How Israel Might Destroy Iran's Nuclear Program

Submitted by Edmond Beniacar (Australia), Jul 20, 2015 at 21:10

There is a widespread view that Israel has an absolute need to destroy Iran's nuclear program.

I'd like to propose that the old story of David and Goliath may be a useful reminder that there is another alternative:

1. We know that anti-ballistic missile technology is improving by the day and that Israel will quickly reach the stage where it can be fairly certain of shooting down any missile from Iran

2. Israel is a tiny state and most of it is desert anyway. The critical effect of this is that it would take very few missile batteries to provide a protective shield over the country. Multiple redundancy would be the order of the day to ensure as great a guarantee of success is is possible. We know about Iron Dome and David's Sling. The Arrow will reach tht stage and better.

3. On the other hand, Iran is terrtorially large and consequently far more difficult to protect against attack, if at all.

4. Critically, the most vulnerable to any development of Iranian missilry and nuclear weapons will be Europe. Given its land mass, it would not have a snowflake's chance in hell of protecting all its cities and would be left open to easy blackmail from Iran.

Consequently, in any exchange with Iran, Israel is the only one that can harmlessly repulse an attack and retaliate massively, the others would have to be prepared to suffer mutual damage. It would be interesting to see how Europe would react to an Iranian threat, given its history of prompt capitulation.

Once in a while, it pays to be David and watch the other Goliaths face off among one another.

Given a choice, I would much rather be an Israeli than a European.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".