WarSclerotic

Over the radio, the pilot:

“For all those who were murdered, we will never let it happen again. We are here. We will fight for you.”

Iran should watch this and understand. We mean it when we say:

NEVER AGAIN !

IAEA confirms Iran worked on bui… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    In the most critical and damning report of Iran’s nuclear program to date, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Tuesday that the Islamic Republic is working to develop a nuclear-weapon design and is conducting extensive research and tests only relevant for a nuclear weapon.

“The agency has serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program,” the IAEA said in the report, which included a 13-page annex with key technical descriptions of its research. “The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device.”


Israel played a key role in helping the IAEA compile the report and its intelligence agencies provided critical information over the years used in the report. Israel now hopes that the United States will use the report to push through a new regimen of sanctions against Iran including a focus on the Central Bank of Iran and the Iranian energy sector.

The report can be found here.

In the report, the IAEA reveals a list of Iranian research centers that are connected to the work on the nuclear weapons program.

The agency says that it frequently confronted Iran with information it obtained from various IAEA member states – including documents seized from computers belonging to members of a black market nuclear arms network which supplied technology to Iran. The reference is likely to the Pakistani ring led by AQ Kahn.

The report focuses on three main technical areas – the “green salt project”, a name for a covert Iranian program to enrich military-grade uranium; the development and testing of high explosives; and the re-engineering of the payload chamber of ballistic missiles to be able to accommodate a nuclear warhead.

In the report, for example, the IAEA reveals that Iran was working on “exploding bridgewire detonators” which are fast-acting detonators required to create a nuclear explosion.

“Given their possible application in a nuclear explosive device, and the fact that there are limited civilian and conventional military applications for such technology, Iran’s development of such detonators and equipment is a matter of concern,” the report said.

One member state provided the IAEA with information about a “large-scale” test Iran conducted in 2003 to initiate a high explosive charge in the form of a hemispherical shell whose dimensions are consistent with the dimensions of a potential nuclear payload that can be installed on a Shahab-3 ballistic missile.

Work on this project was assisted, according to the IAEA, by a foreign expert, apparently a reference to a Russian scientist who worked with Iran from 1996 to 2002. The scientist has been named in various media reports as Vyacheslav Danilenko.

Additional information in the report reveals that Iran has manufactured simulated nuclear explosive components using high density materials such as tungsten to determine if its theoretical design of an implosion device is correct.

These high-explosive tests are referred to as “hydrodynamic experiments” are conducted when fissile and nuclear components are replaced by surrogate materials.

The explosives chamber, the IAEA said, was constructed in a facility called Parchin in 2000.

The agency said that it obtained commercial satellite images of the facility which showed the chamber built around a large cylindrical object and that it was designed to contain the detonation of up to 70 kilograms of high explosives, which would be suitable for carrying out nuclear weapons experiments.

The IAEA also said that it obtained evidence from a member state that Iran was working to manufacture small capsules called “neutron initiators” which are placed in the center of the nuclear core and produce a burst of neutrons needed to create a fission chain reaction.

The location where the experiments were conducted was said to have been cleaned of contamination after the experiments had taken place. The IAEA said that Iran allegedly worked on validating this process through 2010.

Lastly, the IAEA said that Iran also appeared to have taken preparatory steps to conduct an underground nuclear weapons test. It said that it obtained a document in Farsi which relates directly to the logistics and safety arrangements that would be necessary for conducting a nuclear test.

http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/images/iaeairan.pdf

VIENNA –  The U.N. nuclear atomic energy agency says that Iran is suspected of conducting secret experiments whose sole purpose can only be the development of nuclear arms.

The conclusion is contained in a restricted International Atomic Energy Agency report obtained by The Associated Press Tuesday, shortly after it was circulated to the IAEA’s 35-nation board and to the U.N. Security Council.

The report says that while some of the suspected secret nuclear work by Iran can have peaceful purposes, “others are specific to nuclear weapons.”

In its latest report on Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency outlines the sum of its knowledge on the Islamic Republic’s alleged secret nuclear weapons work, including:

–Clandestine procurement of equipment and design information needed to make such arms;

–High explosives testing and detonator development to set off a nuclear charge;

–Computer modeling of a core of a nuclear warhead;

–Preparatory work for a nuclear weapons test, and

–Developing and mounting a nuclear payload onto its Shahab 3 intermediate range missile — a weapon that can reach Israel, Iran’s arch foe.

The report is the strongest sign yet that Iran seeks to build a nuclear arsenal, despite claims to the contrary.

A 2007 National Intelligence Estimate given to then-President George W. Bush indicated that Iran had abandoned its weapons-related research in 2003. However, an ongoing investigation by the Fox News Specials Unit concludes that more that 600 entities were working inside Iran to support its program, and at least 40 sites where the work is taking place are suspected to still exist across the country.

The Qom uranium enrichment construction site, hidden deep in the mountains of Iran, causes concern among many investigators. Intelligence shows that security walls have recently doubled around the site.

Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, not weapons production.

While some of the suspected secret nuclear work outlined in the annex could also be used for peaceful purposes, “others are specific to nuclear weapons,” said the confidential report obtained by The Associated Press.

Some of the information contained in the annex was new — including evidence of a large metal chamber at a military site for nuclear-related explosives testing. The bulk, however, was a compilation and expansion of alleged work already partially revealed by the agency.

But a senior diplomat familiar with the report said its significance lay in its comprehensiveness, thereby reflecting that Iran apparently had engaged in all aspects of testing that were needed to develop such a weapon. Also significant was the agency’s decision to share most of what it knows or suspect about Iran’s secret work the 35-nation IAEA board and the U.N. Security Council after being stonewalled by Tehran in its attempts to probe such allegations.

Copies of the report went to board members and the council, which has imposed four sets of U.N. sanction on Tehran for refusing to stop activities that could be used to make a nuclear weapon and refusing to cooperate with IAEA attempts to fully understand its nuclear program.

The agency said the annex was based on more than 1,000 pages of intelligence and other information forwarded by more than 10 nations and material gathered by the IAEA itself.

Ahead of the report’s release, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned of a possible Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear program.

He told Israel Radio that he did not expect any new U.N. sanctions on Tehran to persuade it to stop its nuclear defiance, adding: We continue to recommend to our friends in the world and to ourselves, not to take any option off the table.”

The “all options on the table” phrase is often used by Israeli politicians to mean a military assault, and Israeli government members have engaged in increased saber rattling recently suggesting that an attack was likely a more effective way to stop Iran’s nuclear program than continued diplomacy.

Russian President Dimitry Medvedev warned against threatening Iran with the use of force. Speaking in Berlin Tuesday, Medvedev said threats could lead to a war, “and for the Middle East this would be a catastrophe.”

China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hong Lei said Tuesday that while Beijing is firmly opposed to any use of force, “the Iranian side should also show flexibility and sincerity.”

China is Iran’s biggest trading partner but has supported previous U.N. sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Israel could mount pinpoint raids on Iran: analysts | Reuters.

JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Should the Israelis attack Iran, they would probably focus strikes on select nuclear facilities while trying to avoid killing civilians en masse or crippling the oil sector.

Past operations by Israel, such as the 1981 bombing of Iraq’s Osirak atomic reactor and a similar strike against Syria in 2007, suggest a strategy of one-off pinpoint raids, due both to military limitations and a desire to avoid wider war.

“It (Israel) has the capability to get there, and it has the capability to do serious damage to the Iranian nuclear program,” said Sam Gardiner, a retired U.S. air force colonel who has run war games for various Washington agencies and academic forums.

Israel remains publicly committed to the U.S.-led big power strategy of diplomacy and punitive sanctions to get the Iranians to curb their uranium enrichment and ensure it is for peaceful purposes only.

But the specter of unilateral Israeli strikes resurfaced with the publication on Tuesday of charges by U.N. inspectors of a possible military dimension to Iran’s nuclear project.

Israel lacks heavy long-range air force bombers, but its advanced F-15 and F-16 warplanes could hit sites in western Iran and further inland with air-to-air refueling and by using stealth technology to overfly hostile Arab nations.

Israel attacked Iraq and Syria before their alleged nuclear weapons projects had yielded fissile material that could end up as toxic debris. Similarly, analysts say, it would try to avoid an Iranian death toll that would fuel public calls for revenge.

A 2009 simulation at the Brookings Institution in Washington theorized that Israel, intent on halting or hobbling what the West suspects is Tehran’s covert quest for the means to make atomic weaponry, would launch a sneak pre-emptive attack on half-a-dozen nuclear sites in Iran.

Israel would not want to risk drawing in Iranian allies like Hezbollah, Hamas or Syria, especially with political upheaval shaking U.S.-aligned Gulf Arabs and Egypt. Israel’s armed forces are geared for brief border wars, not prolonged open conflict.

“Israel would most likely begin efforts to control escalation immediately after the strike,” said Gardiner, who posits Iranian retaliation could compel the United States — perhaps by Israeli design — to weigh in with its superior arms.

Facing recrimination from allies like the United States, Israel might argue the strike “created a terrific opportunity for the West to pressure Iran, weaken it, and possibly even undermine the regime”, said the Brookings simulation summary.

Aircraft are not the only means at Israel’s disposal.

It could also launch ballistic Jericho missiles with conventional warheads at Iran, according to a 2009 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Israel’s three German-built Dolphin submarines are believed to be capable of carrying conventional and nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. They would have to transit through Egypt’s Suez Canal — as one did in 2009 — to reach the Gulf.

Elite foot soldiers might be deployed to spot targets and possibly launch covert attacks. Far-flying drones could assist in surveillance and possibly drop bombs of their own.

Israel has also been developing “cyber warfare” capabilities and could use this together with other sabotage by Mossad spies on the ground.

BLOWBACK

Israel would be loath to hit Iranian energy assets, like oil production and shipping facilities. This could stoke a spike in oil prices, turning world opinion against Israel while alienating the Iranian dissident movement.

The same would follow a large Iranian death toll, though civilian infrastructure might not be spared.

Gardiner said the Israelis, like the U.S. air force during the Serbia campaign of 1999, might fry Iran’s electricity grids by dropping carbon fibers on its exposed power lines.

“Israel knows that an attack on Iran, no matter how much evidence to show that Iran is on the cusp of acquiring nuclear weapons that could kill large numbers of Israelis if it chooses, would cause an international outcry,” said Richard Kemp, a retired British army colonel who has studied Israeli doctrines.

“It is very much in Israel’s interest to take every possible precaution to make it as precise and effective as possible (and) do everything to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties.”

But escalation might be impossible to avoid.

Should Iran retaliate with Shehab missile launches against Tel Aviv, for example, the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would find it hard not to strike back. It would need outside assurances that the Shehab salvoes would stop — say, through a U.S. military enlistment against Iran, or a truce.

After losing the tactical edge of the initial sneak attack, Israeli forces would find it hard to keep up precision strikes.

Iran would be on alert for hostile warplanes, submarines and commandos. Iraq, Turkey or Saudi Arabia — countries which a 2006 study by the Massachusetts Institutes of Technology envisaged Israeli warplanes overflying en route to Iran — would shut down their air space.

The Israeli public would chafe at losing troops and living in bomb shelters. Defense Minister Ehud Barak, in rare remarks on such a sensitive subject, said on Tuesday he saw the home front suffering “maybe not even 500 dead”.

In such a situation, Israel might rely increasingly on “stand-off” weaponry such as the Jerichos, which Jane’s missile experts believe are accurate only to around 1,000 yards (meters). This could mean more damage to Iran’s civilian infrastructure, including the lifeblood energy sector.

(Writing by Dan Williams; Editing by Robert Woodward and Mark Heinrich)

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Special Report November 8, 2011, 8:53 PM (GMT+02:00)

F-16 warplane

The UN nuclear watchdog (IAEA) began circulating its much-awaited Iran report Tuesday night, Nov. 11 to Security Council and IAEA board members. According to the first leaks, the agency has no doubt that Iran is working on developing atomic weapons: Its clandestine computer-simulated and practical tests on nuclear detonators, uranium enrichment at a hidden underground site at Fordo and tests for adapting nuclear warheads to missiles have no explanation other than work on components for a nuclear weapon.

Israel’s initial response was to give sanctions a last chance and hold its military option in abeyance for the weeks needed to put them in place, so long as they are tough enough to disrupt Iran’s central bank and its oil industry. However, the Obama administration has already foresworn these penalties, as debkafile reported earlier Tuesday.

US President Barack Obama is backing away from crippling sanctions on Iran’s central bank bank and an embargo on its oil trade. This was decided shortly before the International Atomic Energy Agency was due to confirm Tuesday or Wednesday, Nov. 8-9 that Iran’s clandestine military nuclear program had reached the point of no-return, and after Israel intelligence experts found that Iran could build a weapon as soon as it so decided.
Four considerations persuaded the Obama administration to backtrack on new sanctions, thereby letting Tehran prevail in this round of the nuclear controversy:
1.  Because it is too late. Even the harshest sanctions would not alter the fact that Iran has arrived at a position wherbey it is capable of building a bomb or warhead any time it chooses.

2. Severe penalties against Iran’s central bank and its fuel exports would exacerbate the turmoil on international financial markets.

The Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday, Nov. 8, “Though US officials had declared they would hold ‘Iran accountable’ for a purported plot [to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington], they now have decided that a proposed move against Iran’s central bank could disrupt international oil markets and further damage the reeling American and world economies.”

Instead, say those officials, Washington will seek to persuade some of Tehran’s key trading partners, including the Persian Gulf states, South Korea and Japan, to join existing sanctions.

3. For the first time in American history, Washington has admitted its military capabilities are constrained by economic concerns.

This constraint was also reflected in the Washington Post of Tuesday: “The possibility of a US strike is considered remote, however. That is partly because there is no certainty it would successfully stop Iran and partly because of the diplomatic and political repercussions for a cash-strapped nation emerging from two wars.”
4.  Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday in a radio interview that he was not optimistic about tough sanctions because there was no international consensus to support them.

debkafile‘s intelligence sources report that Russia and China would not only cast their votes against stiff penalties but disrupt them through marketing mechanisms they have already put in place for bypassing international restrictions on Iran’s foreign banking and exports.

Those mechanisms have also been placed at the disposal of Syria.

Tehran has therefore been able to pre-empt the IAEA report, however damning it may turn out to be, and can continue to develop its nuclear objectives without fear of punishing sanctions.

The Israeli defense minister noted that while it would be preferable in matters as grave as a potential attack on Iran’s nuclear sites to work closely with the United States, Israeli is a sovereign country and its government cannot shirk responsibility for defending its security.
Israel’s existence was not at stake, Barak stressed – either from Iran’s missiles or Hizballah’s rockets. An attack would cause suffering on the home front, he said, but nowhere near the 100,000 mentioned in the speculation of the last two weeks – or even 5,000. He dismissed much of this speculation as wildly irresponsible and unfounded.

If sanctions against Iran fall by the wayside, all other options stay on the table, said the defense minister. Israeli is holding intelligence exchanges with some friends but in the last resort must make its own decisions which he promised would be made responsibly.

Prime Minster Binyamin Netanyahu no doubt intended to go through the motions of demanding tougher sanctions against Iran after the publication of the IAEA report. But that option has vanished from the Washington landscape, leaving Israel with a choice between a military strike or bowing to the Obama administration’s acceptance of a nuclear-armed Iran and learning to live with this ever-present menace.

The same stark choice confronts Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf.

Timeline: Iran’s nuclear program – JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    Nov 8  – Here is a timeline on Iran’s nuclear program in the last year:

Nov. 23, 2010 – An IAEA report says Iran told the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Nov. 22 that 28 cascades, or interlinked units of centrifuges, normally 164 in number, are now enriching uranium.

— Iran tells inspectors it has produced around 7,017 pounds (3,183 kg) of LEU since February 2007, about 840 pounds (380 kg) more than at the start of August. That amount is enough for at least two atom bombs, if enriched to 90 percent fissile purity.

Dec. 5 – Iranian nuclear energy chief Ali Akbar Salehi says Iran will use domestically produced uranium concentrates, known as yellowcake, for the first time at a key nuclear facility, cutting reliance on imports of the ingredient for nuclear fuel.

Dec. 6 – Talks begin in Geneva between Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who is leading the discussions for the six world powers.

Jan. 21, 2011 – The six powers fail to prise any concessions from Iran, such as limits on enrichment activity and transparency about it, in talks. The EU and US call the talks disappointing and saying no further meetings are planned.

Feb. 28 – Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi says he held fruitful and frank discussions with his EU counterpart, Ashton, that he hopes will lead to further talks.

April 8 – Nuclear fuel is again loaded into Iran’s Russian-built reactor at Bushehr after a series of delays to its launch.

April 9 – Iran holds annual celebration of nuclear program, announcing the production and testing of second and third generation centrifuges — the machines which enrich uranium to a purity needed to power nuclear reactors, or even up to nuclear weapons grade.

May 24 – The IAEA says it has received new information about possible military aspects to Iran’s atomic activities. Its report also shows Iran amassing more low-enriched uranium, despite increased international sanctions.

June 9 – Russia and China join Western powers in telling Iran its “consistent failure” to comply with UN resolutions “deepened concerns” about possible military dimensions to its nuclear program.

The statement was issued a day after Iran said it would triple production of higher-grade uranium and shift it to an underground bunker, protected from possible air strikes.

July 12 – Salehi says he held “very fruitful” discussions with Yukiya Amano, the IAEA director general, and they had agreed to explore ways to help resolve outstanding issues.

The IAEA gives a different picture, saying in a brief statement that Amano had “reiterated the agency’s position on the issues where Iran is not meeting its obligations”.

Aug. 3 – Iran has no intention of making an atomic bomb and its nuclear program is for purely peaceful purposes, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says in a television interview.

Aug. 22 — Iran says it is transferring centrifuges from its only enrichment plant at Natanz to a new underground, bunkered facility at Fordow with full observance of non-proliferation safeguards.

Aug. 23 – Iran allows IAEA Deputy Director General Herman Nackaerts rare access to a facility for developing advanced enrichment machines during a tour of all of the country’s main atomic sites, an Iranian envoy says.

Sept. 3 – After many years of delays, the Bushehr nuclear plant begins to provide electricity to the national grid, with a power of around 60 megawatts, state news agency IRNA reports.

Sept. 22 – Ahmadinejad, speaking at the United Nations, says Tehran will stop producing 20 percent enriched uranium if it is guaranteed fuel for a medical research reactor, seeking to revive a fuel swap deal that fell apart in 2009.

Oct. 18 – Iran’s nuclear program is struggling with low-performing centrifuges but would still be able to produce material usable in atom bombs, says a report by the Institute for Science and International Security, a US think tank.

Oct. 21 – Iran plans to soon start moving nuclear material to its underground Fordow site for the pursuit of sensitive atomic activities, diplomatic sources say.

The first batch of uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) — material which is fed into machines used to refine uranium — is to be transferred to Fordow site near the holy city of Qom in preparation for launching enrichment work there.

Nov. 8 – IAEA releases a report saying Iran has worked on developing a nuclear weapon design, and testing and other research relevant for nuclear arms, and some of the activities may still be going on.

Inside Israel’s Attack Plan on Iran’s Nukes – US News and World Report.

Israel will have to decide which targets are the biggest threat and knock them out first

November 8, 2011

General Hajizadeh says ‘if you kill any of us, we will kill dozens of you,’ while Ahmadinejad claims Tehran does not need nuclear bomb to confront US. FM Salehi: If we wanted to develop nukes we would declare so openly

Dudi Cohen, AP

Published: 11.08.11, 15:58 / Israel News

Islamic Republic escalates rhetoric ahead of IAEA report: A top commander in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard force threatened to kill “dozens” of American military commanders, should the US kill any one of theirs.

“You also should not forget that American commanders have plenty of presence and travel in the region. If you kill any of us, we will kill dozens of you,” Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, chief of the Guards’ aerospace division, was quoted by Fars agency on Tuesday as saying.

Earlier last week several American neoconservatives, including retired US Army general Jack Keane, urged the Obama administration to use covert action against Iran and target members of the Quds Force, the Guard’s special foreign actions unit.

Meanwhile, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that his country did not need a nuclear bomb to confront the US.

“If America wants to confront the Iranian nation, it will certainly regret the Iranian nation’s response,” Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by the IRNA news agency. “They are saying that Iran is seeking the atomic bomb. But they should know … we do not need a bomb … Rather we will act thoughtfully and with logic. History has shown that anyone acting against the Iranian nation regrets it.”

איראן לא זקוקה לנשק גרעיני? הכור בבושהר (צילום: AFP)

Nuclear plant in Bushehr (Photo: AFP)

Ahmadinejad also criticized the head of the UN’s nuclear agency as an American pawn, in the run-up to its expected release of evidence which purports to document Tehran’s nuclear weapons program.

In remarks broadcast on state television on Tuesday, Ahmadinejad said that International Atomic Energy Agency chief Yukiya Amano “has no power by himself and violates his organization’s internal regulations.

“He delivers the papers that American officials hand to him,” the Iranian president said.

“לא צריך פצצת אטום כדי להצר את צעדי ארה”ב”. אחמדינג’אד (צילום: AFP)

‘We do not need bomb.’ Ahmadinejad (Photo: AFP)

The report, which is expected to be issued Wednesday, will suggest that Iran made models of a nuclear warhead. Iran denies that it has a weapons program and has called the report fabricated.

Speaking in Tehran, Ahmadinejad called the US’ allegations a “big lie,” adding that Iran’s total nuclear research budget was merely USD 250 million. “The president of the United States allocated an additional 81 billion dollars to the annual budget towards upgrading (the US’) nuclear arsenal,” he claimed.

Meanwhile, Iran’s foreign minister said his country would have no problem telling the world about its plans to develop nuclear weapons if it had such plans.

Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi spoke during a visit to neighboring Armenia on Tuesday. He said if Iran wanted to develop nuclear weapons it would declare so openly, “but our reason and experience tell us that, for us, nuclear weapons would not serve as a deterrent.”

He described the IAEA report as aimed at increasing pressure on Iran.

On Monday Hossein Ebrahimi, vice chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, warned that allies of the Islamic Revolution would annihilate Israel before it is able to attack Iran.

“This is just a baseless allegation because the Zionist regime is engaged in a war over its survival in Tel Aviv today,” he said.

“We’re not alone and it is (in fact) our cries resonating in Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, Palestine, etc,” he said. “Now all these forces are allies of Iran and if the Zionist regime embarks on a foolish action against us, it will burn in the fire of the rage of Iran and its allies worldwide.”

Lebanese terror group Hezbollah is armed with tens of thousands of Iranian-made rockets. The Gaza-based terror group Islamic Jihad has also received massive aid from Iran, and some of its members have been trained by the Revolutionary Guards.

News agencies contributed to the report

via Iran’s Revolutionary Guard threatens US – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Why Obama Might Save Israel From Nuclear Iran: Jeffrey Goldberg | Full Page.

(An opinion 180 degrees different from Debka.  I’m praying Goldberg’s right. – JW)

Nov. 8 (Bloomberg) — The International Atomic Energy Agency is set to release a report today offering further proof that the Iranian regime is bent on acquiring nuclear weapons.

No intelligence is entirely dispositive, but the evidence on hand about Iran’s nuclear activities, even before the release of the latest report, is fairly persuasive, and the IAEA isn’t known to be a den of neoconservative war-plotting. It isn’t interested in giving Israel a pretext for a preemptive attack on Iran unless it has to.

The question now is what Israel — or the U.S. — will do about it.

The Israeli case for preemption is compelling, and has been for some time. The leaders of Iran are eliminationist anti-Semites; men who, for reasons of theology, view the state of the Jews as a “cancer.” They have repeatedly called for Israel’s destruction and worked to hasten that end, mainly by providing material support and training to two organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah, that specialize in the slaughter of innocent Jews. Iran’s leaders are men who deny the Holocaust while promising another.

‘Apocalyptic Cult’

An Iran with nuclear weapons may be unbearable for Israel. It would further empower Israel’s terrorist enemies, who would be able to commit atrocities under the protection of an atomic umbrella. It would mean the end of the peace process, as no Arab state in the shadow of a nuclear Iran would dare make a separate peace with Israel. And it isn’t too much to imagine that some of Iran’s more mystically minded leaders, mesmerized by visions of the apocalypse, would actually consider using a nuclear weapon on Israel — a country so small that a single detonation could cripple it permanently.

The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who once told me he believes that Iran is led by a “messianic, apocalyptic cult,” is correct to view Iran as a threat to his country’s existence.

And yet, a preemptive Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities could be a grievous mistake. For one thing, it may already be too late. The Iranians may have dispersed and hardened their nuclear program to the point that an Israeli strike would do only glancing damage. The Israeli Air Force, as good as it is, would be stretched to its limit by such an operation.

The morality of a strike, which could cause substantial Iranian casualties, would be questioned even by those sympathetic to Israel’s dilemma. Israel will have succeeded in casting Iran as a victim and itself as something of a rogue nation. The international isolation it would experience could be catastrophic in itself. A strike might also endanger Americans in the Middle East and beyond.

A bigger problem posed by an attack, from Israel’s perspective, is that it could bring intense retaliation by Iran against civilian targets. It’s not clear that Hezbollah, which maintains an enormous rocket force in Lebanon, would join an Iranian barrage of Israel, but it’s a threat that can’t be discounted. Hundreds, maybe thousands, of Israelis could die in retaliatory missile strikes and terrorist attacks. In other words, by countering a theoretical nightmare, an Iran with nuclear weapons, Israel could bring about an actual nightmare: an Iranian conventional attack.

There are other options. Sabotage by Israeli, American and British intelligence agencies has already stymied the Iranian nuclear program, and these efforts could conceivably be accelerated and intensified. That’s certainly the view of intelligence officials I’ve spoken to in Washington and Israel.

Obama’s Choices

Which brings us to the single most important player in this drama: President Barack Obama. He has said, repeatedly, that an Iran with nuclear weapons is unacceptable to the U.S. Many Israelis, and many Americans, think Obama is soft on such matters. But I believe, based on interviews inside and outside the White House, that he would consider using force — missile strikes, mainly — to stop the Iranians from crossing the nuclear threshold. Why? Four reasons:

First, Iran and the U.S. have been waging a three- decade war for domination of the Middle East. If Iran goes nuclear, it will have won this war. American power in the Middle East will have been eclipsed, and Obama will look toothless.

Second, every U.S. ally in the Middle East — Israel, the Gulf countries and Turkey, especially — fears a nuclear Iran. The president would have their complete support.

Third, the president is ideologically committed to a world without nuclear weapons. If Iran gets the bomb, it will set off an arms race in the world’s most volatile region. At the very least, Saudi Arabia and Turkey will seek nuclear weapons. It would mark a bitter defeat for Obama to have inadvertently overseen the greatest expansion of the nuclear arms club in recent history.

Finally, the president has a deep understanding of Jewish history, and is repulsed by Iranian anti-Semitism. He doesn’t want to be remembered as the president who failed to guarantee Israel’s existence.

This isn’t to say that Obama has decided to use whatever means necessary to stop Iran. (He faces opposition in the Pentagon, for one thing, though the U.S. military has much greater capabilities than Israel.) Nor is a U.S. strike something desirable, even if done in concert with Western allies. It’s far better for the Iranians to be persuaded through other means to stop their nuclear program.

But numerous Israeli officials have told me that they are much less likely to recommend a preemptive strike of their own if they were reasonably sure that Obama was willing to use force. And if Iran’s leaders feared there was a real chance of a U.S. attack, they might actually modify their behavior. I believe Obama would use force — and that he should make that perfectly clear to the Iranians.

(Jeffrey Goldberg is a Bloomberg View columnist and a national correspondent for the Atlantic. The opinions expressed are his own.)