If Iran needs to be bombed in 2012, fine! If Iran need to be bombed again in 2014, fine! and so on as it takes to a regime change. What option is better with a regime that has thousands of centrifuges spinning RIGHT NOW calling for the destruction of Israel? That sponsor Israel's enemies like Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, etc.

Striking the nuclear sites should be phase 2. Phase 1 should be a very massive assault on the heads of all the snakes in Iran. Wipe out their leadership in the first 2 hours and then hit the nuke sites with all you have. Results: Persia in the 6th century.

America will never again hesitate coming to help Israel! America and Israel share the same blood and understanding, we all fight for the same cause. Iran can say whatever they want, Israel is smarter and never shows the cards they play, they are like the puppet master moving the strings of a doll, you see action but who is behind the curtain. If Iran attacks Israel, god help us all because that would be the start of WWIII, but we will win and exterminate the filth that started this event!

Will never take action under any circumstances because they will always come up with one more rational excuse not to act. But thay do make great victims.

Pretty much no matter what happens, Iran is going to come out the winner. It especially wins if Israel is foolish enough to attack it unilaterally (and if ynet talkbackers are representative of Israelis, then they certainly are foolish enough.) No matter how this plays out, the US will begin to distance itself from Israel (and thus join the rest of the world which got fed up with Israeli immaturity a long time ago.) The next few years will set the stage. When ME nations emerge from the 'arab spring' with ever more anti-Israeli governments, the US will no longer solidly back Israel (and all because of the way Israel has acted over Iran.) That's when the fun starts!

What we had in our first years? We had much, much less technique ! - BUT we had our brave boys from the M....d !! So let them do some effective work first !

there are patterns to human behaviour which repeat themselves, however the details and circumstances in which they occur are always different. Iran does not have to be a world power in order to inflict heavy damage on Israel. All that matters is their intention to do so and their posssession of means to carry it out for Israel to react. They have plainly called for the destruction of the state and are materially assisting Israel's enemies. They are therefore also enemies of Israel. Israel clearly cannot ignore this danger and must act if there is a realistic assessment of a credible threat. However there are other ways to defang Iran than a direct strike. A collapse of its base of support in Syria and Lebanon (and Turkey) and the forging of closer relations with neighbouring states including Turkey is one way. So while I do not necessarily agree with the author's assessments of the danger, I agree with his conclusion that a reckless move by Israel could do incalculable damage to the state.

One cannot just look at the price of an item, but we compare prices in decision making. The same here. The price alluded to in this article need to be compared with the price of allowing Iran to possess nuclear weapons. Which price is the heavier and most dangerous one? The restraints of Eshkol and Shamir that Bar-Joseph cites in this article are, and have been, in fact exercised for some years: Netanyahu has held his fire; he deferred to the US in several ways; he has restrained action all this time. But clearly he cannot do so indefinitely - esp. that diplomacy with Iran has failed after TEN years.

The good professor states that the world has learned the lessons of Czechoslovakia and Auschwitz. Really? Perhaps he's never heard of the killing fields in Cambodia, Darfur, Srebinica or East Timor, where the world turned a blind eye to genocide? And his unidentified experts that support continued use of sanctions is less than convincing.

Although Bar-Joseph's opinion against attacking Iran has some merit and is worth discussion, the fact that he resorts to "facts" from the Leftist narrative weaken his argument, as pointed out by #5, #9, #18 and makes him look silly. The First Lebanon war was a military success. Sharon's idea to destroy the Syrian occupation, expel the Fatah terrorists and help an alliance of Druze, Christians and moderate Muslims rule Lebanon was potentially a good idea. This plan, that might have brought peace, failed because of three reasons that Sharon could not foresee: the extreme Left's desire to seize power, even at the price of critically damaging Israeli security, extreme Left IDF generals like Eli Geva who refused combat orders, and Assad's intelligence defeated the Mossad/Aman amateurs by turning Eli Hubeika to perform the Sabra-Shatilla massacre.

I respect Uri. However on this issue he is wrong. Silence in the name of secrecy should be maintained.

If Iran comes out the winner, everybody else will be the loser including the US. The US supports Israel because it needs Israel as a buffer against Islam and a true ally in the Middle East! Brace yourself if US ever stops that support - it truly will be when the fun starts!!

Uri makes an insane argument to let the Iranian genocidists build nuclear bombs. The idea that economic sanctions will stop Iran from building nukes is ludicrous. No nation has EVER been stopped from doing anything by sanctions. Destroy Iran's nukes NOW!

just like the weapon Assad is using these days. Maybe the Israeli Government knows MUCH more then you or I about Iran? I would hope so. There is a reason why Iran has not been turned into vitrification yet. If it was up to some of these commenters, they would have already done so and we probably wouldn't be enjoying the day reading the Ynet News. Iran might be crazy, but they aren't stupid either. In this day and age, do you really believe you can stop anyone from obtaining WMD's?????

iran's threat to destroy israel is an act of war. iran will annihilate israel if israel refuses to act NOW!!!

I think you have some valid opinions. Unfortunately, I think that Israel should have taken out Iran's nuclear program LONG before they got to this level of threat. The delay has turned what would have been a relatively simple operation, not much more involved than those against Iraq and Syria, into a major effort that has only a limited chance of succeeding. I hope not... but I fear you may have waited too long (unless you use nukes).