Will Israel attack?

Or, are they just going to leave it up the US?

That is a very good question, and it’s exactly what Israel wants you to keep asking.

Psychology is one of the most important aspects of fighting a war and is often the single most important factor in winning one. If your enemy thinks that they cannot win, they won’t fight.

Do you know that we are still not sure if Israel has nuclear weapons?

But, you had better believe that the Arab world hasn’t been interested in finding out the hard way.

The same goes for Israel’s planning for an attack on Iran. By keeping Iran guessing, Israel might be able to convince Iran to slow down their nuclear weapons production, or even halt it altogether.

Also, the guessing game keeps more neutral countries from getting in the way.

Israel plays a very deep game, and it will be playing that game right up until the first Israeli bomb hits one of the Iranian nuclear weapons development sites.

Scratch away, Iran.

Arab press wonders: Is Israel going to attack or not?

Commentators try to make sense of the Barak-Gantz contradictory statements on Iran

By Jed Halfon, April 28, 2012 | The Times of Israel

Contradictory statements by the IDF’s top brass have left newscasters and pundits in the Arab press with more questions than answers.

In an article Saturday entitled “Israel’s Increasing Ambiguity on Iran,” Elaph, a leading Arabic online newspaper, cites IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz saying that economic sanctions have been effective against Iran, and further, that “I do not believe Iran will decide to develop nuclear weapons.”

Elaph juxtaposes his stance with Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s statement on Friday that sanctions had almost no chance of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The newspaper features a follow up article which includes the Iranian response to Barak and Gantz. Iranian Spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ramin Mehmanparsat said that sanctions had actually “strengthened” the Iranian economy by making it more “self sufficient.” He also said that the Iranian military was in a position of unprecedented strength, and the chance of an attack on Iran was “very small.”

An editorial in Al Arabiya entitled “War on Iran” also addresses the effects of economic sanctions. Saad bin Ajami compares Iran to North Korea and argues that, indeed, economic sanctions are working. The crippling effect on the North Korean economy and continuing food shortage have dissuaded Iran from pursuing a similar course. Ajami further argues that the irrational and often erratic behavior of North Korea’s leaders could not be expected from Iran.

Al Ahram also cites Barak’s comments in discussing the potential for a regional arms race between Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey, should Iran acquire nuclear weapons. Headlined with a front page photo of Barak addressing a unit of IDF soldiers, the article does not mention Gantz’s statement, but highlights Barak’s view that Israel remains a regional power “from Tripoli to Tehran.”

Read the rest of the article here.

That’s right. Mutual Assured Destruction. It worked for our parents and grandparents, so why can’t it work for us?

I mean, those Iranians are people just like us, right?

They can’t be worse than those crazy Soviet communists, right?

No. Not right.

The Mullocracy in Iran makes every Stalinist government in the world look like Jeffersonian democrats.

In fact, I’d go as far as to say that Adolf Hitler would be preferable to what is in power in Tehran right now. At least Hitler responded to threats. No, really. Adolf only became suicidal towards the end.

The Shiite Islamists in power in Iran at this moment?

THEY’RE SUICIDAL RIGHT NOW!

How can ANYONE believe that the threat of Mutual Assured Destruction would work with fanatics who WANT to die RIGHT NOW for what they believe in?

I mean, the Soviets actually didn’t want to die for what they believed in. They just wanted US to die.

But, if Iran – all of it – dies in the process of killing America and Israel? It’s paradise and virgins all around.

So no, MAD ain’t gonna work.

Going Mad over MAD

April 6, 2012, Nicholas Saidel, Times of Israel

The question has been floating around for some time now: “Is the Iranian regime a rational actor?” This question is more than relevant for military strategists who subscribe to the Cold War nuclear deterrence model known as Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). MAD contemplates the dynamic between two adversaries armed with enough nuclear weapons to survive and respond in kind to a first strike. The threat of catastrophic retaliation creates an equilibrium whereby both sides lose the incentive to be the first to attack. MAD theory postulates that even if Iran does acquire nuclear arms, it would not use them against Israel, as such use would be akin to national suicide, given the expected Israeli nuclear response. Instead, Iran would be locked into a cold war with Israel – a nuclear paralysis comparable to that between the United States and the Soviet Union during the latter half of the 20th century.

Proponents of MAD rely on the assumption that a “rational” state actor will not commit acts that will almost certainly result in the annihilation of a major portion of its own population and infrastructure, e.g. acts such as a nuclear first strike against an enemy state that possesses second strike capability (in this case, Israel). Most foreign policy analysts agree that since the revolution of 1979, the Islamic Republic has sufficiently demonstrated it is a rationally behaving entity. Even Israeli ex-Mossad Director Meir Dagan has been clear on this point. Assuming Iran is a rational actor; can we safely assume a nuclear equipped Iran would be deterred from attacking Israel under the principles of MAD?

MAD about the bomb

MAD doctrine’s presumption that rational actors will be guided by a self-interest averse to wholesale devastation to its populace and infrastructure is dangerously flawed. The historical record shows Iran is willing to accomplish relatively minor gains at huge cost to the Iranian civilian populace. The military tactics of Iran during its decade-long war with Iraq in the 1980s evidence a shocking disregard not only for Iraqi civilian life, but for Iranian lives as well.

Perhaps most abhorrent was the decision by the Iranian military to clear mine fields by sending tens of thousands of untrained boys to their certain death. Enticing children to commit suicide involved the invocation of the Islamic notion of martyrdom through jihad. Plastic necklaces with “keys to paradise” were purportedly given to the children prior to their ghastly mission.

In a similar vein, thousands of children and other untrained Iranians were recruited for suicide missions in which human waves would run toward enemy artillery installations to make the path easier for Iranian troops and tanks. Massive enemy civilian casualties were the intended result of the “War of the Cities,” a relatively dark period of the Iran-Iraq War during which both sides barraged each other’s population centers — ostensibly to crush enemy morale.
If a moderate like Rafsanjani can envision a nuclear exchange with Israel as a positive for Iran, what are we to expect from his more extreme cohorts? (illustration: Arie Katz/The Times of Israel)

If a moderate like Rafsanjani can envision a nuclear exchange with Israel as a positive for Iran, what are we to expect from his more extreme cohorts? (illustration: Arie Katz/The Times of Israel)

Iran has already proven its willingness to target innocent Jewish populations for mass execution. Iran was formally charged by Argentinean prosecutors for the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires — a civilian facility — that claimed 85 innocent lives. Unbeknownst to many, Iran’s current minister of defense, Ahmad Vahidi, is one of five men wanted by Interpol for his involvement in the 1994 slaughter.

Read the rest of the article here.

I don’t know about you, but that’s unsettling.

And no, this is not some last minute change in IDF policy. Benny Gantz (IDF Chief of Staff) didn’t wake up and suddenly realize that Israeli soldiers have turned into a bunch of pansies and need to be in uniform during the High Holy Days. It’s certainly not a change in policy that you make at the last minute.

Jewish mothers everywhere are going to be upset, and you do NOT want that.

So, what’s up?

Is Hamas planning something nasty?

Is the IDF planning something nasty?

(Okay, they’re ALWAYS planning something nasty.)

Or, did Benny get up on the wrong side of the bed Tuesday, and he’s making everyone pay for it.

Nooo… something nasty is going down.

IDF to Remain on Full Alert Over Passover
IDF chief Benny Gantz ends the Army’s long-customary Passover vacation, orders commanders to cancel leaves and remain at full strength.

By Gabe Kahn, 3/29/2012, Arutz Sheva

The IDF on Tuesday broke with Israeli tradition and ordered all units to cancel the long-customary Passover leaves and remain on full alert over the holiday.

Over the years, an army-wide break during Passover became a tradition followed by all major military units, including the Air Force, Navy and intelligence corps.

But this year soldiers will have to divide their vacation days among themselves in order to ensure that their units remain at full strength.

Senior military officials insisted the decision did not stem from any planned military operations set to occur on – or immediately after – the holiday.

IDF chief of staff Benny Gantz said Wednesday he gave the order saying he “does not accept” the notion of an army-wide vacation during Passover.

According to reports, many soldiers who received the news Tuesday did not believe the timing of the decision was arbitrary and dismissed Gantz’s explanation as obfuscation.

Read the rest of the article here.

Within five days of the new moon, Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities – five days before through to five days after – as they did when they took out the Syrian reactor. The first window opened on March 17, and it closes on March 27th. The next one opens on April 16th and closes on the 26th.

And then, there’s May, June, July…

But, the point is the New Moon.

Why? Because you do not want to make it easy for Israeli aircraft to be identified and shot down.

Of course, now that everyone is expecting Israel to attack during a new moon, they’ll attack at a completely different time… like during a full moon.

Anyway, when you see that a new moon is coming (the darkest time of the month), think about it as a perfect opportunity to take out nuclear facilities in Iran.

Or not.

1001 Moonless Kinetic Nights: Presenting The Windows Of Opportunity For An Iranian Attack
by Tyler Durden on 03/21/2012 | Zero Hedge

Following last Friday’s majority vote by the Israel Security Council authorizing Iranian “action” when required, answering the “if“, the only open question remains “when.” As it turns out, based on the following analysis by Rapidan Group, there are only 10 or so distinct 10 day New Moon windows for the remainder of 2012. If one removes the sandstorm prone months of April, July and September, there are 7 periods in which a military strike is realistic. Also CVN 65 is moving at a snail’s pace and is just now approaching the Straits of Gibraltar.  Since any action will likely not take place unless 3 aircraft carriers are in the vicinity, and because the ICE yesterday instituted ultra-short term trading spike curbs in crude, starting April 1, one can likely eliminate the immediately proximal March 17-27 window. Which leaves six. Our advice would be to buy up OTM calls in Brent in the days just ahead of the start of any such window, as any “surprise” attack will have a uplifting impact on all combustible assets, doubly so for levered ones.

From Rapidan Group

Timing Considerations

Based on press reports, officials see high odds of an attack sometime between 2Q12 and the end of the year, with most pointing to 2Q or 3Q.

If Israel elects to conduct a conventional military strike, the optimal conditions would be moonless and cloudless nights. “Operation Orchard,” Israel’s attack on Syria’s reactor at Al-Kibar on Sep 6, 2007, took place 5 days before the new moon. This suggests windows starting about 5 days before a new moon and ending five days after – see the table below. Low humidity is also ideal, but not required.

Attackers would want to avoid sandstorms, which have afflicted Iran in April, July, and September in recent years. Last year, a large sandstorm in mid-April hit 20 provinces, forcing the shutdown of schools and businesses. Sandstorms are visible and predictable, however, and would be taken into account by planners.

Read the rest of the article here.

This possibility should give no one any joy, and certainly doesn’t please the Israelis. The problem is that the fault for this lies squarely with the highest levels of the US administration. When Israel has cooperated with the US and shared vital intelligence, that intelligence has often been used against Israel.

On top of this, the US has consistently blocked Israel’s efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program. And, this is a problem that goes back to the Bush administration – and beyond.

With all that the US government has done to leave Israel out in the cold, the Pentagon shouldn’t be surprised when Israel chooses to ‘go it alone’. The fault lies squarely with the President of the United States and the members of his cabinet. They have allowed this situation to come to pass, and they will be the ones who will be responsible for ANY casualties that the US suffers.

Of course, that’s not how the media and the US government will spin this. Just as they have done in the past, Israel will be blamed for everything.

Fools.

U.S. War Game Sees Perils of Israeli Strike Against Iran

Gen. James N. Mattis, who commands American forces in the Middle East, was said to be troubled by results of the war game.

By Mark Mazzetti and Thom Shanker, March 19, 2012, NYT

WASHINGTON — A classified war simulation held this month to assess the repercussions of an Israeli attack on Iran forecasts that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according to American officials.
At War

The officials said the so-called war game was not designed as a rehearsal for American military action — and they emphasized that the exercise’s results were not the only possible outcome of a real-world conflict.

But the game has raised fears among top American planners that it may be impossible to preclude American involvement in any escalating confrontation with Iran, the officials said. In the debate among policy makers over the consequences of any Israeli attack, that reaction may give stronger voice to those in the White House, Pentagon and intelligence community who have warned that a strike could prove perilous for the United States.

The results of the war game were particularly troubling to Gen. James N. Mattis, who commands all American forces in the Middle East, Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia, according to officials who either participated in the Central Command exercise or who were briefed on the results and spoke on condition of anonymity because of its classified nature. When the exercise had concluded earlier this month, according to the officials, General Mattis told aides that an Israeli first strike would be likely to have dire consequences across the region and for United States forces there.

The two-week war game, called Internal Look, played out a narrative in which the United States found it was pulled into the conflict after Iranian missiles struck a Navy warship in the Persian Gulf, killing about 200 Americans, according to officials with knowledge of the exercise. The United States then retaliated by carrying out its own strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

The initial Israeli attack was assessed to have set back the Iranian nuclear program by roughly a year, and the subsequent American strikes did not slow the Iranian nuclear program by more than an additional two years. However, other Pentagon planners have said that America’s arsenal of long-range bombers, refueling aircraft and precision missiles could do far more damage to the Iranian nuclear program — if President Obama were to decide on a full-scale retaliation.

The exercise was designed specifically to test internal military communications and coordination among battle staffs in the Pentagon, Tampa, Fla., where the headquarters of the Central Command is located, and in the Persian Gulf in the aftermath of an Israeli strike. But the exercise was written to assess a pressing, potential, real-world situation.

In the end, the war game reinforced to military officials the unpredictable and uncontrollable nature of a strike by Israel, and a counterstrike by Iran, the officials said.

Read the rest of the article here.