Israel needs to adapt to the changing world around it. The fall of Mubarak in particular will limit Israel's ability to launch any strikes against Iran. This issue cannot be solved through bombs - the cost of war is too high and the U.S. is too broke. Not to mention, bombing would just make Iran take its nuclear program underground with new-found international sympathy...

Trita

If you used the terms "Ayatollah regime" in your articles, instead of "Iran", then the whole argument would be a lot clearer. By using the word "Iran" to describe the activities of Ayatollahs, you are confusing the issues. Do not mix Iranian people or Iran with the will of the Ayatollahs. Once you do that regularly, then the world will realise that the situation much more clearly. You will then find that you can describe the people of Iran as against the Ayatollahs etc etc.

To pretend there is no Iranian threat and to suggest that Israel only inflated it is ludicrous. Iranian leadership has made huge inroads in the Arab world by it's promises to help destroy Israel. Genocidal public statements by Ahmadinejad have been unqualified.

The reality is that Israel has been doing the bidding of the US who didn't want to get involved in a direct fight with Iran, but Israel's concerns are still real.

Iran by all accounts took her responsibility for convincing the west of her peaceful nuclear intentions very seriously.

It started with suspension of enrichment activity, and voluntary implementation of the additional protocol (snap inspections by IAEA any where without notice) from 2003 to 2005.

Iran's UN Ambassador, Javad Zarif wrote in 2006:

"Lost amid the rhetoric is this: Iran has a strong interest in enhancing the integrity and authority of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. It has been in the forefront of efforts to ensure the treaty's universality. Iran's reliance on the nonproliferation regime is based on legal commitments, sober strategic calculations and spiritual and ideological doctrine. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, has issued a decree against the development, production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/opinion/06zarif.html?_r=2&scp=3&sq=javad%20zarif&st=cse

Later, Hassan Rohani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator wrote in

"A nuclear weaponized Iran destabilizes the region, prompts a regional arms race, and wastes the scarce resources in the region. And taking account of U.S. nuclear arsenal and its policy of ensuring a strategic edge for Israel, an Iranian bomb will accord Iran no security dividends. There are also some Islamic and developmental reasons why Iran as an Islamic and developing state must not develop and use weapons of mass destruction."
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1192435,00.html?iid=perma_share

Iran must have eventually realized the accusations against her are just a pretext for a war of aggression, necessitating plan B -- build enough missiles to flatten Tel Aviv in response to being attacked.

It is this, and only this capacity to retaliate massively which has had (human rights loving) folks to postpone the dream of dropping large amounts of bombs on Iranians' heads.

Iran would be smart to assume the dream lives on.

Perceptive post but Trita Parsi fails to mention what the Security Council would not tolerate from any other UN member state : the frequent and regular threats of attacking Iran by a state that has questionable legitimacy, a history of aggression against all of its immediate neighbors and one that has blockaded the indigenous people of Palestine of Gaza in what is the longest entrapment of a major population center since the Nazis laid siege to Leningrad.

Just so my Jewish friends know: I love Israel. Yet, sometimes it looks like Israel is becoming more like Nazi Germany every day. Any rational person ought to see a military solution with Iran is suicide by fear of death. You know, like the flawed reason that Germany attacked first to begin WWI.

More to the point: there is a revolutionary clean cheap and abundant energy generation technology. Israel would be FAR better off disseminating this technology (i.e. the Rossi E-Cat) to the world in terms of combating Iran, than they would by trying to wipe out Iran's nuclear infrastructure (and more importantly their nuclear program).

Image LENR replacing burning fossil fuel as a source of energy. Less than 1 cent per kilowatt hour electricity, very cheap desalination of water, greenhouses growing abundant amount of food, and very cheap transportation cost.

I guess when all you own is a hammer (Israel's military might), everything problem looks like a nail. Israel, your problems won't be solved by military means.

May god have mercy on there souls if they wish to invade Iran That would be David vs Goliath but I guess Israel have won Wars like that before.

How about this:
Israel is really an extension of the US, and like any other state, its #1 priority is to raid the Treasury, our Treasury, for as much as possible. Wank the Yank! Given its a military expansionist border state, and uniquely has 80% of the Congress making up most of its in-state raiding parties, then let it carry on with the Iran scare ! If it did bomb Iran, this looting of the Treasury will well be much less. Parsi is right when he says Israel is bluffing.

Ditto the bluff about Al Qaeda. It numbered less than 1000 in 01, in 12/09 Obama said its was under 100, in 5/10 Panetta said 50, all in Pakistan. Now we are told that with OBL out of the way we can leave Afghanistan. So we spent $1 trillion to get one man? Yes, but its a bluff for our military industrial security complex to incease its plundering of the Treasury . A very incompetent albeit expensive complex as we have learnt to our cost since 01.. But good for Israel and China!

It's odd that Parsi concludes this rationalization for inaction with a non-solution, one that has been tried but continues to fail throughout the Middle East:

"enable Washington to address the broader set of challenges presented by Iran that have been neglected -- which include Iran's regional policies, its human rights abuses, and the repression of the Iranian people's struggle for democracy."

This kind of solution to the Iranian threat (with or without nukes) is so trite and empty of value in light of the entire M.E. situation, that it effectively undermines the entire essay leading up to it. "Human rights abuses," "struggle for democracy"? The only add-on cliche that was missing was "Don't worry - be happy."

OH MY GAWD!!!! How did we get someone talking about this issue other than another apparatchiki from AIPAC? It is a refeashing and long overdue article to counter the constant, "The Sky is Falling, We must attack now" propaganda from the Likkudniks. There are similarities in the thinking of the Bush and Netanyahu crowd. Even when their top intelligence people told them there was no danger, the political side continued to hype the imminent, but non-existent danger. In the early summer of 2008, the Israelis sent all their heavy hitters to ask Bush for an assist in an attack against Iran. He would later state that he was "angry" that he had to turn them down because all the US intelligence said there was no danger. Cheney had attempted to stop that National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) from being distributed. What should bother us is that the political side of the Obama government is still playing to the tune by Israel. Many Jewish members of Congress also support the radical ideas of Bibi. Zionists have infiltrated critical positions at the State Department and effectively sabotage any meaningful rapprochment with Iran. What is almost laughable is that the Israelis are starting to whine that Rand Paul is a danger to Israel because he would stop all the free money. That's how paranoid they are; that a man who has no chance of winning the Presidency is seen as a real threat.

Simple bare (numerical) facts pound devastating blow to Israeli deceptive propaganda. One wonders why the Likudniks are so naively arrogant.....also so short-sighted. Can’t they see apartheid and deceptive ways can’t stand the torrents of history?

Today is Tunis and Egypt.....day after tomorrow is the whole world including USA.

Here are some eye-opening facts.

1- Eric A Brill in his 40 page report shows “...not a single credible evidence of fraud is found in June 2009 Iranian presidential election”

refer to http://www.iran2009presidentialelection.blogspot.com/

2- Nima Shirazi lists, by date and source, almost 3 decades of lies about “Iran is building an atomic bomb”.

http://www.wideasleepinamerica.com/2010/12/phantom-menace-fantasies-falsehoods-and.html

...and here is something which might surprise us all ...hopefully soon:

No one talks about why Iran didn’t use Chemical weapons in its 8 year war with Iraq. Refer to Humanist’s comment in this post.

http://www.wideasleepinamerica.com/2011/05/iran-nuclear-scare-timeline-update.html

Israel also uses Iran's alleged nuclear weapon's ambitions to taint Hamas and Hezbollah as existential threats.
Clearly, neither Iran, nor Hezbollah, nor Hamas poses an existential threat to Israel. Israel is only looking for justifications for its expansionist policies.

This brief essay demonstrates the foolishness that passes for intellectualism in the diplomatic / foreign policy world and ignores military reality.

First, the author never identifies verifies any Israeli leader seriously intending to bomb Iran. The effort would require more aircraft flying over to many targets for the size of the Israeli air force absent their use of nuclear weapons. The United States, if it wished, is more than capable of taking out the sites and destroying the Iranian Air Force and Navy along the way--a necessary step, but not difficult. And, yes a nation with our weapons systems can destroy and permanently seal Iranian sites and entomb / kill their workers and "no," the crowd killing Iranian military forces are not capable of an effective response.

However, that begs the issue of why do it as it is unnecessary. Let the Iranians live in their own culturally 10th Century world.
First, lets deal with the reality of dealing with the radical Islamic government ruling Iran. That would simply be impossible. The divide between secular, modern democracies and that regime are impossible to bridge. When a nation's leaders of a barbaric 10th Century mentality are characterized by their need to impose a backward and abusive way of life on the world, you isolate them.

If the secular intellectuals ever replace fanatical Muslim leadership in that part of the world and their youth are brought up to accept others and to change their societal norms, then, and only then can that society be dealt with and accepted into the universe of modern nations. That would require those nations in the middle east removing religion from having a role in government in all respects. Modernity requires a separation of church and state in all respects other than for ceremonial purposes. One cannot deal with a society that executes co-coreligionists for leaving their faith or prohibits and punishes missionaries from other faiths--for starters.

Second, the western military, including that of Israel, is more than capable of dealing with Iran--even when it becomes nuclear armed, and they are definitely on that path believing they will recreate the Persian Empire of old, forgetting that it was repeatedly defeated by lesser numbers of Greeks. As k the ghosts of Darius and Xeres how it worked out for them.

Next, neither Egypt nor Turkey were ever Israel's partners. It was a temporary association of convenience between them or perhaps between members of their military.

Turkey is now led by an Islamic government in forming that believes it can reimpose the Ottoman Empire on the world. As the United States will eventually discover, absent a change in Turkish government, they are not a reliable western style ally. Turkey keeps its (useless) participation in NATO, etc because it needs American arms. How ironic were they to break that tie and need to rely on Russia as a supplier of armament. Wouldn't that make for a strategic dilemma on Turkey's part. The United States needs to pull out of its bases in Turkey, move them elsewhere if determined necessary and then deal appropriately with Turkey.
Egypt may or may not be on the way to diplomatic self destruction. That future however will rest in the hands of the Egyptian military which has no interest in fighting another war with Israel, unlike the stance of others in its government, who are anti-Israel, but of course foreign ministry and academics never fight in wars. They just cause them to occur.

Iran will find it s nuclear weapons to be of no strategic value.

First, they will be informed by the US that their country is targeted by a large number of submarine based nuclear tipped missiles and they will be obliterated should they ever attempt to use one of their atomic weapons outside their own country.

Presuming, that as some Iranian religious leaders have allegedly stated they are willing to sacrifice themselves to remove the Jewish State as there are many more Muslims, when Iran obtains its nuclear weapons, Israel simply needs to inform the Muslim nations of the world that they are all in range of their Jericho missile system and that Israel's response will be total.
If Israel is attacked by nuclear weapon carrying missiles, the Jewish and Muslim worlds will simultaneously cease to exist along with the rest of Earth's population as the nuclear cloud sweeps over it.

Third, anti-missile systems available on US Navy Ships and at other locations are capable of nullifying any Iranian offensive capability. Further, the rapidly advancing Laser weapons systems of the US and Israel will soon totally nullify the offensive capability of Iran's missile systems along with that of their client regimes such as Hezbollah. They do not realize it, but the strategic balance is rapidly changing to the defense, if one is a technically advanced country. Also, are you familiar with the term Iron Dome.

Israel is a democratic country that needs no "strategic" alliances with unstable Muslim countries whose governments and people still live in the 10th century, on a good day. Their economy is booming, the nation has a decent standard of living, they produce more engineers and scientists per capita then anywhere in their world, their military capabilities are ever increasing and they should continue pursuing their current goals. Muslims are fleeing from many of their countries, but you co not see them evacuating Israel. Israel Arabs, with all their problems, live in the freest, most democratic, upwardly mobile society versus any of their counterparts in all-Arab countries. Arabs are Judges on the Israeli Supreme Court, serve as Generals and other officer level in the military, are professors, business people, etc in that society.

Israel should simply designate those area on the west bank which are going to be part of the new Palestinian State, advise any Jewish settlers in those areas they will not have protection from the Israeli Army after a certain date and need to leave or they are their own, advise the Palestinians Israel will remove any Hamas elected government and remove any missile / rocket installations by force and wish them adieu. Free elections are the objective, but the world cannot stand by and allow another country to elect a Nazi government as was tolerated in Germany in 1933. All free elections are not free if they result in a Nazi style government.
Inform the Arab / Muslims that just as the British theft of part of Ireland was not and is not legitimized by their renaming it Northern Ireland, neither was the temporary British theft by proxy of several Jerusalem neighborhoods by the British led and equipped Arab Legion in 1948 (when they drove Jews out of that area) legitimized by their attempt to rename that part of the city East Jerusalem. Of course, people can peacefully visit their Mosques (arrogantly) built on top of the Jewish Temple--but only in reasonable numbers. Then let the Palestinians know if they establish a government and culture that is of a western style 21rst Century mentality they can attempt to reestablish the economic ties between the areas from which so many Palestinians once economically benefited.

The west should encourage the Arab and Iranian populations to revolt and actively, surreptitiously of course, aid them with small arms and ammunition, if necessary as in Syria. Add to that broadcasts to Syria's Sunni soldiers to turn their weapons on the Alawite leaders and provide encouragement and whatever benefit possible to the Iranian students, et. al, and aid the Kurdish rebel groups with anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles in Turkey and Iran, etc. Lets help further the so-called Arab spring.

Maybe the good people of the Muslim world will wake up out their deep cultural sleep and once again, as in their past, reestablish a humanity based, academically advanced society that is not anti-Jewish or anti-Christian or anti-Western and provide women with the equal tights of human beings. Time will tell.

This statement: "One of the few Israeli leaders who has consistently cautioned against Israel's alarmist line on Iran is current Defense Minister Ehud Barak" is interesting considering Barak has been the foremost proponent of the view that "all options remain on the table" for dealing with Iran's nuclear program. On the other hand, Barak has also come out strongly against panic in Israel over Iran's capabilities. This is not a contradiction; he wants to promote the view of Israel as a strong nation that isn't afraid of Iran (and he doesn't want to see mass emigration because of fear). Ergo, he has to assure Israelis that Iran's leaders are rational (and he probably does believe that) and Israel can handle whatever capability Iran develops, but he also strongly believes Iran is Israel's #1 strategic threat. A number of Israeli articles about Dagan's comments in January to reporters assumed that he was trying to block not only Netanyahu's, but Barak's, intentions to attack Iran, and when Ashkenazi retired as Chief of General Staff, Ha'aretz writers claimed he and Dagan were supporters of the Cabinet bloc that opposed those who wanted a strike on Iran - Netanyahu and Barak. Of course, who knows??