Reply #48: Has it Occurred to Anyone that [View All]

[Wonder]

Iran might feel Israel (and the US though I am focusing more on Israel at the moment) is a threat to their security.

here are some items I read recently an article from February 2002

It sounds like another game of chicken

snip
"If Israel attacks Iran, we will respond in a way no Israeli politician has ever dreamed about," warned Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani yesterday. Asked by al-Jazeera television if he was referring to nuclear weapons, Shamkhani gave a negative reply, but added that "time would tell" the nature of Iran's response.

Shamkhani said he wasn't worried about the possibility of an Israeli preemptive strike on the nuclear plant being built, with the aid of Russian experts, near the Persian Gulf port of Bushehr. Iranian media frequently warns that Israel would strike the plant in an attack similar to the 1981 air attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in Osirak.

"Iran is not a small country like Iraq. Iran has a powerful artillery, a disciplined army, and skilled air defenses," Shamkhani said.

Military sources in Israel said that Shamkhani's interview proved, once again, that Iran's long-range missiles and its development of nuclear capabilities were not for self-defense purposes, but rather targeted at Israel's destruction. "The Iranians are no longer hiding behind false statements but are now stating the truth openly," one senior official said, quoted in Maariv.'

end snip: http://www.israelinsider.com/channels/security/articles/sec_0189.htm

opening paragraph states Iran's position: If Israel attacks we are ready seems the warning. It is clearly stated that Iran is prepared to retaliate in the event of an Israeli preemptive strike: "Iranian media frequently warns that Israel would strike the plant in an attack similar to the 1981 air attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in Osirak." By the time you get down to the last paragraph in the snip it switches completely around from the Israeli perspective: it is the Iranian stance interpreted as an aggressive threat to Israel. I find that a kind of a strange interpretation based on the opening paragraphs in the above article.

Yes, we know this antagonistic relationship goes back in time, which includes the fact that Iran will not acknowledge Israel's existence. Yet I can not help wondering when I go through the history, that is what I know of it so far, on one level does Israel acknowledge the surrounding Arabs right to exist (or should I say exist equally)? It sometimes seems difficult to say.

Now we move to July 8th Iran makes it clear it can retaliate with a tested Shahab-3 ballistic missile with Israel well within its range. It seems the international community want Iran to sign the NPT and open itself up for inspection, yet what is the incentive?

Remember in 2002 Iran seemed concerned for an israeli premptive strike which now a year later one could argue they have prepared themselves to defend themselves from. These are arch-rivals with a history of Hostility. Why would Iran agree to sign the NPT if Israel is to remain exempt from signing it? http://www.inq7.net/wnw/2003/jul/08/wnw_1-1.htm

Below is a little snatch from Israel Shahak's book Open Secret's... You can read the chapter of the book on Israel vs Iran if you like, but I will just pull the very last sentence... for the purposes of this thread, in particular, in speaking of a consideration of going to war with Iran (and this was written in 1993) the last sentence reads: "Their ranks may include some relatively less-opinionated individuals, who have survived the negative selection process which usually occurs within groups sharing such ideologically-tight imageries. But such individuals can be assumed to prefer to keep their moderation to themselves, while hoping that Israel can reap some fringe benefits from any western provocation against Iran, even if it results in a protracted and inconclusive war."

end small snip

here is the chapter from Shahak's book: http://www.geocities.com/roundtable_texts/israelvsiran.html

And here is a little background on Dr.Israel Shahak, he is a dissident I believe.

small snip
This Warsaw-born concentration camp survivor, who until this year was a professor of chemistry at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has lived in Israel since its creation in 1948. His broad powers of observation are matched only by his ability to convey, in vivid, carefully crafted phrases and anecdotes, arresting and unforgettable pictures of the Israel society in which he lives. His monthly "Translations from the Hebrew Press," painstakingly selected to convey the essence of issues that now perplex a deeply polarized Israeli public, provide the most illuminating reading on contemporary Israel available to non-Hebrew speakers.

In preparing these insights, and presenting them on lecture tours in Europe and the United States, Shahak violates a basic canon of the Jewish diaspora: Don't discuss Jewish problems outside the Jewish community.

This does not deter Shahak, a self-motivated, human rights-obsessed 56-year-old academic turned prophet. He acknowledges no contradictions among his obligations as a loyal citizen of Israel, a good Jew, and a believer in universal human values. He brushes aside suggestions that Israeli authorities may someday devise a way to muzzle his candor.

"Israel is still a democracy for Jews," he explains impatiently The problem is that the civil liberties Israel so zealously protects for its Jewish citizens are not transferable to others. In seeking to change that, Israel Shahak has no doubt that he is serving the best interests of Israel, and that his way offers Israel's best hope to assume its self-appointed role as "a light unto the nations."

end snip

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0689/8906019.htm

There is a definite correlation between Israel's security concerns and this US PNAC strategy. One does seem more and more to go hand and hand with one another, with two very forceful right wing factions at the helm Anglo-Saxon christians and the RW Likud. There is no getting around it anymore.

Of everything I placed here this sticks out in my mind

"while hoping that Israel can reap some fringe benefits from any western provocation against Iran, even if it results in a protracted and inconclusive war."

"Even if it results in a protracted and inconclusive war." It seems reasonable to me Israel could take that position. Haven't they been in an on and off state of war for the last half a century or so. One might say it is almost normal for them. Problem is it is not normal for America to be so over extended. At least not in a while we are certainly a bit older than the State of Israel as well.

Perhaps others more knowledgeable than I, from whichever perspective, can put it into more exact historic and critical perspective.

I pondered this myself and in relation to their infamous relationship with Israel, who's war on terrorism propaganda formula is one the U.S. is following.

I hope no one minds I placed these thoughts in another thread here, but I can not find it at the moment, however I did keep it for my own files as well because I feel there are a number of perspectives on certain aspects of history that do fall by the wayside.

At present Iran might be a threat to both Israel and the U.S. If they go nuke, yes that would be a world travesty. Yet there does exist much Israeli and US doctrine here that can tend to muddy up the waters.