Everyone wants to know if Israel will pre-emptively strike Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities, and possibly usher in a region-wide war the likes of which we have not seen for decades, or whether Iran will go nuclear and tower over the world’s energy-producing region as an apocalyptic-minded hegemon wielding the weapons of genocide.
Nobody knows. Not even the Israelis or the Iranians know.
Jeffrery Goldberg, though, has come about as close to figuring it out as anyone can. He isn’t actually very close, but he’s less far away than the rest of us.
IT IS POSSIBLE that at some point in the next 12 months, the imposition of devastating economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran will persuade its leaders to cease their pursuit of nuclear weapons. It is also possible that Iran’s reform-minded Green Movement will somehow replace the mullah-led regime, or at least discover the means to temper the regime’s ideological extremism. It is possible, as well, that “foiling operations” conducted by the intelligence agencies of Israel, the United States, Great Britain, and other Western powers—programs designed to subvert the Iranian nuclear effort through sabotage and, on occasion, the carefully engineered disappearances of nuclear scientists—will have hindered Iran’s progress in some significant way. It is also possible that President Obama, who has said on more than a few occasions that he finds the prospect of a nuclear Iran “unacceptable,” will order a military strike against the country’s main weapons and uranium-enrichment facilities.
But none of these things—least of all the notion that Barack Obama, for whom initiating new wars in the Middle East is not a foreign-policy goal, will soon order the American military into action against Iran—seems, at this moment, terribly likely. What is more likely, then, is that one day next spring, the Israeli national-security adviser, Uzi Arad, and the Israeli defense minister, Ehud Barak, will simultaneously telephone their counterparts at the White House and the Pentagon, to inform them that their prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has just ordered roughly one hundred F-15Es, F-16Is, F-16Cs, and other aircraft of the Israeli air force to fly east toward Iran—possibly by crossing Saudi Arabia, possibly by threading the border between Syria and Turkey, and possibly by traveling directly through Iraq’s airspace, though it is crowded with American aircraft. (It’s so crowded, in fact, that the United States Central Command, whose area of responsibility is the greater Middle East, has already asked the Pentagon what to do should Israeli aircraft invade its airspace. According to multiple sources, the answer came back: do not shoot them down.)
In these conversations, which will be fraught, the Israelis will tell their American counterparts that they are taking this drastic step because a nuclear Iran poses the gravest threat since Hitler to the physical survival of the Jewish people. The Israelis will also state that they believe they have a reasonable chance of delaying the Iranian nuclear program for at least three to five years. They will tell their American colleagues that Israel was left with no choice. They will not be asking for permission, because it will be too late to ask for permission.
When the Israelis begin to bomb the uranium-enrichment facility at Natanz, the formerly secret enrichment site at Qom, the nuclear-research center at Esfahan, and possibly even the Bushehr reactor, along with the other main sites of the Iranian nuclear program, a short while after they depart en masse from their bases across Israel—regardless of whether they succeed in destroying Iran’s centrifuges and warhead and missile plants, or whether they fail miserably to even make a dent in Iran’s nuclear program—they stand a good chance of changing the Middle East forever; of sparking lethal reprisals, and even a full-blown regional war that could lead to the deaths of thousands of Israelis and Iranians, and possibly Arabs and Americans as well; of creating a crisis for Barack Obama that will dwarf Afghanistan in significance and complexity; of rupturing relations between Jerusalem and Washington, which is Israel’s only meaningful ally; of inadvertently solidifying the somewhat tenuous rule of the mullahs in Tehran; of causing the price of oil to spike to cataclysmic highs, launching the world economy into a period of turbulence not experienced since the autumn of 2008, or possibly since the oil shock of 1973; of placing communities across the Jewish diaspora in mortal danger, by making them targets of Iranian-sponsored terror attacks, as they have been in the past, in a limited though already lethal way; and of accelerating Israel’s conversion from a once-admired refuge for a persecuted people into a leper among nations.
If a strike does succeed in crippling the Iranian nuclear program, however, Israel, in addition to possibly generating some combination of the various catastrophes outlined above, will have removed from its list of existential worries the immediate specter of nuclear-weaponized, theologically driven, eliminationist anti-Semitism; it may derive for itself the secret thanks (though the public condemnation) of the Middle East’s moderate Arab regimes, all of which fear an Iranian bomb with an intensity that in some instances matches Israel’s; and it will have succeeded in countering, in militant fashion, the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, which is, not irrelevantly, a prime goal of the enthusiastic counter-proliferator who currently occupies the White House.
Well … if the Israelis do attack Iran, they better tell us specifically why, so we can stop guessing about Bibi’s past dealings with his father, etc.
Yeah … Did you read that bit? The psychological approach to understanding rational (or irrational) decision-making of the Israeli prime minister. Wow, have we now covered all channels?
I’m seeing this whole thing as more of an order of operations equation: Do the Israelis want to go after the mother ship in Iran, or clear out south Lebanon first?
Personally, if I were the Israelis, and going to do it anyway, I’d take out Hezbollah rockets and then hit Iran as a final show of force.
But that being said, I still think its crazy.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons last week’s incident didn’t touch off a major confrontation with Lebanon. Maybe Netanyahu didn’t want to prematurely begin the military operation against Iran.
But who knows? There’s so much misinformation, disinformation, deliberate leaks, bluffing, contradictory reports, it’s impossible to predict.
I don’t think we have a choice, we must at least attempt to de-rail Iran’s nuclear program, even if the delay is only for a few years & regardless of consequences.
But, most certainly, Netanyahu, like any other politician, will delay as long as possible.
There just is no level of acceptable risk – you can’t say MAYBE they won’t use it on us.
#1 Abu Guerrilla.
I suppose you also like playing Russian roulette on your spare time.
“Everyone wants to know if Israel will pre-emptively strike Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities”
I consulted my magic 8 ball. The answer is. Wait for it. Wait for it. Yes.
I actually like drinking Bourbon and hunting jackrabbit with AK-47s. But that’s a different story; no use going off that way. At least not now.
I think the Russian roulette (the recklessness) is in the estimation of Iran and its possibility to actually use nuclear weapons. What about Pakistan? Now that’s a place with loads of nukes and Islamist fanatics who’d like to use ‘em.
Iran getting a nuke may, after all, have the reverse effect for them; it might just help unite the Arabs and the Israelis with the West. Nobody wants anyone else to have a nuke. That’s the bottom line. And if Iran as so much as hits at using the damn thing, they’ll have to deal with the collective arsenal of the US, Israel, the EU and perhaps (probably) Russia.
Is that something we can debate on Totten’s blog, or are we in FULL AGREEMENT that Iran must be stopped? What would a nuclear Iran look like? And if it is as bad as Netanyahu seems to think, what exactly will he do about it?
Perhaps that’s why Goldberg wrote the massive article.
#4 Abu Guerrilla.
I think you’ve been drinking too much of the Bourbon.
Right, the Arabs will unite with Israel & the West ……
What planet are you writing from?
That was really funny – the collective arsenal of the EU. That’s hilarious.
The discussion should really be about why deterrence or containment won’t work.
Of interest for this subject are some articles written by Spengler for the Asia Times Online.
”Obama in More Trouble than Netanyahu over Iran.”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LC16Ak01.html
”The Case for an Israeli Strike Against Iran.”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LB18Ak01.html
And for Mr Totten who might find this amusing:
”The State We’re In.”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LF15Ak01.html
Nuclear Iran- approaching the point of no return –
Daily Alert’s policy experts summarize top Israel news for busy readers. Read the synopsis of Atlantic Monthly piece at http://blog.dailyalert.org/2010/08/11/a-nuclearized-iran-approaching-the-point-of-no-return/
…and also about why WWII had to happen, and was not the “Unnecessary War,” which is what Churchill coined it (even if one understands exactly why he called it that)….
Truly ridiculous stuff. Mr. Goldberg is a fine writer of fiction, almost as good as Tom Clancy.
“8. Joe
Truly ridiculous stuff. Mr. Goldberg is a fine writer of fiction, almost as good as Tom Clancy.”
Sir,
You would not believe how much I would like you to be right !
However, western reason and deterrence only play a very limited role in ahmandinjab’s twisted logic
His aim is to get his beloved” mahdi”,the 12 th iman, out of his hole as fast as possible
And the tool to attain this glorious objective is a global violent war against Israel
IAF will strike,no doubts about it
In the best case, USAF will give a hand but with a post modern president like you have,IAF will unfortunately have to do it alone….
Scores of cruise missiles,Jerichos 2 and 3with UAVs will strike first,100 F15Is and F16Is will be the second and probably last wave to finish the targets
I am not looking forward to these dark days but very unfortunately,we have no choice !
Am Israel Hai,
Your theory is more real than anything I’ve heard. I agree with you whole heardedly!
This will bring about real dark days as you’ve said; muslims worldwide will rebel.
It all is foretold in the Bible including the beginning of Worldwar III, including the outcome, which is mainly Israel will prevail. I believe in this assurance, but also face reality that more than one billion will die. It will be sad period for mankind.
Abu Guerrilla: Is that something we can debate on Totten’s blog, or are we in FULL AGREEMENT that Iran must be stopped?
Of course this can be debated.
I agree with you that attacking Iran is crazy. I also think it’s crazy to let Iran get nuclear weapons.
I’m sure glad I’m not the one who has to decide how to proceed. This is truly the problem from hell.
#12 trumpeldor
Churchill once said one should never start a major war because you don’t know what it will lead to. The ramifications are too wide and complex to imagine and to plan for. An attack on Iran would create more uncertainties than the absence of such an attack. It also sets the dangerous precedent of Israel going to war against a non-Arab state. It would be smarter and safer to subvert the Iranian regime from inside.
#12 trumpeldor (continued)
You are also treating as a certainty an attack by Iran on Israel, once it gets its weapon. I don’t buy that at all. Dictators just want to stay in power. All that other stuff is for the masses. I guess that is the crux of our disagreement. If I did agree on this point, then of course, a preventive attack would be the only thing to do.
100 aircraft wouldn’t do it. It could not possibly be hits against just three or five nuclear related sites. Personally, I think that since Iran will not have a bomb for at least a year or so and then much more time to make it a deliverable weapon, we are seeing a game of technological chess with Hizb’Allah a greater trigger point at the moment.
I think Obama has privately suggested US force down the road is a real option he is serious about. That is a huge game changer but I do not think Israel can trust the administration, nor the administration Israel. Perhaps the area of mutual interest now would be the elimination of Iranian leadership. Unfortunately, Iran already has some nasty WMD materials which it might use through terror proxies should the Mullahs get blown up.
With Iraq now ready to stumble as we withdraw and Afghanistan a problem, Iran might become the scapegoat. Obama’s play on Iran is the summer of 2012 before the election, not right now. What Bibi’s political problems are, I don’t know.
The Iranian regime, in my view, is too powerful and self-sufficient to collapse on its own. There has to be a widespread bombing campaign that may last for months, which Israel obviously cannot carry out because they can’t fly hundreds of sorties over Iraq and Saudi Arabia. The other option is an incredibly robust regime change campaign, which is a huge gamble because it may or may not work.
Ali, I think they could make repeated attacks. The question is what the Gulf would look like. Very quickly the entire Qods force becomes a question along with all conventional assets. This draws in America which is the stick the US is holding over Bibi’s head. Since this does involve the US (and Obama made sure to squeeze more assets into the Gulf), he has cornered Bibi for now.
If Arabs could get over their BS and actually make peace with Israel, this matter would be over. If the international community was united against Iran and terror, this also would be over by now.
So the Mullahs beat their famous woman adulterer until she confesses on TV. This regime is disgusting and a real danger. I expect they do more to spread fear and there will be a tipping point. It is all about timing which also involves deployment of technology that will make the termination of Iranian threats less risky. Beware of false flag operations. Its going to get very murky……
I think its long been understood (several years at least) that there are simply not enough strike aircraft and long range missiles in the IDF inventory to hit all of the potential Iranian nuclear related targets, even assuming perfection in targeting and no losses to the strike package.
I’m certain that the IDF understands full well the ramifications of potentially losing some, the majority, or even all of its strike aircraft and trained pilots on one far-flung mission over Persia. Especially with a US president who is extremely unlikely to replace those lost aircraft.
F-16C’s up to block 52 would have to carry a maximum load of external fuel tanks on all available mounting points in order to make the round trip. Block 52 models could carry a couple of external weapons (HARM or other 1,000lb or less types). Even the F-15E’s would have to carry so much external fuel that their weapon load-outs would make such strikes mere pinpricks to an elephant.
Unless, of course, a closer re-fueling point along the routes can be found and used…
HINT
HINT,
R
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/the-morning-after-the-attack-on-iran-1.307474
http://www1.voanews.com/policy/editorials/middle-east/Iran-Keeps-Top-Terror-Distinction-100469024.html
http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2010/08/12/davutoghlu/
(Turkey tries to play both sides after the pressure hit)
Render, they will refuel in transit which ups the number of aircraft. They will undoubtedly need all their drones and missiles, using subs as well. Big question is whether they will use low yield “clean” nukes on underground targets. I hear repeatedly, an expeditionary force might be used to destroy hardened targets.
Given the existential threat, you can see why kinetics would have been the answer without going nuclear. I guess Israelis forgot about David. Israel has no sufficient space program or bombers to deliver the rocks.
Just a reminder…
The Iranian “elite” 92nd ARM Div is based less then one hours drive from Basra, Iraq. There are no local ground forces (Coalition or otherwise) anywhere in the local region that are capable of stopping them before they reach Basra.
ELUSIVE
VICTORY,
R
Ah, Render, this is all SO PREDICTABLE. Didn’t anybody play Risk as a child?
MJT: Everyone wants to know if Israel will pre-emptively strike Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities, and possibly usher in a region-wide war the likes of which we have not seen for decades, or whether Iran will go nuclear and tower over the world’s energy-producing region as an apocalyptic-minded hegemon wielding the weapons of genocide.
I think it’s a bit silly to assume that these are the only two possible outcomes.
And it’s pretty sad to see so many supposedly intelligent people entertain the fiction that Israel is planning to bomb Iran. The chances of that happening are about one in a million.
Max -
http://francona.blogspot.com/2006/03/iran-israels-air-strike-options.html
Eight KC-707′s, enough to re-fuel 24 strike aircraft.
I seriously doubt any first use of nukes by the IDF, under any circumstances.
AMONG
THE
NATIONS,
R
Intelligence is a one in a million prediction of an Israeli or US/Israeli attack? That’s funny Edgar. Any other gems?
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=184484
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1302353/British-bunch-people-ruled-mafia-says-Irans-vice-president.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Max – I was called a racist for asking the exact same “Risk” question about our current C-in-C. And I never did get a straight answer…
ASSUMPTIONS,
R
Well Render, they might have a bit more air refueling capabilities as well as perhaps “other” locations to take off (and land) from. Also waves would stagger some sorties. I expect some kind of “quick trigger” for this kind of action.
If Israel does have some reduced radiation nukes, they might use them on underground facilities. It all depends on how clean they are.
Or Israel could fool the Iranians and take our everything threatening in the first wave. Refuel and go after the nuke sites. How Hizb’Allah and Syria react would be a concern for a protracted mission.
How is playing Risk a racist behavior? LOl….
Today’s kids play far more bloody, realistic and militaristic games… Can’t wait for the Muslim Conquest series…
I guess, You Sunk My Battleship is more PC. $80 in the digital mode……
Here’s a crazy idea. Crazy enough for the IDF try it, and crazy enough that it *might* work.
Israel covertly buys a second or third hand oil tanker, puts the usual flag of convenience on it, and converts it into an aircraft carrier, complete with a hanger deck and all the trimmings, only that it still looks like an oil tanker. The carrier could also carry a bevvy of cruise missiles as well as commandos, in addition to strike aircraft. The aircraft (perhaps 10-20 aircraft) could potentially land, refuel and rearm and launch multiple sorties on various WMD targets from unexpected directions and from a forward operating base relatively close to the theater of operations–say, 200 nautical miles off Iran’s coast. Once the ship’s presence is too much of a liability, the Israelis could always pull the plug by evacuating their assets and then scuttling the ‘aircraft carrier’.
This crazy scheme has never been pulled off, but should be well within the realm of the technically proficient Israelis.
I think tactical nukes might be necessary, we only get one shot, can’t afford to fail. I’m far from being a military expert, if the IDF decides they can do the job without nukes, all the better. But, personally, I wouldn’t take the chance of not accomplishing the mission. We’ll be condemned anyway, no point in taking anyone’s opinion into account.
America should be ashamed leaving this to a country the size of a postage stamp (relatively) when they have the means to do the job right.
So, while we may be condemned by the usual crowd of hypocrites, everyone will have in the back of their mind that America no longer means much, a feckless irresponsible ally, not to be counted on.
There are some questions one can ask that no matter the answer, the mere question adds to the known unknowns. This can serve a good purpose. Many things are possible, but less so probable. And if some questions SHOULD NOT BE ANSWERED for obvious reasons, they do little damage asking.
Could there be alliances and air bases made available to the IDF? Would this not require strict secrecy? Have some activities along this line already been reported in open source?
As for drones and cruise missiles, both significant factors, again quantities and points of launch are known unknowns. These parameters have large consequence.
The most important thing for Americans is that we have a rather large foot print in the no-man’s land of this imagined strike. All this must be considered. It could even be that US forces represent a hostage of sorts of the drama.
Two things ARE clear.
1. A strike by Israel will LIKELY trigger some aggression against the US and allies.
2. Congress would demand retaliation by the US.
3. Any retaliation and counter retaliation would LIKELY lead to the complete degradation of all Iranian assets very quickly, especially if initial aggression led to ANY significant loss of US lives or assets.
4. The introduction of nuclear weapons by Israel is made MORE LIKELY in the case of multiple conflicts at the same time with significant military and civilian loss on the Israeli side or the Axis introduction of WMD of any kind. Any tactical use of nukes by Israel is speculative.
5. While Render is likely correct, tactical assumptions about low yield MRRs should be considered. Where does this limited use stand in relation to Iran’s getting a bomb any time soon?
“(How advanced is India in the matter of nuclear weaponization? A former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, Dr.P.K. Iyengar, says that the process of weaponization must continue, leading to the development of neutron bombs and testing them.)
The development work must continue. It is an ongoing process. What was the objective of these nuclear tests? It was to have a credible, minimum nuclear deterrent. For that purpose, what you really require (is weapons) from several kilotons to a couple of hundred kilotons range. These weapons must be compact, lightweight and compatible with the delivery vehicles. This has been the basis of configuring the five tests, and I think we have sufficient information on the basis of these five tests to build a credible, minimum nuclear deterrent.
Now, the neutron bomb is strictly a tactical weapon. There is no problem about the capability of building a neutron bomb.
(The capability of building a neutron bomb in our country?)
That capability exists. At this moment we are talking about this credible deterrent that can be established based on the five tests done. If you are talking about a credible deterrent, then I think that whatever has been done is sufficient.
(Are you convinced that we need not explode more nuclear devices, thermo-nuclear bombs with bigger yields?)
I will not put it the way you are putting it. The 45-kiloton thermo-nuclear test that we did was in a configuration which allows us to easily go up to 200 kiloton. So far as thermo-nuclear technology is concerned, there is no doubt that we have the full capability.
A thermo-nuclear device is popularly called the hydrogen bomb. According to a top DAE scientist, the hydrogen bomb and the neutron bomb are the same. Is there any difference between them?
A thermo-nuclear bomb or hydrogen bomb is a two-stage weapon, which consists of the primary which is based on fission or boosted fission system, and the secondary is where the radiation implosion is used to get a large yield. So any thermo-nuclear weapon will have a certain amount of energy coming in the form of fission, and a certain amount of energy coming in the form of fusion.
In a neutron bomb, the fusion energy is maximized. With minimum fission energy, you get maximum fusion energy. So you end up getting a much larger neutron output and so it can create much more damage by radiation. That is the difference.
But the neutron bomb is usually a small yield weapon and it is more useful as a tactical weapon.”
() = interviewer’s questions of Dr. Anil Kakodkar (head of India’s programs in 2000)
So Israel (acting in primal self defense against a genocidal threat from Muslim maniacs in Iran) attempts to destroy/delay that nuclear threat, and the moral relativist narrative says that it is ISRAEL, not the genocidal Muslims, who “sparked” conflagration?
Let’s not forget that Iranian nukes were abetted by the Muslim maniacs in Pakistan, who are funded, in turn, by genocidal Muslim trillionaires in Saudi Arabia, and ALL of them proliferate Islamic terror globally. Isn’t it time for this distorted and sloppy swill to stop?
To my fellow Americans – I think that it should be the United States, not Israel, to attack Iran if such a thing happens. We have better means to do it than Israel does, and we would most likely get involved anyway if Israel was to attack Iran. If you agree with that, perhaps the best thing you can do right now is write (not email) your Senators, Representative and the White House and say that this is our responsibility, not Israel’s. They are politicians, they need to know how you feel.
As an aside, I noticed (and am surprised) that none of you mentioned the possibility that Iran wants to develop an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb rather than a conventional nuclear one. Their missile tests strongly indicate just that (they tested for high altitude explosions). You may want to brush up on it. If so, then there is a strong possibility that the design of the nuclear weapons is for an attack on the US, not Israel. The danger to the US from an Iranian EMP bomb(s) has been covered in the mainstream media. It would be simply devastating to us. Possibly tens of millions killed with just one bomb. I don’t think we can take that risk.
Israel has no carrier capable or qualified aircraft left in its strike inventory. The F-4 Phantoms were retired in 2004. The last of the A-4 Skyhawks were used as training aircraft up until about 2008, when they were retired as no longer maintainable.
Converting a VLC tanker into a fixed-wing aircraft carrier is technically feasable, but it would no longer resemble an oil tanker afterward no matter how much paint was applied.
Modern aircraft carrier catapaults require a tremendous amount of steam, require a very strong deck, can be extremely dangerous, are very rough on the aircraft, and are rather expensive to produce and maintain.
Lastly, the Israeli Navy is extremely unlikely to ever have a capitol ship, or any surface ship larger then a big FAC missile boat, again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Zealous_(R39)#Service_as_Eilat_and_Sinking
LESSON
LEARNED,
R
Mr. Totten wrote:
I agree with you that attacking Iran is crazy. I also think it’s crazy to let Iran get nuclear weapons.
I think attacking Iran’s nuclear development facilities — and ONLY its nuclear development facilities — is indeed crazy. An attack that leaves the Iranian regime in place simply invites a massive reprisal by said regime.
It is the regime that has to be attacked and destroyed — and it must be done with overwhelming military force so that there is no doubt about the success of the attack. Israel cannot do that — but the U.S. military can.
The Iranian regime is a collection of 6th-century barbarian mystics openly chanting “Death to America” at state-sponsored rallies and meetings, and working to achieve nuclear weapons to carry out its threat. The only rational response to that threat is the prompt and total destruction of that regime, using the full military might of the United States. Destroy the regime and the nuclear development facilities and then get out. What happens in the aftermath is up to the Iranian people.
But that attack is not going to happen — not under Obama.
Unfortunately, America has not had a President since Roosevelt who knows how to fight our enemies properly. All we’ve had is a collection of appeasers, both conservatives as well as liberals, who insist that negotiations, international diplomacy, appeasement, “engagement”, “multi-party talks”, U.N. resolutions, “containment”, “deterrence”, IAEA inspections — and, most recently, “sanctions” — are the best way to deal with an enemy like the Iranian regime.
And even when the horrors of 9/11 led an enraged American public to demand retaliation, what did Bush do? He launched a limited military response in Afghanistan only after aligning our troops with the “Northern Alliance”, who (in all likelihood) promptly let Bin Laden and Omar Mullah escape. And when Bush decided to depose Saddam Hussein — who certainly deserved to be killed along with his entire murderous gang — he turned the operation into a nation-building “democracy project” that was supposed to inspire freedom-lovers all over the middle east. Hasn’t exactly worked out, has it?
Now we have Obama — who seems to believe that if he apologizes for America’s existence to the world loudly enough and with sufficient contrition — while simultaneously scolding our allies like Israel — that this will make the world respect us again and show the Iranians they really don’t need to nuke us. Or something like that — I cannot imagine what on earth goes on in the man’s head.
The evidence so far indicates that all we can expect from our current leadership is wishful thinking, talk and inaction — right up to the moment of detonation.
Well MS, Michael has brought up removing the regime before. There was quite a discussion. Dissidents plead that we remove the regime. To some the nuke issues are secondary. It is the regime that makes nuclear power scary.
The problem beyond “will” seems the problem of not wanting to hurt Iranians and the measures Iran would take if they thought their heads were actually on the line and not just their facilities. Personally, I think any escalation from strike on nuclear results in taking out Qods and this would weaken the regime more than unite Iranians. I agree with the writer above that the US is far more able to strike Iran than Israel. It does however have far more vulnerabilities in the area.
As Render leads up to: the VISTOL version of the F-35 is what Israel really needs when it comes to fighters. US won’t sell them. Such air craft could take off from a tanker. It could even touch down anywhere SF has fuel set up. It could set set down an a floating platform and take on fuel from a sub.
As far as EMP, it would present Iranians themselves problems. It is Iran who should fear EMPs, but again the West has a high threshold on using nukes where as China, India, France, Pakistan and Israel? have different tactical doctrines. If a major terrorist attack happened and it was traceable to underground facilities, I don’t doubt these countries might very well use some form of low yield nuke to penetrate ground. Would the use of EMP against the US constitute a nuclear attack? On one blog, experts debated where a .5 kiloton blast from a hyper-velocity bomb should go in the WMD class with nukes. In the next twenty years many capabilities will get blurred….
I am wondering which side time favors. I guess more time favors the possibility of nukes going off, but less time favors questionable battle plans.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/DRDOs-next-Star-Wars-like-weapons/articleshow/6248942.cms
There is a bigger picture here we should be considering. If played correctly, time is perhaps on our side. Next generation weapons will swing the advantage away from asymmetrical warfare to a significant degree…
http://www.livescience.com/technology/Sci-Fi-Weapons-100615.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+livescience%2Ftechnology+%28LiveScience.com+Technology%29
There are few not mentioned as well.
Iran has no real allies other than Hezbollah. If Iran gets into real trouble then Syria is just being rented and Turkey isn’t stupid enough to go to war for the Persian mullahs. But Hez is far more dangerous than the Al Queda that nearly committed suicide in Iraq. So all these Hez people in Dearborn can be counted on to take action on Iranian command, plus the thousands of Hez agents that came in from Mexico in the last decade. But Hez is dependent on the mullahs’ pay checks. Those get cut off if the people of Iran take the Israeli attack as an opportunity to take down the theocracy. I skimmed the Atlantic article (hey, it’s the Atlantic) but I don’t think Jeff covered that much relevant ground. However, I am impressed by Bibi’s Dad.
Speaking about trouble in the US:
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/08/elias_abuelazams_ex-mother_in.html
I can’t wait for the IDS to explode. I wonder how long it will take before the masses realize this man is Catholic, not Jewish. For that, I’m grateful…..
But max,
They’ll just claim he was abused and tormented by those evil Jews who killed Jesus and therefore had no choice but to become a serial murderer
So he came here to kill Blacks? ABC tonight begins to discuss “the new normal”. I guess that is what all this stuff is leading to: defining a “new normal”. Lots of people didn’t exactly like the “old normal”, but the new is bothering many because it seeks to change definitions and process rather than reforming what’s not working and cleaning up bad signals and behavior.
This regime should have been locked down and put flat on its back economically by now, thus weakening its retaliatory ability and sowing doubt among supporters. The military scenarios having unpredictable and probably escalating consequences works in Iran’s favor.
Could, should, may, might…speculation can be maddening, can’t it?
There is a series of articles in the recent AW&ST on Israel’s defense thinking, expenditures, philosophy UAV’s etc.
And it seems that several of the individuals Goldberg spoke to may the same ones interviewed in these articles since the quotes are almost identical.
However, one comment which does not appear in the Atlantic article is from an Israel official who states in part:” “‘We think there is a possibility to stop or considerably delay the Iranian nuclear program with diplomatic efforts and military efforts other than strike’ ”
” ‘There are other intelligence and clandestine options to delay Iran’s program’ ”
The other comment is more a propos the tree cutting incident: Russia has supplied intelligence to Syria, and the intel-sharing between Syria, Hezbollah and Iran is huge.
The J-2 (intelligence organization) of the Lebanese military is totally penetrated by Hezbollah.
There’s plenty more which is depressing and leads one to conclude that the Israelis should show no mercy to those villages involved in Hezbollah activity, firing positions, launch sites, weapons storage, C&C locations etc., if they ever have to go into that area again.
I mention this latter comment to illustrate the nature of the Lebanese Army’s responsibility or lack thereof.
In any future war on Lebanese soil, the army will effectively cease to exist and its members run off to join their hezbollah confreres or just run away if they are not Shiite.
Does anyone here think that Turkey could help out Israel by letting them use some airbases. If your answer is no, consider the fact that Erdogan might be out of office by July of next year.
Ali,
No! Non! Nyet! Nein! Loh!
There have been credible reports that some of the heavy weapons including missiles have been smuggled through Turkey by rail. and of course Erdogan knows nothing about it
The real test for us is to make Israel such an attractive place, such a cutting-edge place in human society, education, culture, science, quality of life, that even American Jewish young people want to come here.”
The purpose of Israel is to be a safe place for Jews (both religious and secular).
It is not, and cannot be, a safe place unless its neighbors accept it, peacefully.
Iran getting a nuke means some chance, every year, that Israel gets socked with 5-10 nukes and is destroyed.
I think the chance would be only 10% or so … each year, until it happens. Others disagree on that containment probability — what a joke above about dictators wanting to stay in power, both Hitler and Saddam attacked. And later lost.
I’d hope that Israel’s diplomacy includes support for independent Kurds from Iran. Getting refueling rights near Erbil would be an indication of this.
An attack against nuke facilities, without going against the mullahs, is most crazy — therefore, if they attack, they need “regime change” as part of the attack.
Democracy nation building for Iran is far beyond Israel’s power, but mullah bombing & Iranian army bombing is not.
I think Israel should be learning how to do nation building for S. Lebanon, and Gaza — and should implement it before an attack on Iran. Should have gone against Hez just now, with no return to armistice borders until there is a signed Peace Agreement with Lebanon. Or the next incident.
Or, if the Jews can’t live in peace, because the Muslim Arabs don’t accept peace, the Jews will have no reason to stay in Israel (evacuate, not fight). Historically, losers of wars who are hurt by the war choose to accept peace rather than the pain. Thus, Israel’s problem has been to make losing war too painless for their Arab neighbors, without getting Peace.
Yesjb, did you consider the possibility of Erdogan losing the elections? Also what language is loh?
http://www.straight.com/article-336047/vancouver/circumcision-big-deal-foreskin-advocate
Yes, this is a human rights violation….
On the lighter side
P.S. vote above and see the poll results….lol
Max,
How often does clitorectomy come up among The Apple’s Left?
The status of women in much of the Middle East being such an obvious feminist and human rights topic, I’m curious to know how the Left addresses it.
One of the earliest American supporters of Afghani women’s rights I recall hearing about was Jay Leno’s wife, Mavis.
It’s a given that whatever effort Israel makes against Iran will effectively involve the U.S.A. in the knee-jerk Asian and European opinion factories…the truthfulness or lack thereof, or, the perceived extent of our contribution, will make no difference to their target audience.
Hence,prior to that event, the U.S.A. should discard our conventionally professed angst concerning the world’s opinion of us; this same hypocritical world which in the late century has seen more American blood and treasure shed on European and Asia/Pacific shores than any nation on earth with perhaps the exception of the Chinese at the hands of Imperial Japan. This American blood shed for the benefit of our world at large.
I think that we Americans should provide whatever means we have to any true ally to ensure that Iran has no nuclear capability. Specifically-cleared airspace over Iraq, re-fueling 707′s, and perhaps a carrier or two standing by in adjacent waters with deck space available for emergency landing/retrievals. Those practicalities can be worked out.
Our present massive ground presence in Central Asia is materially exhausting, and requires a staggering logistical pipeline….accomplishing little more than “whack-a-mole” results. Hence, anything less than the elimination of Iran as an adversary is wheel-spinning on America’s part. In the case of this Asian spongy land mass, we simply haven’t got the long run resources.
Of course, unless I’m deluded about my orgasmic abilities, the comparison to clitorectomy is absurd….
How the Left addresses woman’s rights abroad is made even sillier by their advocacy for making circumcision illegal… But then they’ll discover Muslims do it and then it will be okay (for Muslims).
Back to the article: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/08/bombing-iran-what-is-the-atlantics-line/61408/
I wasn’t comparing the two procedures, just curious about how the East Coast Left might address it.
Unless economic sanctions bite hard, for long enough, Israel will be left without non-military options.
….Human foreskins are an important resource in tissue culture laboratories for vital medical research. I can brag that I used to air-ship them packed for export in dry ice or inside non-pressurized liquid nitrogen containers..not many people can say that…….and, hastily adding that I had no hand in obtaining this tissue.
Re my #61….”Point Of No Return”…..indeed.
“wonder how long it will take before the masses realize this man is Catholic, not Jewish. For that, I’m grateful…..”
Maxtrue – if the media has its way, they’ll never find out. I was shocked and outraged that in a lengthy, detailed article by AP, the fact that the killer was an Israeli Arab wasn’t mentioned once. Do you think that would have been the case if he’d won a nobel prize?
The fact of his ethnicity shouldn’t be used to incite against Arabs, but on the other hand not to mention it is a material omission of fact, and is a de facto incitement against Israel. Already you can see the morons on the internet crowing over the “Nazi Israeli serial killer”, and how Israel is showing its true, racist face. The vast majority of Americans can’t distinguish between an Arab and Jewish name, and are probably unaware that there are over a million Arabs who are citizens of Israel.
#63 MarkC.
The initial reports in the English-language media here initially ran the report without the man’s name. Then, they added the photo, finally, in an update, the man’s name. Finally, when it was unavoidable, they mentioned his ethnicity, buried close to the end of the article, NYT-style.
But, I think most Israelis (certainly myself & everyone I talked to) knew immediately he was not a Jew. Later I saw the news report on Fox & thought the same thing you did – everyone would assume ”Israeli” meant Jew.
Just for your information, many Jews have names of Arabic origin but not in this case. And while many Jews look ”Middle-Eastern” to Western eyes, they don’t look like this guy. I agree, it was a material omission of fact, he should not have been labeled as Israeli but as Arab, political correctness be damned.
#51 Ali.
Loh is lah – loh is Hebrew, lah as you know, is Arabic. There is a great similarity between the two languages, maybe 40% of the 3-letter roots are the same. I still automatically say lah even when speaking Hebrew.
Re: your other point, I know Erdogan is losing popularity but I doubt if he’ll allow a fair election. I’d expect a lot of cheating. Turkey’s secular democracy, whatever it’s many faults, depended on the military, they should have immediately annuled his election & made his party illegal. Now, it may be too late.
Terry -
It is true, many Israelis have Arabic last names (my wife is Moroccan by origin), but there is no Jew named Elias – the name is clearly Christian (Arabic for Elijah, from what I understand).
The truth is, even the Israeli press isn’t out and out naming him as an Israeli Arab, so I may have to modify my opinion that it’s only the Israeli-hating western media. They are only willing to say that he is from Ramle, a mixed Jewish-Arab town.
Again, the purpose isn’t to point fingers at the Arabs, but to refute the assumption many will be happy to make that the killer was Jewish.
MarkC and Terry -very correct on media.
Charlie, now that was a job…..
#66 MarkC.
Mark – Eli or Eliyahu is a Moroccan-Jewish name, my grandfather’s name was Eliyahu as a matter of fact. But, Elias, never saw that name among Jews. But, I was referring to the family name, AbuElAzam, which is not at all a Jewish name. Names like Elbaz (Arabic: El Baz) were commen enough in Morocco, particularly for names derived from occupations – Anidjar (carpenter), Benhaddad (smith), Sebbagh (dyer), while Arabs from Fes had Jewish names (forced conversions) like El Kouen, Dairi (Edhery), Benchekroun ……
Anyway, the nature of the crime made it very unlikely that he would be Jewish. If the crime had been smuggling Ecstasy pills, some scam, phoney investments, money laundering, or illegal arms trading, he’d likely be an Israeli Jew. But not racially motivated murder with a knife.
Our newspapers are just as politically correct as everywhere else. Crimes by Arab Israelis are routinely anonymous, committed by ”youths” or a ”man from some village” unless there is no possible way to avoid mentioning ethnicity. Similarly, municipalities that go bankrupt here (always Arab because of mismanagement or that Arabs won’t pay taxes) remain anonymous, stories about crime statistics, or unemployment, are written so as to avoid inconvenient reality unless, of course, Arabs can be presented as ”victims” – and I’m not even talking about the traitors over at Haaretz, the Jerusalem Post or Ynet are just as bad. Journalists are basically liars everywhere.
Thanks Terry,
C’est exactement ce que j’allais dire!
Merci
Ali, Terry said it all. I also agree with him about Erdogan. Unless the military performs a coup, Turkey may eventually become Iran lite.
Israel must act alone. The Democrat party of the US, which worships UN resolutions but has little regard for the US Constitution, needs a nuclear armed Iran to force Israel to comply with hundreds of anti Israel UN resolutions. If Obama tried to do this, this might upset both Jews and Christian evangelists and harm the fundraising of the democrat party. However, if Iran does it, then Obama can wash his hands of it. In a sense, Ahmadinejad was correct-Obama does depend on him
Nimrod: The Democrat party of the US…needs a nuclear armed Iran to force Israel to comply with hundreds of anti Israel UN resolutions.
Let’s see if we can have an adult conversation in here.
“Nimrod” Tal ?
you first name speaks volume !
Do you hate your origin so much?
At least,Tal “dew” sweetens the enemy of God but what a strange mixture
Sadly, some secular Israeli mothers, out of ignorance give their babies unfortunate names because they are “from the bible”. A friend of mine met an Israeli named “Esav”.
Paul, my take is that they’re involved in the same castration attempt the West Coast is….
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/12/obamas-islamic-america/
Sometimes I wonder what the hell Obama is talking about. The Newspeak going on these last few years is extraordinary.
Here is another alternative narrative from the anti-side. Again -to see the mindset responding to the article above.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2010/08/of-chess-and-baseball-david-habakkuk.html
#66 MarkC — at least some US papers have been reporting that he is Christian, but they bury it about 2/3 into the article. They do not say that he is Arab but they interviewed his mother; I forget the mother’s name, but it was definitely Arabic.
Thanks, All for the backgrounder on names.
Max,
I was just curious about any Right Coast permutations. I sense that the “new” definition of “victim” lies at the heart of a lot of today’s madness.
Michael:
You may want to look at Barry Rubin’s take on all this over at Rubin Reports. I think he is a superb analyst.
A while back he wrote a lengthy piece on why Israel will not attack Iran any time soon, and he is sticking to it:
Israel About to Attack Iran? No. Iran About to Get Nuclear Weapons? Also No.
By Barry Rubin
There’s been a new round of speculation on Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities to prevent Tehran from getting nuclear weapons. I will repeat my earlier point: This is not about to happen, certainly not in the next year and, in my opinion, better not to happen at all.
Again, Israel will retain its option to attack at a time of its choosing, if and when it feels there is a threat of Iran’s actually using nuclear weapons against itself and when its defensive and offensive abilities are at a peak. By the way, the United States is starting to deliver 20 new F-35s, the world’s best air superiority fighter plane, after more than five years of discussions. This is another sign that U.S.-Israel relations are going well at present.
For those who want to understand why it’s wrong to assume that the issue is simply one of Iran getting nuclear weapons on some given day, see a good analysis by one of the most creative and well-informed arms’ control experts: (http://pollack.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/3053/some-straight-talk-about-iran).
I’m concluding “new” too often equals ignoring lessons from the past as well as any mugging reality may have inflicted along the way. Maybe psychiatry will add a new term for it to their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
1. Like MJT said, I am glad I do not have to decide this. With that said here are my two cents …
2. I believe Israel must not attack Iran over nukes and it is because …
3. I believe Iran can be allowed to go nuclear. Mullahs are all about survival (see June of 2009) and the moment they will get their precious they will understand the level of liability this hot potato carries. If anything I expect adverse reaction vis-a-vis their military and financial support for Hezbollah for the fear of upsetting Israelis. Besides and most important, I do not think Mullahs have much time left anyway. Secular or non-reactionary Iran can have piles of nukes as far as I am concerned.
No F-35′s will be delivered to anybody prior to 2012 at the earliest, 2015 is the scheduled date of record. Given the many bugs, equipment failures, and design changes so far expect the latter date to be more likely.
At the moment only 13 F-35 flight test aircraft exist. 15 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) aircraft have been ordered for the USAF, 11 of those are scheduled for delivery in 2011, pending production delays.
Regarding F-35 deliveries to the IDF, for the next 890 days those remain subject to the whim of a president who just might get upset about apartment buildings, again.
DEVILED
EGGS,
R
I wish I weren’t saying this, but I think sanctions in this case are laughable. The history of sanctions against Saddam Hussein shows it takes only two or three useful idiots in charge of nations, to render sanctions essentially worthless. Back then, it was France and Syria; now it’s Venezuela and Russia via the Caspian Sea. Or, whatever Tinystan between them that can be invaded by Revolutionary Guards and/or the Iranian Army.
Attack, or not? The worst choice between two evils I’ve ever seen in my lifetime.
“Elias” is the Hellenized form of “Eliya”. It’s kind of a multi-lingual pun, since “helios” is Greek for “sun”; Helios drove his flaming chariot across the sky every day, and Eliya ascended into Heaven on a flaming chariot.
What gives? My first comment goes into moderation land, but my second one comes up right away?
81. leo
Agreed.
Why can’t Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar jointly launch an air strike against Iran. They have the bases and capacity to waste the Iranian military, navy, and air force in days. USAF and USN aviation could defend their respective countries from Iranian counter attack.
“the moment they will get their precious (nukes) they will understand the level of liability this hot potato carries.”
Like North Korea did?
This confident speculation, from well outside the Iranian inner circle, about what the mullah mind will or won’t do strikes me as shaky at best.
“Why can’t Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar jointly launch an air strike against Iran.”
Because they are no match for anybody who is willing to fight back.
“USAF and USN aviation could defend their respective countries from Iranian counter attack.”
Why? US is not in jeopardy. I agree US can help with hardware and training and earn some money in the process, but those guys must do their own fighting and dying.
“Like North Korea did?”
Like NK did what? Started a war? Yeah, why wouldn’t they?
Leo, think back to what the Israelis destroyed in Syria, and who supplied the equipment.
Those flights from Iran arriving in Venezuela land at cordoned off air fields for a reason.
“Leo, think back to what the Israelis destroyed in Syria, and who supplied the equipment.”
You have a point.
Now the question remains, will Mullahs risk doing the same.
I believe they will not.
I am guessing you believe they will.
Which one of us is right?
(Later. Friday night and all. Have fun.)
I don’t have a clue, but “might” alone demands all the preparation Israel can muster. My point was a nuclear capability emboldens, encouraging more mischief making that might someday spill over into a devastating, escalating mess.
“Why…” he asks…
Because having the Persian Gulf turn into a free fire zone riddled with mines and swarms of RPG firing jet skis and speedboat suicide bombs is not in the best interests of the Gulf regions best customers for its only product, namely Europe, China, and Japan. The US still has over 40,000 troops in Iraq whose primary route of supply runs through the Persian Gulf, so its not really in our interests either (yet).
Because none of those “combined” nations would or could work together in any militarily useful way without massive US intervention and control. They’ve spent the last fifty years proving exactly that.
Because at least two of those nations do not have the logistical infrastructure to support expeditionary strike/fighter squadrons outside of their own air space. (Jordan, whose Mirages are probably too old anyway, has but two squadrons of F-16s. And Egypt, who with Israel on one side and Libya on the other is extremely unlikely to send its best strike fighters out of the country.)
Because none of those nations are willing to risk their hellishly expensive air forces on an all or nothing gamble over Persian air space, without direct US intervention. They are much more likely to take that gamble over Israeli air space, without direct US intervention.
OBVIOUSLY,
R
Leo, the Iranian air force and navy are jokes. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE all have pretty good air forces. Why wouldn’t they be able to destroy the Iranian Air Force and Iranian navy within days?
If Iran tries counterattacks in Iraq, the Iraqi Army will hit back hard. If Iran tries to mess in Afghanistan, President Karzai is likely to order everything he has got against Iran.
The only real worry in Lebanon. If Hezbollah attacks Israel, who knows what would happen.
40 Persian MiG-29′s are not a joke (the rest is), they are an issue that must be addressed in any kind of strike on Iran. The IRGC Navy is is not a joke either, its an asymetrical nightmare in the Gulf.
The Iraqi Army is not hitting anybody outside of Iraqi borders, hard or otherwise. Without direct, massive, and very rapid US intervention Basra will fall to the 92nd ARM Div in a matter of hours. The central front will quickly degenerate into the usual WW1 trench fighting. The northern front will be resolved, if at all, by competing Kurdish militias from both sides.
Iran is already messing in western Afghanistan. Karzai can order until he’s blue in the face, he has nothing to answer the four mechanized and one semi-armored divisions the Iranians are reputed to have on their eastern border. Even if he had such, he will not order such without US permission nor will he turn his pitiful excuse for an army away from the Pakistani border. For much the same reasons that the Pakistanis will not turn their excuse for an army away from the Indian border.
The tale of a man who has a wolf by both ears and dares not let go…
-some old proverb
A TORCH TO
THE ENEMY,
R
“Leo, the Iranian air force and navy are jokes. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE all have pretty good air forces. Why wouldn’t they be able to destroy the Iranian Air Force and Iranian navy within days?”
Of the list above only Egyptians might (might) offer any meaningful resistance. The rest are parade ready forces with zero of combat experience and any kind of determination to fight. Whatever hardware they’ve got is very good candidate to become a trophy.
Caroline Glick has a number of posts on her blog worth reading on this subject.
In ”A Guide to the Perplexed” she states that there are no circumstances in which Obama would take military action against Iran. I generally agree.
There is also a YouTube video clip of Ms Glick speaking at a Baltimore synagogue & I highly recommend taking the time to listen.
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/
#79 GES.
Prof. Barry Rubin is indeed a good analyst. I read the article but I think this time Prof. Rubin is overly optimistic. Prof. Rubin does not like military actions – in all the years I have been reading Prof. Rubin, he has never ever recommended a military response. While his analyses are usually correct (albeit generally optimistic), his conclusions are always on the side of inaction. Optimism in the context of the Middle-East is never realistic. In my experience, no matter how pessimistic you are on Middle-East developments, Arabs always find a way to make the most pessimistic prediction even worse than you imagined.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/08/taliban_al_qaeda_for.php
Somewhat related to the topic (it is after all, the same war)…
The ANA finally got around to launching their first very own fully independent (of US forces) full battalion attack…and they got trounced badly, by the pro’s from al-Q’s Shadow Army.
CASE
RESTS,
R
#69 yesjb.
Speaking of Prof. Rubin, he seems to believe that Erdogan will lose the upcoming elections. I follow Turkish affairs a little bit – Hudson NY puts out a newsletter, the Turkish Daily Press – if you’re interested, here is the link:
http://www.hudson-ny.org/1482/turkish-daily-press-august-12-2010
Hudson-NY also carries short essays by Khaled Abu Toameh of the Jerusalem Post.
Tu sait, je dit ce que je pense, je n’ai pas l’habitude de me taire pour faire plaisir a personne. Je faisais la meme chose quand j’habitais au maroc.
Hey Terry, this is slightly off-topic, but are most Israelis white-skinned or dark-skinned.
#101 Ali.
Sbah l’chayr, si Ali. Ramdan m’bark.
I can only give you my impression, Israelis come in all colours, from the lightest of blondes with blue eyes to African-dark & everything in between.
But, I guess I’d have to say 50/50% although I don”t know what you mean by dark, I suppose you mean olive complexion.
Yes, I did mean olive and I’m assuming si means mister. I always hear North Africans say it, but I never knew exactly what it means. And shokran.
#103 Ali.
Si is the abbreviation of siyyed, basically used like Mr.
I’m sure you recognize the root, master or lord.
We don’t say choukran, we say ”ti baraka ilahu fik” ……
If you’re fasting, have an easy fast.
For Ramadan, we used to make harira (a special Moroccan soup) with dates on the side & chebekia (fried dough with honey pastery) for the f’tour. I might try & make the soup this week, nostalgia, right?
When you say “we”, what do you mean? Do you fast? I know what siyyed means, but in other dialects of Arabic its pronounced more like sayyed. Its usually used in a formal context though and even then its rare. Ostaz or ostath is more common. Harira sounds delicious. Sometimes we say Tabarak allahu feek, but I sort of forgot :O.
#105 Ali.
I see we will be giving Arabic lessons to Mr Totten’s readers. I hope he doesn’t mind.
For siyyed, it was often used as in Sidna Moussa, for example, meaning Our Master, Moses or any other major religious figure or prophet. Otherwise, no, it’s not formal at all.
At first I didn’t recognize the term you used, ostaz, then I realized it was Usted in our dialect & it’s used to denote a teacher or a master musician.
Harira is delicious, you should look up a recipe & try to make it.
When I say ”we” I mean that I had a lot of Muslim friends, during Ramadan, sometimes I invited them to my house for f’tour, sometimes I was invited to their houses. No, I don’t fast – but when I was younger & working, we had a special schedule for Ramadan so I didn’t go home for lunch. So, I had my morning coffee & then didn’t eat until sundown. Actually, at that time, in the 1970′s, a great many Moroccans didn’t fast, at least in Casablanca where I lived then. It wasn’t ”modern” to be religious. But, you could still get arrested for smoking or eating in public, even for chewing gum.
Ramadan used to be a lot of fun in those days. We went out all night, ate mahjoun because alcohol was forbidden, fooled around a lot. Then we’d get beghrir (a Moroccan pancake or crepe) with tea at 3:30-4:00 AM.
Now, Ramadan is more of a curse, it’s too expensive, people eat too much, everyone gets sick, the economy goes to hell, and very few people go out at night like before.
All the restaurants are closed, same with bars & nightclubs, only a few cafes open at night, it’s very depressing.
Terry,
Thanks for the link to Hudson-NY
“Tu sait, je dit ce que je pense, je n’ai pas l’habitude de me taire pour faire plaisir a personne. Je faisais la meme chose quand j’habitais au maroc.”
Bien sur! Et vous vous bien exprimez en plusieurs langues.
Terry, when you were in Morocco, did you let people know about your opinions (pro-Israel and anti-Islamist)?
Terry, Ali, Others,
If it doesn’t steer us too far off topic, as a Westerner with no experience outside North America, I’d be curious to know about any body language and/or symbolic gestures you think are particularly interesting. An Argentinian classmate warned, for example, that the circled thumb and index finger sign Americans commonly use does NOT mean “OK” in her native country.
#108 Ali.
Prior to the 9/11 attacks in New York, I discussed politics & religion a little bit, with close friends, but it wasn’t a major subject of discussion. We had our little jokes, very politically incorrect, if someone said something, I returned the compliment. A few friends were curious about Judaism, they had some really distorted ideas, we talked about history, Moroccan politics, relations between Berbers & Arabs. We talked about food a lot, that’s very Moroccan.
My knowledge of Islam was mostly the ”folk religion” aspect, customs, holidays. I know a lot about the musical tradition ”Andalouse” & we got together mostly to listen to music, also Western Classical, operas, which no one was familiar with.
After 9/11, the atmosphere changed greatly. I changed, my friends changed. A lot of tension, heated discussions, some arguments, some friends stopped talking to me altogether.
So, to finally answer your question, yes, I was very out-spoken, perhaps tactless.
But, I can’t not say what I think. I just don’t believe in being a hypocrite & spouting pleasant BS. And, I respect my friends too much to treat them like retarded idiots.
#109 Paul S.
We’re already way off subject.
I’m sure Ali will have some thoughts on this.
I can tell you a few. Moroccans talk with their hands. Westerners don’t like it when we stand too close when we talk, we, of course, think the opposite, that Westerners stand too far away. We don’t avoid physical contact, Westerners don’t like touching.
We kiss men on both cheeks when we meet but don’t generally touch women in public unless it’s family. It’s not polite to sit with the soles of your feet facing someone. It’s also rude to go in someone’s house with your shoes on. If you visit a friend & he’s not home but his wife is home, you don’t go in the house & wait, you come back later. It still bothers some people if you eat with your left hand. When I was in Morocco, you could spot a Westerner by the way they walked.
I’d be curious to hear if Ali has some thoughts on this.
Thanks, Terry.
Personal space: I heard from an Italian that moviegoers there will cue up right next to each other regardless of how much room there is. This puzzles Americans. I had my incident with a student from Beirut who kept moving closer to me, as I kept backing away, both gestures being spontaneous on our parts. Finally my professor, observing, took us aside and explained why we both were feeling uncomfortable.
An American free associating:
“Oh, give me land, lots of land under starry skies above,
Don’t fence me in.
Let me ride through the wide open country that I love,
Don’t fence me in.
Let me be by myself in the evenin’ breeze,
And listen to the murmur of the cottonwood trees,
Send me off forever but I ask you please,
Don’t fence me in.”
Unfortunately, Bing Crosby can’t join us to sing it.
We do love our space.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10976438
That’s cute. Donations to Hizb’Allah too?
Maxtrue 76
I read the article and looked at his site . The writer is very much anti-Israeli and has little regard to the IDF,but he is also a retired Colonel .
Who is he? Are his opinions widespread at the US army?
Paul S.
Or the Andrew Sisters or Roy Rogers or Cole Porter
But you know as I was learning French I was also learning the customs and culture and became quite adept at speaking with my hands. I have a pretty good accent too. In fact when I was in Israel, people thought I was French since I spoke Hebrew with a French accent…go figure.
And in Paris, unless I stumbled on a particular word, I was always taken for a parisien. One can learn these customs if one tries.
Interesting discussion. When I am in Israel, I tend to talk with my hands. I am used to touching people there, yet kissing people is more of a Sephardi thing than and Ashkenazi thing, unless it’s your grandmother. Americans don’t just ‘like their space’, they get very aggravated with unwanted body or eye contact. There is a great deal of aversion, I would describe it as. And not much laughter, at least in public, but much more aggression than you would expect. Americans think Israelis are very aggressive, but I would say Israelis are physical, loud, boisterous. My impression is that Americans are just more phobic, often afraid of strangers.
To the war. Israel has no choice but to sovereign existence and vigorously. Israelis want to live, and even lefties understand there is no second Jewish homeland. The physical and psychic fallout from either being nuked or being turned into a vassal of Iran, dhimmized, then shredded as the IRG uses blackmail against the West to destroy us – unthinkable. I miss Israel, rough place and all. I yearn for Bibi to take a decision.
To the comments on tactics, I am also no military expert, except for those few nights at the Holiday Inn Express. Okay, okay…I just know that the IDF, Mossad, IAF and Israel Navy have tricks up their sleeves that most here can not imagine. I honestly don’t know what they are, but you will see them…
…and you will also not see them, and have not seen them. And Israel has more allies in and around Iran than some might think. Think about it.
A little more Arabic:
Antiochian Orthodox refer to their bishops as “Sayedna”. Thanks for filling in the gap, Terry.
In Andalusia, women greet everyone with a kiss on each cheek, while men greet men with a handshake and a pat on the right shoulder with the left hand. I don’t know how far north that carries. And yes, they all stand close to talk, but it also means one can use a lower voice.
@Larry: Check Michael’s archives here to read about the hospitality and generosity of Israelis. It basically outstrips every other nation’s that he’s experienced.
Larry, Others,
Interesting perspectives, particularly for those of us without the benefit of your overseas, in-person experiences. Trying to better understand personal (psychological) space preferences, America has fostered independence and individuality over generations now, even with an easier and, for me, troubling acceptance of greater dependency domestically. Yet Americans can be willing and eager joiners of clubs and other common interest associations; the voluntary nature of which, I sense, is an important part of their attraction.
gus,
I’ve been told—by Americans, admittedly—that the “safest” spot to touch another, beyond shaking hands, is the upper arm, about midway between the elbow and the shoulder.
Thanks, Gus. I will, and I agree. The only ‘catch’ for most Westerners is that Israelis like to give advice. For a lot of people, this is a strange and sometimes annoying thing. But hospitality, yes, and warmth, yes.
Paul, thanks. It’s pretty different. The other thing that stands out is that an Israeli will check you out, stare at you. Do that here with men, and they often/usually think it’s a challenge. Women think it’s a come-on. In Israel, people just look at each other, partly too because they figure they must know you from grade school, the army, or somewhere. It’s a ‘family’ kind of country, or used to be. Now it’s more like American than in the past.
This is one of the most arcane, diverse threads I have ever seen in my life.
It has almost everything…. from secretly converting second hand super-tankers into clandestine aircraft carriers via clitorectomy to Bing Crosby, from Mig-29s to foreskin trafficking, Semitic linguistics and the socio-anthropology of handshakes to Caroline Glick, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and Mavis Leno…
Michael, you should print it out and frame it.
We’re an international bazaar, microraptor. Step right up!
#122
Don’t forget the Ramadan food and hand gestures.
#109
The ok gesture, where you make a circle with your thumb and index finger means you’re in trouble. It isn’t a death threat, but it means I’ll show you.
The V for victory sign could mean victory, but it could mean that you’ll cut off someone’s tongue if he’s talking too much. Also not a physical threat.
“The V for victory sign could mean victory, but it could mean that you’ll cut off someone’s tongue if he’s talking too much. Also not a physical threat.”
Wouldn’t it also have to imitate open/close (scissors) movement?
#125
Yeah
“The ok gesture”
This gets more interesting. My Argentinian classmate warned me that down there (pun intended) it means “you are a…certain orifice.”
Americans benefit from these kind of lessons; I wonder how long it took Chevrolet to figure out why an automobile named “Nova” didn’t sell well in Spanish speaking countries.
Well, I’m an Ashkenazi, born and bred in the Midwest. Once during my undergrad days I was at some sort of pro-Israel (or was I protesting a pro-Palestinian?) rally, and arguing with a Palestinian. Both of us were apparently talking with our hands because a security guard who was watching us closely asked us both to step back a bit and put our arms down. We both gave each other a half smile and then continued our bickering. I don’t think talking with one’s hands is a Midwestern thing, but I guess when I’m excited I do!
semite,
The broad generalization I’ve heard since I was a kid is that it’s more characteristic of Southern than Northern Europeans, along with physical contact and interruption.
Would Dr. Watson interrupt Sherlock Holmes—unless Prof. Moriarity was about to strike? At my Irish Dad’s dinner table it was definitely frowned on.
Thanks for your indulgence, Michael. The grim business of life and death in the Middle East will be there forever, I’m afraid.
Yeah. Michael has created quite a mix.
We were speaking about the point of no return earlier. Here is breaking point: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2010/0813/Iran-changes-Ashtiani-stoning-sentence-for-adultery-to-hanging
Hang her and they drive in another nail, loosen another brick in wall.
http://www.rferl.org/content/The_Language_Of_Ahmadinejad_The_Boogeyman_Snatched_The_Boob/2125263.html
Its all good Paul….
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/08/why-russians-dont-get-depressed/
“Brazil has also offered asylum to Ms. Ashtiani.” Only Brazil? More elsewhere, Max?
“Ahmadinejad’s…rhetoric… The language that is being used is simple language, language that relies on the logic of force. It’s patriarchal language. It gives the right to power; not brain power, but there’s a greater stress on physical power”
Substitute “Saddam” for Ahmadinejad. A playbook so brutally simple keeping a copy on the shelf isn’t necessary.
#122 Larry in the Silicon.
Welcome to the discussion.
And back to the subject of this article, did you read reports of Russia installing the fuel rods at the Busheyr reactor? John Bolton made some remarks on the subject, this is really bad news.
#134 Maxtrue.
I liked the ”Why Russians Don’t Get Depressed.” –
Comparing Middle-Eastern personality to Western personality, the generality is that Middle-Easterners are not introspective, they blame someone or external circumstances while Westerners do the opposite, they blame themselves.
Quite some time ago, I read, ”The Arab Mind.” by Prof. Raphael Patai – I’d recommend it to anyone who really wants to understand the Middle-East.
Re: why Russians don’t get depressed: as for responding to sadness, depression, despondency, despair…that is, the blues…I enthusiastically recommend blues historian, and musical treasure to lovers of the blues, John Hammond Jr, recorded at one of his favorite clubs, The New Morning, in Paris, 19 February 2004, son of legendary producer John Hammond Sr: “Towards the end of the 1930s, Hammond organized the “Spirituals to Swing” concert, which brought much black music into the white spotlight for the first time.”
“My Time After A While”: “It’s your time now, Baby. But I got a feelin’ it’s goin’ be my time after a while.”
Back to the grim business…
Terry,
“Middle-Easterners are not introspective, they blame someone or external circumstances while Westerners do the opposite, they blame themselves.”
The power of the individual, or lack of, to affect change maybe? As a Westerner (and perhaps even more so as an American, with our traditions,) I’ve often wondered in what ways, in what circumstances do Middle Easterners feel personally (or collectively) empowered?
And your reading suggestion joins my (long) list.
#140 Paul S.
You know, Paul, this is so complex a subject that it’s not possible to realistically discuss it in this limited format. That’s why I recommended the book by Raphael Patai. And while this is an excellent study, it is just a beginning, a glimpse at another culture. I lived in an Arab country most of my life & I still don’t think I fully understand it. And my experience is based on only one country, there are large differences between all the countries that make up the region. And each country is not a monolithic culture – like all countries, there are differences among ethnic groups, religious communities, social class, tribal affiliation, even down to family traditions. We stereotype to make complexity understandable.
Well stated, Terry, Thanks again.
Reflecting on “each country is not a monolithic culture”, I’m making mental contrasts, between San Francisco, where I’ve felt increasingly out of place for a long while, and Texas, which fits my state of mind like a well made pair of boots.
#143 Paul S.
I’ll make a further comment. Frequently, when speaking with people of Middle-Eastern origin, they say ”we” this or that. I know I do it all the time. But when we say ”we” (see, I just did it again), we mean our small social circle, not the general population, which we couldn’t care less about. This is especially true of elites, our society being not even vaguely egalitarian.
You might find of interest something I just read a few minutes ago. It is about what is happening in France today with immigrants, something which I have known & seen for myself as well as hearing from family I have in France. Nonetheless, it is somehow more shocking when I read it in a public forum.
”France Becomes Africa, part II”
http://bigpeace.com/nmay/2010/08/14/france-becomes-africa-part-2/#more-14861
I’ll check it out later in the AM; sleep beckons. Bon soir.
On introspection:
I would qualify that by pointing out the character of modern Jewish holidays: Passover, Purim and Hanukkah celebrate what wonderful things G-d did for them, while the Day of Atonement is when they bemoan their individual and collective guilt. A lot of that reversal from Middle Eastern attitudes might be traceable to the pre-Diaspora shift to “the Kingdom of G-d is within you” which, in the M.E., took root in Jewish culture. (Which may have, in turn, adapted it from Seneca or Aristotle. I plead ignorance on that.)
But, fast-forwarding a bit, the tendency to blame others was put on display for all the world when Felipe Calderon dared to wag his finger at the United States. Consider that Hernan Cortes’s first landing in Mexico was just one generation after the end of the Reconquista in 1492. It could very well be that there were men with him, who had been born in Granada when it was still an Islamic city. The influences of the predominant Middle Eastern religion of the time, were still very strong.
Yes, Terry, extremely bad news. I read the Debka piece, and I read about Bolton’s comments elsewhere. The Russians have made a declaration to Israel about windows, doors, foundations, etc.
Guys, very interesting. gus, I think you’re confused a bit about Judaism in your last remark. It has always required introspection. If we are to start with a generalization that ‘Middle Easterners don’t take responsibility’, well, then jump back thousands of years. One of the primary reasons for Jew-hatred is that Jews from early on demanded more of individuals, Jewish and not, then their neighbors did. I appreciate Terry’s experiences in Morocco, but I do not accept the idea that in the West everybody is raised to take personal responsibility. Very often, this is just professed outwardly, while people inwardly scurry to blame and ‘get back.’
But, yes, the Iranian situation has come to a boiling point.
@Terry from Eilat,
It is always a pleasure to read your pundit comments over the situation in Middle East on this site and on ynet.
As we often share the same opinions,it makes me feel less lonely,especially here,in Brussels,the capital of eurabia
Je te souhaite une agréable semaine,Shavua Tov,
Trumpeldor
#148 Trumpeldor.
Je te remercie et le sentiment est reciproque.
Shavua tov gam lecha.
#147 Larry in the Silicon.
We may have waited too long, for the life of me, I cannot figure out Netanyahu’s strategy.
Much as I dislike psycho-babble, I think there is some truth in the characterization of the Middle-East being a shame society & the West a guilt society.
I believe that personality formation in the two cultures is very different, producing very different modal personalities.
Every individual in a society doesn’t have to be an example of this, I would say that it has to do with the percentage of a type or behavior in a society.
In any case, it explains a great deal of behavior that I’ve observed over the years.
He is improvising, Terry. This is what Israelis in leadership positions typically do.
I agree with the overall assessment of cultural differences. I was attempting to distinguish ‘Jewish’ from ‘Middle Eastern.’ Clearly, Israel has some of both. But with the Muslim world, yes, it is usually about shaming others. It is very tiring, so is endless guilt.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67E0XC20100815
Constitutional v “wisdom”, Professor Obama distinguishes in this new “teaching moment”. Yeah right. It is very complex here as social fractures cause shifts in linguistic meaning. “Change” has been pretty hollowed out. When hope becomes hopelessness, watch out.
What is astonishing is the lower caliber of potential candidates. We share this with Israel. It is a shame for which we are all responsible (guilt), that we produce such mediocre millionaire club leaders. Bibi is a member.
I hate to say it but superior reasoning comes with a price. It requires a moral compass and an open mind. The problem is that “moral” and “open mindedness” are part of the linguistic struggle going on in the battle of narratives.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a30d6ef68-330e-4d35-9d8d-5940537bdc05&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
We all know Iran and Syria will continue to deploy as many missiles, cruise missiles, drones and torpedoes as possible. They will continue to seek smaller, faster and stealthier attack vehicles such as small LCSs that actual slip below the surface, modified mini subs and cruise missiles. They will continue to burrow into the mountains and seek air defense against strikes. I am talking more about Iran here, but I wouldn’t underestimate Syria, Hizb’Allah and their friends North Korea.
Though threatening in number and tactics, the real tactical advantage will arise in the deployment of newer generation missile defense, hypersonics and DEW.
At some point in this decade, the military advantage radically shifts to the newer weapon systems. Hyper velocity weapons in stealthy materials will be hard items to hit even with a S-400. Lasers will revolutionize air warfare as will metamaterials and DEW defense. The technologically advanced countries with modern military hardware like Israel, India, China, Germany, Russia and Japan (there are more) could eventually possess game changers while the US several years ahead.
Of course Iran with nuclear weapons is a terror threat, no matter our future advantages. Still, I think that if the Mullah knew the US could reign down on them a hundred Rods from God with the force of 50 Hiroshimas minus the fallout, or zap their missiles, drones and air craft, they just might blink….
http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_20100329231957.aspx
The question here is whether Obama will strip defense at the turning point in both ideological struggle and the evolution of technology.
Larry.
Improvising. Oy vey.
#152 Maxtrue.
Deterrence will not work with Iran given their ideology.
Technology without real leaders, sadly lacking in the West these days, loses much of it’s importance.
Preemption is the only valid strategy.
#152 Maxtrue
Do you visit Jerry Pournelle’s site?
http://www.amazon.com/Place-Among-Nations-Benjamin-Netanyahu/dp/0553089749
Bibi has already written what he’s doing. If only he doesn’t pull a Sharon (2005).
EVERYBODY
MAKES
MISTAKES,
R
Pre-empt AFTER you deal with the counter missile barrage, the shots at US forces and the depletion of Israeli stockpiles with IDS blaring loudly. If you really don’t break their backs, what good will come? I was suggesting that contrary to conventional wisdom, time might favor the West. American’s have had their fill of less than competent pre-emption. In fact, the more pre-emption becomes credible, the more the foe considers the physical integrity of their sorry asses. The Mullahs did prefer the Shah to the Soviets.
How long before Iran has movable (usable) nukes? They don’t go the final route out of fear. They know they would be branded utter liars. I think they are still vulnerable even after breakout, at least until they have something usable and deliverable. Terrorists transporting around a 5000lb bomb would present some problems. Once the Mullahs test a bomb the onslaught would come. It would mean at that point, taking out Qods and ending the regime.
Would this Iranian ICBM be in a decade? Probably. So before Obama leaves office should he win a second term, he might have the means to bitch slap them without it getting terribly ugly. He’s got a lot of stuff sitting in the Gulf. The new stuff is even deadlier. Then again, he might have already gutted the DoD. Who knows? He might not win a second term stepping in stuff like this: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/15/administrations-muddled-response-mosque-creates-new-election-year-debate/
What is he thinking? Same missteps as before.
What seems clear is that within the next ten years we could have the means to repel counter-strikes and flatten anything underground without nukes or much allied loss. Those able to leap up the bar will have novel advantages. Demonstrating this will break a foes will. Until then, Israel’s adversaries hold greater unknown unknowns than ever before. Missteps are becoming increasingly costly.
God, do I sound like Pournelle?
Leadership first requires intellect, as distinguished from academic success. Will and constitution are prerequisites also for weathering the consequences of unpredictable, game changing events, but career politicians possess those traits. A leader, however, must have not just unshakable confidence but humbling wisdom, the latter being the crucial and, sadly, rare component. As I tell my nieces, the only thing important about intelligence is what’s done with it; the rest is packaging. Carefully designed packaging sells well, unfortunately.
Attn: #123 Microraptor…Re:my #’s 61 and 62….
I can’t resist commenting on your “foreskin trafficking” comment which brought a big smile to my face because in all of my years in import/export/letters of credit,etc. and yes indeed, Traffic, I/we never referred to the business as “trafficking”. I love the sinister, sub rosa, clandestine implications of that word “trafficking” added to the challenges/anxieties/relief of actually having this neo-natal foreskin tissue arrive at a tissue culture lab half way around the world passing via who-knows-how-many indifferent ramp handlers, but ever alert, extremely curious, Port Health and Customs employees…..in usable condition without delay.
Permit a very few technical details for the curious….. (you know who you are)….the neo-natal (newborn) tissue is broken down into whole, individual cells by way of a solution called trypsin-versene.
The reason for the liquid nitrogen as a freezing agent is that all molecular activity ceases in this extreme cold…I think its -70 Centigrade, if I remember correctly. The non-pressurized stainless steel containers are lined with spongy absorbent material so that there is no Ln2 sloshing around, or able to spill out if tipped. Still, it’s documented carefully as Hazmat for all of those enroute. But, any tipping for any length of time will permit the intense cold to slip out…ruining your expensive product. Having this formidable looking container non-pressurized for a/c will need no explaining. I’ve no idea what this entails now in this hyper-security-conscious era, as the container really, really looks like a bomb.
Okay, I love plays on words…so one last thing…I did all of this for many years working for a biotech company named….drum roll….
…Micro-Biological Associates.
…Cheers…Micro-raptor, from this ex-”trafficker” in human tissue.
(…my apologies, Michael Totten, but how often will your readers be regaled with such outre stuff? I promise no more…)
MicroRaptor (#123) – Did you miss the thread that had the Satanic German techno-doom vampire goth music video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DajkNstIKk8
===
Charlie (#159 et al) – Thanks. Thanks loads. I really had better things to do with that memory storage spot. Sheesh…
===
I wonder where Anan could be? Looking for those “maneuver brigades?”
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/08/taliban_al_qaeda_for.php
SOUL
OF
ICE,
R
Terry,
As troubling as “France Becomes Africa” and its long term implications are, I feel no more sympathy for French taxpayers whose votes permit such a gravy train than I do Americans whose cognitive dissonance splits off “illegal” from “immigration”, at a cost of billions. Borrowing the late George Carlin’s phrase, we’re circling the drain. Willingly.
#157 Maxtrue
“God, do I sound like Pournelle?”
When speaking about technology – yes
Not that I disagree – time is working against the Mullahs.
Terry, Render – improvisation is not all bad. Coltrane, etc.
I don’t mean that he has no plan at all. I just mean that he has a tendency to get stuck on the small things. Bibi Netanyahu has principles, and analytical ability. His problem has always been a tendency to react too emotionally on the day to day stuff. That is, he does this more than a ‘statesman’ should. He has learned to overcome this. I have various examples, but not now.
Maybe a pleasant diversion from the grimness for some; this year’s Miss Universe contestants. Miss Israel looks strikingly tall, and Miss Lebanon has a charming smile:
http://missuniverse.com/members/contestants/sortBy:region
Being diplomatic and a gentleman, I “rate” them all delightful.
“San Francisco, where I’ve felt increasingly out of place for a long while”
Paul, you may not have to go all the way to Texas. I lived in San Francisco for 25 years but eventually movved to Silicon Valley to be closer to my job. I miss hanging out in the City but not the crackpot politics. While most of the Bay Area is quite liberal, when you get out to the suburbs they aren’t so moonbatty and the lifestyles are more conventionally Middle American.
PS – if you are a blues fan I have quite a bit of personal familiarity with the local blues scene.
Gary,
I agree that, away from Fantasy Island, more critical thinking is in evidence. How much? This November will be telling. My fear is that it hasn’t gotten bad enough yet.
#161 Paul S.
I don’t have all that much sympathy myself, I can’t help feeling they’re getting what they deserve. However, if this was not the situation in France, I would be writing to you from Paris, not Eilat. Or, for that matter, from Malaga.
I was in France several years ago & I was very disappointed with how France had gone down-hill. It wasn’t the France I knew from several decades ago.
Aside from the obvious dangers of uncontrolled immigration, I posted the link primarily to show the cultural aspect since that was what we were talking about.
Liberals like to pretend that everyone is basically the same, has the same mentality, & while I admit that we are one species biologically, psychologically there are great differences. Assuming everyone is ”just like us” is naive, ignorant, shallow, & basically, condescending.
#163 Larry in the Silicon.
What I find disturbing is that Israeli leadership so often seems unprepared. Much that happens is very predictable even with spotty or incomplete intelligence.
Look at the flotilla fiasco, even the incident on the Lebanese border. Isn’t Obama predictable? The Palestinians are predictable.
Perhaps Netanyahu should read ”The Art of War” by SunTzu or whatever his name is.
Enormous psychological differences.
One historical example that surfaced in a documentary I watched recently was a German pilot discussing the Kamikaze phenomenon, which had no roots in and was, in fact, alien to any European cultural traditions he was familiar with.
Terry,
My greatest sympathies are for children, who play no part in decision making, the consequences of which they live with the longest. I may never get those Hamas children’s shows out of my mind.
#164 Paul S.
Well, more of a lighter stuff – there’s one ongoing Lebano-Israeli war that is absolutely bloodless. It’s a houmous war – for a place in the Guinness Book of Records for a largest houmous plate ever made. Currently it’s Lebanon with a 10452 kg plate, but our Jawdat Ibrahim from Abu Ghosh wows it’s not for long.
rabbit,
Such “battles” need encouragement. I remember when Los Angeles erupted in violence several years ago, and Korean shop owners armed themselves against looters. One wise black commentator offered a solution for easing tensions: barbeque; he suggested a neighborhood competition, with each competing team arriving armed with their best family recipes and secret sauces.
#170 Paul S.
Totalitarian ideologies must make a great effort at crushing the humanity out of their populations. Brainwashing starts at an early age, it’s like the Hitler Youth.
Islam does that generally but groups like Hamas or Hezbollah need mindless programed cannon fodder. For lunatic fanatics like them, individuals are expendable.
“individuals are expendable.”
The Al-Shaheed (Martyr’s Memorial) Monument in Iraq being one of it’s sad symbolic architectural manifestations.
“groups like Hamas or Hezbollah need mindless programed cannon fodder. For lunatic fanatics like them, individuals are expendable.”
How can any Westerner with a conscience speak on behalf of these depraved gangs, especially after seeing their horrifying “children’s” videos? The hypocrisy of those who piously berate Israel while making excuses for Hamas and Hezbollah is truly disgusting.
“their horrifying “children’s” videos”
The puppet shows made an indelible impression on me.
Even moreso, I think, than seeing rocket damage in Sderot.
@ Charlie / 159.
Guilty as charged…
I was thinking of “exporting” but “trafficking” sounded more dramatic…
Terry, I guess it’s one part denial and one part attrition on the mental processes caused by internal political knife fights?
http://www.slate.com/id/2264064/
Hitchens on why Iran can’t get the bomb…..
http://www.slate.com/id/2264064/
And Kaplan chimes in on Goldberg too….
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/08/a-long-way-from-the-point-of-no-return-with-iran/61507/
A bet I won’t make…
Hi Max,
I once followed a link of yours to Defense Tech.
I’m not going back there.
The guy who runs it has an anti-Israeli animus. And any mention Israel and all the Jew-haters come out in force.
Its not fun trying to defend Israel and then having to defend yourself against xenophobes who feel they are free to criticize anyone and any country but complain bitterly when someone who is not an American criticizes US policy.
And when someone brought up the USS Liberty, that was it for me! Adios to DT.
The issue is less Iran’s nuclear capability than Iran’s intentions. An Israeli strike on various nuclear facilities with more or less aircraft/weapons to set-back Iran’s nuclear ambitions for 3-5 years, is a limited strike against a massive problem. More useful, achievable, and effective would be an all out strike against the Iranian political/leadership class – which frankly would be welcomed by much of Iran’s population. If left alone, there is not doubt at all that Iran’s current leadership would immediately reconstitute or resume it weapons programs and the existential threat to Israel would simply be delayed for 60 months or so.
A mass-killing of Iran’s current leadership, combined with support to the revolutionary youth “Green” movement, could possibly create an actual “regime change” that would ease tensions in the Persian Gulf, appease Arab governments, and create the conditions for a successful civilian nuclear power program in Iran that a majority of Iranians currently desire.
There are numerous obstacles to accomplishing an actual regime change in Iran – and Israel would get no gratitude from anyone, but a military strike against hardware doesn’t eliminate Israels existential threat – it just post-phones it to some later date that really isn’t that far away. A change in Iran’s leadership might be much more effective on a long-term basis. Would that someone might has terminated most of the Nazi leadership in 1935-6; 60 million lives might not have been lost.