We must stop Iran militarily now Rabbi Jonathan Ginsburg

We must convince President Obama and the US Congress that military action alone can stop Iran before it is too late.



President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
"The pretext (Holocaust) for the creation of the Zionist regime (Israel) is false "Confronting the Zionist regime is a national and religious duty." "This regime (Israel) will not last long. Do not tie your fate to it ... This regime has no future. Its life has come to an end," he said in a speech broadcast live on state radio.
Will Obama allow this man to control nuclear bombs and missiles?


There is no more pressing issue of our time then stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. They have delivery systems that can reach Israel and Europe and smart bomb delivery capability for the USA and everywhere. The evidence is clear that they are working diligently to develop nuclear weapons. Nothing anyone has tried (diplomacy, sanctions, threats) has, or will stop them. The use of force the only way and there isn’t much time. There will be dire consequences to the use of force, but it will be much worse for the world if force is not used. They say they will use them and we should believe them. The United States alone is capable of stopping them. The Arab world is begging the US to do so. Defenses as they exist today are not 100% guaranteed to stop Iranian missiles and certainly not suitcase dirty bombs. The problem is that Obama and the Congress have no current will to use force. Ron Paul says no problem if Iran gets nuclear weapons. We must mobilize to persuade them to bomb. Such an attack is Jewishly justifiable.

One. Iran is trying to achieve nuclear weapons capability.
They get closer and closer and have the missiles. It is estimated that Iran will have enough highly enriched uranium for one nuclear bomb within two months and currently has enough low-enriched uranium for three nuclear bombs.” 1

Two. They have delivery systems.
Iran Developing Long-Range Missiles - Reza Kahlili (Washington Times) Iran is also perfecting its missile-delivery systems. Recently, the Revolutionary Guards tested two long-range ballistic missiles, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. The guards' ballistic missiles have a range of 1,200 miles, covering all U.S. bases in the Middle East and all of Israel, and now they possess missiles from North Korea with a range of 2,000 miles, which covers most of Western Europe.”

Three. Sanctions, hoping for regime change and diplomacy will not stop them “For years it was assumed that economic sanctions and diplomacy would produce a pliable negotiating partner in Iran. But Iran’s truculence has effectively undermined the once-popular notion, while a degree of confusion and consternation has gripped the international community. The often-unstated hope is that denial of critical technologies and sabotage can slow the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program until, somehow, an alternative strategy, or an agreement, emerges. The thinking has been that time is on our side and that Iran’s weak scientific foundation can be further derailed through such pressure. Contrary to such presumptions, however, Iran’s scientific infrastructure has grown in sophistication and capability in the past two decades.” . Ray Takeyh,The writer is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. For full article see http://bombirannow.blogspot.com/2011/08/who-will-stop-iran.html

Sanctions will not work
But Russia and India have made it clear that they intend to continue legitimate trade with Iran, providing Tehran with hope that some nations will accept its solution for the insurance crisis: coverage guaranteed by the Iranian government. "These sanctions have not affected us much," said Mohammad Hussein Dajmar, the managing director of the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), which has 160 ships in its fleet. "The world has many ports. We will sail to those nations that want to do business with us."

Ehud Barak: History Will Judge Obama on Nuclear Iran
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu “History will judge this [Obama] administration when it comes to the end of its term whether Iran has nuclear weapons or not,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak told Fox News in an interview. He also said sanctions are not enough to stop Iran from reaching nuclear capability.


Four. Dangers of Iran possessing the bomb.
Iran will use the weapons if they possess them
We should take them at their word that they will use them. Mutually Assured Destruction does not work with a suicide bomber mentality government. Ahmadinejad would sacrifice half of Iran to wipe out Israel' Jerusalem Post ^ | | DAVID HOROVITZ Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, if he ever became the supreme decision maker in his country, would "sacrifice half of Iran for the sake of eliminating Israel," Giora Eiland, Israel's former national security adviser, told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday. The Iranian president, he said, "has a religious conviction that Israel's demise is essential to the restoration of Muslim glory, that the Zionist thorn in the heart of the Islamic nations must be removed. And he will pay almost any price to right the perceived historic wrong. If he becomes the supreme leader and has a nuclear capability, that's a real threat." Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for the author of a book called “A Time To Betray: The Astonishing Double Life of a CIA Agent Inside the Revolutionary Guard of Iran.” He joined the Revolutionary guard in 1979. He contacted the CIA and worked as an agent. In July, speaking in Washington, he predicted that Iran will eventually attack Israel, Europe and the Gulf. He advocated a preemptive military strike saying, “Stop dreaming please, you’re not dealing with rational people. Every time you extend a hand, it is not seen as sincerity but stupidity.”

There are other dangers too. Unless Jerusalem bombs, the Israelis will soon be confronting a situation without historical parallel. We’re not talking about the stolid (but at times dangerously foolish) Pakistani Army controlling nuclear weapons; we’re talking about folks who’ve maintained terrorist liaison relationships with most of the Middle East’s radical Muslim groups…Without a raid, if the Iranians get the bomb, Europe’s appeasement reflex will kick in and the EU sanctions regime will collapse, leaving the Americans alone to contain the Islamic Republic. Most of the Gulf Arabs will probably kowtow to Persia, having more fear of Iran than confidence in the defensive assurances of the United States. And Sunni Arabs who don’t view an Iranian bomb as a plus for the Muslim world will, at daunting speed, become much more interested in “nuclear energy”; the Saudis, who likely helped Islamabad go nuclear, will just call in their chits with the Pakistani military

Five. The Arab world wants the USA or Israel to stop Iran

The Israelis know that many in the Sunni Arab world would be enormously relieved if the Israelis did what the Americans have declined to take on. The United Arab Emirates’ ambassador to the United States recently revealed what is likely a Sunni Arab consensus: Bombing Iran might be bad; allowing Khamenei to have a nuke would be worse. 3

Six. Time is running out to bomb
Ehud Barak: History Will Judge Obama on Nuclear Iran
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu Barak estimated that Iran “technically” may be able to possess a nuclear weapon within a year and a half “if they break all the rules.” He explained the major problem is that Iran may “become immune” to a military strike by building several sites and protecting them by burying them deep underground.

Seven. The USA currently does not intend to stop them
The USA is not trying to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons
US drops ball on Iranian nuks.
First the numerous skipped deadlines….the silence and lack of support for Iranian protesters..the continual pushback of the date that Iran would be nuclear-weapon capable..and now “US has no problem with Iran’s Busherh atomic plant”. Iran is rich with natural gas- a relatively clean way to generate electricity. Iran does not need nuclear power. “ Ed Lasky

“And if we assume that ultimately there will be sanctions, so what? The involvement with sanctions, who's for and who's against, when, why and to what extent, deflects from the primary problem - the absence of an American strategy for tough negotiations with Iran. Even more serious, however, is that there are worrying signs that the Obama administration is beginning to resign itself not only to the fact that Iran will continue to enrich uranium, but also to recognition that the Islamic republic could ultimately build a nuclear bomb.” 4


Eight. A sustained US bombing campaign is the only way.
The US Navy believes its destroyer off the shore of Iran can shoot down any Iranian missiles. With 100% accuracy? Can it stop 100% cargo coming into to world ports? Dirty bombs being smuggled across porous borders.“Without genuine American determination, there is no prospect of preventing the Iranians from developing nuclear weapons.” The writer is a senior research associate at the Institute for National Security Studies, where she is also director of the Arms Control and Regional Security Project. 5
Diplomacy and sanctions won't stop Iran from building a nuclear warhead, according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu."There has only been one time that Iran actually stopped the program," Netanyahu told Fox News' Chris Wallace Sunday. "That was when it feared U.S. military action."The prime minister agreed with CIA Director Leon Panetta that sanctions would "probably not" stop the Iranians http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/38298..



Nine. Jewish law justifies military action
Halachik justification for preemptive bombing campaign to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Such a war would be a mamlechet mitzvah.
The Torah does not expect us to submit to armed aggression, to stand silently and passively when others seek to conquer and dominate us. The people of Israel have the right to defend themselves from attack.
Indeed, we are commanded to do so: the obligation to defend and preserve our lives overrides virtually every other religious duty.[10] Though the word "mitzvah" has a particularly Jewish connotation, there is no reason to believe that the Jews are the only people that is entitled to self-defense. Every nation must possess the right to take up arms if necessary to protect itself and its citizens against military attack.
Analogy using Israel’s strike on Iraqi reactor in 1981
All we can say is that if the Iraqis were building a bomb there, then Israel was morally justified in attacking the facility in the name of national defense. When diplomacy fails, when our foes spurn the offer of peace that our tradition bids us to make them, when they are clearly bent upon their aggressive course, then the time to initiate preemptive action is sooner rather than later. 8

10. Yes there would be negative be consequences, but on balance much less probelmactic than allowing Iran to go nuclear. . Iran may mine the Gulf or sink ships making it impossible to transport gasoline. They may unleash terrorists cells everywhere, have Hezbollah and Hamas send its 70,000 missiles at Israel etc. Not stopping them though will be much worse. Contemplate one nuclear missile getting through Israeli defenses destroying Tel Aviv, or dirty bombs in LA, Chicago, NY etc.

11. Will/Should Israel have to take care of it?
a. Why Hasn't Israel Bombed Iran (Yet)?
The military risks are large; the political risks could be even bigger.
By BRET STEPHENS
Here are four theories in ascending order of significance and plausibility.
The first is that Israeli military planners have concluded that any attack would be unlikely to succeed (or succeed at a reasonable price). …senior Israeli military and political leaders insist it is not completely beyond it.
A second theory is that Israel is biding its time as it improves its military capabilities on both its offensive and defensive ends..
The third theory concerns the internal dynamics of Israeli politics. Mr. Netanyahu may favor a strike, but he will not order one without the consent of Defense Minister Ehud Barak, President Shimon Peres, Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and perhaps also Mossad chief Meir Dagan. This inner cabinet is said to be uniformly against a strike, with the wavering exception of Mr. Barak. But Mr. Ashkenazi and Mr. Dagan are due to step down within a few months, and who Mr. Netanyahu chooses to replace them will have a material bearing on the government's attitude toward a strike.
Finally, Israeli leaders are mindful of history. Put aside the routine comparisons between a prospective military strike on Iran with Israel's quick and effective destruction of Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981. As I'm reminded by Michael Doran, a Middle East scholar at NYU, Israel's leaders are probably no less alert to the lessons of the Suez War in 1956. Back then, a successful military operation by Britain, France and Israel to humiliate Egypt's Gamel Abdel Nasser (in many ways the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of his day) fell afoul of the determined political opposition of the Eisenhower administration, which mistakenly thought that it could curry favor with the Arabs by visibly distancing itself from Israel and its traditional European allies. Sound familiar?



“Unless Jerusalem bombs, the Israelis will soon be confronting a situation without historical parallel. We’re not talking about the stolid (but at times dangerously foolish) Pakistani Army controlling nuclear weapons; we’re talking about folks who’ve maintained terrorist liaison relationships with most of the Middle East’s radical Muslim groups…Without a raid, if the Iranians get the bomb, Europe’s appeasement reflex will kick in and the EU sanctions regime will collapse, leaving the Americans alone to contain the Islamic Republic. Most of the Gulf Arabs will probably kowtow to Persia, having more fear of Iran than confidence in the defensive assurances of the United States. And Sunni Arabs who don’t view an Iranian bomb as a plus for the Muslim world will, at daunting speed, become much more interested in “nuclear energy”; the Saudis, who likely helped Islamabad go nuclear, will just call in their chits with the Pakistani military. So then, does the Israeli air force think it can do it? Historically, Israeli politicians have taken the assessments of their air force as canonical. If the air command believes it can, will Bibi Netanyahu and his cabinet proceed with preemption, which has, most Israelis will tell you, repeatedly saved the Jewish state from terrible situations? 9.


Therefore, it is our sacred and solemn duty to work day and night to convince President Obama and the US Congress that military action alone can stop Iran before it is too late.


Notes
1. DAILY ALERT Monday, August 1, 2011
Iran Developing Long-Range Missiles - Reza Kahlili (Washington Times)
2. ibid
3. Should Israel Bomb Iran? Better safe than sorry
BY Reuel Marc Gerecht
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/should-israel-bomb-iran
4. http://bombirannow.blogspot.com/2011/08/us-wont-stop-iran.html
5. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/sanctions-alone-won-t-stop-iran-s-nuclear-work-1.265981

6. http://bombirannow.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-hasnt-israel-bombed-yet.html

7. http://bombirannow.blogspot.com/2011/08/good-time-for-israel-to-bomb.html

8. http://bombirannow.blogspot.com/2011/08/jewish-justification-for-bombing.html
9. http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/should-israel-bomb-iran Should Israel Bomb Iran?
Better safe than sorry BY Reuel Marc Gerecht