Is an Israeli strike on Iran imminent?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

This alone should be cause enough not to regard a solo Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities as 'imminent'. 

Agreed.

[Sbane]

Fox News: Most Israelis Oppose Strike against Iran

Israel's tough talk of military action against Iran's nuclear program has unleashed a strong backlash at home, with a growing number of voices urging the government not to attack without the support of the United States.

...

"I'm very afraid. I want peace, not war. I absolutely don't want Israel to strike Iran," said Pnina Grinbaum, a 55-year-old government clerk in Jerusalem.
Opinion polls have shown that while Israelis agree a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a grave threat, most think Israel should not act alone but coordinate any military option with Washington .
Israel's figurehead president, Shimon Peres, appeared to take a swipe at Barak and Netanyahu on Thursday when he told a popular news program that Israel must trust President Barack Obama's pledges to prevent Iran from getting a bomb.
"It is clear to us now that we cannot do this alone," Peres said. "It is clear to us that we need to work together with America."

"I'm very nervous about the Iranian threat and it's kind of creepy that I'm getting a gas mask right now," 25-year-old Cheryl Lieberman, a recent immigrant from New York, said Thursday as she stood in line for a mask at a Jerusalem mall.
A new poll issued Thursday said 61 percent of Israelis believe Iran should not be attacked without U.S. consent. The Dahaf Institute poll of 516 people had a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points. Other surveys have shown similar reluctance to have Israel act alone.

This alone should be cause enough not to regard a solo Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities as 'imminent'. 

Unless Obama is giving the Israelis the green flag on the down low....

[MaxQue]

Fox News: Most Israelis Oppose Strike against Iran

Israel's tough talk of military action against Iran's nuclear program has unleashed a strong backlash at home, with a growing number of voices urging the government not to attack without the support of the United States.

...

"I'm very afraid. I want peace, not war. I absolutely don't want Israel to strike Iran," said Pnina Grinbaum, a 55-year-old government clerk in Jerusalem.
Opinion polls have shown that while Israelis agree a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a grave threat, most think Israel should not act alone but coordinate any military option with Washington .
Israel's figurehead president, Shimon Peres, appeared to take a swipe at Barak and Netanyahu on Thursday when he told a popular news program that Israel must trust President Barack Obama's pledges to prevent Iran from getting a bomb.
"It is clear to us now that we cannot do this alone," Peres said. "It is clear to us that we need to work together with America."

"I'm very nervous about the Iranian threat and it's kind of creepy that I'm getting a gas mask right now," 25-year-old Cheryl Lieberman, a recent immigrant from New York, said Thursday as she stood in line for a mask at a Jerusalem mall.
A new poll issued Thursday said 61 percent of Israelis believe Iran should not be attacked without U.S. consent. The Dahaf Institute poll of 516 people had a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points. Other surveys have shown similar reluctance to have Israel act alone.

This alone should be cause enough not to regard a solo Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities as 'imminent'. 

Unless Obama is giving the Israelis the green flag on the down low....

I doubt it is in his interest to do so before the election.

[Sbane]

Fox News: Most Israelis Oppose Strike against Iran

Israel's tough talk of military action against Iran's nuclear program has unleashed a strong backlash at home, with a growing number of voices urging the government not to attack without the support of the United States.

...

"I'm very afraid. I want peace, not war. I absolutely don't want Israel to strike Iran," said Pnina Grinbaum, a 55-year-old government clerk in Jerusalem.
Opinion polls have shown that while Israelis agree a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a grave threat, most think Israel should not act alone but coordinate any military option with Washington .
Israel's figurehead president, Shimon Peres, appeared to take a swipe at Barak and Netanyahu on Thursday when he told a popular news program that Israel must trust President Barack Obama's pledges to prevent Iran from getting a bomb.
"It is clear to us now that we cannot do this alone," Peres said. "It is clear to us that we need to work together with America."

"I'm very nervous about the Iranian threat and it's kind of creepy that I'm getting a gas mask right now," 25-year-old Cheryl Lieberman, a recent immigrant from New York, said Thursday as she stood in line for a mask at a Jerusalem mall.
A new poll issued Thursday said 61 percent of Israelis believe Iran should not be attacked without U.S. consent. The Dahaf Institute poll of 516 people had a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points. Other surveys have shown similar reluctance to have Israel act alone.

This alone should be cause enough not to regard a solo Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities as 'imminent'. 

Unless Obama is giving the Israelis the green flag on the down low....

I doubt it is in his interest to do so before the election.

Why do you think that? There is nothing better than jingoistic fervor to get an incumbent president elected. And if you think that the fiasco in Iraq has changed how Americans think about war, think again. The media has decided it won't cover the war in Afghanistan so most people have probably forgotten that is still going on. And also consider that most Americans aren't affected by war since they have poor people to go fight for them (of course they have to pay for the wars but the ensuing budget deficit is blamed on the poor as well). And since Obama isn't really running on much, a war right now would be great for him.

[dead0man]

And also consider that most Americans aren't affected by war since they have poor people to go fight for them

This is one persistent myth.

[patrick1]

And also consider that most Americans aren't affected by war since they have poor people to go fight for them

This is one persistent myth.

Yep, at least it was only half of the myth though. 

[Sbane]

And also consider that most Americans aren't affected by war since they have poor people to go fight for them

This is one persistent myth.

Cite?

[dead0man]

And also consider that most Americans aren't affected by war since they have poor people to go fight for them

This is one persistent myth.

Cite?

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Sbane]

Very interesting, I guess I'm wrong about the poor part. But it doesn't look like the 100k+ crowd is very interested is as interested in military service as those in the middle. Probably even more the case on the coasts.

[dead0man]

Indeed, the children of rich lefties tend to be pansies

[Sbane]

Or they know which wars are worth fighting.

[Sbane]

In any case, it's stil only a small portion of the population that gets affected by war, even if they are representative of the country. Congress should be mandated to raise taxes whenever they declare war. That would end a lot of these adventures.

[dead0man]

Agreed.  Congress should raise taxes every time* they do something where they are spending more than they take in.  That would end a lot of the stupidity in DC.


*with the occasional exception for extreme circumstances...and I mean once a century extreme situations...like WWII or the Civil War

[Sbane]

Well, countercyclical spending is good imho, but that would imply running surpluses in the good years.

[dead0man]

That would be fine too...much better than way we're doing it now anyway.

[Beet]

WASHINGTON — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel inserted himself into the most contentious foreign policy issue of the American presidential campaign on Tuesday, criticizing the Obama administration for refusing to set clear “red lines” on Iran’s nuclear progress that would prompt the United States to undertake a military strike. As a result, he said, the administration had no “moral right” to restrain Israel from taking military action of its own.

Mr. Netanyahu’s unusually harsh public comments about Israel’s most important ally, which closely track what he has reportedly said in vivid terms to American officials visiting Jerusalem, laid bare the tension between him and President Obama over how to handle Iran. They also suggested that Mr. Netanyahu is willing to use the pressure of the presidential election to try to force Mr. Obama to commit to attack Iran under certain conditions.

In demanding that Mr. Obama effectively issue an ultimatum to Iran, Mr. Netanyahu appeared to be making maximum use of his political leverage at a time when Mr. Obama’s Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, has sought to make an issue of what he says is the administration’s lack of support for Israel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/united-states-and-israel-engage-in-public-spat-over-iran-policy.html

As unfortunate as it seems, Israel does have leverage over Obama on this; an Israeli strike could force an international crisis just before the election. This is a really tricky situation. At the one hand, an attack on Iran is clearly a bad idea, when US intelligence still does not think Iran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons. On the other hand, Israel is a strong ally and has certain ability to force the U.S.'s hand.

[patrick1]

The arrogance, gall and well chutzpah of Bibi really pisses me off. 

[dead0man]

It's still imminent?...how long can something be imminent?