boomer on December 24, 2007 at 6:56 PM

Nuclear winter > global warming

Oddly, I cannot recall the direction of the prevailing winds in Israel — are they out to sea or in from the sea? I think it’s the latter. If the former, the problem of fallout might not be severe, as the winds would tend to carry the fallout out to sea. Recall that there was, in essence, no problem with fallout at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, as the fallout was borne out to sea by the prevailing winds. Of course, huge numbers were killed by direct radiation, either IR or ionizing.

Every Shiite in the world (i.e., Lebanon and Iraq) would have a mortal grievance with Israel after that

Yes but that might be a tad bit tempered by the simple fact that 20 million of so of their brethren have just received a one way trip straight to hell.

Side note would a small nuclear winter end global; warming????

Iran/Russia defense

Are you saying Israeli politicians might allow a nuclear attack without response, even if the attack wipes out israel? Seems like even presenting that possibility would put a smile on the face of the mullahs. I can’t believe the Israelis are that suicidal.

Not suicidal, no. But they are a very moral people. Israel will not use nuclear weapons, I think, until the very last, utmost need. The Samson option is meant for deterrence. It’s not meant to be used. Samson died. Israelis want to live.

I’m saying that the Israeli response would not be the total annihilation of Iran. I’m saying that Israel always has one eye on world opinion, because the world has proven itself always ready to criticize the Jewish state, and a worldwide boycott of Israel would be devastating. I’m saying that this report is pretty much bullhockey, because it isn’t using accurate information. It’s using guesswork.

I’d be far more interested in seeing the Israeli report, but that is obviously classified information that will never be revealed (we hope).

The Israelis aren’t wusses. But neither are they monsters.

Spurius Ligustinus on December 24, 2007 at 2:10 PM

Contrary to popular opinion, I’m not so sure the top dogs in Iran are so eager for that 12th inman to appear. Most of them are corrupt to the core and enjoying the material wordly benefits/power that they work so hard to accumulate. If Israel rains down death and destruction on the masses, it kills more than Iranian civilians and Palestinians. it also kills the goose that lays the golden egg they deposit monthly in those Swiss bank accounts. I’ve suspected for a long time that Dinnerjacket is a propaganda tool to scare the bejesus out of the West, while the real men behind the curtain have no intention of actually using the weapons, other than as poker chips. I wouldn’t bet the farm on that theory, but accumulation of wealth is not something given up easily, and I suspect cynical exploitation of religion is not restricted to Huckabee.

Not mentioned in this report (and as Tony737 mentioned) is that the Mullahs in Iran firmly believe that nuking Israel (and getting hit in return) would bring back the 12th Iman from his hiding place at the bottom of some well who will save them and establish Islamic Paradise or some such…

To them a few million dead of their fellow Iranians (you can bet the Mullahs will be cowering in remote bunkers) is a small price to pay. And dead Palestinians are no price at all.

Funny how Israel cares more about the Palestinians then their fellow Islamic nations do.

CrazyFool on December 24, 2007 at 12:26 PM

Well said. What makes the Iranians’ – and North Koreans’ – nuclear weapons programs so alarming is that unlike the Soviets and Chinese, they’re comparatively immune from the restraining influence of the idea of “mutually assured destruction.” What are a few “involuntary martyrs” on their side for a shot at the two-fer of (1) wiping out the Jews, and (2) triggering the return of the Hidden Imam?

Meryl Yourish on December 24, 2007 at 11:50 AM

One vital thing you’re overlooking: the Israelis aren’t the wusses we are. They’re not busy discussing whether or not to fight back. They’re doing it every day, on their home soil. I don’t think they’d hesitate for a moment to nail every nuke coming their way, and fire back even if they’ve sustained no casualties.

Meryl Yourish on December 24, 2007 at 11:50 AM

Sampson option.

To them a few million dead of their fellow Iranians (you can bet the Mullahs will be cowering in remote bunkers) is a small price to pay. And dead Palestinians are no price at all.

Funny how Israel cares more about the Palestinians then their fellow Islamic nations do.

Can’t wait. I’ll be under my desk.

There is only so much supposition an outside organization can do. And some people may be tired of hearing this, but Israel is a Jewish state, and her politicians in charge of whether or not to fire off the nukes are Jews, raised in the traditions of the Talmud and the Torah—even the ones who aren’t very religious. That upbringing affects whether or not the Prime Minister will make the decision to retaliate against Iran. The “Samson Option” has always been there, but will Israeli politicians use it? Easy for you and me to sit here and say yes or no, but we’re not the ones making that decision.

A nuclear exchange with Iran is, indeed, the nightmare scenario. Israel will not survive it. Meryl Yourish on December 24, 2007 at 11:50 AM

Are you saying Israeli politicians might allow a nuclear attack without response, even if the attack wipes out israel? Seems like even presenting that possibility would put a smile on the face of the mullahs. I can’t believe the Israelis are that suicidal.

Every Shiite in the world (i.e., Lebanon and Iraq) would have a mortal grievance with Israel after that, although I suppose that’s a minor concern after you’ve just been through nuclear war.

Is that different than how the Shiites already feel about Israel?

There is only so much supposition an outside organization can do. And some people may be tired of hearing this, but Israel is a Jewish state, and her politicians in charge of whether or not to fire off the nukes are Jews, raised in the traditions of the Talmud and the Torah—even the ones who aren’t very religious. That upbringing affects whether or not the Prime Minister will make the decision to retaliate against Iran. The “Samson Option” has always been there, but will Israeli politicians use it? Easy for you and me to sit here and say yes or no, but we’re not the ones making that decision.

A nuclear exchange with Iran is, indeed, the nightmare scenario. Israel will not survive it. The Jewish population of Europe did not survive the Holocaust. The Jewish sections of most European nations are no longer Jewish, and haven’t been in sixty years. Few Jews remain in Europe. In the 1930s, there were some 9.5 million. Today, there are about 1.5 million. There would be about 30-40 million more Jews in the world if the murders of the Holocaust hadn’t happened.

I don’t buy the Israeli casualty figures in this report. And I doubt that the report truly takes into account the economic blow to Israel. Who will help her in the aftermath of a nuclear exchange? The world will, as always, excoriate Israel for having brought it on herself. American and European Jews will pony up personally, but will the EU send aid? With their Muslim minority rioting in their cities, I doubt it. Will they even protect their own Jewish populations from the rioting Muslims? Odds are against that, seeing as how they’re unable to stop the “youths” from burning cars and buses now.

Any way you look at it, a nuclear attack on Israel would be the end of Israeli civilization as it is now. The fact that it might also take out Iran is no comfort whatsoever. I don’t want to wake up one day to find out that 20 million people died in a nuclear exchange.

No question. The Palestinians are nothing but a political tool for jihadists so I doubt Iran’s losing any sleep over it.

Allahpundit on December 24, 2007 at 9:55 AM

Ain’t them mullahs sweethearts?

survive the exchange whereas Iran would re-enter the proverbial Stone Age.

Damn, they’d lose 30 maybe even 40 years of progress? ouch.