Why Wouldn't Iran Seek a Nuclear Weapon?
Matthew Hoh, a senior fellow with the Center for International Policy, appeared on Judge Andrew Napolitano's podcast
Israel uses its threat of nuclear weapons to prevent countries from standing up to its aggression in the Middle East, so why wouldn’t other countries — like Iran — not pursue a nuclear bomb?
Matthew Hoh, a senior fellow with the Center for International Policy and a member of the Eisenhower Media Network, asked the question during an interview on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s “Judging Freedom.”
Hoh noted that Israel is a nuclear power and said the country’s government proved to be “genocidal maniacs.”
“So the idea of going tit-for-tat with genocidal maniacs with nuclear weapons is something that gives every nation pause…that is a real deterrent. Do you want to get to the point where the Israelis decide that they are justified in using a nuclear weapon? Not just for military means but for political means.”
He noted that if Israel used a nuclear weapon against Iran, the move would probably be embraced by Washington and Congress would “probably pass a resolution celebrating it.”
IRAN WILL WIPE OUT ISRAELI REGIME IF ATTACKED AGAIN: RAISI
“Why wouldn't you, judge….if you and I were in leadership roles… national security roles in any of those countries – after seeing what Israel has done and, recognizing that is Israel's main deterrent and it's deterring you from acting to protect the Palestinian people, let alone protect your own self-interest… Why would you not then pursue nuclear weapons?”
Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told DW that Iran is "weeks rather than months" away from having enough enriched uranium to develop a nuclear bomb
Mark Levin, the pro-Israel Fox News host, said in October that Israel may consider going nuclear during an interview if it finds itself on the losing end of a multi-front war with Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.
Levin asked his colleagues what Israel should do since it would be unable to win a conventional war against these militaries. He repeated Ben Shapiro’s comment that Hezbollah has 150,000 missiles pointed at Israel. Shapiro, who is also Jewish, has been on a war footing calling for Israel to smash Hamas at nearly all costs.
Mike Evans, a former informal Evangelical adviser to President Donald Trump on Israel and founder of Friends of Zion, penned an op-ed calling on the U.S. to carry out preemptive strikes on Iran before it obtains a nuclear weapon — or Israel may have “to do the unthinkable and authorize the Samson Option.”
Evans’s column was titled “America Needs to Bomb Iran,” and was published in The Jerusalem Post. His argument sounds like it could have been written by Sens. Tom Cotton or Lindsey Graham, who have been begging for war with Iran.
He imagined Iran with a nuclear bomb and compared it to Adolph Hitler obtaining a nuclear bomb during WWII.
“If the US continues to appease Iran with what they call a proportional response, Israel will be forced into an apocalyptic dilemma. How do you stop Iran from wiping Israel off the map with a nuclear bomb? It could be that Israel will be forced to do the unthinkable and authorize the Samson Option against Iran as a preemptive strike on Iran to save the State of Israel, in a decision similar to President Harry Truman's move to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, on August 6, 1945, and three days later on Nagasaki, to help end World War II.”
TRENDPOST: West Point’s Modern War Institute wrote that Israel, which has never publicly acknowledged having nuclear weapons, is also ambiguous on how/when it would deploy them.
There has been new talk about Israel using the so-called “Samson Option.”
Haaretz called the “Samson Option” the idea that Israel “can deter its enemies because of the threat that it would use alleged atomic weapons if it viewed itself as facing certain, imminent destruction – is unquestionably necessary for Israel’s security.”
Thus, Israel can destroy the world with it.
But Iran is not allowed a nuclear weapon. It can only be a target.
Last year, the UN General Assembly voted last week on a resolution—introduced by Egypt—demanding that Israel destroy its nuclear weapons arsenal, even though Tel Aviv never officially confirmed that it has the weapons.
The resolution was opposed by the U.S., Micronesia, Canada, and Palau, but sponsored by nations that signed on to the Abraham Accords, including the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Jordan, and Bahrain.
The resolution called on Israel to accede to the Treaty without further delay and, in the meantime, not to “develop, produce, test, or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, to renounce possession of nuclear weapons and to place all its unsafe guarded nuclear facilities under the full scope of Agency safeguards as an important confidence-building measure among all States of the region and as a step toward enhancing peace and security.”
Readers of this publication know that Israel does not have to play by the same rules as other countries in the region because of U.S. support. The resolution noted that Israel is the only country in the Middle East that has not signed on to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The countries that opposed the measure, led by the U.S., said they are concerned about the “risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.”
The UNGA voted 152-5 (24 abstentions) to call on Israel to get rid of its nuclear weapons. Germany, France, and the U.K. abstained from voting. BRICs like Russia, South Africa, Brazil, and China, all voted in favor of the resolution. So did Ukraine, which sparked some online backlash after Israelis took to social media noting how Kyiv has demanded aid from Israel “while at the same time voting against it at the UN.”