A nuclear Iran might make it more difficult for Israel to attack its immediate neighbors, according to a senior Israeli military official on Tuesday.
Military planning division chief Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel said if Tehran attains nuclear weapons, that could constrain Israel from striking Iranian-backed groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. “If we are forced to do things in Gaza or in Lebanon, under the Iranian nuclear umbrella it might be different,” Eshel said at a briefing in Jerusalem.
Concern in the U.S. and Israel over Iran’s nuclear program has increased in recent months, bringing harsh economic sanctions and calls from both Americans and Israelis for a unilateral military strike against Iran. The latest event in the controversy came last week when another Iranian nuclear scientist was assassinated in a plot widely suspected as the work of Israel, the U.S., or both.
Still, there is no evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program, and the opinion of the U.S. intelligence community, the Obama administration, and the latest IAEA report is that Iran’s enrichment is so far civilian in nature.
Israel has tried to couch the debate in terms of Iran representing an existential threat. But at a time when Israel has announced its intention to attack Gaza yet again, Maj. Gen. Eshel’s admission that a nuclear Iran would actually mean a more militarily constrained Israel is a sign that the Israeli leadership is not being genuine about its concerns.
Previous admissions of Iran’s rational approach to international politics and the nuclear issue – as opposed to the extremist genocidal one they normally try to portray – have made headlines as well. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak admitted in November that Iran might want a nuclear weapon because it would elevate them to the level of the other great powers that are nuclear capable. He even admitted that Iran might want a nuclear weapon because of Israel’s possession of several hundred nuclear warheads.
Indeed, the vast majority of academic literature on the subject agrees that Iran, if it chose to attain a nuclear weapon, would do so to acquire a deterrent in the threat environment they face with constant U.S. and Israeli aggression.
At this point, it seems likely that the Israeli leadership is aggressive towards Iran not because they fear being “wiped off the map,” but rather because they fear they will lose their sway in the region and the fear they use to act militarily against their neighbors.
16 thoughts on “Israeli Army Says Nuclear Iran Would Hinder Military Aggression in Gaza, Lebanon”
The leaders of the rogue state of Israel are incapable of telling the truth. These upstarts should be firmly put in their place by the US and UK, rather than being cossetted and protected. Having zionists in all the leading positions in the US government makes it difficult for the US to put its own interests first.
Israel is only genuine in its greed for more and more land and resources…just like HITLER
any country (made of certain humans) that needs to continually attack it's neighbors probably is in the wrong neighborhood…
I sure hope that in this next election that every single member of this congress is voted out….
I personally dont think aipac will have the ability to bamboozal an all new congress…so maybe we could have some hope in knocking down their power
and it just amazes me that this congress..is willing to alienate 3 4 500 million people to please 5 million…500 million customers as opposed to 5 million….
Its not customers but campaign donors they care about.
The danger of nuclear Iran is the fact that it would destroy empire Israel. Israel in the past faced the disorganized military left by the withdraw of the former british empire. Israel has been smart than the USA in that it has avoided most of the major military operations after almost having their clocks cleaned in 1973. The limited military operation in Lebanon has shown that it is not a smart move to put ones military in harms way especially if you have fool willing to have their kids killed for your empire.
The population is going quickly against the chosen so I think it might be time for them to actually make a peace before Israel is an arab nation.
And this is why Iran must not have a nuclear weapon. Why is Iran trying to enrich uranium upwards of 60%? That's 30% away from making a nuclear weapon. For a site priding itself as being "anti-war" a nuclear Iran will up the ante.
Where is your source that Iran is trying to enrich uranium above 60%? They're only trying to enrich to 20% to fuel their research reactor which creates medical isotopes. The US objects even to that, but it's nowhere near 60%.
They are already enriching at 20% which can easily then be further enriched to 60 then 90. 20% has no peaceful purpose.
you really are a klutz, cast your eyes up to Pepe Escobar's article to get the, horrifying for you, truth. you are a true bozo, comic relief is your true calling
Klutz – you don't know what you are talking about. None of your points shows any understanding of the science involved.
"And this is why Iran must not have a nuclear weapon . . ."
So Israel can brutalize Gaza and Lebanon at will, and fulfill expansionist ambitions? (How "anti-war" of you!) And just what are YOU going to do to ensure Israeli hegemony in the region? Are you willing to bleed for, die for, such a cause? Are you willing to lose your loved ones to it? Or are you just here to lecture other people on how THEY need to sacrifice in order to fulfill the geopolitical ambitions of a faithless and altogether troublesome foreign "ally"?
While further proliferation is not desirable, a nuclear Iran would present no real threat to the United States—nor to Israel, save that it might put the kibosh on plans for a "Greater Israel." Moreover, a nuclear Iran is by no means a foregone conclusion. And our best chance at averting such an undesirable—but far from fatal—outcome remains untried: i.e., diplomacy.
And yes, anti_republocrat has your number when it comes to your "60% enrichment" claim. You'll have to try your nonsense on a more credulous crowd. Redstate.com, National Review, et al. are THAT way———–>
But its okay for Israel to have Nukes, huh.
As an Israel lover, of course you would say that Iran must not have nuclear weapons because it would hinder Israel from doing as it pleases in the Middle East, as the Israeli military officials admit in the article.
Your point is needless, why bother even making it when the IDF already admitted in the article that this is the worry??
The horror! No more yearly festivals to kill Palestinians. What is israel going to do???
We fail to realize that just maybe if we were friends with all Arabs we might only be paying 2 dollars a gallon for gasoline. Maybe if the stupid American public knew this it would turn them aganist Israel! Money talks and s–t walks! With that extra money they could buy more beer and TV sets.
So Israel will have its bullying curtailed. We just can't have that, can we.
Comments are closed.