This article is not yet another screed on the necessity for attacking the nuclear facilities in Iran, facilities which, if allowed to grow unchecked, will pose a deadly existential threat to the State and to the People of Israel. Such articles have become a cottage industry of sorts and the more they are turned out, the cheesier they get. Nearly all of these articles posit that if we in Israel attack the Persian nuclear facilities, we will retard their drive for nuclear weaponry and thereby win the (eventual) gratitude of the "civilized" world. Leaving aside the obvious military problems this nation faces in executing such an attack, it assumes that the rest of the world is civilized at all, and that with time, will have the intelligence to show gratitude to us. Considering how so many in the world continue to call for us to die, such assumptions are premature at the least.
Let's look at one of the least cheesy articles on the subject, one from 8 May's Jerusalem Post authored by Caroline Glick, "Obama's Green Light to Attack Iran." She points out that
As a consequence, the operational significance of the administration's anti-Israel positions is that Israel will not be well served by adopting a more accommodating posture toward the Palestinians and Iran. Indeed, perversely, what the Obama administration's treatment of Israel should be making clear to the Netanyahu government is that Israel should no longer take Washington's views into account as it makes its decisions about how to advance Israel's national security interests. This is particularly true with regard to Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Rationally speaking, the only way the Obama administration could reasonably expect to deter Israel from attacking Iran's nuclear installations would be if it could make the cost for Israel of attacking higher than the cost for Israel of not attacking. But what the behavior of the Obama administration is demonstrating is that there is no significant difference in the costs of the two options.
By blaming Israel for the absence of peace in the Middle East while ignoring the Palestinians' refusal to accept Israel's right to exist; by seeking to build an international coalition with Europe and the Arabs against Israel while glossing over the fact that at least the Arabs share Israel's concerns about Iran; by exposing Israel's nuclear arsenal and pressuring Israel to disarm while in the meantime courting the ayatollahs like an overeager bridegroom, the Obama administration is telling Israel that regardless of what it does, and what objective reality is, as far as the White House is concerned, Israel is to blame.
Unlike Ms. Glick, who cannot afford to say these things from her perch at the Jerusalem Post, the article that follows calls for a preemptive nuclear strike on Tehran and such other targets in Persia that will destroy the command and control systems holding together Persian offensive military capability. Even if this attack never comes about, it is incumbent for an Israeli to lay on the table and make clear to the world the necessity for such a strike, if only to make clear to our mortal enemies that we possess the will to exterminate them as they would exterminate us.