Jewish Advocates of Pre-Emptive War with Iran Come Under Increasing Criticism

[bemildred]

An array of Jewish organizations are in the forefront of promoting pre-emptive action against Iran and are coming under increasing criticism by other voices in the Jewish community.

A fund-raising letter from the World Jewish Congress declares that, “Iran poses the greatest danger to the Jewish people since the Nazis came to power in the 1930s.” An Anti-Defamation League appeal declares that, “ADL has taken a tough and principled stand against those who deal with demagogues like (Iran president) Ahmadinejad ... We’ve put it to the world that Ahmadinejad must be isolated.” A letter from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) reads: “Today the threats to Israel have never been greater ... Iran is speeding up its nuclear weapons program. Now that the Iranians have the capability to enrich uranium, they have constructed more than 2,000 centrifuges and plan to have more than 8,000 centrifuges in operation by the end of this year ... Do your part to stop Iran’s rapidly accelerating nuclear weapons program ...”

---

Martin van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, is critical of those who urge a pre-emptive attack upon Iran and who, in his view, overestimate its potential danger. He writes in The Forward (Sept. 28, 2007), “Though rich in oil, Iran is a Third World country with a population of 80 million and a per capita income of $2,440 ... Its annual defense budget stands at about $6.3 billion — a little more than half of Israel’s and a little less than 2 percent of America’s. Iran, in fact, spends a smaller percentage of its resources on defense than any of its neighbors except the United Arab Emirates.”

Van Creveld notes that, “Iran may have some Shihab III missiles with the range to hit Israel, but their number is limited and their reliability uncertain. Should the missiles carry conventional warheads, then militarily speaking the effect will probably be close to zero. Should they carry unconventional ones, then Iran — to quote former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, speaking not long before the first Gulf War — will open itself to ‘awesome and terrible retaliation.’ ... General John Abizaid, the former commander of the U.S. Central Command, is only the latest in a long list of experts to argue that the world can live with a nuclear Iran. Their views deserve to be carefully considered, lest Ahmadinejad’s fear-driven posturing cause anybody to do something stupid.”

http://www.acjna.org/acjna/articles_detail.aspx?id=469#

[Mythsaje]

1. If we'd quit running around acting as though Iran is some great threat

and getting the hard-liners there all fired up, the moderates and liberal Iranians wouldn't have gotten silenced and left out in the cold for so long. I blame Bushco and its rhetoric for allowing the hard-liners to gain control again.

And we STILL have no evidence that Iran actually wants nuclear weapons in the first place, though it's certainly possible. The U.S. seems remarkably reluctant to attack countries that are so armed.

[bemildred]

2. I just think these silly shits have done enough damage already.

Running around like chicken littles with their heads cut off. Only there are herds of them.

I have no doubt Iran wants nukes, they are sitting on a big pool of oil in an aqe where oil is in short supply. Look what happened to Iraq. You think that lesson is lost on Iran? Pakistan, India, China, Russia and Israel all have nukes already. Not to mention the usual suspects. All of those countries are important for Iran. They would have to be naive or have some really good, friendly treaties with the right sort of protectors to NOT want to have a few nukes in the cooler.

[azurnoir]

3. Almost had to smile at this

Should the missiles carry conventional warheads, then militarily speaking the effect will probably be close to zero. Should they carry unconventional ones, then Iran — to quote former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, speaking not long before the first Gulf War — will open itself to ‘awesome and terrible retaliation.’

Gee ya think so? What I have never gotten is that more people do not accept this simple fact, it used to be called "nuclear deterrent" and guess what we're all still sitting here so it most likely worked. To believe that some how Iran is different is to buy into the the idea that all "Mooslims" are crazed suicidal maniacs willing to die for a some cause be it killing Jews, Americans, or whomever and yes there are Muslim suicide bombers and through out time there have been others willing to die for their cause so are all of them crazed? Remember if you add it up this could and most likely would be inclusive of everyone.

Now as to why we America and allies were willing to have a dialog with the USSR and China to me that one is simple they had and have the military ability to truly hurt us and Iran does not.