The New Road to Tehran

In contemplating Israeli options to attack Iran's nuclear facilities (the map in that post is dead, but this interactive map from the same outfit should do, too), we should consider a couple things.

One, considerable time has passed since many people concluded that Israel can't attack Iran with any hope of success. I was never in that camp, believing that even though we could do a far more thorough job (assuming Iran hasn't outsourced critical back up facilities to areas outside Iran), if Israel had no choice other than seeing Iran go nuclear, Israel would try even a low odds strike to buy whatever time they could get. Israel has had time to improve their capabilities to strike Iran. I assume they used that time. Like this, for example.

Two, Israel's limitations assume that Israel wouldn't dare go through Iraqi air space to reach Iran. Remember that some nutballs here even suggested we should shoot down Israeli aircraft attempting to cross Iraqi air space to attack Iran. But in two months, we'll be out of Iraq. And Iraq just got air traffic control responsibility for their own air space.

So Israel no longer has to fear that we might refuse their request to fly through Iraqi air space since it is no longer our permission to grant or deny. And Iraq could plausibly deny that they detected any strike and certainly didn't approve of an Israeli mission that crosses Iraqi air space. Indeed, Israel might be able to deny it altogether with no proof they did fly across Iraq. Given Iraqi weaknesses without our presence, Iraqi denials might actually all be true.

Iran may be licking their chops at the thought of Iraq without America, but this could be the most Trojani of Horses that Iran has ever received as a gift.

If I was an Iranian nutball, I'd track President Obama's reelection numbers very closely next summer. And if they are below 50 and trending down, I'd raise my alert level.

UPDATE: Why Israel won't attack Iran without our permission. The argument rests on two major premises: one, Iran's retaliation would kill Americans and spike oil prices, leading to a loss of American support for Israel; and two, Israel has gained a lot of diplomatic support against Iran as Iran has defied the world over the nuclear issue.

Well then, never mind. He's the expert. I'm just a blogger without portfolio. What can I say?

Oh, one more thing. You mean that all those American troops near Iran are just targets rather than being a potent force that could rip Iran's throat out if we used them? We'd just sit and take it, instead? Well you could be right about that. And our vast nuclear and conventional arsenal wouldn't deter a non-nuclear Iran from attacking us in "retaliation" when a third country attacks Iran? Huh. That kind of rains on the parade of the crowd that says we can deter Iran if they go nuclear.

And another thing. All that diplomatic isolation of Iran has gotten Israel ... what exactly?

Who cares if Iran is more isolated than ever? I mean, Iran may be going slower than they would otherwise, but they are still on the path to nuclear weapons. European support on this issue won't mean much if Iran goes nuclear and nukes Israel. Europeans don't like Israel much anyway. Israel's effective destruction might get a weepy headline that "we're all Israelis, now" in Paris or Berlin, I admit. But in less than a week they'll say the Israelis deserved it, as sad as it might be that so many Israelis had to suffer for their leaders' sins. As for Arab support for Israel against Iran? Well, they'll be sad to lose an asset against Iran, no doubt. But if they are lucky, Israel will nuke Iran in retaliation and it will be two countries they hate crippled and dead while they watched safely from the side lines. No crying in the Arab world over that result, unless I'm grossly mistaken.

Basically, you think that when Israel is weighing the risks of losing European and Arab diplomatic support and American support even permanently versus the half life of dangerous radiation zones in Tel Aviv, that the Israelis will decide that the radiation risk is less?

Huh. Well, you're the expert. What can I say? I'm just a blogger far from Tel Aviv.

UPDATE: Another thought. Given how this administration celebrates "leading from behind," does anyone think that an Israeli strike would be interpreted by Iran as anything other than an American strike?