- The Washington Times - Monday, January 18, 2010


As The Washington Times editorial (“War with Iran nears,” Wednesday) contends, “Israel has repeatedly stated that it will not tolerate a nuclear Iran, and the Jewish state is receiving significant behind-the-scenes encouragement from Sunni Arab states wary of the possibility of Iranian regional hegemony.” The assassination of the Iranian nuclear scientist Massoud Ali-Mohammedi Tuesday is evidence that Tehran’s nuclear ambitions may signal greater conflict with Israel and the United States.

The Israeli destruction of nuclear sites in Iraq and Syria serves as a warning to the mullahs that Iran’s nuclear facilities are not off-limits, especially when the Jewish state is threatened with the prospect of an atomic bomb. If reprisal attacks occur from Iran’s “proxies” in Gaza and Lebanon, what would be the role of the United States in a conflict between Iran and Israel? Would the White House be fully committed to defend Israel in that event?

The role of diplomatic engagement has proven ineffective in dealing with the Tehran regime. Given that diplomacy with Iran has failed consistently since 1979, is it surprising that current efforts to achieve detente have been an abysmal failure?Still, the White House may not have the last word. As The Washington Times put it, “But soon the choice will be made by others, and the real question is what role the United States will play when war comes.”



Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More

Click to Hide