Soob

From a linked article on John Robbs blog regarding Pat Langs take on "Boogey Men:"

Iran and the international jihadi movement are existential threats to Israel. They are not existential threats to the the USA. Fight over that one. Just think about what it would take to kill the USA. It would take a lot, a hell of a lot. Think about potential jihadi or Iranian capabilities. Think about ranges, throw weights. Think about "the unthinkable." Undertand that the death of a city will not kill the United States. We are Israel's ally. We are prepared to go to war for Israel. I do not question that as policy, but if we go to war with Iran at root it will be because of the Israelis reasonable fear them as an existential threat.

From a post I put forth last week:

The immediate concern is not Iranian warheads or terrorist suitcase bombs. These concerns make for very effective hypothetical debate, frenetic punditry and might even translate into some of the more spectacular cable news segway graphics but they are not even remotely paramount to the current Persian nuke crisis.

Along with the all too recent psychological "defeat" at the hands of Hezbollah and in consideration of the very real likelihood of a Hamas coup in the Palestinian territory the addition of a possible Iranian nuclear threat might well serve a flashpoint in which the Israelis react (much in the same fashion of this past summer) in a rash, kneejerk measure: Military intervention in Iran.

Certainly we differ in opinion (especially in light of what leads up to the above quote but that's a seperate issue) in that Mr. Lang addresses a US incursion against Iran at the behest of Israel where as I envision an Israeli preemptive measure despite American attempts to mitigate. That we're both thinking outside the popular "Irans a direct national threat" box and indicating Israel as the true root (albeit from decidedly different directions) of concern is satisfying.

And yes, I'm tooting my own horn. And no I don't feel in the least bit bad for it :-P