May 16, 2009
Steve Collins

As readers know, there has been widespread speculation on when or if the Israelis will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weaponry. A very detailed study has been released by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. on this very issue. It is a lengthy report–a summary of which has been posted at the Israeli website for the Haaretz newspaper (see link below). I recommend it to readers for its in-depth discussion of how the Israelis could launch (A) an airstrike using much of its air force escorted by electronic warfare planes and refueled by in-flight tankers or (B) launching salvos of Jericho ballistic missiles at the Iranians. Obviously, the Israelis could choose a combination of the above two options. This analysis also projects the percentage of Israeli aircraft that might be lost in such an attack and what the regional repercussions could be.

The report is well worth your reading, but I think it has one major flaw. Perhaps the full report makes mention of a third Israeli option, but I did not see it discussed in the link below. The Israelis have at least three ultra-modern, German-made submarines with state-of-the art diesel propulsion systems. It is widely-assumed that the Israelis have modified these subs to fire long-range cruise missiles. If this has been done, the Israelis might be able to position one or more of these submarines in the Persian Gulf and have them open a strike against Iran by firing salvos of cruise missiles at key Iranian defensive sites (such as the ultra-modern Russian air defense systems). The vital question for this option is whether the Israelis have submarine-launched cruise missiles with sufficient range to reach the intended Iranian targets. If they do, and the Israelis knock out the Russian-made air-defense systems with sub-launched cruise missiles, an Israeli air strike would be made much, much easier. Another factor to consider is whether the vaunted Israeli Mossad could arrange some catastrophic “accidents” at some of the Iranian facilities. A coordinated series of such “accidents” would give the Israelis plausible deniability and would also set back the Iranian nuclear program for an extended period of time.

If the Israelis do launch an attack vs. Iran, an Iranian counter-strike with long-range missiles vs. Israeli cities is quite likely as are attacks by Hezbollah, Hamas and possible Syria against the Israeli homeland. If this happens, a large regional war is possible and it would be hard for the USA to not get involved on the Israeli side. A large percentage of American voters would be infuriated at their national leaders if the US did nothing to help the Israelis. If the Israelis attack Iran, Iran may launch salvos of cruise missiles at US navy ships in the Persian Gulf as well as at western oil tankers and at Saudi oil facilities. It could get very ugly. Such a war would drive Iran deeply into the embrace of the Russian bear and Chinese dragon as Iran would want vengeance against the USA and the Israelis. If Russia or China have supplied Iran with the Russian-made sizzler cruise missiles which are supersonic, we may find out if the US Navy has deployed a defensive capability against them (the Russians are likely itching to test them vs. US ships). If the sizzler cruise missiles are fired by Iran and they sink US warships, it will create an earthquake under the Obama administration and the US Pentagon. The American people will demand answers re: who was to blame if such a disaster occurs and they will not be forgiving in the 2010 elections toward incumbent politicians who were “weak on defense.”

Of course, Jesus Christ warned in Matthew 24:6 that the latter-days would include “wars and rumors of wars.” This means that not all rumored wars will actually occur. The Israeli-Iranian war may not occur at all, but given the Iranian leader’s declaration that he intends to “wipe Israel off the map,” it is hard to see how the Israelis can wait much longer to act.