Charles Krauthammer: Applying Cold War deterrence plan to Iran is silly

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Joe Moe Logan, UT
    Sept. 3, 2012 9:04 p.m.

    How many launch sites does Israel have, spread out how much, and how much would it take to knock them all out? Such a small country, seems like it would be relatively easy, but I don't know.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Sept. 3, 2012 3:24 p.m.

    One assumption is that Iran's leaders are more concerned about the hereafter than they are in the present. Thst is a myth. Nothing about their behavior shows the slightest indication that they believe in a hereafter. Everything is based on their perception of their national interests. Israel is not a one bomb proposition. The Negev is pretty big. If Tel aviv was bombed, there would still be a lot of air bases or missile sites to launch retaliatory sites. MAD.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Sept. 3, 2012 8:12 a.m.

    So in typical Krauthammer fashion, he rejects peaceful efforts and advocates war. I'll give this tough talker more credibility when he has something on the line besides his mouth. His neo-con ways did not prove to be a good thing in our past misadventures in trying to control the world.

  • Joe Moe Logan, UT
    Sept. 3, 2012 12:11 a.m.

    I read Zakaria's article and found it fairly convincing, and the idea of the destruction of Jerusalem is another caveat. But why would (should?) Israel trust it's every existence to these theories or assumptions?

    Iran and many Muslims have stated as their explicit goal the extinction of Israel. There have already been a number of attempted invasions. All the sudden do we should believe the militant Muslims are lying about their threats of annhilation? One or two nukes would do the job in an instant. I don't know how we can fault Israel for believing the repeated threats, seeing the history of attacks, and recognizing the existential threat.

    Back to Jerusalem. It's fairly important to Muslims, certainly. But it's not their most holy site. And, based on what I know of radical Muslims, they'd much rather see it razed, then eventually repopulated with Muslims, than leave it peacefully in the hands of Israel. So, not a convincing argument to me. Again, why would Israel gamble their existence on such tentative theories? Would YOU?

  • freedomingood provo, Utah
    Sept. 2, 2012 5:27 p.m.

    Iran can't destroy Israel with nukes without destroying the holy sites in the same city they are fighting over.

    Mabey is the West recognized Palistine they wouldn't be so desparate for RECOGNITION.

  • UT Brit London, England
    Sept. 2, 2012 10:36 a.m.

    The thought that iran would destroy isreal is ludicrous. Jerusalem is one of the holiest sites to muslims. Give iran a nuke and you would find they would quieten down.