Today in the NY Times Nicolas Kristof has published an excellent piece that pretty much skewers the idea that Israel bombing Iran is anywhere near a rational idea. Furthermore, this is not about a difference of opinion, this is the consensus of every qualified expert on the subject.
You can view the article HERE--Kristof--NY Times.
Here are some of the critical highlights:
Regarding the "Debate" that is allegedly going on Kristof says:
There really isn’t such a debate. Or rather, it’s the same kind of debate as the one about climate change — credible experts are overwhelmingly on one side.
No one who actually knows about the region thinks Netanyahu and Likud's recent antics are anywhere near a good idea. Further Kristof succinctly enumerates five reasons why this
Attack Iran Idea is really stupid and counter-productive.
1. It won't solve the problem--just delay development
2. It won't be a single attack and there will be significant civilian deaths--BlowbacK anyone?
3. It would very likely escalate into a larger war--anyone remember how WWI got started?
4. The economic impact of oil prices will be disastrous--talk is already having an effect
5. Sanctions and other low risk methods are better right now.
I find # 4 rather compelling, and I think this is also one of the reasons that this whole campaign is going on. Let's look at it a little more closely:
Fourth, oil supplies through the Persian Gulf could be interrupted, sending oil and gas prices soaring, and damaging the global economy.
This is definitely true, and look at what their war mongering has done to oil prices already. This is one of the side benefits that Netanyahu and his Likud buddies are well aware of. I don't think it is any secret that they do not want to see Obama re-elected. Politically they are good friends with Neocons and other war mongering conservatives on this side of the Atlantic. It may still be a long shot for Obama to be defeated right now, but high oil prices certainly don't help. All they have to do is talk, and oil prices go up. And talking is what they have been doing a great deal of lately. I still think that even they are not so insane as to carry out strikes on Iran, however, over time just about everyone has a tendency to start believing their own bullshit.
Kristof concludes:
Whether Israel will attack Iranian nuclear sites is one of this year’s crucial questions, and people in the know seem to think the odds are about 50-50. We don’t know that the economy would be harmed or that a war would unfold, but anyone who is confident about what would happen is a fool.
So as we hear talk about military action against Iran, let’s be clear about one thing. Outside Netanyahu’s aides and a fringe of raptors, just about every expert thinks that a military strike at this time would be a catastrophically bad idea. That’s not a debate, but a consensus.
I don't know about you, but 50-50 is pretty damn scary. Anyone willing to roll those dice, is not only a gambler, but a reckless one. It really boggles my mind how well Congress receives Netanyahu--with friends like him we make enemies all over the world.