Originally Posted by
Useless
As the situation continues to escalate, I'm left to contemplate the possibility, or even the inevitability of some type of nuclear option being used by Hezbollah, Syria, Iran, or even Israel.
I think that Israel would only use it under the most dire circumstances, and that would be against Iran, if and when the time comes. Yet there are a number of factors that come into play here, and I don't think that any nuclear involvement can be accurately predicted until other events unfold.
It looks to me like Israel has caught Hezbollah, Lebanon, Syria, The U.N., and to some degree, The United States, a wee bit off guard with their tactics. No longer are they taking the approach of fighting a terrorist organization without also engaging the countries that provide them with safe harbor, nor do they seem too terribly worried about confining their activities to surgical strikes.
In this respect, what has become known in essence as the traditional rulebook for engagement has been thrown out. So, it looks to me like Israel has finally awakened to the reality that the old way of doing things has not worked in the past, and will not work in the future. By the same token, Hezbollah has become comfortable with believing that they could seek safe haven in other countries while striking out at Israel, and that Israel would not take military action against the countries that harbor them on anything more than a surgical level.
While it is clear that The Bush Administration, and particularly The State Dept. are being kept informed of Israel's actions and intentions, as far as political posturing is concerned, all Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice can do is go through the motions of talking about trying to arrange some type of cease fire or peace accord; yet, even The State Dept. has in so many words, acknowledged that their hands are effectively tied. The U.S. Ambassador to The U.N. John Bolton has even acknowledged that point.
Additionally, as much as other Arab countries may despise Israel, their concerns over Iran are even greater, and they would much rather have Israel take on Iran. For that reason, the hands of The U.N. are effectively tied; while they can whine and moan about Israel's incursions, The U.N. knows that other Arab countries would rather have Israel carrying the water. For that, I am very thankful.
While I'm no fan of The Bush Administration, I do applaud the Administration's decision to drop back, confine their actions to political posturing and supplying the Israeli's with arms, while letting Israel deal with this. I've never considered Pres. Bush to be the sharpest tool in the box, but so far, I think that his handling of the situation (or more correctly stated, his decision to let Israel handle the situation without U.S. interference) is one of the best foreign policy decisions that has been made by his administration since he took office.
The last thing that Israel needs is for The U.S., along with the politics of The U.S. Military, to get involved and muddle the situation. That isn't to suggest that their is not some behind the scene involvement and support coming from the U.S.; clearly, there is!! It is to say that The Bush Administration is clearly in favor of having Israel "in the driver's seat", and in control of the situation.
Throughout history, (especially since 1967) any country that has ever messed with Israel has lived to regret it. While they may be a small nation, their military capability and fortitude is simply unparalleled in the Middle East. I've no doubt that this shall remain true.
While the U.S. may have the most powerful military complex in the world, the fact is that our military policies and our abilities to exercise the full power of our military complex have been seriously constrained and compromised by the political forces in Washington. While our Constitution rightly and correctly mandates a system of checks and balances, the willingness of numerous administrations (Republican and Democrat alike) to subordinate the power of The United States to the power of The U.N., and our excessive worries about how we will be viewed in the world court of public opinion has effectively tied our hands unnecessarily as well. We saw this happen during WW ll and the days that followed the conclusion of the war in Europe (remember; Patton wanted to take on Russia immediately after our victory in Europe), The Korean and Vietnam Wars, in Desert Storm, and even now in Iraq. Israel's military force now appears to be unencumbered by similar constraints.
Will the situation escalate to a nuclear level?? I'm left to wonder. As the pounding of Lebanon continues, and the count of so-called "innocent" civilian casualties continues to rise, Israel will no doubt lose favor in the court of world opinion, but so far, Israel does not seem too terribly worried about that. Syria, a nation that has long been a harbinger for terrorists, and a very fertile breeding ground for terrorist funding, training, and activity, will allow Lebanon to be pounded as long as it can buy them time. At the same time, Syria also knows, as does the rest of the world, that they are in Israel's cross-hairs. For Israel to do anything less than to keep Syria in it's crosshairs would be the equivalent of an oral surgeon extracting two bad wisdom teeth, when he or she knows full well that all four wisdom teeth need to be removed.
I think that most everyone can agree that Israel is about to hold Syria accountable for their actions. Will Syria's sense of desperation rise? If so, then to what level??
As I said before, Israel is not a large country, and regardless of their strength and fortitude, even one well placed nuke bomb could cripple them severely. Will Israel stop them before they act out of desperation?? The flip side of that possibility is that in attacking Israel by means of the nuclear option, The Palestinian Territory would be taken out as well.
If, as many people have theorized, Syria has control of the chemical weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction that Iraq once had, and if they do unleash them, that could play a pivotal role in the outcome.
The way I see it, Iran is the greatest threat to Israel, and ultimately, Israel is going to go after them as well. This is where the danger of the nuclear option becomes the greatest. How will that unfold?? I say that it is too early to tell. In my opinion, the answer will not become anywhere near clear until we see what happens between Israel and Syria.
So for now, my position in the poll is that they will continue to fight. I can not say that a nuclear exchange is right around the corner, but at the same time, I do not see how we cane completely exclude or discount that possibility.
I Predict...
Reply With Quote
