Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Israeli Chief of Staff: Iran will not build a bomb

  1. #1
    Al B. Sure!
    Deity Al B. Sure!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Mar 1999
    Location
    Edge of the American Empire
    Posts
    24,303
    Country
    This is Al B. Sure!'s Country Flag
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 88 Times in 66 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    12:29

    Israeli Chief of Staff: Iran will not build a bomb

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1451644.html

    Israel's military chief said in an interview published Wednesday that Iran will ultimately decide against building a nuclear weapon – putting him at odds with Israel's more pessimistic prime minister.

    Maj. Gen. Benny Gantz told the Haaretz daily that he believes that diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions, along with Israel's determination to strike if necessary, will deter Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons.

    "I don't think (Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei) will want to go the extra mile," he said. "I think the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people."
    "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
    "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

  2. #2
    gribbler
    Deity gribbler's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Feb 2010
    Location
    Nazi Moon Colony
    Posts
    13,826
    Country
    This is gribbler's Country Flag
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 122 Times in 97 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    11:29
    Don't be ridiculous Al, it's common sense that muslims are irrational lunatics.
    "South Africa is a shithole. It used to be a decent place." -Ben Kenobi, sharing his wisdom on world history

  3. #3
    Zevico
    King
    Join Date
    12 Apr 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,496
    Country
    This is Zevico's Country Flag
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 28 Times in 24 Posts
    Local Date
    October 3, 2014
    Local Time
    02:29
    Rich Lowry put it better than I have time to; rationality is not the issue here. No one is saying that Iran is run by psychologically identifiable lunatics. Ideology is the issue, not psychology.
    The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, thinks that Iran is a “rational actor.” He is indisputably correct.

    Iran has, quite rationally, concluded that if it spins thousands of centrifuges to enrich enough uranium, it will soon have the bomb. Just as rationally, it believes it can string the West along. Then there is its airtight chain of cause and effect in the alleged plot against the Saudi ambassador to the United States: If it hired a Mexican drug gang, and that gang blew up a Washington, D.C., restaurant, and the Saudi ambassador was dining there at the time, the ambassador would die. Q.E.D.

    General Dempsey said too little and too much about the Iranian regime. Tehran couldn’t have made itself into the world’s foremost exporter of terror and extended its tentacles throughout the Middle East without resorting to rational calculation. That’s obvious. What Dempsey is implying, though, is that a regime capable of such calculation can necessarily be deterred if it gets a nuclear weapon. That’s an unsupportable leap.

    Advertisement
    If there’s one thing we should have established beyond doubt during the past decade, it is that involvement in terror attacks on American soil is extremely costly to the perpetrators. Nonetheless, according to the U.S. government, the Iranians hatched a plot against the Saudi ambassador where the risk bore no relation whatsoever to the possible reward — from our perspective.

    More fundamentally from our perspective, there is no point in establishing a theocracy, killing innocents abroad, pursuing sectarian war, crushing protesters, denying the Holocaust, and threatening Israel with annihilation, either. From the point of view of the Western liberal tradition, the Islamic Republic itself makes no sense. Yet there it is, withstanding punishing economic sanctions to pursue the weapon that the regime wouldn’t want in the first place if it accepted international norms.

    If the Soviets, the famous “evil empire” bristling with thousands of nuclear weapons, could be deterred, why not Iran? The Soviet leadership became more pragmatic over time. After Nikita Khrushchev renounced Josef Stalin, it didn’t believe that war with its enemies was imminent and inevitable. Iran’s religio-ideological fire, in contrast, is still burning hot.

    A highly ideological leadership with a sense of desperate urgency is the enemy of deterrence. In 1941, Dean Acheson rightly said: “No rational Japanese could believe an attack on us could result anything but disaster.” Except the Japanese — driven by a sense of honor alien to us — believed that they only had two choices: getting squeezed out of China by the U.S., or launching a risky war.

    Even in the Cold War, deterrence almost failed. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the airstrike and invasion pushed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff might well have unwittingly prompted a nuclear exchange. The defense secretary at the time, the late Bob McNamara, maintained that “we lucked out.” Ah, yes, that crucial backstop to deterrence — luck.

    The Israelis can be forgiven for not feeling very lucky. Do we think Israeli prime minister Bibi Netanyahu and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will establish a “red telephone” to smooth out misunderstandings after Iran goes nuclear? The Iranian regime is factionalized, and it is sure to be the most fanatical elements that control the nukes. It is also prone to bouts of popular unrest threatening its existence. If the regime ever believes it is going down, national martyrdom might look gloriously alluring.

    In March 1945, Adolf Hitler gave his infamous Nero Decree, essentially calling for the destruction of Germany. After the first U.S. atomic attack on Hiroshima, the Japanese war minister mused about how wonderful it would be if his nation were destroyed “like a beautiful flower.” It is in this tradition that former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani — a relative pragmatist — said that “even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.”

    On his own perverse terms, Rafsanjani’s reasoning is unassailable. He’s just another “rational actor.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ity-rich-lowry
    "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

  4. #4
    DinoDoc
    Deity DinoDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Sep 1999
    Location
    100% WOLF
    Posts
    17,338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 211 Times in 171 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    11:29
    Does it really matter at this point if they build a nuclear weapon since they've already mastered the critical steps needed to build one according to the IAEA?
    I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
    For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

  5. #5
    DaShi
    Emperor DaShi's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Sep 2000
    Location
    The Taste of Japan
    Posts
    8,391
    Country
    This is DaShi's Country Flag
    Thanks
    525
    Thanked 226 Times in 170 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    16:29
    Quote Originally Posted by Zevico View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Rich Lowry put it better than I have time to; rationality is not the issue here. No one is saying that Iran is run by psychologically identifiable lunatics. Ideology is the issue, not psychology.
    The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, thinks that Iran is a “rational actor.” He is indisputably correct.

    Iran has, quite rationally, concluded that if it spins thousands of centrifuges to enrich enough uranium, it will soon have the bomb. Just as rationally, it believes it can string the West along. Then there is its airtight chain of cause and effect in the alleged plot against the Saudi ambassador to the United States: If it hired a Mexican drug gang, and that gang blew up a Washington, D.C., restaurant, and the Saudi ambassador was dining there at the time, the ambassador would die. Q.E.D.

    General Dempsey said too little and too much about the Iranian regime. Tehran couldn’t have made itself into the world’s foremost exporter of terror and extended its tentacles throughout the Middle East without resorting to rational calculation. That’s obvious. What Dempsey is implying, though, is that a regime capable of such calculation can necessarily be deterred if it gets a nuclear weapon. That’s an unsupportable leap.

    Advertisement
    If there’s one thing we should have established beyond doubt during the past decade, it is that involvement in terror attacks on American soil is extremely costly to the perpetrators. Nonetheless, according to the U.S. government, the Iranians hatched a plot against the Saudi ambassador where the risk bore no relation whatsoever to the possible reward — from our perspective.

    More fundamentally from our perspective, there is no point in establishing a theocracy, killing innocents abroad, pursuing sectarian war, crushing protesters, denying the Holocaust, and threatening Israel with annihilation, either. From the point of view of the Western liberal tradition, the Islamic Republic itself makes no sense. Yet there it is, withstanding punishing economic sanctions to pursue the weapon that the regime wouldn’t want in the first place if it accepted international norms.

    If the Soviets, the famous “evil empire” bristling with thousands of nuclear weapons, could be deterred, why not Iran? The Soviet leadership became more pragmatic over time. After Nikita Khrushchev renounced Josef Stalin, it didn’t believe that war with its enemies was imminent and inevitable. Iran’s religio-ideological fire, in contrast, is still burning hot.

    A highly ideological leadership with a sense of desperate urgency is the enemy of deterrence. In 1941, Dean Acheson rightly said: “No rational Japanese could believe an attack on us could result anything but disaster.” Except the Japanese — driven by a sense of honor alien to us — believed that they only had two choices: getting squeezed out of China by the U.S., or launching a risky war.

    Even in the Cold War, deterrence almost failed. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the airstrike and invasion pushed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff might well have unwittingly prompted a nuclear exchange. The defense secretary at the time, the late Bob McNamara, maintained that “we lucked out.” Ah, yes, that crucial backstop to deterrence — luck.

    The Israelis can be forgiven for not feeling very lucky. Do we think Israeli prime minister Bibi Netanyahu and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will establish a “red telephone” to smooth out misunderstandings after Iran goes nuclear? The Iranian regime is factionalized, and it is sure to be the most fanatical elements that control the nukes. It is also prone to bouts of popular unrest threatening its existence. If the regime ever believes it is going down, national martyrdom might look gloriously alluring.

    In March 1945, Adolf Hitler gave his infamous Nero Decree, essentially calling for the destruction of Germany. After the first U.S. atomic attack on Hiroshima, the Japanese war minister mused about how wonderful it would be if his nation were destroyed “like a beautiful flower.” It is in this tradition that former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani — a relative pragmatist — said that “even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.”

    On his own perverse terms, Rafsanjani’s reasoning is unassailable. He’s just another “rational actor.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ity-rich-lowry
    In confrontations between two or more rational actors, one inevitably loses regardless of who was "more" rational.
    “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
    "Capitalism ho!"

  6. #6
    dannubis
    Emperor
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2002
    Posts
    4,346
    Country
    This is dannubis's Country Flag
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    18:29
    Quote Originally Posted by DinoDoc View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Does it really matter at this point if they build a nuclear weapon since they've already mastered the critical steps needed to build one according to the IAEA?
    So, buying a gun gets you arrested for armed robbery these days ?
    "Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."

  7. #7
    Zevico
    King
    Join Date
    12 Apr 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,496
    Country
    This is Zevico's Country Flag
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 28 Times in 24 Posts
    Local Date
    October 3, 2014
    Local Time
    02:29
    Quote Originally Posted by dannubis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So, buying a gun gets you arrested for armed robbery these days ?
    He's comparing them to e.g. the Japanese, who are not in the possession of a nuclear weapon but are regarded as capable of making them fairly easily. The point being that the danger is the same whether or nor they have an actual nuclear weapon if they have the cabability to make one. That danger does not depend on capability per se but on the beliefs, actions, stability and culture of the regime entrusted with the care of the nuclear material or weaponry. The danger lies in the character of the Iranian regime; the question is whether it can be entrusted with material that could relatively easily be converted into nuclear weaponry, or nuclear weaponry itself.
    "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

  8. #8
    dannubis
    Emperor
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2002
    Posts
    4,346
    Country
    This is dannubis's Country Flag
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    18:29
    I am happy to say that that is not your decision to make. Sovereignity i believe it is called.

    BTW, that question I asked, your reply to it wasn't an answer.
    "Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."

  9. #9
    Zevico
    King
    Join Date
    12 Apr 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,496
    Country
    This is Zevico's Country Flag
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 28 Times in 24 Posts
    Local Date
    October 3, 2014
    Local Time
    02:29
    Quote Originally Posted by dannubis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I am happy to say that that is not your decision to make. Sovereignity i believe it is called.
    I'll have you know I'm a one man sovereign state. I call myself Zevicotania.

    BTW, that question I asked, your reply to it wasn't an answer.
    True. But strictly speaking if your question is taken literally it's completely irrelevant to the subject. It's only relevant as an analogy; I addressed the analaogy instead of the question. So what?
    "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

  10. #10
    dannubis
    Emperor
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2002
    Posts
    4,346
    Country
    This is dannubis's Country Flag
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    18:29
    Quote Originally Posted by Zevico View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'll have you know I'm a one man sovereign state. I call myself Zevicotania.
    I will not get an entry visum I promise you that !

    Quote Originally Posted by Zevico View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    True. But strictly speaking if your question is taken literally it's completely irrelevant to the subject. It's only relevant as an analogy; I addressed the analaogy instead of the question. So what?
    No you made an inconsistent attempt at refuting the fact that DD is changing the rethoric from:

    "Quickly, they are building the bomb. Let's stop them by any means possible"
    to
    "We don't care if they are actually building the bomb, let's go to war"

    And jsut for you I will reword the question:

    So being black and buying a gun gets you arrested for armed robbery these days ?
    "Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."

  11. #11
    rah
    Just another peon rah's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 1999
    Location
    Same old place
    Posts
    28,660
    Country
    This is rah's Country Flag
    Thanks
    75
    Thanked 170 Times in 112 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    10:29
    If that black guy has been saying for months that when he gets that gun, he's going to kill every white guy on the block, it makes the white guys want to try to make sure he doesn't get a gun.

    Maybe if they didn't spend so much time mouthing off about killing all the jews, people wouldn't be so uptight about them developing the means to do it.

    It's their right to do so, but when they mouth off like that, they should expect to have to deal with the response.
    "If black people robbed you, I'd not consider it prejudice for you to be angry at black people in general" - Ben Kenobi
    Lessons in Christianity.
    Baron O RIP.

  12. #12
    DinoDoc
    Deity DinoDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Sep 1999
    Location
    100% WOLF
    Posts
    17,338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 211 Times in 171 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    11:29
    Quote Originally Posted by dannubis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So, buying a gun gets you arrested for armed robbery these days ?
    Are you so brain damaged as to think domestic law analogies have any useful place in this discussion?
    I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
    For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

  13. #13
    dannubis
    Emperor
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2002
    Posts
    4,346
    Country
    This is dannubis's Country Flag
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts
    Local Date
    October 2, 2014
    Local Time
    18:29
    No, but since you obviously are too dumb to understand I am not going to try to explain to you what part of the analogy you should be focussing on.
    "Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."

Similar Threads

  1. Saudis clear Israel to bomb Iran?
    By SlowwHand in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: June 13, 2010, 00:21
  2. Replies: 52
    Last Post: November 6, 2006, 13:33
  3. Replies: 24
    Last Post: December 20, 2005, 14:05
  4. Tent of the Chief of Staff, HQ
    By El Awrence in forum Civ2-Democracy Game: Exodus
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: November 19, 2003, 16:12
  5. Chief of Staff's Apply Here.
    By PinkyGen in forum Civ2-Democracy Game: Exodus
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: October 14, 2003, 23:42

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions