Stephen Elsberry


Stephen Elsberry discusses his article “There Will Be No War with Iran. At Least Not a Hot One;” the mitigating factors of war, including the fragile world economy and Israel’s inability to go it alone; Israel’s faltering “periphery doctrine,” that requires friendly relations with regional non-Arab countries (Turkey, Iran) to counterbalance the Saudi sphere of influence; how Iranian regime change risks starting a “Shia Spring” that could take hold in Bahrain and eastern Saudi Arabia; and why Israeli-sponsored terrorism in Iran isn’t intended to halt their nuclear program, but to provoke a counterattack useful for drawing in the US.

MP3 here. (22:16)

Stephen Elsberry writes for the Yahoo! Contributor Network.

15 thoughts on “Stephen Elsberry”

  1. Even if this whole thing is a "bluff" (which, in a certain sense it is–as the bombs have not already fallen in Iran)…how does it change anything? Would Bibi prefer Iran's voluntary cessation of uranium enrichment? I think that's a given. Would Bibi prefer the incumbent Iranian regime to voluntarily give up power and for the subsequent regime to be "pro-Israeli" (whatever such an accolade would require from a Nation in Bibi's mind)–I'm guessing Bibi would. Would Bibi also like the most attractive Iranian woman, in Bibi's mind, to also travel to Israel and give him free foot massages during, and all the way through, this "transition" phase? I'm guessing Bibi himself wouldn't protest. Would Bibi prefer to receive all of these 'concessions' from Iran without making decisions which involve risk–for both Israel and himself politically–such as authorizing military force? I would guess so. I don't think Bibi is rabid or otherwise completely insane. Will all, much less any, of these things actually happen? I seriously doubt it. In fact, I am willing to put money down and bet they will not (and can figure out 'legal' ways [i.e. Intrade]) if anyone is interested.

    So what happens when Bibi–the "genius" comparable only to Aristotle, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, Adam Smith, etc., with the extra ability to foresee future events–turns out to be "wrong" (assuming the decision to bomb Iran has not already been made in his mind, and he can get his way)? Accepting Bibi is just a blowhard "coward" at heart and in truth (which he may or may not be), is he more "afraid"–at this point–of the potential "consequences" of bombing Iran, or of looking like, and being remembered as, a complete ass if the "bluff" is "called"?

  2. I have a feeling, from my past reading about the history of Israelis – that if this despicably evil Netanyahu was really seriously thinking about attacking Iran – and thereby subjecting a huge number of other jews in Israel to the Iranian missile retaliation, that the hardline Israelis would probably arrange for Bibi to join Yitzhak Rabin in sort of a 'reunion' for jews who were insufficiently concerned with the survival of the jewish people.

    Hence, Netanyahu is bluffing and the hardliners are in on it, because Bibi would likely want to cover his own backside.

  3. Spiritual powers — Are Bush and Obama lying to us?

    Why is it whenever the West discusses the possibility of Iran getting the A-bomb, like in this interview, never is Muslim convictions considered of any importance? For both Bush and Obama claim to pray to heaven and to kill in the name of heaven. While on the other hand, Iran and Venezuela claim that the Bush-Obama Administration are disciples of the devil and their A-bomb invention the work of the devil.

    For whether there is, or is not, a spiritual world, when the leaders of nations engaged in war claim that spiritual powers are on their side, should not the subject be given at least some passing mention?

  4. I just read that they have not take away the sanctions on Iraq. What needs to be done to get the Iraq oil back to the market. This fact pretty much yells the fact that it is all about money. The Iran provide oil and they want us to pay $4.00 a gallon.

  5. Wake UP and smill Pu$h MOssad huntincc ZoO.فما بني على باطل فهو باطل مهما طال الزمن

  6. To the tune of Why can't the farmers & the cowboys just be friends (Oklahoma), substitute Israelis & Iranians.

  7. We are all prisoners to a government which could bloody care less whether any of us lives or dies. There is no "asylum" or "national" interest, there is only the "transnational elite" interest. If the elites want war, they will have it. What anyone else thinks may be in "their" interest is totally irrelvant. So standby……………………..

  8. Just to clarify–when I said that there would be a military response to Iran withdrawing from the NPT and kicking out the IAEA inspectors I should have added that it would be the U.S. doing the responding in that case.

    Also when Scott refers to Robert Baer observing that all these covert ops, sabotage, and assassination of nuclear scientists are designed to induce Iran into doing something stupid there is indeed a neocon plan out there–a Brookings report entitled "Which Path to Persia?"–aiming to do just that. To their chagrin, however, Iran is not falling for the bait and the report acknowledges this, saying "It would not be inevitable that Iran would lash out violently in response to an American air campaign." The more Iran suffers these provocations and attacks for no legitimate reason (i.e. everyone knows they have no nuclear weapons program) without retaliating the better they look in the eyes of the world, forcing the global consensus to collapse on the issue and having the neocon strategy backfire.

    1. What would happen if Ahmadinejad announced that Iran will suspend uranium enrichment if Israel signs the NPT and allows unfettered IAEA inspections of Israel's nuclear facilities like Dimona ? Refer to YouTube video : Israel's Illegal Dimona Nuclear Weaapons Factory in 3D

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.