Introduction
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.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - M ar k
Idiocy. eof
2 - roger nowosielski
I see you've changed your epithet. It used to be "Fuck that!"
Interestingly, our frequent intelocutor can't seem to distinguish between Ruvy's holistic positions and mine.
Oh well! All fundamentalists suffer from this disease because they feel they must group all views which are disagreeable with their own as anathema.
3 - M ar k
Yes. Mass murder is fundamentally anathema.
4 - roger nowosielski
As a matter of fact, it's becoming more and more difficult to distinguish between Ruvy's state of mind from that Ahmadinejad.
In defense of the latter, one might argue it's a matter of political posturing. But we know than in Ruvy's case it's definitely not that. He means it!
5 - roger nowosielski
I agree with #3, but you missed the allusion.
6 - M ar k
yup
7 - roger nowosielski
Chris Rose is due for an incisive comment.
I can't wait.
8 - Ruvy
Did either of you even read the article? Somehow, I do not think either of you did.
Sarkozy has a force de frappé to swing around under his shorts when he isn't pumping that model he married. But he doesn't get on a sabon box and call for the destruction of Israel. So, as little as I like the damned frogs, I don't say "destroy Paris". Gordon Brown also has a nuclear cigar to smoke - and he also doesn't say anything about destroying Israel. So I don't say anything about destroying London. And I do have it in for the Brits for being fucking us over with the Mandate. Even the Pakistanis have their Islamic bomb that does nawaz five times a day (quite a feat for thick metal, getting down on a prayer rug). But the Pakistanis do not say "destroy Israel" either. So, there is not a peep out of me about harming Karachi or Islamabad.
In addition, none of the above nations (except the Brits, if you count the occupation of Eretz Yisrael as going to war) went to war against this country.
Are you getting the point here? [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
9 - roger nowosielski
Yes, Ruvy, I have.
You make an eloquent distinction, I must say, between genocide and mass murder.
Somehow, I don't think it will fly.
10 - M ar k
I read your piece of shit.
By now, some of you reading this are wondering how I could possibly justify killing millions of people to accomplish a military goal. Isn't that genocide? Wouldn't that make us as bad as the Nazis we protest we aren't? Actually, what is proposed is not genocide, what is proposed is mass murder.
11 - roger nowosielski
Good try, though, analogizing the present situation to that of Rome and Carthage.
One essential difference, though. In those days, there was no public opinion other than whatever emanated from Rome, so disputing Rome's pronouncements was a moot point. And more importantly perhaps, Rome could back up her words with deeds.
The little nation of Israel is hardly in that position.
12 - Ruvy
Rome could back up her words with deeds. The little nation of Israel is hardly in that position.
You haven't figured out why we have a nuclear force at all, have you? And do you seriously think I would suggest something we couldn't handle? Attacking the nuclear plants, enrichment facilities, etc, etc. is a lot harder than slamming one or two cities with nukes, Roger. That's doable. I'm not sure of the real success of attacking enrichment plants. The assholes who had them built in the first place would still be around, and they are the real problem, not the machinery.
As for Mark's whining, he just doesn't want to face the long-term consequences of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the firebombing of Dresden and other German cities. These actions made destroying cities legitimate tools of war. Now that we are being threatened with extinction (as in wiped off the map), backed with action (the 2006 war in Lebanon was not a game of Risk, and the fighting in Gaza last Hanukka was not spinning dreidels), we have to be willing to use these terrible weapons of war to OUR advantage.
As for the moral case, it goes this way;
YOU GOYIM DID NOTHING TO STOP THE NAZIS IN THE 1930'S; YOU GOYIM DID NOTHING TO STOP THE NAZIS IN WWII; YOU DID NOTHING TO STOP THE ARABS IN 1948; YOU DID NOTHING TO STOP THEM AGAIN IN 1967; YOU DAMNED NEAR GOT THIS NATION DESTROYED IN 1973! WE DO NOT OWE YOU JACK SHIT! YOU OWE US! WE DESTROYED OSIRAK FOR YOU!
If you want to pay your debts to us, you can blow up Tehran yourselves - you Americans have more experience at mass murder than we do, what with all that napalm you dropped in Nam and the like - and then you can get the fuck out of the Middle East.
In the meantime, YOU OWE US! And until you have fixed the damage YOU have done in the Middle East, you haven't got a moral leg to stand on.
So, fuck that!
13 - M a rk
Buffalo Bill's
defunct
who used to
ride a watersmooth-silver
stallion
and break onetwothreefourfive pigeonsjustlikethat
Jesus
he was a handsome man
and what i want to know is
how do you like your blueeyed boy
Mister Death
-- E. E. Cummings
14 - A civilized human
If Blofeld wrote this article would be the type of article he might write. Filled with the bitterness of hate, a lust for violence and thoughts of mass murder and revenge. I'm sure that Stalin justified his tactics in much the same way as Ruvy does here.
There is an old expression that says you cannot put out a fire with a flame, and although a nuclear explosion may put out a single fire, it's sure to start more than fires than it extinguishes. And as is always the case with martyrdom, those fires that start will burn hotter and with fundamentalist justification and likely with international support, than the unreasonable flame that is now destined to burn forever in the hearts and minds of all.
15 - Ruvy
All you want to do is read e.e. cummings, Mark? Nu, take you scrap of a poem to what used to be Lake Treblinka in eastern Poland, and read it over where my relatives were murdered by the Nazis. See if my dead relatives give a damn for your poetry reading.
They are probably as impressed as I am - that is to say, not at all.
16 - M ark
You forget my status as a semi Semite and that my family was in Poland as well.
No need to lose your soul.
To quote some more Cummings:
"there is some shit I will not eat"
17 - Ville
Ruvy, you are sick.
18 - roger nowosielski
Likewise here, Mark. There's one great movie, though, you've got to watch, German production, "The Counterfeiters," along with the commentaries on DVD. I'm sure it's listed in the Wiki.
19 - Cindy
And as is always the case with martyrdom, those fires that start will burn hotter and with fundamentalist justification...
I was thinking last night...what do those who justify war in Afghanistan see those Afghan children--dealing with US destruction of their families--growing up to be?
The focus is on the 'idea' of war and its justification. What does this 'idea' have to do with what real effects war has on real people? Why is it so hard just to look and see how things really work?
The same people who justify the US in Afghanistan will forget all about it when Afghan terrorists start flying airplanes into buildings at some future date.
(Sorry Ruvy, I haven't had the stomach to read your article yet. Seeing the selected quotes and all. I just wanted to respond to what A civilized human said.)
20 - A civilized human
I live in Europe and here it is a truth, universally acknowledged that going to war in Iraq/Afghanistan was absolutely wrong. I no way condoned the US or its behaviour. However if you are going to justify doing evil because evil has been done in the past you are guilty of the very thing you fight against, and doomed to repeat the past.
21 - Ruvy
I'm going to rub your noses in this until they get red and raw.
Americans and Brits wrote the rules of warfare that we must now abide by. Particularly Americans. They burst the atomic hymen and destroyed two cities. I'm not attacking that strategy. In the long run, the destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, brutal as it was, was the more humane decision to make in concluding the war with Japan.
But once the hymen was burst, the restrained use of atomic (now nuclear) weapons was made legitimate. And Israel is rapidly approaching a position where it will need to use nuclear weapons to defend itself. Given that Israel has NO strategic depth, it cannot afford to absorb any nuclear attacks - and that is precisely what Israel is being threatened with - nuclear attacks, either from a proxy to the north or southwest, or the source in Persia.
The location matters little. What matters is the fact that the uncivilized humans, the savage two-legged animals who call for our deaths, for our return to the ovens, for our being wiped from the map, take their orders from Tehran. Therefore, the civilized human, faced with choices that only savages should have to choose from, must, for the sake of survival, use weapons of mass murder that others have legitimized. And they must strike first, for they do not have the luxury of 5,000 kilometers of strategic depth.
Fools will say, seeing this consideration, "you're sick!" Or they will say, "Filled with the bitterness of hate, a lust for violence and thoughts of mass murder and revenge. I'm sure that Stalin justified his tactics in much the same way as Ruvy does here."
The truth is, I find it disgusting that I, a mere writer in the Shomron, should have to consider strategies that his so-called "leaders" haven't the guts to consider. I find it disgusting, that I should have to consider the murder of five million or more civilians because my so-called "leaders" have not stood up manfully to imperialist powers pushing us over a ledge of suicide. I find it disgusting that instead of Israeli diplomats making it clear to Arabs, Persians, Americans Europeans, Russians, and the like that actions to damage this nation will be met with strong military force, that I have to call for such force. And I find it obscene that I should be condemned for doing what my so-called "leaders", who draw NIS 50,000 monthly, haven't either the balls or brains to do.
22 - Cindy
I find it disgusting, that I should...consider the murder of five million or more civilians...
I find it disgusting too. Your life isn't worth it.
And by 'your' life, I mean anyone's life. Life becomes meaningless altogether. We are here for 100 years. That's it! Yet people act as if they will live forever and can 'win' something that lasts forever by killing people--instead they lose everything. Use your time wisely.
I like this quote, it says a lot about what we might be doing with our allotted time:
"So what if we are mortal. We all hold some immortality in our hands." -- Paladin Heart, a Greek Anarchist
23 - roger nowosielski
"The truth is, I find it disgusting that I, a mere writer in the Shomron, should have to consider strategies that his so-called "leaders" haven't the guts to consider. I find it disgusting, that I should have to consider the murder of five million or more civilians because my so-called "leaders" have not stood up manfully to imperialist powers pushing us over a ledge of suicide. I find it disgusting that instead of Israeli diplomats making it clear to Arabs, Persians, Americans Europeans, Russians, and the like that actions to damage this nation will be met with strong military force, that I have to call for such force. And I find it obscene that I should be condemned for doing what my so-called "leaders", who draw NIS 50,000 monthly, haven't either the balls or brains to do."
Perhaps there is an altogether different message you ought to derive from this diatribe - how very much out of touch you are with the rest of the world, out of touch with reality, to continue seeing the world in archaic, biblical terms.
Believe it or not, it's no longer just the children of Israel against the Canaanites. That little tribal conflict may be a good story to tell your children or grandchildren, but it had long ceased to occupy the attention of the world; it's petty, parochial and trivial. Yet, you keep on configuring and reconfiguring the modern world in terms of ancient histories and fairy tales.
Grow up. There are more important things to be concerned about than your local and petty squabbles. One way or another, we'll resolve it for you, with your participation or liking or without.
Your growl is impressive, but you're still a paper tiger. And I'm sure glad for the fact that all you can do is bark.
24 - Ruvy
Grow up. There are more important things to be concerned about than your local and petty squabbles. One way or another, we'll resolve it for you, with your participation or liking or without.
Pay close attention to what I'm telling you. Roger. I will not tell you again. Perhaps some person living in 'Afula or S'derot will say, ma la'asót?, shrugging his shoulders, figuring that someone will take care of the big problems for him. But out here, we take care of our own problems. Up to a point, we will accept what the authorities in Jerusalem decide. But, when it is a matter of our own homes, and in Yehuda and Shomron, it is a matter of our own homes, we will be the final arbiters of the matter - or we will die in the process of being the final arbiters. We have here in these mountains, the spirit of liberty that Americans once had. You aspire after that spirit yourself, but all you see in your adopted homeland is a ghost of a spirit. I never thought to find that spirit of liberty here. It was not something I was looking for at all. But, to my pleasant surprise, I have found it. And no arrogant or obnoxious American or European - and certainly not some damned Arab or Persian - is going to take it away.
Remember, Roger, I take shooting seriously. That's because if I raise a gun and cock it, it will be aimed at a man's head or heart, not some damned squirrel or duck. I bid you a good evening. The bride and I will be barbecuing hot-dogs at the La"g b'Omer bonfire in the village. Both of us are rather hungry.
25 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy, the only thing you are actually rubbing our noses in is the only thing you have to give - a myopically intense vision of such limited perception that it conjures shapes and meaning out of shadows.
Your political and military suggestions are as naive and ill-informed as your understanding of spirituality is.
Your only achievement is to have tainted a nook of Blogcritics with your well-written but fundamentally illiterate article.