

"A lot could depend on the impact of the initial, risk-filled assault. A comprehensive strike could cow Israel's opponents. A botched effort would encourage them."

And there you have it, folks. The classic risk:reward scenario. Good analysis by Reuters. Thanks for posting.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)

2. Israelis want to drag the US and the west into the next 3,500 year-long blood feud.

Reply to Owlet (Reply #1)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 08:48 AM

Mar 2012

No thanks. If Obama wants to put a stop to this, all he has to do is state clearly that a war between Israel and Iran is not in the US national interest, and that we will not tolerate a preemptive strike by either.

But, is that what he said, at least in public? No. The long-simmering campaign of threats, terror and provocation against Iran may just work.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)

3. either way with or without direct US involvment

Reply to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 12:36 PM

Mar 2012

an Israeli attack against Iran will be very expensive for the US and that is without factoring in the increase in oil prices and economic rollover from that for the entire globe

just the price of deploying Iron Dome and Arrow alone for the US

Israel would also depend on Washington's grants for the two projects to bear the lopsided cost of each interception -- between $25,000 and $80,000 for Iron Dome, and $2 million and $3 million for Arrow.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/13/us-iran-nuclear-israel-idUSBRE82C0UU20120313

oberliner

(58,724 posts)

4. Not really

Reply to azurnoir (Reply #3)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 05:29 PM

Mar 2012

In fact, it would probably be a boon to the defense industry.

The US has made a fortune off Iron Dome and Arrow.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)

5. ya your right never mind the cost of actually deploying it

Reply to oberliner (Reply #4)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 06:38 PM

Mar 2012

and gotta keep that military/industrial complex profitable too don'cha know?

Reply to this discussion