Submitted by Michael S (United States), Sep 18, 2015 at 11:32
Hello, Anon (US). You said,
because - and God forbid - if Iran uses a nuke against Israel then whatever damage happens to Israel it is clear that Iran will be destroyed by the West because anything less would be intolerable.
The West would do no such thing. Three points:
- Iran doesn't have to use its nukes, in order to achieve its gains. By possessing nuclear weapons, along with the impressive delivery systems the Iranians already have in their arsenal that could reach Israel, the Ayatollah would have the clout he needs to get others, including the British, French, etc., but certainly fellow Muslim countries, to act in concert against Israel. It would be like the high school bully showing up on campus driving an Abrams tank instead of coming on the bus (The other students would be impressed, and make room for him in the hallways).
- The West is not in any position to anything worthwhile in the Middle East at the moment -- the place has spun completely out of their control. The European countries, one after another, are finding themselves unable to withstand an unarmed invasion at the moment, of hundreds of thousands of Syrians who are freely mixed with Jihadis. The enemy don't need nukes, nor tanks, nor even sidearms: they are simply walking in and taking over the place. Meanwhile, the US, in its typical short-sightedness and stupidity, is in the process of welcoming some 70,000 ot them over here -- during an election year, no less. This is the new "fourth generation warfare" (qv).
- Besides being witless about how to handle fourth-generation warfare, the West cannot address Middle East problems even in conventional ways. The Russians and Iranians, on the other hand, are acting like old pros: They know who their enemies are, and who their friends are -- something the Americans and Europeans seem to have gotten all confused, decades ago. While the Russians and Iranians are sending troops into Syria (for Iran, this is part of its new boldness after the surrender of the Americans and their allies at Vienna), the Americans now say they have one or two men (but not boots, God forbid!) on the ground in Syria. Those men are supporting the Syrian Kurds -- Kurds allied to the PKK in neighboring Turkey. Meanwhile, our Turkish allies are busy putting Kurdish cities in their country under curfew, invading Iraq in hot pursuit of the PKK, and lobbing artillery at their Syrian affiliates where the Americans presumably have men on the ground. This isn't a case of military weakness, such as that I outlined above, but of total confusion in American policy -- and yes, the Europeans and Australians still look to us as leaders in these matters.
In summary, the Ayatollah can and will do anything he pleases now, because the West have all shown themselves to be lost, incompetent wimps
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".