Israeli Maj-Gen (res.) Itzhak Brik and security analyst Yair Ansbacher have diametrically opposed views on dealing with Iran’s nuclear threat: “Experts debate the urgency of striking Iran: Is time running out for Israel?,” by Natan Galula, Jerusalem Post, September 21, 2024:
One of Israel’s biggest problems, Brik relayed, is its ammunition shortages.
“Bullets, tanks, artillery shells – all missing. Emergency warehouses that the US held here in Israel were delivered to Ukraine,” he said.
“Israel needs to build factories for the [independent] production of ammunition. But even then, Jerusalem needs to cooperate with Washington because Israel is a small country and its resources are limited. We must strike a defense alliance with the US, both in terms of resources and war.”…
That assumes an administration in Washington that is pro-Israel. Brik is far too hopeful; he may not realize just how inimical to Israel’s interests Kamala Harris is certain to be.
On Israel’s nemesis in the north, Hezbollah, Ansbacher said that it is already worn down by the series of IDF attacks in the past 10 months, despite perhaps a contrary perception by the Israeli public. “And like Iran, Hezbollah is threatened by internal Lebanese forces waiting for an opportunity to overthrow it. [Hezbollah] doesn’t want war right now,” he said.
As for Iran, “If Israel attacks the ayatollah regime or elements within the regime that suppress the population, such as the Basij [a domestic militia that brutally enforces Islamic rules], then there’s a high probability that a rebellion will break out inside Iran and topple the government. And even if it doesn’t, it will be enough to paralyze Iran’s efforts to attack us,” he noted.
“We shouldn’t think about what Iran can do, but [about] what it already did. It revealed all its cards. Hamas can’t harm us strategically. Hezbollah is limited. This is the time to strike Iran. Cutting off the head of the octopus will dry up its arms in a domino effect that will deter all our enemies. The entire world will benefit from this, and I believe that the US will join the war effort, too. This will send a clear message to those challenging the West – China, Russia, and North Korea – that it is still as powerful and as decisive as ever.”…
What Ansbacher believes is certain — “that the US will join the war effort [against Iran] too” — is really a big “If.” Why does he place such faith in Kamala Harris, who shows scant sympathy for Israel and no signs of being willing to enter a war against Iran on Israel’s side, if the Jewish state does as Ansbacher says it should, and strikes first?
For some of the fanatical theocrats who run Iran, destroying Israel may be so important that they would be willing to risk a nuclear counterstrike by the Jewish state. Brik treats them as rational actors — what if he is wrong? And I simply fail to understand his remark that Tehran’s “pursuit of nuclear capacity is to provide cover for its conventional war efforts.” You mean, those tens of billions of dollars spent on the nuclear program, those underground facilities at Natanz and Fordow, were all just a ruse to deflect attention from Iran’s buildup of its conventional sources? How likely is that?
Israel’s anti-missile laser system, the Iron Beam, is in the last stages of development and should be ready for use early in 2025. But it doesn’t have it now.
Brik is counting a great deal—too much? — on an American administration willing to go all in with Israel against Iran, and he assumes that Iran’s theocrats are not fanatics, but eminently reasonable men who would not use nuclear weapons against Israel because of the damage Israel’s nuclear response would inflict.
Both Brik and Ansbacher offer compelling arguments, and they are diametrically opposed on the question of whether to strike Iran’s nuclear program now (Ansbacher) or never (Brik). I leave it to you to make up your own mind; in this critical matter, I still haven’t made up mine.
Frank Anderson says
In my opinion, no country has ever spent the time and money to acquire nuclear weapons and failed. Iran has some bombs now, designed produced and tested in North Korea at Iran’s expense. When Iran gets the number of bombs it wants to strike all the targets it desires, it will use them to bring back the missing 12th Imam according to Shia teaching.
Cynthia says
I think now is the moment before US is no longer a friend. Bunker busters are already be withheld. However, Israel might have something else it developed up its sleeve. I’m all in favor of the Samson option if cornered. The whole Middle East will go in an instant. It would be no loss to mankind except for Israel whose tiny population has contributed a tremendous amount of medical, technological and agricultural advances to the world.
Stive says
Iran already has nuke or atomic bombs of whatever size to take out Israel assuming delivery would be successful. Iran is waiting till it has enough to take out america and others at the same time as they only get one chance before retaliation. My point is irans nuclear program is only to destroy america as they’ve got for Israel already. I’m not thinking the nuke program under mountains needs hit if even possible.iran needs the ruling junta eliminated. I’m not concerned with a free moral Iran having nukes if they want them.perhaps they won’t.
All these hezbolla leaders eliminated yet nasrallah remains ? Why is knomeni not eliminated already ? At least once a year khomeni and all the religious leaders meet in Qom city. Get them all at once. Or funerals with even knomeni in attendance strike them all.
Do the above and Iranians, now 70% non Muslim will take over. At the right moment pour in weapons to irans people. It’s not as hard as one would think.
Frank Anderson says
Imagine for a second: Would you kill your snitch?
Russ Wivell says
I’m sure there would be a tit for tat and then some
Kosh's Shadow says
Take out the IRGC and Basij, and let the Iranians take their country back.
Bye, Hamas, Hizballah, Houthis.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Ansbacher’s assumption is really unwarranted. As noted above, Kamala has no inclination to do anything to offend Iran: the Dem strategy on the Middle East has been to tilt towards Iran in order to punish Saudi Arabia, even though that has resulted in Riyadh happily teaming up w/ Moscow in SCO, and maybe even BRICS. It’s apparently Obama’s way of punishing Saudi Arabia for 9/11, w/o actually confronting them on that issue itself
Even if President Trump gets elected, one of his key selling points is that he’s never started any wars, so he won’t start one w/ Iran, any more than pinpricks, like when he took out Soleimani. Israel’s better approach if he gets elected (w/ Kamala, they are SOL) would be to persuade him to deal w/ Hamas and Hizbullah outside Gaza & Lebanon in every possible way – from freezing their assets to having INTERPOL hunt them down. Maybe discuss w/ a Trump administration who will take out Khark island, their major oil terminal, so that they won’t have to armtwist other countries to re-sanction Iran. That’s how Israel should deal w/ this Iran issue if Trump gets re-elected
Frank Anderson says
I agree with your conclusion. Please tell your thoughts on the proposition that Israel will use the weapons it has if it is not sold or provided the weapons it wants. It will not submit to another Masada..
James Lincoln says
࿗Infidel࿘ says,
“That’s how Israel should deal w/ this Iran issue if Trump gets re-elected”
Agree, all good ideas.
And let Israel with its IDF deal w/ Hamas and Hizbullah INSIDE Gaza & Lebanon.
gravenimage says
Israel Should Not Assume a Pro-Israel Administration in Washington
……………………………………
Grimly this is true. Harris would be even less so than Biden.