Subscribe to Print Edition    |
  Sun., December 11, 2005 Kislev 10, 5766| |Israel Time: 16:18 (EST+7)
Search site 
Print
Related Links
* The nuclear sum game
* Israel demands change to IAEA resolution, threatens boycott
* Iran vows to react severely to Israeli action against nuke sites
* Waiting to bomb Iran
Editorial & Op-Eds
Going for broke
By Yoel Marcus
Accepting the other
Editorial
Corruption finds its way
Editorial
Medicines for poverty
By Avraham Tal
Cartoon
Editorial
Reconsider the museum deal
Editorial
The usual suspects
By Uzi Benziman
The safe passage: The history of a farce
By Gideon Levy
Absentee journalism
By Zvi Bar'el
The disengagement, with a look to the future
By Ze'ev Schiff
Cartoon
Editorial
How should Israel respond to Iran's nuclear program?

Israel's chief of military intelligence warned this month that if the world community fails to curb Iran's nuclear program, within six months Tehran will have all the means at its disposal to build nuclear bombs.

The Iranian military has test-fired a Shihab-3 ballistic missile whose range is described as exactly the distance from Iran to any point within the state of Israel.

Iran reacted with anger and threats of severe retaliation to reports that Israel, whose war planes bombed an Iraqi reactor just as it was to go online in 1981, was to receive 500 "bunker buster" bombs from the United States.

How should Israel respond to the Iranian nuclear program? From Israel's perspective, how does the danger posed by Iran compare to that of Saddam's Iraq? In the absence of international sanctions against Tehran, would Israel be justified in attacking Iranian nuclear sites as it did Iraq in 1981?

What you think
Israel should consider a new policy of retaliation in the event of a nuclear attack against her. It should state that it will retaliate not only against the country which is the direct source of the attack (if that can be ascertained) but also against all the countries indirectly responsible - be it through the supply of technology, or the promotion of appeasement policies that permitted the development of the nuclear weapons - and against all countries that are indirectly connected with the promotion of hostilities with Israel. That is, it should state that all oil fields in the region as well as an undisclosed number of targets in Arab as well as European countries would be targeted in the event of a nuclear attack on the Jewish State. I bet that this will help a lot of people to focus and to take the Iranian nuclear threat more seriously.
Daniel Sudarsky,  Mexico City,  Mexico
I think Tom K of Toronto makes the best point: the Iranian missiles could miss by 10 or 20 kilometers, which means that instead of an Israeli town, a Palestinian town will be hit, perhaps even Jerusalem. Are the Iranians ready to take that risk? Perhaps. Are the Palestinians aware of that risk? Perhaps. Despite that, many savor the idea of hitting the Jews hard as ibe savors a rare fruit dripping with sweet juices ready to fall in one's mouth. What have we done to deserve such disproportionate hate? Who knows. Rather, better we ask, why so disproportionate?
Stephanie Schwartz,  Houston,  United States of America
An effort has to be made to put international economic sanctions against Iran. They will continue their weapons program anyway, but that slows it down, along with any programs to fund or generate terrorism. Their nuclear facilities have to be closed down one way or another.

The problem is not just them not using them against us, but us never being able to take action against them because of the weapon. What if Hussein had the weapon before we invaded last year or even back during the Gulf War? Do you really think that we would have used military force against him? He would have taken over any Middle Eastern country he wanted.
Anthony Spectorman,  Stony Brook,  United States of America
Is anyone distinguishing between the desirability and feasibility of destroying Iran's underground, widely-spaced and secret nuclear bunkers? The U.S. would have liked to destroy the Soviet Union's. Very nice: no Soviet imperialism; no Eastern Europe in Soviet chains; no Soviet-backed Third World guerrilla warfare; no Cold War; no danger of deliberate or accidental Doomsday war. So why didn't the U.S. do it? Maybe because it was not feasible?

I haven't yet seen a single person affirm they would like to do this with Iran's missiles but assess that nonetheless it cannot be done. In the Middle East, do the borders between felicitous dream and hard reality become increasingly permeable until they disappear altogether? Is this syndrome the same reason why there is so much fantasy and extremism on all sides there?

There is also a reason for hope based in reality. Not even fanatics would irradiate Jerusalem.
Jon Friedman,  Arlington-Boston,  United States of America
Even if Iran developed nuclear ballistic rockets, not even one will hit the state of Israel. Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades, but never once used them. Iran will do the same. Iran just wants to raise up its name, to be a powerful and respected state. Iran will not threaten Israel because of all the Arabs that live in the state or near it.
Ashraf Abdul-Hadi,  Amman,  Jordan
The current unstable regime in Iran is unlikely to last for another decade. How can it be trusted with WMDs prior to it being overthrown?
Giles Goodman,  London,  United Kingdom
Is not Tehran like Baghdad? Is not Osirak like similar structures in Iran? Is not Saddam like The Revolutionary Council? The two threats are as similar as they need to be to conclude that they merit similar interdiction.
Brian Brunner,  Reading,  United States of America
If Iran wants to attack Israel, it will have to deal with the mighty United States.
Erik Diamond,  Denver,  United States of America
I predict that either United States or Israel will strike Iran's nuclear plants in the near future. Iran knows that the United States military is in Iraq and the Gulf. Iran actually has few options to respond. Perhaps the United States presence in Iraq is part of a bigger plan under "war on terror" banner. Geographically, the United States has separated Iran from the rest of the Arab world. If Iran wants to attack Israel, it will have to deal with the mighty United States.
Erik Diamond,  Denver,  United States of America
Israel has nuclear weapons; however, it will use them only if under severe threat. This is how Israel has survived. The nations against Israel know this and are afraid to act against Israel. However, the countries against Israel have one goal: to wipe Israel off the map, or in their eyes, to wipe out Jewish-occupied Palestine. Iran and other countries against Israel should be disarmed. They are indeed "insane" enough to use nuclear weapons against the Jewish State. What is the logic behind Iran having nuclear weapons? To defend itself from attack. The only one who is going to attack is Iran. End of Story.
Aaron Michaels,  Aventura,  United States of America
Pakistan obtained nuclear weapons, and after a short period of outrage and alarm became everyone's best friend - even though it has been exporting it's nuclear technology to whomever is prepared to pay for it. I am sure this will be the same scenario for Iran. Iran, unlike most of Israel's neighbors, really could not care less about the Palestinians or Israel, for that matter. Behind the public posturing Iran is probably Israel's best friend in the Mideast. Israel finds comfort in having nuclear weapons, so why not Iran?
Pete Harris,  Ottawa,  Canada
"Mutually Assured Destruction" was able to work in the cold war because both constituencies were afraid of being destroyed. However, isn't it common knowledge by now that Muslim extremists will ascend to heaven when they sacrifice themselves to destroy Israel, be it with a thousand suicide belts or with one nuclear bomb?
David Baum,  Boca Raton,  United States of America
Ask yourselves, "How should Iran respond to Israel's nuclear program?"
Ali Al-Mufleh,  Amman,  Jordan
Ask yourselves, "How should Iran respond to Israel's nuclear program?"
Ali Al-Mufleh,  Amman,  Jordan
First, this issue can't be treated without looking at the bigger picture. The 5 permanent members of the UN. are the world's biggest weapons dealers, with the United States far and away the leader. Second, nukes are a political weapon, not a military one. Sure, they can be used, but so far only one country has done so. Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran are trying for parity, so they can negotiate from a stronger position. Nuclear war is suicide. That brings up a third point. Try to remember how small, how narrow Israel is, and how many non-Jews live there, and that Jerusalem is the third holiest site for Muslims. Radiation knows no borders, and it will not be gone the day after. Finally, the path to true safety for Israelis lies in a political settlement with the Palestinians. It will be the beginning of the integration of Israel into the Middle East.
Tex Tractor,  San Francisco,  United States of America
Israel knows what the future will be like if there is a catastrophic killing of its population. Nonetheless, the first strike will not come from Israel. The French nation will be attacked in a Mediterranean port by using a nuclear bomb implanted in an oil tanker. Many European Muslims will die, as also other people. If Europe, especially France, does not protect the interest of all nations including Israel, France itself will suffer through instigators that have sought shelter inside the Republic. As the old saying goes: Make noise in the East and attack from the West.
Joseph Hellul,  Sydney,  Australia
It is precisely the national players that always are the sources of leaking nuclear materials and knowledge, which then might end-up in the hands of terrorist rogue elements. Rogue elements don't own and operate nuclear power plants - nations do.

Terrorist rogue elements will always be there trying to obtain the stuff they need to cause massive damage and carnage to the West and Israel. Our safety therefore entirely depends on the nations that do own and operate nuclear technology and knowledge-base. Russia's left over nuclear stockpiles are a risk, North Korea is a risk, and especially Pakistan is at the moment the biggest risk of them all since they sold, are selling nuclear technology to instable nations and who knows.. rogue elements. To allow Iran join the nuclear club would only increase the risks.
Jan Pieter Verhey,  Huizen,  The Netherlands
Far better to change the person who has the weapon than stop possession and use of the weapon.
Uday Kulkarni,  Pune,  India
Military responses are not always the best option. Israel must use tact and guile to disarm Iranian intentions. Far better to change the person who has the weapon than stop possession and use of the weapon. This of course is a fundamental policy from which Israel as a state has moved far away. To return there is a long grind.

So in the short term, what can Israel do? It needs to rely on the Cold War strategy of Mutual Assured Destruction. I don't for a moment believe that Iran, even after it possesses nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them will be foolish enough to even threaten their use. To expect such naivete from one's adversary is being simplistic to the point of idiocy. Iran will use these solely to assert its old Persian Empire status and as a deterrent against being pushed around.

Israel's real threat does not come from national players, but from rogue elements who might get their hands on nuclear bombs. This has nothing to do with Iran getting nuclear weapons. The former Soviet states are sufficiently insecure to be a sourse of such weapons-grade material as to make a dirty bomb.
Uday Kulkarni,  Pune,  India
Rolf Kitty has made the point that in his eyes defending yourself has a negative connotation. That might play in the coffee shops of Amsterdam but not in Sderot. The implacable mullahs must not aquire nuclear weapons and Israel is justified in any action it takes to remove the Iranian nuclear threat. If the mullahs aquire nuclear weapons they will use them. That is something Rolf Kitty just does not understand.
Dov de Jong,  St. Annaparochie,  The Netherlands
Israeli politicians and supporters of the Likud party are confused about Israel's position in the world. The state of Israel is dependent economically and militarily on the U.S.. Since the economic status of the U.S. is clearly eroding--big deficits at all levels-- the ability to impose American point of view on other peoples is limited. Iraq is a good example. Any friend of Israel would advise to sign a peace treaty with the Palestinians (evacuate all settlements, etc.) and leave the Iranians alone. Iranians are not going to use atomic bombs against Israel, or for that matter, against anybody. And the U.S. does not have the economic means to initiate hostilities in another country.with the Palestinians (evacuate all settlements, etc.) and leave the Iranians alone. Iranians are not going to use atomic bombs against Israel, or for that matter, against anybody. And the USA has not the economic mneans to initiate hostilities in another country. Luis Cervela
luis cervela,  San Francisco,  United States of America
Israel has a nuclear weapons program which she keeps secret. She also refuses to allow UN weapons inspectors to audit. This is a double standard.
Bruce Campbell,  Toronto,  Canada
Everyone forgets Russia's role here. They are building the reactor. After Beslan and the new detente between Israel and Russia, a little bit of clandestine sabotage would be in order. Israel and the U.S.A. stay out of it. The U.S.A. can help to pressure Russia.
Rajiv Singh,  Sydney,  Australia
Israel does not have (did it ever have?) sufficient credit in the world to execute a major attack on the Iranian nuclear installation. An attack would be a dramatic, negative action, even if Israel had the full right to secure its safety.

The brillant bombing of the Iraqi nuclear site happened in another era and the world should be grateful to that prophetic action. But please - not again.
Rolf Kitty,  Amsterdam, 
It's perfectly clear that Israel is not the aggressor against nations in the region. Israel is the target for governments that can't accept of Israel's existence.

If Iran is determined to strike Israel, heaven forbid, then it's better to finish off Iran's capabilities prior to its acquisition of nuclear weapons.

The people of Iran want a different government. It's time for the world to allow them to have it so that they can provide for their own futures away from the terrorist connections that will only bring increased harm to everyone.
Sandy M.,  Denver,  United States of America
Whenever one resorts to threats as a means of deterrence that is an indication of one thing: lack of means.
Cyrus Razavi,  Washington DC,  United States of America
If Israel could stop the Iranian nuclear drive by military means I can assure everyone we would not be talking about it on this list. Why? Because the deed would already be history. Whenever one resorts to threats as a means of deterrence that is an indication of one thing: lack of means. Does Israel have the F-16s and bunker busting bombs? Yes. But it takes more than that to stop this baby. I am sorry folks. Iran already has the nuclear capability and it seems their new missile can deliver it.
Cyrus Razavi,  Washington DC,  United States of America
Israel has no choice but strike first. Iran's mullahs openly opposed to the existence of Israel. That is what the nukes are for. Even though Israel has nuclear weapons it has never expressed pure hatred for the existence of any Muslim nation. The only time Israel will use it's nuclear weaponry is it is overpowered by all Arab or Persian nation.
Mesghina Yemane,  Atlanta,  United States of America
I believe that you are not entitled but obliged to try to strike and destroy a threat of this dimension before it materializes. However, I fear that the discussion is redundant since the Israeli army, no doubt, if it could, would have terminated Iran?s nuclear program. Either Iran?s nuclear program is too well protected or the risks of retaliation, with weapons of mass destruction involved, are to great. Maybe all this means that the Iranians actually already have nuclear arms?
Hampus Forssell,  Stockholm,  Sweden
Israel should just sit back and wait for Uncle Sam to do it. Iran is next on the list of preemptive strikes by the United States. North Korea will follow Iran. The precendednt is set. Israel doesn't have to dirty its hands. If circumstances warrant it, then Israel should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. But they won't until the United States says "OK." Sad but true.
Bill Caniano,  Concord,  United States of America
Guenther Heil fails to understand the relationship between Iran and Israel. They are, in fact, in a state of war, and therefore Israel's concerns should be taken very seriously. Attacking a country's civilians with the intent to kill indiscriminately by using militant cells or armies is not only a war crime, but a pretty close definition of international terrorism. Iran declared war on Israel when it began funding terrorist organizations that seek the destruction of Israel. The fact that Iran hasn't declared (officially) war in 200 years, as he claims, is of no consequence. It only takes one hot-headed terrorist with an a-bomb to destroy countless lives and destabilize the region, and somehow I don't think the mullahs would have a problem funding this act. What Mr. Heil calls "paranoia" about Iranian intentions has already resulted in the indiscriminate killing or maiming of countless Israelis.
Richard Townsend,  Memphis,  United States of America
Being over zealous sometimes may work against you. Iran now is NOT Iraq. God forbid should an exchange of missiles between Iran and Israel start; the whole Middle East will go up in smoke. Let's hope common sense will prevail, peace takes over, and all nuclear weapons disappear - before we all evaporate.
Sam Abraham,  Manchester,  United Kingdom
Nukes are a political weapon. Iran would commit collective suicide if it used them.
Guenther Heil,  Trier,  Germany
I donīt know whether I should be amused or cry about all the paranoia spread in this forum. But the discussion reflects the actual mixture of Israeli contempt and arrogance towards its Middle Eastern neighbors. Instead of trying to offer the Iranians something for abandoning the nuclear path, there is nothing but threats.

Iran is not the primitive country portrayed by some of the hardliners in this forum. First, the country hasnīt started a war the last 200 years and it spends much a smaller proportion of its GDP on defense than Israel does. Secondly, nukes are a political weapon. Iran would commit collective suicide if it used them. Finally, why are Iranian security concerns less legitimate than those of any other country? Has Israel asked any other country whether it is willing to accept their nukes?

To put things clearly: I am totally against further nuclear proliferation. But I am not willing to accept a debate where Israel is the only sacred angel of peace in the region. Haaretz reminds me every day of the way Israel treats the Palestinians in the territories. Is this a contribution to Middle East peace and stability?
Guenther Heil,  Trier,  Germany
Israel obtained nuclear technology a few decades ago and could have used it on three desperate occations, but it did not act due to its principles and integrity. No one believes that Iran knows any value for humankind, as has been shown in the past by her support for terror and destruction. Israel should take action soon and not worry about world opinion. The European Union should either help to disarm Iran or leave Israel alone to finish the job.
Morad Alnazeef,  Boston,  United States of America
This is like asking a surgeon what to do about a fatal brain tumor. Remove it.
David Schottenstein,  Columbus,  United States of America
Iran already has rockets aimed at Israel from various positions. All they need is an excuse to launch them and Israel must not give them one.
Jeff Elder,  Tucson,  United States of America
I agee 100% with Claude Sternberg and Abbey George. Israel must stay completely out of any conflict with Iran. The U.S.A. warned Israel to stay out of the conflict with Iraq both in 1991 and in 2003, even after Saddam fired rockets into Israel. When the U.S.A. attacks Iran, Israel will once again be warned to stay out of the conflict. It would be wise for Israel to abide by America's warning because as Abbey George said, Iran already has rockets aimed at Israel from various positions. All they need is an excuse to launch them and Israel must not give them one. The UN has a responsibility to stop Iran's nuclear program and the Arabs already know that if the UN does not do it's duty, America will.
Jeff Elder,  Tucson,  United States of America
It is not just Israel that must worry about a nuclear Iran, but all countries within range, including European cities. If diplomacy fails, Israel and the USA should do a joint operation through Iraqi airspace to destroy Iran's nulcear facilities. Or Israel should go it alone. The world will be enraged, as it was when Israel destroyed Osirak in 1981. However, two decades later, does anyone think Israel made the wrong choice then?
Ben Fredman,  Columbia,  United States of America
I belive it is too late to attack Iran. Iran has ballistic missiles of range to bomb the state of Israel. Israel should make peace with its neighbors including Iran. Israel can not wait for the U.S.A. to force peace - it should be forced by Israel.
Manollo Du-Chaman,  Detroit,  United States of America
I agree with Mark Schneider: Only with a non-proliferation treaty and the elimination of all nuclear weapons can progress be made. If Israel strikes at Iran it may delay, but will not in the long term prevent, nuclear proliferation, which inevitablly will lead to a nuclear war.
AG McNamara,  Perth,  Australia
Israel cannot afford to lose a single chance. As it lays alone among the nations of the world, it must defend itself. A preemptive strike under a covert operation should be planned and implemented. Everybody knows Iranian intentions are not innocent.
Manuel Gwiazda,  Buenos Aires,  Argentina
However dangerous nukes are, friends don't fear friends that have them.
James Adler,  Boston,  United States of America
However dangerous nukes are, friends don't fear friends that have them. Israel must act long-term and take bolder steps for peace that would lead to regional cooperation against nuclear proliferation, careless nuclear accidents and rogue extremism. But the Israeli-Palestinian conflict prevents cooperation and increases extremism. It is this conflict that is the gasoline and match.
James Adler,  Boston,  United States of America
Israel should strike immediately and take out any potential nuclear threat. Israel does not need to concern herself about world opinion, God's covenant with Israel is her guarantee of security. "Behold he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumbers nor sleep" - Psalm 121:4.
Samuel Flanagan,  Belfast,  United Kingdom
Israel must first use diplomacy and pressure Iran into abandoning the nuclear program. If that fails, a covert operation must be planned, and the lab must be destroyed, preferably by someone that works there. Of course, if that is not possible, it must be destroyed by other means. Letting Iran aquire nuclear weapons means it can make demands unheard of at the current time.
Kirill Bensonoff,  Boston,  United States of America
I certainly hope Mark Schneider never holds public office on any offical governmental level anywhere on this planet. When a country is being threatened like Israel is experiencing right now, you don't go and destroy your means of defense. Dealing with a country like Iran is going to take a lot of weapons and a lot of nerve....which the Israeli people have.
Michelle Nenni,  Newburgh,  United States of America
Israel may have no choice but to act on her own and suffer the consequences that ensue.
Paul Kane,  Tel Aviv,  Israel
When the U.S. decided to invade Iraq they made the wrong choice. Iran is a much bigger threat to the region and to the free world (e.g., its full support of terrorist activity, as seen in Argentina) than Iraq. Had the U.S. decided to face up to the much larger regional threat Israel might not be in the predicament it is in now. With the U.S. bogged down in Iraq and a growing lack of domestic support there is no way the U.S. can take on Iran at a time like this. The UN is completly impotent when it comes to dealing with such serious issues. Israel may have no choice but to act on her own and suffer the consequences that ensue.
Paul Kane,  Tel Aviv,  Israel
Mark Schneider must be incredibly naive to think that Iran would sit down and discuss a nuclear non-proliferation treaty with Israel. Does he not follow any news at all?
Raoul Schur,  Haifa,  Israel
Israel should unilaterly destroy its stockpile of nuclear weapons and other forms of weapons of mass destruction. Then, with this moral capital, it should go on the offensive and create non-proliferation treaties with all nations in the mid-east and elsewhere.
Mark Schneider,  Denver,  United States of America
Rabiello Benitto is completely wrong about just how Israel received the bomb. It was received with the help of France in the mid-fifties, and not with the help of the U.S. That special relationship that we think of today wasn't nearly as strong in those early days.

That being said, any nation has the right to defend itself and its population. Israel, even now, is not calling for the destruction of Iran. Iran, however, has as one of its tenets the destruction of the Jewish state. The zeal of radical Islam mingled with nuclear capabilities is a recipe for disaster- not just for Israel but for the whole world. A clean strike, supported globally, should be carried out immediately against these nuclear facilities but not in any way against non-military targets.
Richard Townsend,  Memphis,  United States of America
Israel must act cautiously, especially if Kerry wins the U.S. election.
Eric Galen,  Los Angeles,  United States of America
The threat posed by Iran is at least as great as that posed previously by Iraq, though unlike Iraq, Iran's nuclear facilities are decentralized and largely underground (hence, the bunker-buster bombs to be purchased). However, Israel must act cautiously, especially if Kerry wins the US election. Unlike Bush, Kerry is likely to give greater deference to the UN and other European countries, which would almost certainly condemn (at best), or act against (at worst) Israel in the event it attacks Iranian facilities. For the immediate future, Israel's best bet appears to be planning for the worst (through acquiring necessary bombs, etc.), while attempting to convince the U.S. and other countries to act against Iran immediately.
Eric Galen,  Los Angeles,  United States of America
As the United Nations begins its next session and much anti-Israel advocacy is expected from the many nations who hate her, now would be the time to fight back with the facts about Iran's nuclear program. Now is the time that Israel must appeal to other democratic nations and gain their assistance. A United Nations weapons-inspection team should be dispatched to Iran immediately and must continue to monitor this situation well into the future! Israel must build a coalition that will defend her against the hatred of the Iranian state and either dismantle or destroy Iran's nuclear capability. If other nations will not support Israel, then Israel must take decisive action against Iran's nuclear program, up to and including an attack similar to that of the 1981 destruction of Iraq's nuclear generator.
Jeremy Borouchoff,  Milwaukee, WI,  United States of America
No question at all. Israel should run a fast and clean strike against this nuclear program... and if Israel does it, I will take my time to defend the decision to my friends and family. Sad enough that it has to be explained at all.
Ronald Weller,  Goettingen,  Germany
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If Israel has got weapons of mass destruction, why not Iran? Why not North Korea? Why not anybody, for that matter? After all, Israel acquired these WMD with the help of the U.S.A. Iran is doing so with the Chinese help. If the U.S.A. and Israel don't play ball, there will never be peace. I read with dismay some of the thoughts by the people who sent their views... I can't believe it is 2004 and some of these people live in the U.S.A., supposedly the greatest democracy... Shame on you.
Rabiello Benitto,  Nottingham,  United Kingdom
Stopping Iran from aquiring nuclear weapons appears to be futile. Why should the EU appeasers upset their relations with Iran when they know that Israel will do the dirty work for them? Also, bombing Iran will only provoke retaliation in such a scale that Israel may very well be forced into dropping a nuclear bomb of its own.

Personally I believe that Israel should make it clear to the rest of the world that any nuclear attack - be it via missile or suitcase bomb - on its territory will result in Israel wiping out every single oil field and capital in the Middle East.
Shai Remeny,  Leeds,  United Kingdom
I don't understand how people can still encourage nations to destroy each other.
Khateb Asaid,  Geneva,  Switzerland
I am frankly horrified by the logic of war that too many Jews abroad continue to defend, despite the fact that they do not really know what it means to live in a region where the spectrum of destruction continues to occupy our lives for several decades. I don't understand how people can still encourage nations to destroy each other.

The question today for me: how can we get the Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction? The only way is for Israel to join the community of Nations, respect its engagements towards its neighbours and negotiate with the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Khateb Asaid,  Geneva,  Switzerland
I just wonder what would France or Germany do if, let's say, Lithuania was building their own nuclear weapons programm and declaring they wished to destroy France. Would France just sit and wait for the first bomb to explode in Paris or Berlin?
Daniel Topow,  Switzerland
Iran is the major existential threat now facing Israel. Whether Israel or the United States should attempt to demolish or delay considerably Iran's nuclear program depends on the Iranian power of retaliation at this moment. One can only expect that such power will increase in time. But the answer to this is not given to laymen but is known only by those who have true intelligence on the full range of Iranian capabilities. Even then my sense there is risk in the decision. But it should be kept in mind that delay is also a decision. In the end it is Prime Minister Sharon and President Bush who will make these decisions. Let's pray that they will be wise and right.
Shalom Freedman,  Jerusalem,  Israel
Israel should set the example for all in the world to follow by destroying their own nuclear weapons. They might even have an influence on the U.S.A., which possesses more weapons of mass destruction than any other country.
David Hiebert,  Pittsburgh,  United States of America
The mullahs (and the Muslim extremists, et. al.) need an aggressive Israel, and the Jewish extremists need the mullahs. In this, I concur with Mark Leaman. I put it to you that if there were a quick resolution to the peace plan, then with a single swoop the world may just see an end to these ugly abominations! The solution to Iran's nuclear aspirations is not to deteriorate into war but to escalate the peace!
Mohammed Saifuddin,  B.S.Begawan,  Brunei
To the two Arab supporters of Iranian nukes: The accuracy of missile guidance systems decreases as the range increases. The accuracy of the Iranian Shihab-3 missile is measured as a circle of several kilometers around the target: not very useful for military purposes, but just fine for inflicting maximum civilian casualties. To make the point more bluntly: a theoretical Iranian missile aimed at Haifa could very well land in Acre, leaving a crater where most of the city used to be. "Be careful what you wish for..."
Tom K,  Toronto,  Canada
Israel is weak at making the world understand the existential threats it has to cope with, be it Iranian-sponsored terror attacks, or Iranian nukes. The "Israel must be erased off the face of the earth" banners on the mullahs' Shihab-3 missiles have barely been displayed in the global media. If the EU or the UN stay muted, Israel must make the clearest, loudest and most efficient outcry about all this. It hasn't done so thus far.
Ovadia Nourani,  Livorno,  Italy
The smart thing to do is to finance the Iranian people to overthrow their own government.
Matin S.,  Los Angeles,  United States of America
I am Iranian-born, and witnessed the deadly war between Iran and Iraq, and how Israel saved Iran and Iranians when they destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor. Let's face it, if Saddam had a nuclear weapon during the Iran-Iraq war, he would have most certainly used it.

I am also aware that if Iran ever developed nukes, they would never use them directly against Israel, because the Iranian regime always helps others do their dirty work. It would be possible for Iran to let Hezbollah use the nuke on Israel.

Ninety-five percent of the Iranian people hate their government. The Iranian public are so fed up that they would fight alongside Israel just to get rid of this regime. I don't want to see any regime fight Iran, because Iran could re-group the largest army in Middle East - millions of soldiers like they did in the Iran-Iraq war. The smart thing to do is to finance the Iranian people to overthrow their own government. Right now they are trying, but no nation is helping them. If Israel and the U.S start arming and financing the Iranian people, this radical government will be overthrown. This world be a safer place to live with, and there won't be any bloody postwar, like the one in Iraq.
Matin S.,  Los Angeles,  United States of America
If the government of Israel does not destroy the processing and enrichment facilities or the sites where the rocket engines are manufactured, the State of Israel will cease to exist in 5 years. Those who believe that negotiations and diplomatic pressure will forestall Iran's ultimate goal - the destruction of Israel - or that Iran will not sell fissionable material or a "bomb in a suitcase" to a terrorist group to use on Israel or the U.S., should remember Mr. Chamberlain and his futile, idiotic attempt to appease the greatest murderer of Jews of all time: Mr. Adolf Hitler.
Scott Havsy,  Puyallup,  United States of America
Actually I prefer a nuclear-free Middle East to be enforced on all states. In the absence of this, why shouldn't Iran develop a nuclear weapon? It seems that this is the only way to deter attack on one's country nowadays. Regardless of what Israel does, sooner or later Iran will be a nuclear power.
Sami Sharaf,  Austin,  United States of America
The USA and the EU (if possible, including Russia) still have a few months to try to stop in a diplomatic way Iran's nuclear threat against Israel. If diplomacy doesn't succeed, there will be no other solution than a military offensive against Iran, done by the USA and the EU, not Israel. Israel should not intervene; it has to be out of military action as much as possible. Of course if Israel is attacked by any enemy states or fanatical groups it will have its right of self-defense. Military actions however, have to be coordinated together with the allies' troops, in order not to put in danger any friendly soldiers.
Claude Sternberg,  Jerusalem,  Israel
The threat of Iran usuing nukes against other nations is slim; the threat of Iran "losing" nukes that fall into terrorist's hands are much greater.
Michael Ambrose,  New York,  United States of America
What many people are refusing to acknowlege about the Iranian nuclear threat is the possiblilty of the Iranian government handing over nuclear material to terrorists, who would have a much eaiser time using it than the state of Iran would. If terrorists detonate a nuke in Los Angeles, Iran could not be directly held accountable, whereas if Iran usued a nuclear device against Israel, the government in Tehran would face not only U.S. and Israeli strikes, but an entire world united against them. Hit Iranian sites now. The threat of Iran usuing nukes against other nations is slim; the threat of Iran "losing" nukes that fall into terrorist's hands are much greater.
Michael Ambrose,  New York,  United States of America
Israel will have to take out the Iranian nuclear sites before Iran is capable of blowing the New Jersey-sized state off the Earth. The UN and the international community stand by and watch since Iran "only" wants to harm Israel. Once again, Israel will be forced to protect herself. America and the free world will stand by Israel's decision to guarantee safety for her citizens.
Mati Hoffman,  Boston,  United States of America
What Israel is facing today is a situation it has made by its own hands. Besides, many Islamic countries feel equally threatened by Israel. The solution does not lie with the destruction of Iran's nuclear facilities (God forbid) but in a complete de-nuclearisation of Middle East including my country Pakistan.

If Israel can't guarantee it, then she must be prepared to see nuclear missiles in its skies. What Israel is involved in Palestine makes every Muslim's blood boil, so if I were to become Pakistan's President, I would push the 'Launch' button myself if need be.
Jalal Umar,  Islamabad,  Pakistan
A times a controlled situation of mutual deterrence can be much preferable to setting the entire world on fire.
Andreas Rothenhofer,  Heidelberg,  Germany
I believe that the recent saber-rattling of the Iranian regime can be explained by the threat to said regime posed by the precedent of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Bush's axis-of-evil rhetoric.

I believe history should have taught us that at times a controlled cold-war situation of mutual deterrence can be much preferable to setting the entire world on fire!
Andreas Rothenhofer,  Heidelberg,  Germany
Iran has no need for nuclear weapons, and Israel should strike now before it becomes a threat. If Iran creates nuclear weapons, the Iranians would have no trouble using them against Israel in a time of war.
Leo Yabo,  Indianapolis,  United States of America
I understand that both the U.S. and the EU said they are not ready to accept Iran becoming a nuclear power. It is convenient but unfair to expect Israel to shoulder, politically, the whole responsibility of taking action. That, however, appears the more likely outcome, given that Israel's interest is more "vital" than those of the Western allies in this case.
Ottavio Lavaggi,  Bequia
Israel and the rest of the world know that Iran has only one thing in mind when testing missiles or developing nuclear bombs: the destruction of Israel. You did what you had to do back in 1981 against Iraq, and you should do the same thing this time.
Gabriel Salinas,  Concepcion,  Chile
Once not too long ago before the Ayatollahs and during the time of the Shah, Iran was Israel's good friend. Israel, the only democracy in the region and the size of Lake Michigan, needs the world's support to stop the dangerous Ayatollas from within and without. And before it is too late. Nations awake before W.W.3. wakes you.
Nat Ben Menachem,  Jerusalem,  Israel
I don't know what planet Mr. Couzin lives on, but the government of Iran puts Hitler and his assassins to shame. No one knows this better than the Iranian people, especially us students who continue to experience the brutality of this regime first hand. STOP THE MAD MULLAHS BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.
Mehran T.,  Tehran,  Iran
Instead of asking how Israel should respond to Iran's nuclear program, why don't we ask the UN why they haven't responded to Iran's nuclear program.
Michelle Nenni,  Newburgh,  United States of America
Israel must do whatever is necessary to survive. Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapons capability as long as it has the destruction of the Jewish State as its aim.
If the holocaust has taught the Jewish people anything, it has taught us not to depend on promises of European hypocrites for survival.
Warren Sapir,  Melbourne,  Australia
Iran is somewhat less crazy than Israel. Welcome Iran's achieving the bomb. Learn decency through detente. The hideous snarls on Israeli soldiers' faces will loosen. Nuclear detente almost matured America, but that was an even tougher case.
Dennis Couzin,  Chicago,  United States of America
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Iran does not burden itself with worries about what the world will say if it nukes Israel. Iran has no problem with killing who knows how many Muslims in the area together with the Jews.
Batya Dagan,  Los Angeles,  United States of America
Jerusalem should act now before it is too late.
Elizabeth Stanley,  Sheffield,  United Kingdom
Letting an Islamist, extremist state like Iran have nuclear weapons is like giving an arsonist access to a gallon of gasoline and a match. As a last resort Israel should launch a pre-emptive strike against all of Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile sites. Jerusalem should act now before it is too late.
Elizabeth Stanley,  Sheffield,  United Kingdom
I am afraid Israel will have no other choice but to strike first, with American acquaintance. I suppose the different strikes will be clean, effective and successful, based on reliable intelligence. The world, i.e. mainly the Arabs and Europeans will protest a lot; how sad they do not understand what is at stake.
Jose Bendayan,  Madrid,  Spain
To be appeasing the mullahs in Iran is by far the worst strategic option. I sincerely hope that Arik Sharon has the backbone to do what has to be done to protect the Israeli people against a nuclear threat from Teheran or any other enemy in the world.
Blue Sea,  New York ,  United States of America
Israel must prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. The way you dealt with Iraq's program was just fine.
Jane Maestro,  United States of America
Isn't it time that we acknowledge that Iran is a threat and should be viewed as such by the sane Western world?
Giles Goodman,  London,  United Kingdom
I don't see how those on this message board can have outright cheek to compare Iran to Israel. Israel has never attacked Iran. Iran founded and financed Hezbollah. Iran builds weapons such as the Shihab Missile with the specific intention of using them against Israel in accordance with the Mullah's daily speeches for the destruction of the Zionist entity.

Isn't it time that we acknowledge that Iran is a threat and should be viewed as such by the sane Western world?
Giles Goodman,  London,  United Kingdom
The world is aware of the heinous crimes commited by Israel either directly or indirectly on humanity. Iran wants to inspect Israel's nuclear weapons of mass destruction and would stop its peaceful nuclear program if Israel dismantles all its deadly weapons which is aimed at humanity. In answer to "How should Israel respond to Iran's nuclear program?" I would say that Israel should get into trade relationships with oil-rich Iran which would be good for both parties.

Israelis are not super human beings as if their lives are more important than anyone else's. Every human life is a life and should be respected.
Saif Abbas,  Tehran,  Iran
If nuclear 'programs' in the hands of the many 'safe' nations are not safe, how much less are they safe when in the hands of the extreme?

Iran's nuclear capabilities, combined with its military focus, need to be put on hold - preferably by reaching an understanding.

An increased arsenal leads away from not only world peace, but from Iran's own citizens slowly gaining more independence from its ruling power base.
Jean-Michel David,  Warranwood,  Australia
I believe this would be a wonderful time for Israel to initiate discussions for the purpose of the Middle East becoming a nuclear-free zone.
Eddie Stinson,  Aguanga,  United States of America
The world has always taken threats made against Jews with disregard. When Iran paraded their new missles, a banner on the missle read "Israel must be wiped off the map". What is one to make of that? The world was silent, the UN said nothing.

If Jews know one thing, that is no one will ever come to our aid, and no one will protect us. The destiny of the Jewish people will always be in our own hands. Therefore action must be taken to extinguish this threat. Iran is the quaterback of terror, they may not use a nuke but they sure would "hand it off" to someone that would. Israel must also pressure the US to act. Iran is every thing Iraq was not. Iran is deveoping weapons of mass destruction, Iran is a state sponsor of terror and supports terror. Iran must be stopped.
Lisa Smith,  Burnaby,  Canada
The only sane action is to have the global community compel Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
Adam Segovia,  Portland,  United States of America
If Israel thinks it can handle Iran's nuclear development like it took care of Iraq's in 1981, Israel will not only bring a regional war to its doorstep, but may drag America into it, too. Whose "bunker busters" will be used? The only sane action is to have the global community compel Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions and open up for verifiable inspections. Any premature strike will prove disasterous.
Adam Segovia,  Portland,  United States of America
May I remind the discussion group that a half megaton nuclear weapon (surface blast) will lift approximately one third cubic mile of intensely radioactive dust into the air. Depending on wind direction, on that fateful day, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, the Mediterranean fisheries and priceless monuments to three world religions will shoulder the inestimable costs, but NOT the button pushers.
Paul Fudacz,  Des Moines,  United States of America
To Mr. Walter Hutchinson,

I completely disagree with your overall view of this topic. Yes, the Muslim world would maintain that any attack on the Middle East would be an attack on all their brothers but they maintain the same thing with the Palestinians who they feel are oppressed by the Israelis. As to whether Israel would be able to withstand the military might of all the Arab nations, I ask, "What might?"

You dont need to be the defense minister to know that they could. They have won every war ever launched against them by an Arab nation. Israel has total air and sea supremacy, and intelligence gathering that is unrivaled. If the Arab world launched an attack on every country on earth I'd feel far safer in Israel than anywhere else.
Alexander Levy,  United Kingdom
There is no military response to Iran's declared intention of developing its nuclear capabilities since it's facilities are spread out and protected.

There is no economic strategy that will work because Iran is apparently willing to withstand "sanctions" since it knows that the West needs its oil and that Europe and Russia will not abide by an embargo anyway.

Therefore, the only solution is for the West to rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons and negotiate a nuclear weapons ban treaty for all countries in the Middle East, including Israel.

Israel is not deterring military action against it by possessing nuclear weapons anyway. It hasn't deterred the Palestinian Authority's terror war, it didn't deter the Yom Kippur attack or Hezbollah and won't deter Syria either. So what good are the nuclear weapons that Israel possesses? The answer is that they can be traded in a verifiable, internationally guaranteed treaty for a nuclear-free Middle East which will do more to protect Israel from nuclear attack than it's current not-so secret arsenal.
Bob Kopka,  United States of America
For Israel, it's a matter of pure survival.
Daniel Cohen,  London,  United Kingdom
It drives me mad when I hear Arabs complaining, "Oh we need nuclear weapons to counter Israel's threat!" What threat?

Can you see Israel launching a nuclear strike against Arab countries with the purpose of invading and taking over outright?

Israel has no interest in threatening it's neighbors outright. Arabs on the other hand have openly stated that they want to "blow Israel off the face of the Earth."

They know they can regroup and fight another day in one of their many Arab countries. For Israel, it's a matter of pure survival.
Daniel Cohen,  London,  United Kingdom
Iran's nuclear weapons are in no direct way a threat to the U.S. or Europe. The threat is an existential one to Israel. Understanding the mullahs in Iran, they would easily sacrifice a part of Iran or a few hundred thousand of their own people - which, like all dictatorships, they could care less about - in exchange for a devastating hit to Israel.
Gabriel G,  San Francisco,  United States of America
Israel needs to combat the ability of Iran to become a nuclear power but we must not allow ourdelves to be used by the USA to physically get involved.

The international community has to come together to stop Iran and Israel should work vigorously through diplomatic channels and back doors to persuade the USA, the EU, Britian and Russia to do what needs to be done.
Paul Sherbow,  Kiryat Yam,  Israel
Israel can live with a nuclear Iran, just as Iran can live with a nuclear Israel.
Mark Marshall,  Toronto,  Canada
Israel could destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, but that would seriously destabilize the Middle East.
Israel would do better simply to accept that Iran will get nuclear weapons. There is no reason to believe that Iran would launch a nuclear attack against Israel, because Iran's leaders know that in retaliation Israel would use its own nuclear weapons to destroy all of Iran's major cities. Israel can live with a nuclear Iran, just as Iran can live with a nuclear Israel.
Mark Marshall,  Toronto,  Canada
Even if Iran's nuclear capacity is more a sign of leadership given to other Muslim countries than a threat to Israel, even if the existence of Israel is more convenient to them than its destruction, we have to get the fact that once they will have nuclear capacity they will have it nearly forever. Iran is educating its people to hate Israel. Military parades are showing painted missiles for it's destruction. Hezbollah is an Iranian financed terrorist group. Imagine them with some nuclear capacity. They don't care to die. They don't have any value of life on earth. They think they are on a mission. They are raised for sacrifice.
Alain Katz,  Madrid,  Spain
Israel should move quickly and assassinate scientists in Iran and around the world who supply intelligence for the creation of an Iranian nuke.
Adam Roberts,  Houston,  United States of America
Israel, the United States and the civilized world cannot stand for a nuclear iran. The mullahs in iran are fanatics who will not hesitate to use the weapons or hold the world hostage by them. The world must learn from history, and not wait like it did in 1930's for the Nazi machine to grow. Diplomacy does not work with Muslim fanatics, only force, and Israel must take decisive action now!!!
D. Vinnikov,  NY,  United States of America
Israel would be well advised to accept the fact that Iran is already a nuclear power and stop threatening it. One could draw the conclusion that constant Israeli threats have encouraged Iran to continue down the path of its nuclear ambitions.
Johanes Franzen,  Stockholm,  Sweden
To Mr. Khalid Suleiman, the Muslim world already has nuclear capability. It resides in Pakistan. Did your highhanded anger at Jewish "insolence"and "arrogance" allow you to forget such a basic political fact?
Stephanie Schwartz,  Houston,  United States of America
The situation is different that in 1981. A failed attempt to destroy the dispersed Iranian program would be a disaster. A sucessful attack might also be a disaster. No country with nuclear weapons has ever been sucessfully invaded. Iran needs to know that Israel has not merely 3-5 small A-bombs but 200-400 weapons including some H-bombs, any one of which would destroy Tehran. I would simply let Iran's Mullahs know that any attack on Israel would result in a total destruction of Iran. This policy of "mutually assured destruction" worked during the cold war.

To a large extent if Israel wipes out the reactor it will be doing Europe's dirty work. I say let them do the job.
Norm Pressman,  Saint Louis,  United States of America
An Iraqi or Iranian regime with a couple of nuclear bombs couldn't threaten Israeli security (unless they want to commit national suicide by taking on a country with 200 nukes). The destabilization of the Middle East, which is what an Israeli attack on Iran would help accomplish, certainly would.
Mustafa Malik,  Cheverly, Md.,  United States of America
Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, and other Arab states may have as much or even more to fear than Israel from a nuclear Iran.
Peter Reitzes,  Brooklyn,  United States of America
It seems to me that your question should be expanded. How should all of the countries in the region respond to an Iranian nuclear threat? Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, and other Arab states may have as much or even more to fear than Israel from a nuclear Iran. Because Israel is able to defend itself, Iran may decide to focus its arsenal on less capable countries.
Peter Reitzes,  Brooklyn,  United States of America
How can Israel make a preemtive strike on Iran since Iran has scatted its nuclear facilities around its large and mountainous country? When the U.S. military was sent over 20 years ago to liberate the U.S. hostages it ended up in utter failure. I can't see Israel trying to do the same with aircraft. Only with shield missiles they will be able to protect the country.

If, heaven forbid, a nuclear instrument should be sent to Israel, who would pay? Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and parts of Egypt. I think the U.S. has an important role to play if they are in place in parts of the Middle East to avert such a thing.
Jonathan Maza,  Marseille,  France
Israel should work together with the U.S. to mobilize world opinion to force Iran to change direction. In parallel, Israel should get an American understanding that the U.S. would view an attack on Israel as an attack on its vital interest and respond in kind.
Paul Schur,  Toronto,  Canada
The question asked in this forum "Would Israel, surrounded by Arab nations, be able to withstand their combined indigation, wrath and, more significantly, their military might?" has been asked many times before, in 1948, '67 and '73 and we all know what the answer is. The fact that we have to face is that the Jewish State will be condemned for whatever action she takes just as she was condemned for destroying Iraq's nuclear reactor. Imagine what would happen if we lived in a world where Israel took decisions based on world public opinion! It would be a far more dangerous place than the already treacherous one in which we find ourselves.
Joel K.,  South Africa
Everything depends on the quality of the intelligence obtained about the Iranian nuclear program. All diplomatic moves must be implemented in order to avoid the necessity of any military move. Everything must be done to prevent Iran from reaching the threshold of nuclear capability. The failure of the Ofek-6 (spy satellite) must be repaired as soon as possible. Israel must act in a clever and collaborative way with the European Union and the U.S.A. in order to curb Iran's nuclear program. The bottom line is that everything must be done to stop Iran's nuclear program.
Marc Mordekhai Abitbol,  France
The difference between Israel and Iran is that Israel is a democracy that does not support terrorism in any shape or form and only has nuclear weapons as a deterrent against numerically superior, hostile neighbours.
I Massias,  Gibraltar,  Gibraltar
The difference between Israel and Iran is that Israel is a democracy that does not support terrorism in any shape or form and only has nuclear weapons as a deterrent against numerically superior, hostile neighbours (peace treaty or not they all want the removal of the Jewish state). Iran is not a demoracy and is clearly supporting international terrorism. What would be Iran's reasons for wanting to possess nuclear weapons?

Israel needs to make it clear to the international community and in particular to all Arab countries that if Israel is ever attacked by any country or terrorist group using 'unconventional' weapons then Israel will reply in kind to any country it feels is responsible for either carrying out the act or supporting the act in any way. Israel must also reserve its right to carry out preemptive strikes any where in the world where it feels a threat exists.

In the meantime if the international community does nothing then Israel must (as they are probably doing right now) gather intelligence and destroy Iran's nuclear capability.
I Massias,  Gibraltar,  Gibraltar
Very simply, Israel must ensure its safety from Iran's fanatical ayatollahs on both fronts - the terrorist offensive through the Syria-Lebanon-Gaza axis and the impending threat of a nuclear Iran. Israel must and will do what is necessary to make sure that Iran doesn't go critical with its nuclear capability. If it means Israel must go it alone, so be it. Let us hope this will not be necessary like in '81.
Yuri Kruman,  New York,  United States of America
Israel should exhaust all sources of diplomacy. However, Israel should not depend or completly rely on the diplomatic pressure of the international community against Iran. Iran is determined to have nuclear weapons. Israel must not allow this to happen because the situation will be the same as in India and Pakistan where Pakistani terrorists attack without any fear. Israel has deterrent capacity in the Middle East and the only reason millions of Arabs don't attack is because they are afraid of Israel's deterrent ability. Iran wants to break this deterrent that Israel posseses, therefore Israel must take all action necessary in order to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Khaim Kalontar,  Hillcrest,  United States of America
Israel is not in any position to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities ... Would Israel, surrounded by Arab nations, be able to withstand their combined indigation, wrath and, more significantly, their military might?
Walter Hutchinson,  Toronto,  Canada
Israel, in particular, is not in any position to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. The Muslim world has maintained that an attack on any of its brothers in the Middle East would be an attack on all Muslims. Would Israel, surrounded by Arab nations, be able to withstand their combined indigation, wrath and, more significantly, their military might? Even if it could, blood would be shed and in a worst case scenario, nuclear weapons could come into play with a rebound effect worldwide. Is a global catasrophe worth it? Obviously not! Therefore, I feel that we are faced with having to rely on the UN and sanctions for the time being, no matter how ineffective they may be.
Walter Hutchinson,  Toronto,  Canada
Israel should destroy Tehran's nuclear reactor. After that, however, Israel must construct a long-term plan to deal with the nuclear situation. Many decades ago Sharon realized that going nuclear would so grossly tilt the balance of power in Israel's favor that it would actually put Israel at risk in the future by "forcing" Arab nations to eventually create their own nuclear weapons. Israel is being naive and ignoring the nature of scientific progression that created their own qualitative advantage if they think that Arab nations will allow Israel to possess nuclear weapons for eternity while they themselves are non-nuclear. This is not a realistic scenario.
Paul Mann,  Chicago,  United States of America
The U.S. and Israel must stand together to prevent Islamic states from pursuing nuclear weapons, at all costs. We must not allow them to obtain nuclear capabilities. This is the most dangerous situation in my lifetime. We must do whatever it takes to get rid of the unstable nuclear threat before it is too late.
Brad Johnson,  Sacramento,  United States of America
Israel's response to Iran's nuclear development is gross hypocrisy. Israel has been a nuclear power for decades. If Israel feels threatened by Iran, then Iran surely must feel it is threatened by Israel. The only just response to this spate of threats is for the international community to demand that both Iran and Israel disarm themselves of all nuclear weapons and allow inspectors to verify that they have both done so. The same standard that the world is applying to Iran must be applied to Israel.
Yaakov Sullivan,  New York,  United States of America
To pre-emptively bomb Iran would be stupid and catastrophic ... support the overthrow of the theocracy through internal resistance.
Jeremy Block,  New York,  United States of America
To pre-emptively bomb Iran would be stupid and catastrophic. Israel the U.S., and intelligent European countries (the few that exist) should do whatever they can to support the overthrow of the theocracy through internal resistance. Even if they have to support terrorists groups in Iran, this is the best and most efficient way. Once a new government is installed, it is inevitable that they will give up the nukes.
Jeremy Block,  New York,  United States of America
A terribly difficult question. When experts say that a pre-emptive strike, as with Iraq's nuclear facilities in 1981, is not possible, little else remains for Israel than to search for other options and be prepared for the worst. In any case, a maximum defense against a nuclear attack needs be in place with intercepting missiles ready at all times, as well as underground shelters under each private and public building.

It might also help if the U.S. and Israel declare already that if ever a nuclear missile is launched against Israel, both the country from which it is launched as well as the country from which the warhead originates will be nuked in return. Iran should understand that if they want to become a player in the nuclear game and arms race, they expose themselves to this as well and will pay the price when things go wrong.
Jan Pieter Verhey,  Huizen,  The Netherlands
Hit them now and hit them hard and do not worry what the UN says. After all they never liked us anyway.
Shalom Abboudi,  Highland Park,  United States of America
Anyone comparing Israel's nuclear capability to Iran's is misleading the public. In 1967, when Israel was at an existential risk - with Syrian tanks minutes away from the capital - it did not resort to using nuclear weapons, and would not in the future. Past experience has shown Israel to be a responsible nation. Iran, on the other hand, has publicly stated its intention (on multiple occasions) to "wipe Israel off the map."

Israel, the US and any other country in the world has every right in the world to bomb Iran's nuclear reactors. They have reneged on previous promises to the IAEA and will continue to do so in the future.
Gili,  Montreal,  Canada
How should the Muslim world respond to Israelīs nuclear power?
Guille Kapow,  Madrid,  Spain
How should the Muslim world respond to Israelīs nuclear power? Anti-nuclear policies should affect all countries, otherwise itīs useless, and unfair.
Guille Kapow,  Madrid,  Spain
When it comes to nuclear threat, there is no choice but preventive measures. It doesn't matter what kind of preventive measures, if the choice is between life and death. We can't defend ourselves from nuclear attack. We must prevent it.
Sharon Zaphire,  Mexico City,  Mexico
Iran is ripe for revolution as evident by Mehran's post. Some covert operations could go a long way, and the end results would be the same as military action: a nuclear-weapons free Iran.
A. E.,  Washington,  United States of America
Way to go Iran. Go for it, and do not let anybody stop you. Iran must protect itself from invaders and terrorist governments such as Israel under any circumstances.
Rayyan Rayyan,  Dearborn ,  United States of America
The issue of Iran's nuclear capability is a major problem, and not just for Israel or the U.S., but for people everywhere. This is no time to slip into moral relativism, or to cheer on 'the home team.' The fact that Iran actively supports terrorists makes this prospect frightening. Terrorist groups are difficult for any state to control, let alone defeat, and one suspects this difficulty would increase manifold if terrorist groups were to obtain the means to intimidate. Iran's nuclear aims must be defeated, but with the U.S. army spread too thin, I think this job will fall on Israel's lap. Hats off to Israel, if it takes the initiative.
David Krstovich,  Santa Fe,  United States of America
Israel should bomb every trace of Iran's nuclear program despite the guaranteed world condemnation. World opinion won't help Israel one bit if Iran goes nuclear.
Avraham Goldberg,  New York,  United States of America
Israel should not trust Iran for an instant. If there is any hint that Iran is close to being able to develope a nuclear weapon, all actions must be taken to prevent it.

Diplomacy shouldn't be discounted, but neither should strong military action. A nuclear Iran is Israel's worst nightmare. Who knows what they would do with a nuclear bomb! And who wants to wait around to find out?

Israel should bomb every trace of Iran's nuclear program despite the guaranteed world condemnation. World opinion won't help Israel one bit if Iran goes nuclear.
Avraham Goldberg,  New York,  United States of America
No nation is willing to put herself on the line to defend Israel, therefore Israel has the sole responsibility of defending herself. The Iranians have made clear their policy favoring the destruction of Israel. The horrible fact is that Israel is better off destroying the Iranian capability now at the risk of losing thousands of its citizens than waiting for a nuclear fallout that would see losses in the millions.
Paul Sterling,  Sydney,  Australia
"If international diplomacy does not work"? Typical European complacency and weakness will ensure that it won't, and if the U.S.A. will not negate Iranian nuclear ambitions through force, then Israel will have to protect itself. If bunker buster bombs don't do the job, then Israel should carefully consider the use of atomic weapons.

Iran actively supports the destruction of the state of Israel, is technically in a state of war with Israel through its proxy army in Hezbollah, and has demonstrated that suicide bombers are one of its preferred methods of carnage. One suicidal terrorist armed with a nuclear bomb can destroy most of Israel in the blink of an eye (and ironically, will kill the same Palestinians who the Muslim world purportedly use as the excuse to annihilate Israel).
A. F.,  Charlotte,  United States of America
If it is true that Iran sanctioned the words "Wipe out the U.S.A," and "Wipe Israel off the map" on the coverings of Shihab-3 ballistic missiles, then, failing dictating Iran's rogue Ayatollahs absolute willingness for diplomacy with Israel and the U.S.A., a pre-emptive strike becomes the immediate order of the day.
Nat Ben Menachem,  Jerusalem,  Israel
The innocent Iranian people are fed up with this oppressive and criminal government.
Mehran T.,  Tehran,  Iran
GET RID OF IT before it's too late. And while you're at it get rid of the rogue and terrorist regime in Iran. The innocent Iranian people are fed up with this oppressive and criminal government.
Mehran T.,  Tehran,  Iran
Iran is a TERRORIST State. We cannot let them get the capability to destroy Israel, no matter how. Europe didn't react in time to stop Hitler's madness. I hope they have already learned their lesson.
Daniel Urman,  Buenos Aires,  Argentina
There's no place for compromise when it comes to nuclear threat.
Fabrice van Praag,  Brussels,  Belgium
Hats off to Iran's efforts to acquire a nuclear capablity.
Khalid Suleiman,  Jerusalem,  Israel
Israel is behaving very childishly by expecting the Muslim world to remain bereft of a nuclear deterent, at the mercy of Israel's 200 or 3000 nuclear weapons. Muslims must never ever depend for their security and survival on Jewish magnanimity. If it is mutal destruction... then be it. Hats off to Iran's efforts to acquire a nuclear capablity. No Muslim capital should become another Hiroshima, enough is enough of Israeli insolence and arrogance of power and American complicity.
Khalid Suleiman,  Jerusalem,  Israel
Iran should not pursue nuclear weapons. But neither should Israel. And Israel has nukes. Iran doesn't (yet).
Israel's nuclear weapons stockpile represents an immense threat to world peace, and of course, has set a grotesque example for the rest of the Middle East.
David Howard,  Ojai, California,  United States of America
Israel should act quickly and decisively to destroy Iran's nuclear program before it is too late. Iran's threat to Israel is real, and too close for comfort. Islamist extremism knows no boundaries, as the U.S. learned, albeit too late to do anything about it.
Javier Lopez-Perez,  San Juan,  Puerto Rico
The world didn't react in the time of the Holocaust. We must "wipe out"
that program, because we have the power to do it. Don't listen to naive and stupid politicians in this matter.
Hannu Kokko,  Kuopio,  Finland
The question better be, "What Iran's reaction would be to Israel's aerial attack on its nuclear program?".

Given the fact that Iran exists in Lebanon through its proxy Hezbollah and its arsenal of rockets that can reach the most important parts of Israel, Israel should carefully calculate the outcomes of its military action. Israel should not forget also that Iran is not another frail Arab state.
Abbey George,  Gaza,  Israel
To think that Iran has any motive other than the destruction of Israel is not only naive but is outright dangerous and stupid.

What the Islamic fundamentalists are preaching through Hezbollah and Hamas is to destroy Israel at any and all costs. How blind do we all have to be to their lies? Israel needs to protect herself now.
Barry Rub,  Los Angeles,  United States of America
Israel has really outdone itself in being the world's most hypocritical state. How could such a nuclear menace as Israel even dare to warn the world about Iran's attempts to possess a nuclear deterrent?

Israel introduced nuclear weapons to the region, it has a fanatic right-wing government, and all its neighbors are left with no proper shield. Nothing will stop others from seeking to acquire this ultimate defense, unless all agree to disarm of these horrible weapons, starting with Israel, and no one else. The IAEA should abandon its double standards and save the whole region of the nuclear threat.
Omar Barghouti,  Acre,  Israel
Dr. Strangelove is alive and well in many countries.
Mark Leaman,  Melbourne,  Australia
I have a friend in Iran. He is a doctor. He says his country is run by terrorists. No one expects the Mullahs to behave in a peaceful way. They are losing their grip on power as the youth of the country increasingly turn away from fundamentalism.

Hating Israel is one of the few things the Mullahs can do to maintain their support base. The sad reality is that Israel will have no choice but to use its high technology to destroy Iran's missiles and nuclear facilities. This will happen after the US election.

The very sad reality is that Israel's strike must be on a scale never seen before. This is guaranteed to cause the engagement of U.S. forces with Iran on two borders.

1.13 million Israeli's are below the poverty line as well as 20 times that number in Iran. Instead, we must use the billions of dollars that would eliminate this poverty on what will be the most expensive fireworks display of the new year.

Dr. Strangelove is alive and well in many countries.
Mark Leaman,  Melbourne,  Australia
Israel should thank Iran for this challenge. This may be the only way to force Israel into dismantling its own nuclear arsenal and free the Middle East from weapons of mass destruction.

Would Israel do that? What other choice?
Sami Aldeeb,  Lausanne,  Switzerland
Make Your Point debates
Lebanon goes to the polls
The AIPAC affair: Can the pro-Israel lobby recover?
Jonathan Pollard: Hero, traitor, or dupe?
Settlers' homes: Raze them or leave them?
John Paul II and the Jews
Fighting the pullout: What is justified?
Was Bush right on the Mideast?
Ken Livingstone: Confront him or ignore him?
Divestment: A blow to Christian-Jewish ties?
Why is Sharon so popular?
New Israel: Fiscal recovery or ruin?
Does Israel still need aliyah?
Can there be a democratic Mideast?
How Jewish the State of Israel?
Should Diaspora Jews criticize Israel?
Is Abbas the partner Israel is seeking?
'Using' the Holocaust: Politics and the Shoah
Can Sharon and Peres get Israel out of Gaza?
How far should Israel go for peace with Syria?
Right of Return: Real hope or deal-breaker?
Should Israel foster the 'new PA'?
After Arafat: A new Mideast?
Arafat's departure: Has the equation changed?
Refusal to serve: Valid protest or not?
The Gaza exit: Should a referendum decide?
Islamic terror: Who gains? Who loses?
IDF in Gaza: Vital or futile?
Iran's nuclear plans: What should Israel do?
Newsmaker of the Year
What will Israel be like 25 years from now?
Why haven't the Palestinians used non-violence?
Will spy charges harm U.S. Jewry and Israel?
Is the two-state solution still viable?
Truth or Bias: Israel in the media
Israel and world Jewry: Are ties at breaking point?
Terror's roots - oppression or radical Islam?
Bush or Kerry: Who's better on the Mideast?
The Lebanon withdrawal
Disengagement plan
The 'new anti-Semitism'
Jewish extremism: How real the threat?
The West Bank separation fence