Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Israel Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: MAD can only work when both sides are rational
sofa    1/22/2007 9:43:58 AM
by Benny Morris for the Jerusalem Post "http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1167467762531&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull" http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1167467762531&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull From PJM: [At PJM the editors review thousands of articles per month. In recent memory we cannot think of a more alarming, prescient essay that this one published today by Benny Morris. Morris is one of the most respected intellectuals in Israel and his conversion dove to hawk was widely heralded and criticized at the time. Morris, one of the ?New Historians,? wrote about this ?transformation? for the Guardian in 2002, saying, ?I imagine that I feel a bit like one of those western fellow travelers rudely awakened by the trundle of Russian tanks crashing through Budapest in 1956.? Today Morris goes even deeper into the darkening future of the Middle East as he looks at what is coming there, and to the rest of the world.] -------------------- THE SECOND HOLOCAUST will not be like the first. The NNazis, of course, industrialized mass murder. But still, the perpetrators had one-on-one contact with the victims. They may have dehumanized them over months and years of appalling debasement and in their minds, before the actual killing. But, still, they were in eye and ear contact, sometimes in tactile contact, with their victims. The Germans, along with their non-German helpers, had to round up the men, women and children from their houses and drag and beat them through the streets and mow them down in nearby woods or push and pack them into cattle cars and transport them to the camps, where ?Work makes free,? separate the able-bodied from the completely useless and lure them into ?shower? halls and pour in the gas and then take out, or oversee the extraction of, the bodies and prepare the ?showers? for the next batch. The second holocaust will be quite different. One bright morning, in five or 10 years, perhaps during a regional crisis, perhaps out of the blue, a day or a year or five years after Iran?s acquisition of the Bomb, the mullahs in Qom will convene in secret session, under a portrait of the steely-eyed Ayatollah Khomeini, and give President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, by then in his second or third term, the go-ahead. The orders will go out and the Shihab III and IV missiles will take off for Tel Aviv, Beersheba, Haifa and Jerusalem, and probably some military sites, including Israel?s half dozen air and (reported) nuclear missile bases. Some of the Shihabs will be nuclear-tipped, perhaps even with multiple warheads. Others will be dupes, packed merely with biological or chemical agents, or old newspapers, to draw off or confuse Israel?s anti-missile batteries and Home Front Command units. With a country the size and shape of Israel (an elongated 20,000 square kilometers), probably four or five hits will suffice: No more Israel. A million or more Israelis in the greater Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem areas will die immediately. Millions will be seriously irradiated. Israel has about seven million inhabitants. No Iranian will see or touch an Israeli. It will be quite impersonal. Some of the dead will inevitably be Arab - 1.3 million of Israel?s citizens are Arab and another 3.5 million Arabs live in the semi-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. Jerusalem, Tel Aviv-Jaffa and Haifa have substantial Arab minorities. And there are large Arab concentrations immediately around Jerusalem (in Ramallah-Al Bireh, Bir Zeit, Bethlehem) and outside Haifa. Here, too, many will die, immediately or by and by. It is doubtful whether such a mass killing of fellow Muslims will trouble Ahmadinejad and the mullahs. The Iranians don?t especially like Arabs, especially Sunni Arabs, with whom they have intermittently warred for centuries. And they have a special contempt for the (Sunni) Palestinians who, after all, though initially outnumbering the Jews by more than 10 to 1, failed during the long conflict to prevent them from establishing their state or taking over all of Palestine. Besides, the Iranian leadership sees the destruction of Israel as a supreme divine command, as a herald of the second coming, and the Muslims dispatched collaterally as so many martyrs in the noble cause. Anyway, the Palestinians, many of them dispersed around the globe, will survive as a people, as will the greater Arab nation of which they are part. And surely, to be rid of the Jewish state, the Arabs should be willing to make some sacrifices. In the cosmic balance sheet, it will be worth the candle. A QUESTION may nevertheless arise in the Iranian councils: What about Jerusalem? After all, the city contains Islam?s third holiest shrines (after Mecca and Medina), Al Aksa Mosque and the Mosque of Omar. But Ali Khamenei, the supreme spiritual leader, and Ahmadinejad most likely would reply much as they would to the wider question regarding the destruction and radioactive poll
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
reefdiver       1/22/2007 10:23:40 AM
And with absolute certainty, a few minutes later, nuclear cruise missiles will rise from Israeli submarines and soon Iran will also cease to be a functioning world power.  No doubt more of Iran will continue to exist. It leaders will have long since hid themselves in their bunkers and survived. But the population and industry of Iran will suffer terribly. Times more Iranians will die than Israelis.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       2/20/2007 8:27:54 PM
We might be overdoing it. If the Moslems really wanted to destroy Israel as much as they say they would have done so a long time ago; just compare the resources. Prowess only goes so far-ask Napolean. It does seem that they really do love their children more then they hate the Jews hard as it seems to believe. If they were willing to pay the price they could have driven Israel into the sea but the fact is they weren't.
Now the ruler of Iran may be an exeption. However even clerical states are really ruled by the same slimy courtiers that inhabit all chancellaries. They want to live and keep their power. You can bet someone, probably lots of "someones" is thinking, "it only takes one knife".
Furthermore even if they do get a nuke, at the start they will only have one. The odds are that it will be intercepted by Israel's ABM's if launched. Would even a madman be willing to take that slight chance of destroying Israel against the near certainty of Iran's destruction? Perhaps, perhaps not. But again, "it only takes one knife."
Should we therefore let Iran off the hook? Certainly not-the risks are to great. However I do point out that the picture is not as dark as it seems. There is still plenty of hope-and hope is after all Israel's song.

 
Quote    Reply

Jerry W. Loper       2/21/2007 2:13:09 PM
If I was an Israeli political or military leader and had the choice of using nukes either (a) too early or
(b) too late, I'd pick (a) too early, for the simple reason that if I didn't pick (a), there wouldn't be any
of my people left to worry about the consequences.

 
Quote    Reply

SGTObvious       2/21/2007 3:58:05 PM
Jastayme,
 
The Arabs tried to slaughter Israel, many times.  They failed, each time.  Sometimes quantity can overcome quality, but not always- not in this case.  The Arabs failed to destroy Israel, the Russians couldn't beat Finland, Chinese couldn't overcome Japan, and the Zulu Impis were gunned down by Europeans.  In some situations, quality wins.
 
You must also distinguish between "The Arabs", meaning the culture, which does dearly hope to destroy Israel one day, "The Arabs" meaning their nation states, which would love to, but prefer someone else (like the Palestinians) pay the price, and "The Arabs" meaning individual people who would love to destroy Israel but do not want to personally get blasted to pieces by an Israeli tank.
 
Which brings us to the present day, with the Arabs working to change the situation so that one day, they might succeed.
 
SGTObvious
 
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       3/5/2007 1:53:11 PM


 Certainly they did try; bit they didn't try hard enough. The difference wasn't comparable to that between the British and Zulus, it was more like that between the monarchists and Bonapartist France. And the monarchists knew what it would take to win and they did so. The Arabs never matched a people's army with a people's army, never trusted their people with arms and never were willing to endure years of Borodinos and Leipzegs. Of course Napolean was an obvious threat, which makes it sound like they don't believe their own propaganda.
In this century the two weapons that the enemies of civilization have used most successfully are feigning irrationality and feigning concern for the wretched; it works every time.
I had to grow up under it too and I'm just a bookworm. Plenty of others here did to. Israeli  posters sometimes had to have not just the theory as I did but  actually have  it  in their  backyard(one E-pal of mine had a bar-mitzvah in a bomb shelter).
But the Soviets were rational? They sure didn't sound so all the  time. Remember  Krushchev and the  shoe?  That was  act  but not everyone knew that.
Of course all that makes it sound like I am claiming to be more manly then modern Israelis which I do acknowledge is absurd(permit me at least to claim to be more manly then journalists though). What I am pointing out is that it has happened before and we are all alive.
And no I do not think that means Israel should do nothing. If nothing else, the danger of getting it wrong is immensely great-a real madman was mistaken for a hypocrite once before.
As for Israel being thought a rascist oppresive state-well I can think of things to say about that but the best one is:

For it's Meyer this and Meyer that and chuck him out the brute, but it's saviour of civilization when the guns begin to shoot

Which is at least a more dignified prejudice then there used to be. If it is any comfort.

I don't think Israel should "just" grit it's teeth and hope for the best. I do think however that Israel can at least hope. I am not making policy suggestions. I am pointing out that there is more hope then might be thought.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics