I don’t remember whether I have ever said this on the blog, and given that it’s Friday afternoon, I’m not going to look. But trust me on this – deep down, I don’t believe that Iran will retaliate in any meaningful way if we take out their nukes. They might have Hamas and Hezbullah shoot off some rockets (and take the retaliatory hits), but I don’t believe Iran is going to go to war with us over their nukes, just like Syria and Iraq didn’t. At least not if we do it before they have a nuclear weapons capability.

The New York Times reports that the working assumption of the Netanyahu government is that Iran will not retaliate. Or at least not very much.

But conversations with eight current and recent top Israeli security officials suggested several things: since Israel has been demanding the new sanctions, including an oil embargo and seizure of Iran’s Central Bank assets, it will give the sanctions some months to work; the sanctions are viewed here as probably insufficient; a military attack remains a very real option; and postattack situations are considered less perilous than one in which Iran has nuclear weapons.

“Take every scenario of confrontation and attack by Iran and its proxies and then ask yourself, ‘How would it look if they had a nuclear weapon?’ ” a senior official said. “In nearly every scenario, the situation looks worse.”

The core analysis is based on an examination of Iran’s interests and abilities, along with recent threats and conflicts. Before the United States-led war against Iraq in 1991, Saddam Hussein vowed that if attacked he would “burn half of Israel.” He fired about 40 Scud missiles at Israel, which did limited damage. Similar fears of retaliation were voiced before the Iraq war in 2003 and in 2006, during Israel’s war against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. In the latter, about 4,000 rockets were fired at Israel by Hezbollah, most of them causing limited harm.

“If you put all those retaliations together and add in the terrorism of recent years, we are probably facing some multiple of that,” a retired official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity, citing an internal study. “I’m not saying Iran will not react. But it will be nothing like London during World War II.”

A paper soon to be published by the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, written by Amos Yadlin, former chief of military intelligence, and Yoel Guzansky, who headed the Iran desk at Israel’s National Security Council until 2009, argues that the Iranian threat to close the Strait of Hormuz is largely a bluff.

The paper contends that, despite the risks of Iranian provocation, Iran would not be able to close the waterway for any length of time and that it would not be in Iran’s own interest to do so.

“If others are closing the taps on you, why close your own?” Mr. Guzansky said. Sealing the strait could also lead to all-out confrontation with the United States, something the authors say they believe Iran wants to avoid.

A separate paper just published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies says that the fear of missile warfare against Israel is exaggerated since the missiles would be able to inflict only limited physical damage.

Most Israeli analysts, like most officials and analysts abroad, reject these arguments. They say that Iran has been preparing for an attack for some years and will react robustly, as will its allies, Hezbollah and Hamas. Moreover, they say, an attack will at best delay the Iranian program by a couple of years and lead Tehran to redouble its efforts to build such a weapon.

But Mr. Barak and Mr. Netanyahu believe that those concerns will pale if Iran does get a nuclear weapon. This was a point made in a public forum in Jerusalem this week by Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel, chief of the army’s planning division. Speaking of the former leaders of Libya and Iraq, he said, “Who would have dared deal with Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein if they had a nuclear capability? No way.”

I agree with the assessments that Iranian retaliation will not be much so long as they don’t have a nuclear weapon. The Arabs are like a child throwing a tantrum – the screaming and crying is a lot worse than the actual physical consequences. The problem is that if God forbid they get a nuclear weapon, then it just becomes a question of pushing one button, and that’s a whole different ballgame. That’s why it’s so important to stop Iran before they get a nuclear weapon.

JPost reports that US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, who visited Israel last week, believes that a strike against Iran is premature.

“I do think the path we’re on – the economic sanctions and the diplomatic pressure – does seem to me to be having an effect,” Dempsey said. “I just think that it’s premature to be deciding that the economic and diplomatic approach is inadequate.”

…

Dempsey admitted differences in opinion between the US and Israel’s leadership on the Iranian threat and how soon to act against it.

“We have to acknowledge that they … see that threat differently than we do. Its existential to them,” he said. “My intervention with them was not to try to persuade them to my thinking or allow them to persuade me to theirs, but rather to acknowledge the complexity and commit to seeking creative solutions, not simple solutions,” he said.

But saying that there are differences in opinion because to us the threat is existential is only half the story. This is from the Times again.

The official said that the defense establishment was not enthusiastic about an attack. It hoped that sanctions and diplomacy would work and that if military action were needed it would come from the United States.

But this approach poses a difficulty. America’s weapons and equipment are far more powerful than Israel’s. So as Iran enriches uranium underground, Washington can wait longer to decide to attack and still be effective. Israel worries that in the coming year Iran will enter what officials call a zone of immunity, meaning its facilities will move beyond reach.

And at this point, we have no commitment from the Obama administration to take military action to stop Iran – just vague speeches that Iran will be stopped – and I doubt most Israelis would accept a promise from Obama anyway. So Israel has to accept the reality that it may be up to us to stop Iran.

If we get past the US election and there is a new Republican administration that can be trusted (i.e. not Ron Paul), it may be possible to make an agreement that Israel will stand down for some period of time and let Washington deal with Iran.

mouths are moving… no action. does anyone really care what the NYTimes writes at this juncture. If they had their way there wouldn’t be an Israel. So why are we even reading them. I suppose then I wouldn’t have anything to blog about. Perhaps ignoring the NYTimes is the best idea. No one takes it seriously anymore anyway… it’s untouchable and partisan.

#Israel— Challah Hu Akbar (@ChallahHuAkbar) January 26, 2012

A group of Israeli hackers that calls itself “IDF Team” claims that it has brought down the websites belonging to the Iranian Health Ministry and an English-language Iranian television channel, Press TV. According to the group, the cyber attack came in response to Arab hackers’ attacks on Israeli sites. (Dudi Cohen and Aviel Magnezi)

Israeli Hackers: We brought down official Iranian websites – bit.ly/A9Cld3 #Iran #Israel

— Challah Hu Akbar (@ChallahHuAkbar) January 26, 2012

Arutz Sheva/Matzav.com Newscenter}Shapiro, who met Wednesday with the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee in Jerusalem, was asked by the MK about the possibility that President Barack Obama might commute Pollard’s sentence to time served.

But the U.S. ambassador told the Israeli lawmakers that he “can’t speculate” on Pollard, and frankly does not know what will become of him.

Vice President Joe Biden eventually met with American Jewish leaders over the issue last year, after he was pressured by a group during the annual Jewish holiday gathering held in Washington D.C. who made it clear that a consensus exists on this issue across the spectrum in the U.S. Jewish community .

Pollard, a Jewish American, was sentenced to life in prison 27 years ago on a single charge of passing classified information to an ally – Israel.

MK Meir Sheetrit also asked the ambassador why MK Michael Ben Ari was unable to obtain a visa to enter the U.S., while Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejaad and Hamas terrorists have been able to do so.

Shapiro replied that he is not responsible for these matters.
(Read more: Arutz Sheva/matzav.com)

All this is very clear with Newt. It obviously is unclear with Obama. It also is unclear with Romney and any other candidate. This is one of the primary reasons I trust Newt because of his courage to take a stand on this issue.

Zachary S. Welch/AP – Two decades after evicting U.S. forces from their biggest base in the Pacific, the Philippines is in talks with the Obama administration about expanding the American military presence in the island nation, the latest in a series of strategic moves aimed at China.

Two decades after evicting U.S. forces from their biggest base in the Pacific, the Philippines is in talks with the Obama administration about expanding the American military presence in the island nation, the latest in a series of strategic moves aimed at China.

Although negotiations are in the early stages, officials from both governments said they are favorably inclined toward a deal. They are scheduled to intensify their discussions Thursday and Friday in Washington prior to higher-level meetings in March. If an arrangement is reached, it would follow other recent agreements to base thousands of U.S. Marines in northern Australia and station Navy warships in Singapore.

At the NYTimes, you can see an op-doc by Ra’anan Alexandrowicz, writer and director of “The Law in These Parts,” which is screening at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival. He lives in Jerusalem and teaches film at the Jerusalem Sam Spiegel Film and Television School and read this introduction:

Israel’s Supreme Court is the body that provides checks and balances to the country’s executive and legislative powers, upholding constitutional standards…

¶ In the four decades since the 1967 Six-Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbors, the court has become a stage for an escalating conflict between two very different world views.

¶ Israel is the only modern state that has held territories under military occupation for over four decades. It is also unusual for a nation to allow residents of territories under a military occupation to petition its Supreme Court and request intervention in acts of state.

¶ Since the early years of the occupation…[rather] than functioning as the bastion of human rights that it was established to be, it has instead become the entity responsible for balancing the needs of a state engaged in a prolonged occupation with basic principles of democracy.

¶ This Op-Doc expands on one of the themes explored in my new feature documentary, “The Law in These Parts,” and asks about the role of the Supreme Court in the legal underpinnings of the longest military occupation in modern times.

I left this comment there:

RA is being petulantly picayune writing: “Israel is the only modern state that has held territories under military occupation for over four decade”. Really?

Consider:

Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara has “only” lasted three plus decades. Turkey’s occupation of Northern Cyprus – a mere 37 years. But Russia’s occupation of the Kuril Islands began in August 1945…

And Tibet has been occupied by China since 1949.

And many consider Northern Ireland occupied, even after the 1998 arrangements of an Executive.

But I suggest the term is “belligerent occupation”, resulting from an Arab war of aggression in 1967 and by acting in defense, not only does Israel have the right to retain all or most of the territories it now administers, but as Schweible, Rostow and other international law experts claim, Israel has a better right than anyone to remain there in Judea and Samaria based on, at the least, discussions, declarations and decisions of Balfour 1917, the Versailles Peace Conference of 1919, the San Remo Conference of 1920 and the League of Nations 1922.

And isn’t it amazing that none of this legalese was ever voiced when those territories were invaded by, illegally occupied by and illegally annexed to Jordan all through 1948-1967?

I left out Kashmir.

^

comment: Kashmir was what first came to mind when I was reading the top and the idea that Israel was the only Occupier immediately rang false with me as well.

Mike Groll/Associated PressThe mayor on Tuesday.

ALBANY – Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said Tuesday that whoever decided to show a film depicting American Muslims as extremists to nearly 1,500 city police officers “exercised some terrible judgment.”

Mr. Bloomberg said that neither he nor the police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, had known at the time that the film, “The Third Jihad,” was being shown to officers. Speaking to reporters after testifying here at a state budget hearing, Mr. Bloomberg said that the film had not been shown at the Police Academy.

“It was done someplace else and as soon as they found out about it they stopped it and took it down,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “Somebody exercised some terrible judgment. I don’t know who. We’ll find out.”

When the screening of the film for some officers was first revealed last year by Tom Robbins of The Village Voice, the Police Department’s main spokesman, Paul J. Browne, said it had been screened “a couple of times.”

But an article in The New York Times Tuesday, based on documents received by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School through a Freedom of Information request, showed that it had been shown repeatedly for at least three months.

The film says that few Muslim leaders can be trusted. It also includes an interview with Mr. Kelly, which, Mr. Browne said, had been lifted from old footage.

The trailer for “The Third Jihad”

They say it like it is a bad thing

Not only was the availability of food no longer associated with prosperity, but even the poor had begun to eat so well that fat began to carry working class and lower class associations.

Fat was no longer wealth, instead conscientious fitness became a mark of prosperity.

(sultanknish.blogspot.com)

Back in 1638 when Rubens created the painting, this kind of female body was considered a kind of mature feminine ideal. The Three Graces are mythological figures representing charm, enjoyment and social goodwill, and as such are usually presented in art as cheerful and beautiful dancing women.

Rubens found @Fat Wars « Why Your Wife Won’t Have Sex With You

Now: The food may cost twice as much, but it’s locally grown on a farm run by handicapped union workers who visit Cuba to receive free health care or by the indigenous peoples of Tuba-Tuba with the proceeds going to a complete sonic library of their chants and ceremonies.

(TabletMag) Every Berber I have met has told me that Amazigh were the original inhabitants of North Africa and that all of that land was once theirs. As one Libyan Amazigh told me, “I’m tired of hearing about the Palestinians and how the Jews took their land. What about how the Arabs took our land?”
There is also the fact that the official language of all the North African countries is Arabic—yet in Morocco 60 percent of the population are Tamazight or Berber-speaking, in Algeria 30 percent, and in Libya perhaps 10 percent. In most of North Africa, the Arabophone majority has suppressed or (in the case of Qaddafi’s Libya) outright prohibited the use of Tamazight, a language that is estimated to be anywhere from 2,200 to 3,000 years old; its tiffinagh script has more than 30 letters, differing somewhat from region to region, and some of them look like ancient Greek.(MORE @ Tablet)

Ann Marlowe uses conjecture to assume that the supposed father of workable counterinsurgency warfare through propaganda was less successful because he did not talk about his own North African Jewish background. I’m not so sure Ann is right about this (She seems to believe in the fiction of “Moderate Islam”), but the history here is interesting.