In 2008 the NSA released a CIA document showing that the organisation knew, at least by 1974, that Israel already had a stockpile of nuclear weapons. This would certainly be in keeping with the contention that the Zionist state had started to produce four to twelve nuclear weapons a year after 1968, which, interestingly, was a decision that can be at least partly traced to the then Minister of Defence, Moshe Dayan’s, belief, that Israel could not depend on the U.S. to defend it. Not only do we have an oxymoronic “Jewish Democracy” but we also have an oxymornic “public secret” of a Zionist state that now has up to 400 nuclear warheads.
However, despite Israel’s nuclear arsenal, not much has in fact changed and while the Zionists are very good at starting wars and pummelling those who are unable to defend themselves and while they might even be able to defend themselves from an outside attack, they are not capable of pursuing their own wars of aggression without outside help and most certainly not to an, in their eyes, successful conclusion. We should listen to Karim Sadjadpour, an associate at the ‘Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’, when he says “Israel can commence a war with Iran, but it may well take US involvement to conclude it”. Why should we listen?
Well, with an Israeli attack looking increasingly likely and, with Tehran moving many of its nuclear installations underground, it looking likely before the summer, we have a scenario whereby a “secret” nuclear power, Israel, will try to halt another country, Iran, from possibly becoming a nuclear power. Quite absurd, of course, but it becomes all the more absurd when we are left to understand that it will be left to the U.S. and, by implication, the West, to achieve Israel’s war aims. Not only are we expected to accept the crimes of the Zionist state and that state’s own “secret” nuclear arsenal, but we are also expected to function as its proxy when it comes to its criminal wars or at least to suffer because of those wars.
Of course, it is not quite as simple as that; firstly, the states that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council also would, and increasingly so, like to see this war, providing, of course, that victory is guaranteed, and it can be argued that access to Iran’s oil fields is in itself enough of an incentive for the United States.
However, oil cannot be overtly stated as a reason and without the Zionist state there will be no credible pretex. After all, after Israel attacks Iran, it is so much easier to suggest that Israel’s existence had been threatened and that they had to defend themselves and that we are now going to have to defend them. Or is it actually possible to envisage a situation where the hypocrites actually tell us that we are going to war for oil and, in collusion with a handful of Sunni despots to, secure Zionist and Western hegemony throughout the region?