> On the contrary, it sends a strong "fuck around and find out" message to any country pursuing nuclear weapons.
We have yet to see how effective these attacks were in preventing Iran from getting the bomb. Early reports seem to suggest, not that effective.
I, however, am more concerned with the fact that Israel—a nuclear armed state—gets to be the arbiter of nuclear non-proliferation. The hypocrisy of these actions should not escape anyone, and it sends the message that some states are allowed to keep the bomb in defiance to international treaties. If Iran has to suffer for wrongly pursuing the bomb, why doesn’t Israel have to suffer equally, for much worse crimes than Iran?
Validating these attacks on the grounds of nuclear non-proliferation is setting up a false dichotomy. There is an available third option here, which Israel seems hellbent on disrupting. We could negotiate with Iran, and have them dismantle their nuclear weapons program (or at least, not pursuing it further). This has worked in the past, and—and I’m just an observer here—given the fact that Israel is well past the point of international sanctions for their Gaza genocide, the west has another ace up their sleeve and could even promise to sanction Israel for their nuclear weapons program in return.
Given how gray this comment already is, I'm not afraid to go against what seems to be the HN-hivemind today: Good luck with that proposal, last week Rubio himself stated there's a no-tolerance policy for anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and such behavior can be the single determining factor against one's ability to legally migrate here. This administration is blindly pro-Israel, much to its detriment - and likely its battle between dovish and hawkish foreign policy; because they're damned either way.
As soon as USSR made their nukes, there was peace.
As soon as DPRK made nukes, everyone stopped bothering them and threatening to invade
> effectively uninvadable
Yet Israel was invaded during the Yom Kippur War when it had nuclear weapons, the UK was invaded by Argentina during the Falklands War, Russia was invaded briefly by Ukraine (Kursk). And Israel arguably just demonstrated that developing a survivable nuclear deterrent probably isn't as easy as many thought. (Ukraine, to a lesser extent, also with Spiderweb.)
> Supporting Israel in preventing Iran from getting nuclear capabilities is destablizing, not the opposite.
On the contrary, it sends a strong "fuck around and find out" message to any country pursuing nuclear weapons. And if Israel is capable of this kind of decapitating strike against a country's nuclear program, imagine what the US (or China) could pull off.