U.S. Bombs Could Get to Iranian Nuclear Facilities Israeli Bombs Couldn't

An anti-aircraft gun at the Natanz nuclear site.(Hasan Sarbakhshian/AP/WP)

• U.S. BUSTER-BUNKERS COULD PROBABLY PENETRATE the underground, fortified Iranian nuclear facility called Fordow, which is likely mostly impervious to Israeli bombs. Understanding this is crucial to understanding the U.S.-Israeli stand-off right now. [WP]

• FORMER MOSSAD CHIEF AMOS YADLIN spells it out: Israel must trust that the United States would strike if it came down to it, or else Israel will now. [NYT]

• IS THERE DAYLIGHT BETWEEN ISRAELI JEWS AND U.S. JEWS? Most Israeli Jews oppose a unilateral Israeli strike against Iran and support President Obama over Republican contenders, according to a new poll. [JPost]

• NO INTIFADA IS FORMALLY PLANNED, said the Palestinian Authority, which added that protests might still erupt in the coming months. [JPost]

• POINTING TO NORTH KOREA, which agreed to temporarily halt its nuclear weapons program in exchange for food, one Israeli official suggested starving Iran into compliance. How about no. [Ynet]

• ISRAEL QUIETLY LEGALIZED SHVUT RACHEL, a small, old hilltop-style settlement outpost in the West Bank. [AP/Vos Iz Neias?]

EMAIL PRINT COMMENT

Click here for access to comments

COMMENTING CHARGES
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180

WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at letters@tabletmag.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

Access1comment

Hershel (Heshy) Ginsburg says:

March 1, 2012 - 10:29 am

“FORMER MOSSAD CHIEF AMOS YADLIN spells it out: Israel must trust that the United States would strike if it came down to it, or else Israel will now”

For the benefit of those who don’t read Yadlin’s full piece (I recommend reading in full; MT’s one liner does not do it justice).

a) Yadlin was not head of the Mossad but rather was Commander of Military Intelligence.

b) Yadlin also was one of the pilots who bombed the Iraqi reactor in 1981. (Another one was Ilan Ramon, the Israeli astronaut who died in the space shuttle Columbia disaster).

c) Yadlin notes that the assumption in 1981 was the attack would delay Iraqi nukes for only a few years. It was the follow-up that was responsible for it lasting far longer.

What Yadlin doesn’t mention is that support in the Israeli military and intelligence establishment for bombing the reactor was not unanimous. A number of the most senior commanders were against it. Shimon Peres (opposition leader at the time) opposed it. Although the working assumption was that the attack would delay Iraq for only ~3 years, some thought that the delay would last only a year and communicated that point to Begin.

d) More than simple “trust” the central question is, should Israel pass up its last chance to stop the Iranians within the limits of Israel’s ability to project force, believing that Obama will follow thru with the use of force if the Iranians don’t undo their nuclear program?

Or, even after giving Israel “ironclad promises”, could Obama find a way to weasel out of attacking Iran? Is massively attacking Iran in his character? Is it in Obama’s character to double-cross Israel and throw it under the bus? Is his word worth enough to entrust Israel’s future to it?

hg
J’lem / Efrata