Israel Strike on Iran Nukes Will Not Begin WWIII

One of the best weapons that the pro-Iran and anti-War crowd has at its disposal are its hysterical assertions that an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities will end all life as we know it.

Their typical tactics are to describe such a strike as a “war” and to warn of all sorts of terrible consequences from the fearsome Iranian military which has yet to defeat the Syrian rebels. The economy will collapse, cats and dogs will begin living in sin and all life as we know it will end.

Last of all, failed former UK Tory Party leader Michael Howard asserts: “The only thing worse than the prospect of an Iran with nuclear weapons would be the consequences of using force to stop them”.

I don’t know Iran could do more damage with nuclear weapons than without nuclear weapons… but then I’m not a failed former Tory leader so I wouldn’t be privy to that sort of thing.

At the UK’s Commentator, Peter C. Glover and Michael J. Economides offer a breath of fresh sanity on the subject.

The fact is that Shia Iran is an isolated and ailing economy with no friends other than Syria in the predominantly Sunni Middle East region. We need to bear in mind that, historically, there is no love lost between Shia and Sunni Islam. We need only look at the murderous conflict between the two in Iraq.

In response to an attack against Iran’s enrichment facilities, young hotheads would certainly take to the streets to burn Israeli and US flags and effigies to call for jihad. Their leaders, from Riyadh to Cairo to Amman would, however, quietly be breathing a sigh of relief that someone had finally ended Iranian nuclear regional ambitions that could well see a nuclear-armed Iran targeting them, not just Israel.

Moreover, Russia may have helped build Iran’s nuclear facility at Bushehr but, as we reported in Has Russia Sold Out Iran for a Stake in Israeli Gas?, for all its public bluster, Moscow appears already to have sold its partners down the Moskva. In short, in the event of a strike on its nuclear facilities, Iran would stand alone.

Equally, as we have shown elsewhere, fears of an attack creating an oil scarcity, should Iran’s global contribution be interrupted, are entirely groundless. While any interruption in Iran’s energy exports and the effect of a regional conflict would temporarily spike world oil prices, sanctions have already effected a significant reduction in Iranian energy exports.

Not to mention that Israel already bombed Iran’s reactor in Syria with no meaningful consequences. And Iran trying to block the Strait of Hormuz would be a pointless gesture leading to the destruction of its navy.

Nuclear weapons are something to fear. Fear itself is not something to fear.

  • joe get

    I recall being told day after day, and night after night on the news, that Gulf Wars 1&2 would both lead to the destruction of earth. I was told that the Iraqi military was one of the best equiped, and most fearsome on the planet. Consequently, hundreds of thousands of allied soldiers would die, and we’d probably need conscription.

    I note with interest, as the author does, that the iranian military industrial complex can’t even beat a few men in Syria wearing flip-flops, carrying AK47s.

    ‘Nuff said…

  • BUTSeriously

    Iran is another Baghdad Bob. Fat thumb savages obsessed with Jewish nuclear tech they should boycott – Islamists have much to fear going nuclear.

  • sandy

    As a fomer level A commando who enjoyed approx 83 % of assigned kills against satanic muslim monsters – they are not human and will do the terrible things to you, that they do to their families …….