What is truly depressing is the absence of critical analysis in this country of Israel's warmongering. No-one asks the obvious question: how is Iran a threat to Israel? In the unlikely event that Iran attacked Israel the Israelis would retaliate. As the world's fourth or fifth largest nuclear power they have the means to wipe Iran off the map, to borrow the much misquoted phrase attributed to Iran's Ahmadinijad. Of course to acknowledge Israel's retaliatory capacity is to acknowledge its nuclear status and that is clearly a forbidden topic among the Australian commentariat.
Seymour Hersh has an interesting discussion with Amy Goodman on yesterday's Democracy Now program: www.democracynow.org. He exposes the bluff and bluster for what it is. The terrifying thing is that the Israeli's are mad enough (as their foreign policy of the past 60 years testifies) to do the unthinkable.
The Gillard government and their echo chamber on the Liberal benches would no doubt come up with a rationalisation.

Short answer, no.
It remains to be seen whether the U.S would even back them if they did, there's a widespread view (not just among the Israeli right either) that Israel has been sold out, that when the next war starts they will be left to their fate.
The Israelis never, I mean NEVER telegraph their punches, they just strike when it suits them and then deny any operation took place, even if they did hit the Iranian nuclear facilities it'd be made to look like an accident, like STUXNET for example.
Israel simply could not survive an all out war with Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt, according to a survey I read a few years ago 1/4 of Israelis said that they'd leave the country if Iran attacked them. They would lose militarily and the civilians would mostly move to the U.S, so Ahmedinijad's prediction would come true, that Israel would no longer be found on any maps.

Jay writes

'so Ahmedinijad's prediction would come true, that Israel would no longer be found on any maps. '

history shows that many have tried to wipe out Israel. You need to be blind not to see that despite being outnumbered many times the God they are in covenant with has last laugh. Seems like many refuse to read the end of the book.

It's interesting to speculate on a role reversal to see just how heavily our Foreign Affairs are weighted toward Israel and against Iran.
Imagine for just one moment that the STUXNET virus had been developed in Iran and deployed against Israel. Can't you hear the howls of indignation, the call to arms?
And yet when Israel developed it and deployed it against Iran, we hear nothing!
Now why is that?

That's not true, when Israel has fought it's always been with overpowering numerical, intelligence and technological advantages.
In the beginning of the 1948 war the Arab armies had about 23,000 combat troops to Israel's 38,000, at the war's height the Israelis held a nearly two to one advantage.
I'd recommend you read Eli Cohn's, "Our Man In Damascus" for an understanding of the role intelligence gathering played in the Six Day War, he was embedded in the Syrian government and fed every detail of the Arab plans to Mossad, forewarned is forearmed, as they say.

This is not 1948 or 1967, recent events have shown that the IDF is not as formidable as it seems, it can flatten a city from the air but it can't hold it's ground in a stand up fight:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HJ12Ak01.html

Even without carrying out such threats, just making threats against Iran can stimulate instability in an already unstable region.
However, are we subjected to a one-dimensional picture of the Middle East, with an overexposed emphasis on Israel at the expense of other conflicts within the same region, as the following article explains?
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/11/21/religious-intolerance-the-real-middle-east/

Nonsense. Israel on its own has no military capability of hitting Iran's nuclear program, which is spread over too many sites and too deep underground.

Israel could however, and should, participate in a coalition, of NATO and others, if/when an operation against Iran's weapons is decided. Iran does not threaten only Israel, but the entire world, primarily Europe, so there is not reason why Israel should attempt to take the whole consequences of war on its own.

James asked: "how is Iran a threat to Israel?"
- well, Iran keeps declaring that it will destroy Israel and it keeps arming Israel's deadly enemies, especially Hezbullah in Lebanon.

The article cynically compares the plight of Palestinians with the threat to Israel's existence: the Palestinians may not have self-determination - that's bad enough, but their life is not under threat, while Iran strives to kill every Israeli man, woman and child.

@ yuyutsu. You really need to distinguish between Israeli propaganda and historical reality. You will have to go far back in history to find Iran being an aggressor in the sense of invading any of its neighbours. It is rather the victim, notably with the Iran/Iraq war that went on for 8 years with over a million Iranian casualties. Iraq was the invader, armed and financed by the Americans.
Look at Israel's record. It invaded and occupied Lebanon for two decades. It still occupies Lebanese territory, as well as Syrian territory, both of which it refuses to relinquish contrary to UN resolutions and a ruling of the International Court.
Hizbollah is a legitimate political party and part of the governing coalition in Lebanon. It arose in response to oppression of the Shi'ite population, and the Israeli invasion and occupation.
To discuss Israel's defiance of international law over Palestine would take a tome in itself.
There is no evidence that Iran has nuclear weapons or is even developing them as several reputable commentators have noted: see for example Seymour Hersh's latest piece in the New Yorker.
It is disappointing that you try to perpetuate the tired disinformation that Iran threatened to wipe Israel off the map. What was actually said, which you can find out if you bother to actually try, is that the Zionist regime would disappear from the pages of history. That is a very different argument.
I reiterate my original point. Why would Iran attack Israel, the world's 4th or 5th largest nuclear power, knowing that such an attack would invite massive retaliation and destruction? The Iranians are not a stupid people.
What is going on is a massive propaganda effort to soften people up in the same way we were prepped for the invasion of Iraq. One of the many tragedies is that Australia is being sucked into another war on behalf of the mad Zionist regime in Isreal (and I use the word 'mad' advisedly) and their neo-con allies in the US. We deserve better.

I have a question for you, James:

Were Israel to totally repent today, withdraw from all occupied land, observe the international laws and bodies, and change its zionist government to a... well lets say something like Australia: Will, in your view, the Arabs, Palestinians and Iran allow it to survive? Will they allow the citizens of Israel to live and be free, say in a manner like we are here in Australia?

Now I will answer your question:

"Why would Iran attack Israel, the world's 4th or 5th largest nuclear power, knowing that such an attack would invite massive retaliation and destruction? The Iranians are not a stupid people."

- Because the Iranian leader belongs to a particular fanatic Shiite sect which believes that their Mahadi, the "hidden Imam" is about to appear very soon, bringing the dead believers back to life, so even if they die, and especially if they die as martyrs, they will soon rise back in all glory and honour.

What's Iran true reason to attack Israel? because they will never forgive Israel for being the Shah's best ally, over 30 years ago.

Yuyutsu,
I will answer your first question. It is very difficult to predict the outcome of hypothetical situations, particularly given the poisoning of the waters over the past 63 years. A big influence on my thinking is a former colleague at the University of Bergen in the 1970s. He asid there would never be peace in Israel/Palestine as long as a Zionist regime occupied Palestinian soil. We know know how the state of Israel came about, and it was through a betrayal of the Palestinian people that continues to this day. Notwithstanding that history I am persuaded that a multi-ethnic state is possible, which is not to say that it is likely to happen.

I am afraid that the rest of your letter does not advance the argument. I mean this in the kindest possible way: you need to read some serious history. Your image of Iran bears no resemblance to reality.

Yuyutsu,

The Shah was installed by the U.S. after the CIA colluded to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran.

With that in mind, it's not surprising that the Shah was seen as an ally by Israel.

So given your answer, James, that "It is very difficult to predict the outcome of hypothetical situations, particularly given the poisoning of the waters over the past 63 years.", what (if any) would you do differently if you were an Israeli and your life, and the lives of your family, depended on that outcome?

Regarding Iran, have you anything to say about their treatment of other religions and of women? I was once helping Iranian refugees who were sentenced to death for "forsaking Islam" because customs found unIslamic religious books in their suitcase when they re-entered Iran. They managed to escape while on bail, cross the border with fake passports, and are now in Australia.

Dear Poirot,

I don't know or care about the Americans, but it is a well-known fact that the Shah and Israel were best of friends and carried out many joint military exercises and extensive trade. The question is, whether today, all Israelis, including those who were not even born at the Shah's time or were just children then, deserve the death-penalty as a result. Any takes?

Yuyutsu,

"I don't know or care about the Americans...."

"Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. From 1976 - 2004, Israel was the largest annual recipient of U.S, foreign assistance, having been supplanted by Iraq. Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly 3 $billion in grants annually to Israel....Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance...."

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/134987.pdf

If Israel attacks Iran,prepare for WW3.

James, what utter nonsense about Iran's threat to "wipe Israel off the map". The threat has been made on more than one occasion and by different Iranian government figures. There is no mistranslation. There is no misunderstanding as to the reality of these threats. The Jews, of all people, have the historical experience of what happens when a powerful leader threatens their extinction.

So what, Poirot?

The topic is Israel, not America. Iran hates Israel because it was best friends with the Shah - they see red when they hear that name and couldn't care less how those close ties came about.

If you are saying that one of the sources of income for Israel is American support, well another is growing bananas.

But since you mentioned those Americans, note that they don't do it because they like Israel - they just want to subsidize their own defense industry: Israel is not allowed to do anything else with those 3-billions except purchase arms from American companies (usually of a dodgy quality). The Americans also use their money to control Israel and prevent it from doing things they don't like, such as selling arms to China. There was also a stage when they used it against the Israeli settlements, deducting the cost of building settlements from their grant. I wonder why they stopped!

America does not care about Israel. Whatever they do is to forward their own interests and America is controlled by fundamentalist Christians who just need to use the Israelis as cannon-fodder in order to fulfill the prophecies in the book of Revelation and bring Jesus back to earth.

Israel develops most of its weapons on her own, so it is not even clear whether on the balance it in fact benefits from the American grants. Israel would probably be better off having closer military ties with France instead, as it did in its first decades - and was more successful in its wars then.

Yuyutsu,

"America does not care about Israel..."

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

America and Israel are conjoined twins when it comes to the U.S. exercising power of veto over resolutions concerning Israel by the UN Security Council.

Much of Israel's high-tech industry (which accounts for around 60 percent of her exports) is in security technology, much of which has evolved in response to "the war on terror" and has been developed in cooperation with the U.S.

That's what, Yuyutsu.

Bempec,
Why is it that critics of Iran are so fond of quoting what I understand to be a mistranslation (usually from Israeli sources) of what Iranian leaders are alleged to have said (see Juan Cole's many comments on this point) but completely ignore the lunatic and verified ravings of Israeli ministers about ethnically purging the Palestinians from what they see as their God-given right to the land of the Palestinians? Lieberman is but one example and he is their foreign minister. The territorial ambitions of the Zionists do not stop with the theft of Palestinian land as political and religious Israeli leaders have claimed parts of Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon at various times in pursuit of the goal of a 'greater Israel'.
The Israelis and the Americans constitute the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East and it is way past time that we focused on what those two nations actually do rather than catering to their claims about what Iran might do.
Although there is no evidence the Iranians have or are developing nuclear weapons if I was in their position that is what I would in fact do. It is the only way to prevent their being attacked by the Israelis and/or Americans whom, you may have noticed, only attack those unable to properly defend themselves.

Yuyutsu,

Here's a recent example of how "America does not care about Israel."

In the wake of UNESCO granting Palestinians full membership, the U.S. promptly cut its funding to the organisation.

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/31/the-irony-of-america-cutting-unesco-funds/

James,I am not considering Israeli translations, but comments from Reza Aslan (of Aslan Media, which is an emigre Iranian think tank). This represents to me a balanced approach, sometimes sympathetic to issues dealing the Iranian regime and sometimes opposing it.
You sound a bit hysterical about "Zionists". You know, that there are normal people also living in Israel. For sure there are many religious and nationalist extremists, just as they exist in all countries in Middle East. At the moment there is a terrible danger emanating from an Israeli threat to Iran, particularly if the PM feels that he is projecting wide held fears from his constituency. There does seem to be a need for another approach with this problem, and it will not help to impose sanctions on Iran or to whitewash the perceived genocidal threats emanating from Iran.

You are still off-topic, Poirot.

I can address your points, but that would take us further away from the current discussion: "Is Israel preparing an assault against Iran?".

My answer is, No. Israel has no such capability. If it had, it would have used it long ago.

At the moment, 41% of Israelis (including 25% of Arab Israelis) favour an attack, 39% are against (54% among Arab Israelis), and 20% are undecided, but that ratio is only because they know that their military capacity is insufficient, and the current Israeli leaders, despite being more militant than the average Israeli, know it better than the citizens. Israeli citizens are facing extinction and are practically helpless about it (and so are the Palestinians, who would not remain alive either when the bombs fall). 11% of Israelis said that they will consider leaving Israel once Iran gains nuclear capabilities, but only a fraction of Israelis would have somewhere else to go - mainly the young and able. Would you like to accept the rest as refugees here in Australia?

Iran knows that once it destroys Israel it will be destroyed too, but their leaders don't care because they believe that their Mahadi will come back and raise them from the dead. However, the rest of the world should care, because dumping 400 nuclear war-heads on Iran in a second-strike, with Israel having nothing more to lose, will mean that this planet will be handed over to spiders and cockroaches. Therefore the world should help Israel, and itself, to remove Iran's nuclear threats before there will be no place left for humans on this planet.

As for your unrelated (false) claim that "America and Israel are conjoined twins", I suggest that you start a new topic. That would save us both from wasting our 4-posts/day limit on an unrelated issue.

Bempec,
I use the terminology of 'Zionists' to distinguish them from the Jewish people. The former are only a fraction of the latter, but it is they and their allies (mainly in the US) who are driving the policies of the Israeli state. That is not 'hysteria', it is demonstrable fact.

Oh really, James! And do you use a similar or equivalent terminology when discussing other ethno-religious entities and nationalities?

Yuyutsu,

"...but their leaders don't care because they believe their Mahadi will come back and raise them from the dead."

Nice to know you've got it all worked out down to the spiders and cockroaches.

You're right about one thing. It's a shame to waste 4 posts a day here.

Bempec,
Yes, where it is appropriate. For example one cannot discuss 'Muslims' or 'Christians' as a composite whole. But really, you are simply avoiding the point of my original postings, so this conversation is now terminated.