When I was briefly in Venezuala, my client’s joint venture partner described a politician as someone who would get in front of a mob and call it a parade. I first thought to use it to describe how the US, at least per recent major media stories, is attempting to depict Iran’s failure to (yet) strike back at Israel over its assassination of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran as the result of US diplomacy.
While we’ll discuss the patent ridiculousness of this claim in more detail, it would be foolhardy for Iran to move in haste, which is what acting by now would amount to. Among other things, Iran has coalition partners, in the form of other members of the Axis of Resistance. In the past, they have only coordinately loosely and have not even always informed each other in advance of big moves, notably Hamas not alerting Iran to its October 7 attack. We can see from the US dealings with NATO members over Ukraine that this process is like herding cats. And NATO has an existing organization and one hopes, decision structure (although Aurelien described long form in a recent post, really not for the sort of activities NATO fancies to take on).
So delay here could solely be due to a Middle Eastern version of nemawashi,1 of reaching consensus. The idea that the US, which not only can’t curb Israel, but regularly has its welfare state Ukraine misbehave, can influence Iran is absurd. So the only was the Venezuela quip work is to elaborate on it: the US is trying to get in front of a mob and call it a parade but is so clueless that it does not see that it is at the tail end and the mob is moving the other way.
So let’s use a well-known American image instead:
The Oz schtick includes intimidating settings, threat displays, and comprehensive information.
Today the looming threat of the Iranian (and Hezbollah and Hamas) retaliation is barely a news item in the Anglosphere media. Admittedly American have the attention span of goldfish, and it could be some time before Iran acts, between needing to get its allies on the same page and agree on tactics and targeting, organizing the related logistics, and shoring up defenses likely to on the “to do” list. In keeping, the Western media has largely ignored Iran getting its allies on the same page, via calling an emergency meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which took place Wednesday in Jeddah. Importantly, Saudi Arabia issued a second condemnation of the Haniyeh killing in addition to joining the official statement, which included deeming “Israel, the illegal occupying power, fully responsible for this heinous attack.”
But the US is trying to persuade anyone paying attention that it is having a significant effect on Iranian decisions. This comes after repeated and embarrassing examples of not even being able to get Israel to pretend it respects US entreaties. The assassination of Hamiyeh, a, perhaps the, Hamas chief negotiator was a slap in the face to Biden and Blinken, who have been doggedly depicting the fantasy of a ceasefire as something that might get done. In a bizarre display of desperation, one recent peace plan iteration, which was no different than the old ones, was depicted by spokescritters as an Israel plan. Aside from that being obviously false, Israel’s pointed silence was confirmation. The Administration soon admitted it was a Biden scheme.
Iran and even more so Hezbollah are well aware of the potential economic and social costs of precipitating a wider war. That is why there responses have been, to use the cliche, measured, meaning they have either amounted to tit for tat or modest escalation. So for the US to act as if they somehow have educated Iran and its fellow Axis of Resistance members on this matter is remarkable, yet sadly typical, arrogance.
The Washington Post took the lead in telegraphing this new US party line on Tuesday, in Biden scrambles to defuse the ticking Iran-Israel time bomb. This article was depicted as “opinion” because it cam in spook whisperer David Igantius’ column. Representative sections:
President Biden… has conducted an intense round of diplomacy and military preparation to stave off a catastrophic war in the Middle East.
The White House effort has included back-channel talks with Iran to urge restraint, blunt warnings to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to obstruct a cease-fire in Gaza, and the dispatch of a U.S. naval and air armada to protect Israel and other U.S. allies if deterrence fails….
The Iranian response has been complicated by seeming confusion over the circumstances of Haniyeh’s death. Tehran at first claimed he was killed by an Israeli missile, requiring a similar Iranian response. But officials say that Tehran has concluded privately that he was instead eliminated by a concealed bomb, perhaps prompting a different response…
Tehran may also be dissuaded by the U.S. show of force this week, and secret White House communications passed via the Swiss embassy in Tehran and the Iranian mission at the United Nations. “Iran understands clearly that the United States is unwavering in its defense of our interests, our partners and our people. We have moved a significant amount of military assets to the region to underscore that principle,” a senior administration official messaged me.
The spin is mighty thick. The claim that Haniyeh was killed by a bomb first came implausibly fast via the New York Times, followed by an even more implausible version in the Telegraph (the latter being highly suspect by the number of sources it claimed to have from the Iran government).
By contrast, Arab news accounts cite eyewitnesses saying a projectile hit the guest house. And Alastair Crooke describes how a colleague was in the same building when Haniyeh was killed. At 13:10, Crooke recounts how the impact took out one section of the side of the building and part fo the roof and was clearly an external impact, not a bomb.
The fact that US sources can posture with straight faces that Iran is confused over what happened in its own guest house, when it is perfectly capable of doing forensics, is an insult to Iran as well as reader intelligence.
We highlighted early that in the same Judge Napolitano show (see at 17:15), that Muslim states and much of the Global South have concludes that “The West wants war.” To Iran, that means further appeasement in the form of negotiated and limited retaliation is no longer on, since the Western media has consistently depicted Iran being measured as an admission of weakness. That was confirmed in the very same Washington Post the following day with this story:
As we and others have recounted long form, the Iran attack was very successful and should have put Israel back on its heels. Under textbook conditions, with Iran attacking only pre-agreed military targets, Iran struck every one with pinpoint precision, defeating Israeli defenses at its best-protected sites. Yet the media hypes the fact that Iran sent a wave of 300 very slow moving and cheap drones, that were meant to draw fire and reveal more about the US, Israel, UK and French and were all destroyed, is perversely presented as a victory to divert attention from the damage done by more powerful missiles, as intended. If any of the drones had gotten through, that would have been a sign of serious Western weakness as opposed to Iranian strength.
Now this piece could merely signify that the US officials are so deluded that they think counterparties in the Middle East will heed what they say, which given Blinken, is entirely possible. Or that they are going into overdrive to try to calm nerves after the market indigestion early in the week.
But there’s an additional sign of US over-obvious eagerness to delay Axis of Resistance action. From a new story in the Wall Street Journal, Biden, Leaders of Egypt and Qatar Urge More Gaza Cease-Fire Talks Next Week. The subhead ought to elicit derision: The countries say they are prepared to offer a proposal to bridge the differences between Israel and Hamas.
After Israel assassinated Haniyeh and now finance minister Ben Smotrich further poisoning the well by depicting Israel as justified in starving all Gazans but hindered by international pressure, the US has the gall to act as if a ceasefire is anything other than a fantasy? Israel’s government wants genocide. The only point for them for a ceasefire would be to give the IDF a breather so they could regroup and then better do more of the same.
A careful reader will discern that this trio is selling vaporware:
In a joint statement issued Thursday, the leaders urged Israel and Hamas to meet for negotiation on Aug. 15, an invitation the U.S. says Israel has welcomed…
Officials didn’t provide details of the proposal that the three leaders said in their statement could resolve “remaining implementation issues in a manner that meets the expectations of all parties.”
It seems that the US is pumping for yet more useless negotiations as a delaying tactic. I can’t imagine Hamas will fall for that, and could take the Russian posture that talks and military action run on independent tracks. After all, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Israel only very briefly halted the prosecution of the war at a few points for humanitarian relief.
These stories all fail to give much (or any) weight to the real deterrent, that Israel uses an Iran/Axis of Resistance attack as the pretext for firing a tactical nuke. Israel used the deaths of Druze schoolchildren, a population that Israel has never much cared about, in what was almost certainly collateral damage from Israel air defenses against a Hezbollah attack, as the pretext for assassinating Hezbollah official Fuad Skukr. So Israel has already established it will use just about any justification for escalation. The implication is that if Iran does anything other than engage in yet another puppet show response, Israel could go whole hog.
The US flogging yet more pointless talks might also be to buy Israel and the US more time to prepare, particularly since US military assets all over the Middle East are exposed. A projectile strike on the Iranian government guest house would seem to require US targeting assistance, making the US a co-belligerent.
Given the givens, it would behoove Iran to act quickly….if it can get all its moving parts lined up, which is not a trivial task. But Lawrence Wilkerson argued that there are some Axis of Resistance plays that would not be hard to tee up, yet could be very effective. He suggested firing 150 missiles a day, every day. That level of steady barrage would drain Israel and the US of air defenses in theater in a very few months, while Iran and its friends could keep up that pace for easily a year.
Even so, Israel would work out soon enough that it would be rendered defenseless. Does it then fire its nuclear missiles? It seems with armageddon as the Israel trump card, the only possible successful countermeasure would be widespread fire/targeting suppression and perhaps a devastating first strike. The Russians have already sent Iran a very powerful electronic warfare device.
Have Russia or Iran tested any electromagnetic pulse bombs so that they too could be deployed?
In other words, Iran is the antithesis of reckless. The stakes are high and potentially existential But Iran also knows following the Western tame retaliation ploy is a sucker’s game. How they square this circle is over my pay grade. The balance of factors suggests they will move as soon as they possibly can. But that still may wind up being a bit of a way away.
_____
1 My Japanese colleagues translated it as “patting the roots” as in making sure a newly-planted tree was in properly-prepared dirt. Contrary to Western images of the Japanese, this process was not at all nice. But grievances and concerns were aired and fixes and horse trades made.
102 comments
Comments are closed.
I wonder if the Olympics are another reason for Iran’s delay. The idea of them being a time of global truce is tattered but still may have appeal for some.
Sochi Games as precedent?
I think they will want their athletes safely home before they attack. Meanwhile every day they hold their fire they turn the screws on Israel’s nervous population and teetering economy.
Americans have short attention-spans. Persians are more reflective and studied, indeed patient.
It is amazing that US thinks its diplomacy – if such it can be called – is more influential over Iran than over Israel. That is illustrative of the Zionist Problem
I’d go farther;
Sorry, I don’t know who first said this.
And insist that it’s not hot and his hands are npt burning? Then agajn, these people are pretending that Biden is still US president and is doing something…
Nah… Real politicians would blame their burning hands on Putin.
Apparently (Wiki, alas) Thad Stevens, when asked if Simon Cameron (Lincoln’s Secretary of War) was honest, said “He would not steal a red-hot stove”. When challenged as to whether this was parliamentary language, Stevens said that on consideration, he no longer believed it correct to say that Cameron would not steal a red-hot stove.
A politician is someone who can stand in front of a mob and call it a parade (from https://ingaza.wordpress.com/2019/03/31/us-is-manufacturing-a-crisis-in-venezuela-so-that-there-is-chaos-and-needed-intervention).
I heard this in 1997, so I didn’t get it from your link. It does seem to be a local witticism.
I wonder if in the grand scheme of things if Iran were to attack Israeli positions in Gaza under the pretext of the “genocide convention “ or launching a barrage from Syria since they are already at war with Israel, would that temper the escalation to tactical nukes.
Iran is the antithesis of reckless. I’ll add the US is the antithesis of diplomacy.
Thanks, Yves. A couple of factors that you point to but which I’m sure start to threaten authorial speculation overload are to what extent the sympathetic major powers, Russia and China, are part of the cat herd the Resistance is trying to manage, and how the Resistance is reading Israeli internal political dynamics. Do they think they could create sufficient strain to bring down the currently dominant Zionist ultras, without prompting a nuclear attack? (And it’s likely that conflict over the use of nukes is currently very high.) How much longer can the Israelis endure the economic strain of the war at its current pace, or a notch or two higher? My guess is that the ultras are worried about this and realize that increased out-migratioin, investment flight etc don’t constitute viable grounds for nuclear escalation.
There were some reports on X that Iran was going to retaliate during the Tisha B’Av holiday (August 12-13) which would be deeply symbolic as the holiday is mourning the destruction of both Holy Temples.
I think the premise of your article is correct though, in that Iran is getting all of its ducks in a row before it does something massive, so while an attack on the holiday would deeply symbolic to Israelis, I don’t think Iran is going to put itself in a position wrt not being able mitigate any retaliatory strike. Plus they need to clean house because it is now obvious elements in their security apparatus are thoroughly compromised.
And you are absolutely correct that the West is thoroughly deluded that they can manage this, especially since the Israeli provocation violated the ancient law of hospitality that still has a strong hold in Iran and across the Levant and ME. While that law may mean little to neocons/neolibs driving us into WW3, it is a deep humiliation to Iranian people, which I see daily on X with many of the regular joe, apolitical, Iranians I follow (whom I initially followed to get a peek at daily life there).
I hope the Iranians et al are wiser than to play into Jewish eschatological fantasies – there are all too many ultra-orthodox nutters who would happily see such an attack as Round One of the promised Armageddon and pull the pin on themselves and the rest of us in order to usher in the End Time and their personal golden tickets to the Messiah’s fun park.
With the Armageddon/Rapture Christians egging them on.
Iran doesn’t have to only worry about Israel’s ability or inability to defend itself.
What the USA (and Britain and other European countries) will do in response to any attack on Israel always has to be a part of their calculation.
Uh. That is not the point.
The last time that Iran felt the need to hit back it was symbolic.
They notified the US about the attack. Then Jordan, Israel, France, Great Britain and the US spent everything they had (price tag around $2 billion) in the area to take the missile/drone swarm out. Only for at least two targets to be hit by missiles.
Now imagine a triple size swarm without notification ahead of time what the targets are.
Or worse the suggestion in the article of just using a 100 to 200 missiles/drones per day for a month. Aside from spending ~$500 million/day to take out those swarms just building the infrastructure to replace the munitions spent would take the US years.
For example take the patriot missiles; The only production was training/expired munitions replacement, they managed to upgrade that to 550 unit/year and that is the cap until they finish building new plants to produce them (+100/year in 2027), combined with the ramp up in Japan that is 600 per year (keep in mind that at least 1/3 of that, more likely 1/2, is needed for normal replacements).
Ukraine has used over 2000 units (this includes stockpile destruction) in the 1 1/2 years that Patriot systems have been employed there (that is 1/6 of the total world stock when the first Patriot arrived in Ukraine).
Every single system the US can use to take out missiles/drones has that same problem. Only training/expiry replacement production with a limited ability to scale up production (normally used when new systems are sold and need their initial allotment of munitions) while building of excess production capacity is not going to happen unless the private manufacturers get hard assurances that they won’t lose money on building that excess capacity.
And this problem isn’t limited to the anti-missile/drone weapons.
>>>In a joint statement issued Thursday, the leaders urged Israel and Hamas to meet for negotiation on Aug. 15, an invitation the U.S. says Israel has welcomed…
The new Hamas political leader is far more hard-lined and maximalist than Haniyeh.
Is Bibi playing 4-D chess and purposefully trying to prolong the war, or is he/IDF-Mossad Establishment just stumbling from crisis to crisis, trying to demonstrate to the Israeli public that Israel is winning the war?
….you make the call. my vote is that their stumbling in the dark trying to score any victory to offset the gradual frog-boil of IDF deaths
Time to call on the famed psychologist, Lord Petyr Baelish, aka Littlefinger, of the Game of Thrones:
We already know Israel is committed to genocide and ethnic cleansing, so being known, this actually cannot rate as “the worst reason”.
As I said in an earlier post, I think they are looking for/ready to create an excuse to use a tactical nuclear weapon. They are willing to gamble no one will dare respond in kind because that would quickly lead to civilization-ending nuclear exchanges.
So if Israel nukes Iran or Lebanon does this mean they will finally have to admit they have nuclear weapons? And while the Israelis may hope for the Neville Chamberlains in the Biden administration to keep preaching “peace in our time,” can they really depend on the same from Iran which has thousands and thousands of missiles?
And finally there are Russia and the other non Western nuclear states which may not care for having themselves threatened with world nuclear holocaust. As Putin has shown, when push comes to shove Russians act and don’t twiddle their thumbs like Joe. Netanyahu may justly think that he owns Joe and Blinken and even Trump but can he really say the same about Putin?
A nuke would settle nothing other than the question of whether Israel is finished. It would be an act of national suicide. IMO.
Who would f with Israel if they dropped a nuke? The math says it’s still cheaper to keep her. What’s one mushroom cloud over Tehran? That’s in Iran you know… my money’s on the neocons being all for making that (comparatively) harmless part of the multi-polar world glow. It would be in character for Israel, as the not-so-plausibly deniable wildcard, to set the pace of conflict for the (increasingly pressured) US, which has need to do a show of force to buttress its waning authority.
My apologies to the people of Tehran, as the above was certainly in poor taste; but, such is my civilization.
The reasoning is, any country which drops the first nuke is clearly insane. Therefore, they might/must be planning to take out everyone else’s nukes. Therefore, destroy them before they destroy you.
It’s probably more complicated than that. Probably India would wait to see what Pakistan does, and I doubt North Korea would nuke Tel Aviv, but what would Pakistan do? It’s been suggested they are ready to sell a few of their nukes to Turkiye. Are NATO nations likely to take advantage of the situation to nuke Moscow? Is the U.S.? I believe Israel has already decided they will nuke Tehran plus …
So, an unconscious suicidal motive might be ‘the worst reason’? Which is a hypothetical underlining the imperative to stop the dude. Maybe they could offer to put him not in a witness protection program, but in a perp protection program…no hitting Israel during the limited time it’s available to him (first offer). That might tempt him to switch back to the more normal instinct?
This American canard again !!!!
On 30 Sept 1938 Neville Chamberlain stated “Peace FOR our time”
In 1878 after returning from Congress of Berlin PM Benjamin Disraeli stated “Peace IN our time” as the settlement delayed war between Britain and Germany 36 years
On 3 Sept 1939 at Noon Berlin time Chamberlain declared WAR on Germany. At 5pm France managed to catch up. USA under FDR declared NEUTRALITY on 4 Sept 1939
Between 1931 and 1937 as Finance Minister Chamberlain REVERSED the Defence Cuts made by Finance Minister Winston Churchill 1925-1929 under his Ten Year Rule whereby Britain could not expect a war on a ten year rolling future view.
Churchill cut the expenditure on fortifications at Singapore and led directly to General Strike 1926 and Invergordon Mutiny 1931. Chamberlain funded Radar, Merlin engines, Shadow Factories, and the RAF plans for monocoque fighters – Hurricanes and Spitfires – and the 4-engined bomber series which evolved into the Lancaster.
Chamberlain died of stomach cancer in Nov 1940 which allowed Churchill to write his own version of history postwar. Ironically Chamberlain’s father had been a political rival of Churchill’s father and it was Dowding as head of Fighter Command that opposed Churchill in May 1940 deploying the RAF reserve to France………
In May 1940 Churchill ordered bombing of German cities beginning 10 May 1940 to obstruct any peace negotiations which would have removed him from power. Indeed the Narvik Debate which Chamberlain won in the House of Commons was Churchill’s endeavour which was about as successful as Gallipoli – but Chamberlain took responsibility.
Churchill had been using backchannels behind Chamberlain’s back to correspond secretly with FDR who use Naval Signals systems to hide communications from White House.
Not quite sure why FDR declared Neutrality but allowed Us corporations to supply Germany with oil and fuel additives and manufacture trucks and weapons for German Reich………..
“People should either be caressed or crushed. If you do them minor damage they will get their revenge; but if you cripple them there is nothing they can do. If you need to injure someone, do it in such a way that you do not have to fear their vengeance.”
~ Niccolo Machiavelli
One can see such thinking on both sides of this conflict . . .
I agree and I think that there are those in the US power structure who very much want to see tactical weapons used. The US media likes to portray Israel as the wayward causative agent for this crisis but who is using whom? Maybe the US is using Israel as its foil. Which country has the greater stockpile of tactical nukes?
“They are willing to gamble no one will dare respond in kind because that would quickly lead to civilization-ending nuclear exchanges.”
Sadly, I can’t say that I find any fault with your logic. The amazing part is that has anyone in DC considered this? I mean lots of people know the emperor has no cloths, but if it transpired, he’d be walking in the street without even the illusion of cloths any longer. Officially, I would expect western alliance to be unfazed, but as for people on the streets… I’d assume a total reassessment of who ones allies/friends are. The whole western world order, which already is creaky, would be pushed into a much faster terminal dissent.
AND that’s not even accounting for the financial fragility we’ve already baked into the system as evidenced by recent posts here pertaining to market activities in Japan. Even if the possible crazy Israeli’s got their wish, there is nothing to prevent… as I mentioned as total meltdown of the western establishment order OR a total global financial meltdown following all of the above.
God help us all! If this can of worms is unloaded, every fragility in the western world is at risk of exploding all at once or at least over a short horizon of a few years or so.
Game that out, though. Both Turkey and Hezbollah have said that any large attack on Lebanon would be a red line for them. That is two of the largest militaries in the ME right there, with one of them being a NATO member. Pakistan has already offered Turkey the use of its’ nukes. Russia is already shipping huge cargo plane loads of munitions, and presumably people who can operate them, into Iran; they will have Iran’s back. And then there is everyone else. The BRICS can likely survive the closure of the Hormuz Straits, but could Saudi Arabia? That might bring them in as well, along with the Emirates and Kuwait.
Israel can gamble all they like, but would the US make that kind of gamble? Without the US that war is over. The Biden Administration is pretty stupid, but that is likely something they have already worked out by now. Hopefully they already have CIA teams nobbling even the potential for a Samson Option coming to fruition.
Will then all US military and financial support to Israel become illegal according to US Law?
Totally agree. While Israel’s gamble that no one will respond in kind will be correct – the use of a tactical nuke will crystalize global Islamic cohesion. Not just in the Middle East but globally. This means all key maritime corridors other than Panama will be blocked. Houthi have already blocked Suez, Morocco can block the Straits of Gibraltar, Malaysia/Indonesia the Malacca Strait. The world economy will be faq’d, US and European economies & social order will collapse and Israel will be left naked with no support. HG Wells predicted that the Zionist project will end in utter defeat because you can only play people off against each other so long before either everyone turns on you or you have no supporters left. Israel is Lord Petyr Baelish. Chaos is a latter only so long as there is a ladder -> power structures still exist to be climbed & to feed off.
For Australia, we will be faq’d because we have put ourselves on the opposing side to Indonesia. Who’s incoming President recently visited Russia and is sanctioned by US. And will very likely join a Islamic coalition against Israel and hence US/Australia.
But, but AUKUS…Washington guarantees…NATO in the Pacific…
AUKUS is a pipe dream that will take 30 years to deliver by which time UK & USA will be shadows of their former selves. As we are finding out, ultimate purpose of AUKUS is not to supply nuclear subs to Australia but to allow UK & US to base & maintain their subs in Australian ports. Reason why UK is so desperate pushing for AUKUS is because UK’s nuclear sub base HMNB Clyde is in Scotland and if Scotland goes full independence the Scots will likely shut the base down. (this was before the SNP imploded but the risk remains).
Hi Yves, I don’t follow your reasoning or your meaning, one of the two. Tactical nukes are, well, tactical. They are low kiloton yield weapons for use on the battlefield, by one combatant on the other. Famously NATO planned to fire nuclear mortars and drop bombs yo defend the Fulda Gap from Warsaw pact. Whereas strategic nukes are for during at your enemies’ cities and fortresses far away, using intercontinental ballistic missiles, B52’s, submarine launched missiles of all stripes etc.
So I struggle to see at what target Israel would fire a tactical nuke. They can glass Gaza. They can glass the Golan. But no meaningful part if the enemy is really there and the fallout in every sense is too close.
Conversely they could fire a nuclear weapon at Iran but even if it had a tiny yield like a tactical nuke, it would still be a strategic attack – with all the danger that entails – even if only done for signalling purposes. Is tactically glassing Natanz amd the Iranian nuclear programme any less a declaration of war than obliterating Isfahan, a jewel of mankind?
I don’t doubt that Israel has an itchy trigger finger but Israel’s problem is that its neighbours have come to the view it is them or Israel And escalating won’t bring them security unless they decapitate their neighbours. So I don’t see a tactical nuke as on the cards but a preemptive strike against all enemies but where does this stop. If they nuke Lebanon, Gaza, Iran, Yemen they still have Syria, Saudi (no further from nuclear capability than Iran,allegedly), Pakistan (with nukes), Egypt, Turkey (plausibly near nuclear) outraged against them.
I hope Iran targets the red heifers. A risible target but once where they can say no humans were harmed in the making of thus motion picture.
I am getting tired of you repeatedly wasting my time by challenging me when you provide NO evidence and in fact are WRONG.
This is Making Shit Up. I told you repeatedly to provide links and you continue to refuse to. Instead you nattered on at length based on your inaccurate layperson understanding.
I said in a previous post in the past week, which this post links to that a justification would be to damage Hezbollah or Iranian tunnels, which are a source of major advantage. Israel has been unable to do much (any?) damage to the much less sturdy Hamas tunnel network (witness Hamas reasserting itself in northern and central Gaza) using extremely heavy US bombs.
This confirms tunnels as suitable targets for a tactical nuclear weapon:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon
One more comment like this and you will be blacklisted.
A physical meeting is a good bomb target. Such a meeting is what the Apr 1 Damascus consulate bomb was for, wasn’t it?
No, that is a waste of a perfectly good nuke.
IMHO the objective/excuse would be to destroy either Hezbollah or Iranian tunnels.
I still maintain that Israel is the epitome of a Security State; it exists to offer safety to Jews. Or, to use Clausewitzian terminology, “perceived safety” is Israel’s center of gravity. Just look at the blood lust caused by the sudden insecurity and insult of a few hundred militants escaping their open-air prison and taking hostages.
So, every day the Axis of Resistance delays and keeps Israeli citizens running for shelters and cellars when they hear any siren is weakening that center of gravity. Israel doesn’t feel safe and secure, and there’s nothing they can do about it.
That said, naturally it takes a great effort and time to synchronize the retaliation even at an elementary level. And if the Axis members are synchronizing, it means this time they are striking for effect, not merely for show. To properly deplete or destroy Israel’s missile defenses, the strike has to come in waves. And so on.
Magnier is wondering if the Axis members have shared the type of targets among them, assuming that Israel will retaliate in kind. So each would hit what it is itself least vulnerable. Makes sense, but I don’t know.
All that said, it seems that Russia has issued a NOTAM banning Russian night flights to Israel for a week, starting today. Psyops on behalf of a friendly nation, or a subtle way of starting the clock? Who knows?
I read somewhere, prolly here, that Israel gets eighty percent of its’ potable water from desalination plants. After what the IDF did in Gaza I can’t help but think that they would rank high on Hezbollah’s target list. They, after all, have all kinds of rivers. As with Russian gas stoves, social media of Lebanese watering their lawns could be quite effective.
That makes perfect sense.
Another reason for Iran to delay its response is the need to integrate the new Russian equipment and their crews into Iran’s air defence system .
What’s key here, I think, is that the US has several generations of being the most important single player on Middle Eastern issues. It’s not quite as influential as it likes to think it is, but it still has a larger voice than anyone else on many questions. More importantly, the premise in Washington, and among the domestic and foreign lobbies that Washington wants to impress, is that this dominance is as strong as it ever was, and that Washington remains the single, essential player on all ME issues.
But that’s not true now. The problem is that none of the main actors–Iran, Israel or the US–want a major ME war. Of course the US and Israel would be quite happy to see Iran destroyed, but they know that the consequences (directly for Israel, and indirectly for the US just before an election) are unacceptable. Iran would no doubt like to see an end to Israel, but knows that the consequences would probably be more than they could tolerate. So nobody wants a general war, but the various partners aren’t talking to each other. Moreover, the US has diminishing influence over Israel (though probably some still with the military) and effectively none with Iran. If the US had behaved differently, it could be in a position to influence Israel to back off in Gaza, in return for Tehran making a smaller reprisal attack than it otherwise would have done. That would be the sensible outcome, but the US now no longer has enough influence over Israel to make such an approach to Iran of any value.
Paradoxically, therefore, whilst the Iranians know that a massive reprisal risks provoking a general ME war which they don’t want and which could hurt them badly, all over a mainly-Sunni area a long way from their borders and a radical Sunni organisation they are not especially close to, nobody can give them a convincing reason not to behave like that, because no-one can assure them that a more measured response will actually lead to de-escalation on the Israeli side. This is a conundrum without a solution, and it’s no surprise Tehran is trying to figure its way out.
Meanwhile, the US has no choice but to pretend to still have the influence it has lost. It’s going to have to keep doing the same thing because there’s nothing else it can do. At the very least, it’s desperately hoping to avoid the crisis getting much worse before November.
USA could have very much influence on one of the actors by threatening to completely stop any further military, financial and diplomatic support. The said actor would fold in months or weeks if said help was declined.
And the said actor is the root cause of all the trouble. But USA refuses to even ponder this option. Which is why it has lost whatever influence it had. People there have never liked USA, it was the fear of USA letting Israel go crazy that kept them toeing the line. Now Israel has gone absolutely berserk, and it’s obvious that USA either doesn’t have any control over Israel, or doesn’t care to use it.
So, the ME nations have to find a solution to the problem of Israel on their own.
Ya think?
Its a huge assumption to state the US wants (no major ME war). I mean, who is the US?
Who is running the US? And what do these unaccountable bureaucrats actually want? I see minimal evidence that logic plays much of a role in decisions by the US or Israel, as opposed to narratives of pogroms and retribution against the goyim.
For those of a certain age, I am reminded that the US seems to be playing the role of Al Bundy in Married with Children – played football in high school and was cheered, now sells shoes and gets no respect.
The assassination of Hamiyeh, a, perhaps the, Hamas chief negotiator was a slap in the face to Biden and Blinken, who have been doggedly depicting the fantasy of a ceasefire as something that might get done.
Thanks for this essay. I also tend to agree with what you have written here, so my perceptions align more or less with your analysis. Some deviations, though, below.
I would point out that the idea that Americans are good negotiators is in itself absurd. Biden and Blinken want to shout and dictate terms. Then they want to engage in bad faith and repudiate whatever doesn’t suit their fancy. Just as the U.S. elites want no cease-fire in Ukraine, so they don’t want an end to the genocide in Palestine.
I would also point out that for a country like Iran with four thousand or so years of continuous history, “now” doesn’t mean what it means to Americans, who think that Kamala Harris had changed the whole political debate in six days. So revenge is a dish eaten cold, and a month or four months of planning are minor. (This also applies to dealings with Greeks, Italians, and Chinese.)
Alessandro Orsini, who has gotten himself into all kinds of “good trouble” for his positions against both wars, wrote a column for Fatto Quotidiano that has me thinking these past few days. (And, no, getting a link out of FQ is one of the great Mysteries of Italy: sorry.)
Orsini thinks that Israeli society is cohesive enough that, say, a bombing campaign by Iran isn’t going to have an effect. We see polls that some two-thirds of Israelis want war and lots of war, as gristly as war can be. Iran isn’t going to bomb the Israelis into stopping their torture of Palestinians.
Iran, on the contrary, according to Orsini, has restraints on its behavior. Internally, the country isn’t a cohesive, even with the new reformist president Pezeshkian. (Consider Pezeshkian as the main target of this event … hmmm.) Iran cannot cause an overthrow of the Israeli government by long-distance bombing. Iran cannot invade. We are seeing some of the limitations on this supposedly new style of war. One can fly in drones, but if one can’t invade and hold territory, then what is the strategy of the war? Remote-control bombing? (Likewise, the soft underbelly of sanctions.)
So Iran is going to have to be measured and judicious in its response.
One should not forget that the results of the tender mercies of the U.S. of A. and Israel are the degradation of Lebanon and Syria. These are not accidents. Lebanon is quite small, which means Hezbollah has limits, too.
So the Iranians can bomb infrastructure, which is what seems likeliest to me. As I have mentioned, some power in the Middle East should destroy the two U.K. bases on Cyprus, which would change the balance of power in the region considerably.
And to operate at the most basic level of tit for tat, I assume that the Beelzebubian Smotrich isn’t sleeping at home these days.
Conversely, and Orsini points this out, which is something we have discussed here at Naked Capitalism, the Israeli government wants the U S of A to have troops on the ground in the Middle East and to fight Iran to the last American.
Even someone as obtuse and morally diminished as Blinken has to have recognized the Israeli strategy as a problem.
So the Iranians can bomb infrastructure, which is what seems likeliest to me.
Israel has a number of Boeing 707 and Lockheed C130 serving for transport (up to 27) and air refuelling (up to 15) — all according to Wikipedia.
These are large airplanes that cannot be concealed away easily. Hezbollah repeatedly sent its spy drones filming “interesting” places deep into Israel, unencumbered by Israeli air defences, and has probably information about that kind of Israeli military asset.
What about launching a massive missile attack to destroy all of that aircraft?
1) This would severely reduce the capabilities of Israel to fly in ammunition from other countries. This would definitely not eliminate the air supply channel (the USA and Europe somewhat compensate the loss by “lending” their own aircraft), but it would make Israel utterly dependent on other countries. Besides, this reduction in the fast delivery of ammunition would give some breathing space to Hamas in Gaza.
2) This would severely reduce the capabilities of Israel to fly long-range missions against Iran and Yemen. Again, it would not eliminate it, but the USA (and possibly European countries) would then have to lend their air-refuelling aircraft, which means they would have a veto over the missions that Israel could carry out — especially those involving dropping atomic bombs on Iran or Yemen.
3) It would not destroy the ground forces of Israel (those fighting Hamas, Hezbollah, and the population in the West Bank), would probably not kill that many personnel, would not be an attack on civilian infrastructure making living hell for Israelis, would severely reduce some well delineated military options of Israel without leading to an existential crisis for this country, and would serve as an unambiguous message: no more demonstrations by hitting deserted landing strips — from now on, every strike will hurt.
Could this be just below the threshold leading to the dreaded Israeli response of throwing tactical nuclear bombs around?
This seems to be very plausible. I kept wondering whether a sneaky Israeli air attack on Iran was possible since it’d need to be supported by tankers that would be difficult to hide, but what’s difficult to hide in the air should also be difficult to hide (or protect) on ground. Their locations should be well known to Iran and its allies. They ought to be easy to destroy and would inflict much pain on Israeli military capabilities without doing either much civilian damage or even killing many military personnel.
It seems to me everyone is jumping at the Israeli Samson option of using a nuke. Let us assume they do such a thing. What would be the reaction of Global South and particularly the Arab States? The Arab States most of them Democratic Monarchies (according to Biden and company) can those kings and princes survive the hostility of their population after such a heinous act? Don’t forget at the conference of the Islamic States all the kings and princes condemned the assassination but fell short of sanctions or oil embargo on Israel. After a nuke is lobbed against a fellow muslim nation can they survive with platitudes such as condemnation only with no coercive action against the perpetrator? I think we will be witnessing a real Arab Awakening this time thanks to Natanyahoo. Thanks
Iran can’t invade Israel but Hezbollah can. The Golan is, after all, Syria, and Hezbollah has already degraded Israeli northern defenses. Perhaps taking out just bits of refinery and or water purification plants might remind israel of its vulnerabilities, it is after all a very small place. If Iran gets its ducks in a row a modest level of combined forces might pressure israel without an all out war.
Another obvious reason for the delay is the time it takes to set up and test all the new military assets that Iran received from Russia. Many observers have noted the number of cargo flights from Russia carrying military hardware.
This is all high tech stuff. Imagine the difficulty in assembling, placing, calibrating, training, practicing, etc.
Iranian Missile Cities are a conceptual answer to the nuclear threat from Israel; Iran will always have enough missiles left to annihilate Israel.
Yup!
… and more stuff could be on the way… plus diffusion to Lebanon and Yemen is not instantaneous….
So if the West had not antagonized Russia via Ukraine, Russia would not have sent Iran any military hardware, and Iran will have no way to retaliate whatsoever?
Do Iran and Israel exist under the condition of MAD, even absent Iran’s possession of a nuclear weapon? If Israel truly believed that a no-holds barred missile attack on Tel Aviv in response to its own launching of a nuclear strike would effectively end the Israel state, then Israel should (in theory at least) be deterred from launching such a strike.
Iranian Missile Cities are a conceptual answer to the nuclear threat from Israel; Iran will always have enough missiles left to annihilate Israel.
It seems like the state increased alert on the part of Israel and its military partners is already creating costs for Israel, not only in stressing the military resources on high alert for days, but also the knock on effects of all the foreigners evacuating and their airlines avoiding the area, etc.
In this sense the delay is an already an attritional victory. To the extent that Netanyahu is relying on an escalation to draw the US in to a wider conflict, Iran’s restraint frustrates him, and turns up the heat on the boiler of Israeli domestic politics.
This. What’s the psychological cost to the population “waiting to be bombed”? Iran should just put out NOTAMs closing out their airspace every couple of days and watch Israel and the western press squirm.
Given the West, backing Israel, was shown negotiations are meaningless, maybe the Iranians should lead a walkout of the United Nations and propose an alternative international forum. Possibly based in Turkey, as the crossroads of civilization for the last few millennia.
That would take considerable wind out of US sails and point the finger at Israel as the breakdown of American diplomatic authority.
I suspect a lot of the rest of the world would go along with it.
I’ve long thought this, the un has shown itself to be mostly useless, granted the ICJ is showing some usefulness.
To the point about Israel potentially using a nuclear weapon, there was this incident earlier in the week:
Panic in Beirut as Israeli warplanes break sound barrier three times within minutes
Note that this occurred on 8/6, the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing. This might be a bit of a stretch, but if you add three days (the number of sonic booms in the demonstration) you get 8/9, the anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing.
In any event, this incident had no military value that I can conceive (though I am far from an expert), but the basic symbolism is clear — we can attack Beirut unmolested with considerable force, and nukes are an option.
I propose that Iran is conferring with countries to the east that will be hit by fallout. The largest populations on Earth are directly east, aka downwind. And… a couple of those countries have nukes as well. If Israel launched any nukes, even 5-6 Israel would be erased. Not only would the Iranians – because you can’t erase Iran, it is way too rocky and dug in – fire back, decisively, but they would be followed by Pakistan and India finishing the mop up operation.
At this point Israel had better back off dramatically or they will be toast. In my opinion, they seem to deserve that fate. All this so that one corrupt Israeli can avoid jail time.
Samson Option end game is an obliteration spasm of western capitals & culture using Israel’s 60+ strategic nukes. “If we go, we take you betrayers with us.”
India is not sympathetic to Muslims, I see no chance of India getting involved. What Pakistan would do, if anything, is a mystery. If they were to do anything perhaps giving Iran a couple might be useful as a deterrent.
I keep reading that Israel’s economy is cratering but where is the effect of that on the populace? I also read that a significant majority want war. Do hungry people paying through their nose for essentials due to war inflation keep as quiet as they have been? Mearsheimer says that WWII proved that local populations will not arise against leaders even if they get the bejusus bombed out of them and in fact their ire converts to a noxious support for their depraved leaders but we know Israel has hardly suffered any bombing except in the North bordering the Litani. So the internal state of the Israeli population seems a puzzle? I am perplexed by the above 50% support for violence against the Palestinians
Ilan Pappe has pointed out that Judaism is a highly tribal religion, and the essence of that tribalism is their Covenant with Yahweh as His Chosen people. Jews receive His blessings in this world, and Heaven in the next, in exchange for following His precepts. His protection and their Covenant are their armor against the woes of this world, and against any tribe that stands against them. The inherent morality of their self defense is a matter of faith. To doubt their right to eliminate their enemies is to doubt Yahweh.
There are the legendary historical examples from the Torah of the utter destruction of the Amalek tribe. And others.
All of which leads to resolute faith that Yahweh will not permit awful things to happen to a state full of practicing Jews who observe His laws. There’s your 50%.
Thanks. I guess it figures. Once religion enters the picture then any attempt at comprehension is futile. I really take my hat off to people like Mearsheimer and Pappe for their bravery in speaking out. I also often wonder if societies and nation states reflect their leadership. We once had great leaders and the World seemed a better place but now bad leaders are legion ergo the ever Rightward drift everywhere?
Please add Norman Finkelstein to your list of brave people; outspoken, guided by allegiance to truth and justice.
I remember reading somewhere long ago that the Tribes of Israel, including the Tribe of Judah as one of those tribes, did not have a concept of heaven, hell and afterlife until they learned those mystical and theological concepts from their exposure to Persian civilization, which had these concepts worked out to a high degree.
But that was long ago and I could be wrong.
The “pathetic wizard of oz act” has been the hallmark of this administration everywhere, though….
“Russia has already lost.”
“Biden is fit and alert”
“Biden is proposing the ‘Israrli’ peace plan”
“Everyone loves Kamala.”
And presumably many others that I can’t come up with on short notice…
This was absolutely hilarious!!!
The state of the US is now somewhere between Never Never Land, 1984, Animal Farm and Alice’s Wonderland, so it is difficult to respond coherently to what is going on. Biden is POTUS and is collecting a paycheck, but he is not there mentally or corporally to take authority or responsibility. No interview Harris takes a stance “that it is better to be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.” It is treasonous to be ‘objective about Putin and hersey to think NATO via Ukraine will not prevail in a dirty little war. It is anti semitic not to embrace the moral degenerates prosecuting a genocide in Gaza. In the interim ,war criminal Bibi has effectively co-opted the armed forces of the US in order to maintain power and stay out of jail. The US/Israel coalition is now engaged in a war of attrition with three-fourths of the planet. Will Russia back down in the Ukraine? Probably not. Will Russia continue to build defensive alliances? Probably yes. Will Iran back down from Israel? Probably not. And will Iran continue to build defenesive alliances. Probably yes? If Israel uses a nuclear weapon, it very well might get annihilated, becasue it cannot prevent a counter response from all sides. Lemming like the US is ready to march off the cliff. And if the people in the US are so braindead as to tolerate imbecile leadership, the patient’s outcome is grim. Try and make sense of all that.
Thank you Anthony. More concise than I could come up with. Just sent to a ideological fan boy of all things that fit his political framework.
This guy (my friend) is smart enough to figure it out, but refuses to look behind the curtains.
Funny thing about my friend is that he is very self-satisfied telling the world that he’s registered independent. \../
In light of this information and in this context, Iran is now accused of “meddling” in US elections, along with Russia and China.
Microsoft “researchers” said so, so it must be true. Dissent in the US comes from foreign influence and manipulation. If you point out facts that contradict the CIA/MI6/Mossad contrived narratives, it is because you are being manipulated by Iran, and/or China and Russia. No facts are allowed, no critical thinking allowed unless you want to be accused of acting for a hostile foreign govt.
Also, Scott Ritter’s home was raided by the FBI, apparently accused of working for hostile foreign govt.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/09/microsoft-reports-iran-hackers-presidential-campaign-election
What are Khamenei and Pezeshkian supposed to do? Iran has never effectively retaliated against the U.S. after Trump orchestrated the cold-blooded murder of Qasem Soleimani. Iranians had their fill of suicide charges during the ‘80’s Iraq War.
Their dilemma is made greater because Biden and Blinken are completely incapable of diplomacy as has been proven again and again by their incessant shouting at the government of our indispensable trading partner China, by their shambolic deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan, by their unwillingness to negotiate with the Russians over Crimea, and by their ongoing provision of the means for the current government of Israel to perpetuate a genocide against the people of Gaza, to name but a few examples.
Ironically, this post made me return to the poem Dialogue with God that Samuel Pisar wrote at the request of Leonard Bernstein to accompany his Symphony No. 3 (“Kaddish”):
I say ironically, because Samuel Pisar was not only one of the most miraculous survivors of the worst hellscapes Shoah, who went on to be the lawyer for Mirror/MacMillan publisher Robert Maxwell and to recite the Kaddish at his 1991 burial. Pisar was also Antony Blinken’s stepfather. Blinken was present when Pisar read Dialogue with God at Yad Vashem in 2009.
He evidently wasn’t listening. What a f*cked-up world we live in.
It depends on who you ask and who you choose to believe, but it seems that Iran may very well have retaliated against a figure roughly comparable to Soleimani.
Reports of the death of Mike D’Andrea and Atlantic Council response
Interesting. I guess the thing about the Swamp is that the identities of who’s who therein are better known to the foreign spooks than they are to the American public…
Gore Vidal was a big fan of The Wizard of Oz. He said it was an American masterpiece because it was so timeless. It was written c. The depression and was an allegory for the delusion of the gold standard. (If I understood correctly, otherwise this is my rendition!) So it is an apt metaphor once again as we are on the verge of losing Saudi oil as not a peg but a guarantee of acceptability. And Dorothy and friends are in fear and trembling once again about the future of finance, only now it’s Janet and Jay, et. al. and Oz is now the oil rich Middle East and we have just taken a political hit from the Saudis on the petro-dollar. “Political” is the key word here because money is the ultimate token of politics. (Some weirdos think nukes are the ultimate token of politics but that would mean politics are nihilism, which is illogical, no?) We need to send Janet a little white pinafore and some red shoes. And whoever is the next cowardly lion, aka the President, needs to suck it up and pass the GND. Can we all just get back to Kansas?
> the gold standard
Oh, that would explain the choice of paving material in “Follow the yellow brick road.”
Caitlin Johnstone came out with a post describing US policy which amounts to ‘Let Israel Escalate Against Iran, Then Tell Iran Not To Escalate Back’. She nails it when she writes ‘They remind you of a parent who lets their kid run around clobbering other children at the playground, then when another child goes to hit them back they rush in and start yelling about the need to play nice.’
https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/us-policy-let-israel-escalate-against-iran-then-tell-iran-not-to-escalate-back-c8e228d597d3
I know that the Dems don’t want another Middle east war breaking out this close to the elections but pretending that Israelis are not trying to make it so and will continue attacks on Iran and other countries is only going to make it worse for them. Trouble is that the whole world see that the US is actually incapable of restraining the Israelis in any shape or form so that leaves Iran and its supporters to break a few Israeli teeth to remind them that actions have consequences – consequences that the US cannot stop.
good text
But still having difficulty with the idea that the US government is being pushed around.
I don´t have the historical in-depth expertise for make the counter-argument beyond any doubt.
I did quote Chomky´s essay argueing against the overseas-elements of Mearsheimer ´s “Israel lobby” couple of weeks ago, where Chomsky put out well why Israel in the end is a vassal. Nothing more. That Chomskyan critique is more than a decade old, although the axioms haven´t changed and thus I would think neither has the accuracy of the analysis.
We know that during 1982, I think, it took a single phone call by Reagan to stop IDF escalation.
Oslo I/II as Finkelstein pointed out in his book “Image and Reality”, could only be done with the blessing of the US (if it was only for neglecting UN Resolution 242 which had been carried by the US some 25 years earlier.)
Just out of curiosity – what would be the US´s advantage if there were a negotiated peace and IDF would go back into the barracks and end this nightmare?
Whether they are capable of containing Iran the way they used to has become questionable I would agree. At least if RU is not willing to play along as it did 20 years ago.
The era of total impunity is over, but that doesn´t mean so are regional wars and the torture of populations. Which is what Israeli elites have been doing since the 1930s.
Nemawashi, not nenawashi
根回し
The NC commentariat is not only the best commentariat, but also the best copyediting collective.
I do know how to spell and pronounce it, but spell check does no and I pretty much never see my own typos. Fixing thanks.
” I pretty much never see my own typos.”
Glad to hear I am not the only one with this issue.
I can reduce the problem by printing out hard copies of my texts. But that´s of course not feasible for blog comments. However it would confirm neuro science argueing in favour of book reading, since you take in the entire page. I was never sure about the hysteria over people losing their skills in an online world, though. Is it true, is it not…
I don’t anticipate an Iranian escalation or wider war because, I think, the only person who stands to benefit from it is Netanyahu but only if he can drag the US in. Israel is already on the ropes and things are getting worse. Why would Iran give the US a motive to join Israel in a regional war, months before an election, when the current situation is wrecking Israel’s economy, military, and global standing?
As an aside on the election, Harris, as well as the DP, is counting on the Black vote. Yet, it’s easy to forget that Blacks comprise the largest group of Muslims in America. According to Pew, Blacks account for 20% of all US Muslims.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/01/17/black-muslims-account-for-a-fifth-of-all-u-s-muslims-and-about-half-are-converts-to-islam/
This was a non-issue in 2020 and the 2022 mid-terms, but since 10/07 Black Muslims, and Blacks generally, question Biden’s Gaza policy are generally on the side of the Palestinians.
From Carnegie 2024: https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/04/most-black-americans-want-a-more-active-us-role-in-ending-the-war-in-gaza-and-protecting-palestinian-lives?lang=en
From NYT 2024: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/06/us/african-americans-palestinian.html
I have the impression that Harris knows following Biden’s foreign policy will cause her an election disaster. But explicitly breaking with Biden is tricky. I also have the impression she has no warm spot for Netanyahu and she wants to change things once elected. I hope she can figure out how get the message across without the appearance of betraying Biden or giving Trump an issue.
What VP Harris has thus far said amounts to, “Hey, Bibi, you really should try to kill a few less civilians, especially those kids. That said, don’t sweat it, as the U.S. will continue to have your back.”
In other words, either way, the weaponry will continue to flow to our friends in Israel.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/8/harris-campaign-denies-support-for-cutting-off-weapons-transfers-to-israel
There is a big difference between support for Israel and support for Netanyahu, and Harris needs to work on that. The R’s called Biden a liar in the middle of his SOTU speech. The D’s called Trump a traitor and Putin’s puppet. Yet, neither party seemed willing to do such a thing during Bibi’s DC visit.
I assume Harris wants to win. I don’t think she can if she betrays Biden because the election needs to be against Trump not Biden. I don’t think she can win if she embraces Bibi either.
If I were her, I would keep Biden, trash Bibi and Trump, and link them together, and talk about a peace program that supports Israel and promotes security in the region.
I have the impression that Harris knows following Biden’s foreign policy will cause her an election disaster. But explicitly breaking with Biden is tricky. I also have the impression she has no warm spot for Netanyahu and she wants to change things once elected.
I have a different impression. She was installed to carry the torch, pun intended.
Perhaps, but fall is around the corner and students will soon be back in school, and if demonstrators turn things up a notch, Harris needs to have some good answers where she stands, as well as a solution or two. It would be nice if, unlike Trump and Biden, she suggested or leaked to the press that no neocons will be in her administration.
I appreciate these ideas and this discussion. What troubles me, is the seeming detachment of Kamala Harris from foreign policy matters. I take this as allowing for a continuation of current policy, which has been especially and increasingly militarist these last 4 years.
I think Harris’ “detachment” is a sign she doesn’t support Biden’s policies. If she did, she would have no problem supporting them openly. However, she can read the polls and she knows Biden was losing to Trump. Thus, she needs to be a reform candidate against an administration that she is a part of; good luck.
Moreover, as Mearsheimer points out she is likely to inherit a foreign policy mess; and the economy might be a problem too.
She’s not Trump and she can’t promise to end the Ukraine war in a day but she needs an alternative message and be prepared to implement real change.
Imo if she was all in on genocide and/or thought it was a vote getter she would have picked Shapiro. If I thought she was rational on israel I’d want her to win, but haven’t seen anything else to support that. Plus she shouted down the protestors, I suppose she might have thought she had to.
The 20% blacks that are Muslim will not likely vote trump, course they could stay home.
If Biden resigned she’d have more freedom, but he’ll never do that.
I just thought the unthinkable:
What if Kamala resigns after the convention to focus on the campaign?
On one hand, she would be free from Biden’s policies. OTOH, she can claim Boss is doing great job that he doesn’t need her for the remainder of the term.
Patrick Lawrence with a good piece on Scheerpost
“Israel Runs the U.S. No, the U.S. Runs Israel. No, Wait … ”
https://scheerpost.com/2024/08/10/patrick-lawrence-israel-runs-the-u-s-no-the-u-s-runs-israel-no-wait/
Including this passage:
“(…) The United States’ power is altogether of another kind. It rests at bottom on material advantage, as Western hegemony has done for the past 500 years. It coerces, bribes, and threatens, of course, but it can also invade and destroy—all this to state the very obvious. Reducing this to the simplest terms, while the Pentagon could invade Israel were it ordered to do so, the Israel Defense Forces could not invade the U.S. The latter, indeed, is incapable of invading even Lebanon or Iran without the assurance of American backing.
What is at issue in all this is the question of responsibility. Israel exercises considerable power over the U.S. — yes, we all know this — but this is by dint of a corrupt abdication on America’s part. We must not miss this. Washington’s whorish elites have sold U.S. policy to the Israelis, and Congress has sold itself similarly. But these are at bottom transactions, as fungible and ephemeral as any other. They do not reflect any kind of radical shift in power balances.
The United States is still the imperium of our time, and Israel is still among its clients, albeit one complicated by various factors — religion, ideology, cynically manipulated guilt, a shared chosen-people consciousness and a lot of money dedicated to brazenly proffered and accepted what are bribes by any other name. Scrape all this away and you find a perfectly ordinary preoccupation with the preservation and projection of American power. Do you think the Pentagon just sent immense flotillas into the eastern Mediterranean because it is worried about the Jews of Israel? It is about power, and this the U.S. has not sold. Implicit in all the demonstrations we have seen this year, indeed, is the correct assumption that America could sink Netanyahu’s boat any time it chooses to do so. Don’t let the moment fool you: Bibi, as history will show, is at bottom merely a passing punk.
This, to finish the thought, is the power that matters most — imperial power.(…)”
I apologise, Yves. I am not trying to get blacklisted!
I didn’t read your prior post where you wrote about targeting the Hamas tunnels and I agree that these would present a plausible physical target for a tactical nuclear device. I will try to provide more links in future to corroborate what I say and not assume things are common ground.
However, on the tunnels, these are adjacent to Israel. A surface attack would be upwind of Israel (onshore breeze twice a day) and using a tactical nuclear weapon here would create fallout and contamination of Israel and of Gaza and of Egypt. An underground detonation would risk contamination of the valuable Gaza aquifer. As many Israelis see a future in settling Gaza as part of Greater Israel, it is difficult to see the domestic political case, let alone the international political case for exposing the Gazan population and the neighbouring Egyptians to nuclear pollution, especially if the causus belli is something done by Iran, a thousand miles in the opposite direction. Israel’s argument would be “big boys made me do it”, which is hardly convincing as a right to nuclear aggression.
We looked into the fallout question. The crude summary of what I said in comments, based on a web gander: A small tactical nuke has only a 5 mile blast range. The radioactivity of fallout is short lived. The big danger is from the heavy particles which don’t go very far, don’t emit enough radiation to penetrated the skin but just like DU, can be inhaled or ingested. There is also debate (with the reasoning seeming to be better substantiated on side v. conventional wisdom, lots of particle size detail) as to whether a ground burst creates more fallout than an air bust. Conventional wisdom says yes, dirt gets irradiated and sucked into cloud; nay sayers disputed that dirt irradiation amounts to much.
I imagine Israel has real experts that have looked very hard at this issue.
Thank you for replying (and with something other than my marching orders!).
The 5 mile blast radius won’t be directed downward into the tunnels if detonated at ground level. The physics of the explosion will reflect a lot of the blast up with soil as fallout.
Based on the geometry of a blastwave, the better options would be either underground detonation, gambling on the blast travelling the tunnel systems (and propping it open) faster than it can drive up and out, or an airburst H miles up, where H balances the diameter of the circular section of the blastwave sphere that hits the ground with the attenuation of the blast radially. The blast surface energy density will decrease by r^2 as the radius (height above ground zero) increases and the radius affected is (25-r^2) thus for a bomb of X kilotons TNT equivalent:
– If you detonate at 1 mile above, the blast has a surface energy of X at ground zero, affects an area of 24 sq miles (96% of the 25 sq. Mile area affected by a ground detonation blast horizontally) and at the perimeter of this area has a blast of only 4% of X. All this energy is being directed downwards to collapse the tunnels but it is going to be very dirty in terms of fallout and also create significant longer-term secondary radiation from the irradiation of solid structures, e.g. concrete and rebar.
– If you detonate at 2.5 miles up, half the blast radius, then at ground zero the blast is 1/6.25 (16%) of X, the area affected is 18.75 sq.m., 75% of the max ground detonation blast zone. The explosion may be cleaner though.
– If you detonate at 4 miles up, the blast at ground zero is 1/16th (6.25%) of X and the radius affected is only 9 sq miles. Only 36% of the blast area so much less bang for your buck but the blast would be a lot cleaner.
I would bet on an underground detonation but I have no first principles to justify this, just a hunch that the blast will.travel the tunnel network faster than the tunnel collapse pinches it shut or allows it to break out and dissipate above ground.
I would be seriously worried about the groundwater though. Wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout – apologies I don’t have a better source!) states:
“Groundwater supplies such as aquifers would however remain unpolluted initially in the event of a nuclear fallout. Over time the groundwater could become contaminated with fallout particles, and would remain contaminated for over 10 years after a nuclear engagement.[35] It would take hundreds or thousands of years for an aquifer to become completely pure.[36] Groundwater would still be safer than surface water supplies and would need to be consumed in smaller doses. Long term, cesium-137 and strontium-90 would be the major radionuclides affecting the fresh water supplies.[35]”
These are the radionuclides I would have expected to be involved and they are largely soluble and metabolised as potassium and calcium are in the body, with particular issues for bone disease.
I would also expect some radioisotopes of common soil minerals to be created by irradiation (calcium, phosphorus, sodium, iron etc), which would again be easily solubilized and bioavailable.
From a paper on Gaza soil and water (https://www.scirp.org/html/1-5400033_1290.htm):
– Gaza’s soil is largely calcareous (https://www.scirp.org/html/1-5400033/2ae6be37-933f-429d-92b9-4b12ad9a8c54.jpg)
– thus Gaza groundwater has high calcium concentrations (very hard water rating) (https://www.scirp.org/html/1-5400033/5d26ed4a-ef6f-4e36-b6d2-c5c88a230b6f.jpg).
– potassium levels are also high (the paper has data on this)
– However iron concentrations are below WHO limits.
This is an interesting picture. There’s not much risk of creating iron radionuclides. There’s some risk of creating calcium radionuclides because the water is so hard. However most contamination is primary radionuclides from fission products. Caesium and strontium will dominate. These will compete with potassium and calcium, which are in high natural concentration. The natural mineralisation of Gazan groundwater will therefore protect Gazans somewhat from fallout / subsurface detonation contamination of their water because the uncontaminated calcium and potassium of the groundwater will be in great excess to the radioactive caesium and strontium, reducing bio-uptake.
Israel pumps water from the same aquifer and has designs on Gaza itself. If you think the Israel occupation force has studied this, that’s bad news for the Gazans. Israel may feel embolden to use subsurface detonations or close to ground detonations and rely on the longer lived caesium and strontium contamination of groundwater being mitigated by the high natural mineralisation of the groundwater.
I still don’t think even Israel believes that politically any Iranian action is any cover for nuking Gaza. It will look like a man kicking his dog because he loses a fight. It risks Egypt tearing up the Camp David accord (which Israel is already in breach of by occupying the Philadelphi Corridor in Gaza) and every ally of Hamas’s retaliating.
I was never positing nuking Gaza. I was positing nuking Lebanon. So please do not straw man me.
The genocide project is working just fine with starvation and disease. No need to take special measures.
Not entirely fitting but perhaps still of interest:
Ted Postol with Daniel Davis on YT about the nature of a low-yield blast aka tactical nuke used by RU forces against NATO tanks.
I don´t share the concept that RU would do such a thing. But may be there are some info bits. He calculated with 1 kt yield.
24.5.2024
TC: 25:00-43:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQGlPaHeitw
Another aspect to keep in mind is the blast strength of roughly 5 pounds per square inch hitting objects.
Surprisingly the human body withstands it better than medics initially had expected.
Study on the effect on structures, from 1977
e.g. search for the entire term “5 pounds per square inch”:
“The Effects of Nuclear Weapons”
Chapter V – STRUCTURAL DAMAGE FROM AIR BLAST
https://atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/effects/glasstone-dolan/chapter5.html
From Wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_nuclear_explosions
“For each goal overpressure, there is a certain optimum burst height at which the blast range is maximized over ground targets. In a typical air burst, where the blast range is maximized to produce the greatest range of severe damage, i.e. the greatest range that ~10 psi (69 kPa) of pressure is extended over, is a GR/ground range of 0.4 km for 1 kiloton (kt) of TNT yield; 1.9 km for 100 kt; and 8.6 km for 10 megatons (Mt) of TNT. The optimum height of burst to maximize this desired severe ground range destruction for a 1 kt bomb is 0.22 km; for 100 kt, 1 km; and for 10 Mt, 4.7 km.”
p.s. personally I have doubts the IDF would use tactical nukes unless they can picture it as self-defense in case of major hostile attack allegedly endangering Israel. Otherwise even Western MSM could abandon them for nefarious aggression. The positive PR context is paramount. To cover it up would be difficult because that would mean you keep secret the radioactivity. Radioactivity kills PR.
“Summary Report of the Joint Commission for the Investigation of the Effects of the Atomic Bomb in Japan.
1951
https://www.osti.gov/biblio/4421057
“The Devastating Effects of Nuclear Weapons
Richard Wolfson and Ferenc Dalnoki-Veress reveal the most horrifying realities of nuclear war.”
https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/devastating-effects-of-nuclear-weapons-war/
HUH? Israel does not care about PR. I don’t know how you could possibly see that as a constraint. Look at all the evidence at the ICJ and later of officials and regular citizens expressing genocidal intent.
This far into the day, after the huge number of insights I’m glad I haven’t missed,
I’ll still offer a paper that others may have read, too. The 2009 Brookings paper, “Path to Persia” and its subsection, “Leave it to Bibi,” that Brian Berletic mentions at the end of a different discussion, reminds us that despite, or because of its own tribal proclivities, Israel is an ideal battering ram in the oil principalities. Miko Peled’s father Matti Peled, the famous Israeli general turned coexistence advocate, argued passionately that we Americans must stop US military aid to Israel because it was creating “irresistable temptations” with Israel “losing our soul in the occupation.” If we believe Brookings at all, despite pretenses of restraining Israel, Bibi is doing what US long term policy demands, and Palestinians – like us peons in the long term – are mere road kill in the path of empire.
Brookings at 45 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzMuuDv_vpw&ab_channel=TheNewAtlas