Suppose for a moment that Iran possessed nuclear weapons ready-to-use. Suppose further that the logic of the Cold War applies: if two states, opposed and armed with very destructive weaponry, command a second strike capability, they will not attack each other. Since Israel possesses nuclear WMD on land and sea - as we further assume, it follows that Iran will not drop the bomb.
So why should a nuclear Iran be a threat to the existence of Israel then?
Suppose further that Iran would launch a nuclear attack or war on Israel and the country could not respond with a second strike. What would happen next?
Note first how implausible this assumption is: for what reason should Iran destroy and make uninhabitable a part of a small region in the Middle-East which the Mullahs think to belong to the Palestinian people? What would that be good for?
So what would happen to a country after launching a nuclear attack on Israel? For much less than such a supposed tragedy other countries have been invaded and devastated, e.g. recently Afghanistan and Iraq. You may expect wild and furious reactions from the rest of the world, led by the United States. Iran would be doomed.
So why would Iran's rich Mullahs risk all of their flourishing businesses and their unchallenged predominance inside the country? For the sake of the Palestinian people? Hardly.
Given these assumptions mentioned above, the idea of preventing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons cannot be based on the fear caused by the alleged "wiping off Israel from the map"-saying. That would be totally unreasonable, against the Cold War logic and survival instincts on the part of Iran.
Nevertheless, the gossip of a "nuclear Iran threatening the existence of Israel" is repeated over and over again by the majority of mass media entertainment around the globe. It is astonishing how persistent this naive idea of the bomb is chanted hysterically ad nauseam, remaining largely unchallenged and thereby obscuring far more convincing economical and geostrategic reasons to start a war against Iran - at least from the viewpoint of the US and their allies.
Is there an explanation of how it is possible that the illusion (under above assumptions) of a "threat of the existence of Israel" is widely accepted?
Yes, there is a reasonable psychological explanation. The logic of nuclear deterrence is quickly suspended by portraying one opponent as crazy, as dangerous madman in possession of a deadly weapon. This has been accomplished by decades of illustrating the "arabs" (muslims) as subhumans and as incalculable, wild, fanatic villains. (See Jack Shaheen's survey "Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People", documentary version on youtube). Hollywood movies, the constant stream of releases dealing with alleged and actual terrorist acts (thereby overstating the danger of "international terrorism"), up to stone throwing children in Palestine - all this is suggesting a picture of primitive creatures unable to handle appropriately a deadly toy such as nuclear technology. In addition, bigmouthed Ahmadinedschad is really a fine and much welcomed leader of the opponent to be put into the role of the "devil on duty" (see principle III of Morelli's Principles of War Propaganda) - though in reality he has not much to say in clerical Iran. These are the ingredients which make even those people who have created this atmosphere of islamophobia believe in their own propaganda lies.
Posts
