THE FOLKS WHO URGE ISRAEL NOT TO PREEMPTIVELY ATTACK IRAN ARE IRRATIONAL

Those who oppose an Israeli preemptive attack on Iran - which by definition must be done BEFORE Iran gets a nuclear bomb - most often argue that the attack won't permanently end Iran's program and that it will perhaps lead to out-of-control retaliations and repercussions.

This is irrational.

Any retaliation by Iran and it's stooges NOW is far better than Iran getting a nuke or nukes for themselves and their stooges WHICH WOULD GIVE THEM EVEN GREATER ABILITY TO BLACKMAIL THE FREE WORLD THAN THEY ALREADY HAVE.

IOW: The fear of retaliation - which is the primary motivator for the doves and appeasers - should not dissuade Israel but actually motivate Israel to act as quickly as is feasible since a conventional and terror-based retaliation would be less likely to inflict horrifying casualties than the casualties caused by a NUCLEAR Iran and its nuclear-emboldened stooges.

People who argue that a preemptive attack wouldn't be worth the likely casualties from a conventional retaliation are irrational for disregarding the most likely alternative should no attack occur: A NUCLEAR ARMED IRAN.

THE LAST 8 YEARS HAVE PROVEN THAT NOTHING SHORT OF A KINETIC ACTION CAN ASSURE IRAN DOESN'T GET A NUKE.

That kinetic action must come when least expected.

So, I think Israel should announce that they believe the sanctions are working and the crisis has been avoided.

And then - without telling Obama or anyone else - bomb the crap out of all of Iran's nuclear and military sites from the air and sea and with special forces already inside Iran who are acting alongside brave Persians who long to be free.