Tuesday, October 17th | 27 Tishri 5778

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
November 15, 2013 10:17 am

Solo Israeli Strike on Iran Would Succeed, Nearly 70 Percent of Israelis Say in Poll

avatar by JNS.org

Email a copy of "Solo Israeli Strike on Iran Would Succeed, Nearly 70 Percent of Israelis Say in Poll" to a friend

IAF F-16 Aircraft. Photo: wiki commons.

JNS.orgA new Israel Hayom-New Wave Research poll found that 52.4 percent of Israeli Jews are in favor of an independent strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, and 68.8 percent believe a solo Israeli military strike on Iran would be successful.

Asked whether Israel is right to oppose the Iran sanctions relief deal brewing between Iran and the West, 65.5 percent said Israel should continue to oppose the deal, while 16.2 percent said that Israel should support an agreement with Iran.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Lef

    Rabbi Kahane was right. Jews in general and Israel in particular must never entrust their survival to anyone else. We have to do the job ourselves and put our trust in Hashem.

    When engaging in war, we must use all our power to prevail against a mortal enemy. This includes the use of any and al weapons at disposal.

    The whole world is on notice. You cannot do more than that to avoid war. Nuclear Iran is definitely an intolerable existential threat.

    Shema Israel : Do the job and rely on Hashem for the rest.

  • Daniel F Katz

    It’s very simple.

    Either kill the jihadist leadership and their supporters or be prepared to be killed by them.

    There are no second chances.

  • nat schmelzer

    Israel should preemptively strike Iran with atomic weapons. The only thing the world understands is strength. Obliterating Iran would send the message that no longer can Jews be threatened with destruction with impunity.

  • Aleksander

    Now is the time. Would be a Israel by the time of the Holocaust, there where not six milion jews slafted

  • Alison Weston

    Blow Iran to smithereens, the sooner the better – it’s high time the West stopped pussy-footing around. The muslims are not interested in peace anywhere – their religion is evil and they don’t hesitate to inflict pain and suffering, death too, on anyone whom they perceive does not believe in Allah. There is no such thing as a Palestinian instead they are a bunch of nomadic arabs – was it not Arafat who coined the word Palestinian? Leave Israel and the Jews alone.

  • Uzi lowenthal

    I am generally supportive of bibi -I did not vote for him by the way.anyway I would be most interested in knowing where the averabpge Israeli like myself is equipped with the pertinent knowledge and ability to correctly judge what the outcome of an Israeli attack on Iran would be.more important,if the average Israeli supportive of an attack by us on Iran is willing to accept the fact that a massive rocket attack may leave many of us dead injured and homeless,and still remain united ……and consider the fact that our mission may fail…then go ahead! By the way …it is not certain that the USA will intervene or send a sky train of aid to help Israel after the attack.of course my knowledge is zero,and I am an ignoramus like the average citizen…..but do try to think a bit.i do not trust the Iranians by the way….not a bit.

  • It would be a cake walk. Remember the Azerbajanis are letting Israel use air fields directly north of Eretz Persia. Iranistan soon to be Israelistan!!!!

    • Mark_

      We should never gloat about a possible war or talk about ruling over other people by acts of war. Mutually assured destruction will have to be the policy of Israel if Iran manages to get the bomb. That is a possibility and we Jews need to face it. If Israel decides to strike now, it risks a total break with the U.S. Instead Israel should continue to insist on tighter sanctions and more and more inspection of Iran’s nuclear program. Iran deserves that treatment because it is a country led by Mullahs who advocate Israel’s destruction and bless statements by secular leaders working for them, threatening to wipe Israel off the map. If Israel were to attack Iran now I believe it would be inadvisable but if it is done it must be done with surgical precision with as few civilian casualties as possible, and a call to the Iranian people to overthrow the Islamic Republic of Iran and an offer of friendship and cooperation with a more friendly Iranian regime if one should emerge as a result of a revolution against the Mullahs and the bigots who support them.

  • Mark_

    I don’t think it’s that simple to destroy the Iran’s capability to make nuclear weapons. They may have materials deep underground and there may be no way of knowing exactly where all the components of their nuclear program are located. It is also true that the knowledge to create nuclear weapons is there in the minds of Iranian scientists. A nuclear armed Iran would be a terrible situation. However, using bombs to stop Iran could fail and end any hope of stopping an arms race in the Middle East. These things should be decided by experts not in opinion polls. Israel should and probably is quietly increasing the number of nuclear weapons it has and it should try to build a system to destroy missiles before they reach Israel. I know that sounds impossible but it may not be. If Iran arms itself with nuclear weapons, Israel should make it clear that it has nuclear weapons and will retaliate and destroy every city in Iran if Israel is attacked by Iran with nuclear bombs.

  • Joel

    The Prophets give no indication that Israel will attack Iran and because the Prophets (i.e., Jeremiah and Ezekiel) are so explicit about Israel’s future defensive wars with surrounding Arabic-speaking nations and Russia, Iran, Turkey etc., I don’t believe it will occur. Nevertheless, it is possible. Israel may have such advanced stealth and/or electronic warfare capabilities that an attacking IAF force would be unknown by the enemy until the first explosions occurred. That is possible. In fact, I believe, with God’s help, that such a raid could occur without loss of a single IAF attacker to enemy countermeasures. The world and especially the Muslim world knows Israel has proven its capabilities for devastating first strikes over and over again. The LORD knows and He will determine.

  • dan kaufman

    stop talking and strike Iran without warning

  • yussi

    Having said all that, I am still glad that Bibi is speaking out against the “deal” being brokered and any removal of sanctions against Iran. That is the language they understand. Anything else is interpreted as a sign of weakness. But weakness it is not.

  • yussi

    Poll is irrelavant..Despite all the rhetoric,if a strike becomes necessary,and it might, the US will be right there with Israel..GUARANTEED!! dont listen to the Obama haters. He is a man who values human life and his record shows that he attempts anything and everything to avoid puting young people in harms way. But rest assured if that becomes necessary it will be done. He is not a hawkish,gun toting moron like “W” and Cheney who needlessly had over 4000 kids killed and tens of thousands of others maimed.

  • The most important facts about Obama are: Duplicity, Wavering, Mendacity, Incompetence which add up to UNTRUSTWORTHY!

    As an Arabic speaker who monitors the Arab and Muslim news media, NOT a SINGLE leader among them trusts Obama.
    It is also obvious now that not even the Europeans and others trust Obama anymore
    Allowing Iran become a nuclear weapons producer is as Bibi said “a historical miscalculation” because this will force as many other nations in the Middle East and Asia to arm themselves similarly
    Obama’s foreign policies have been and continue to be destructive for America and her allies because they are endangering world peace and stability
    While Obama cowers and abdicates America’s responsibilities as the guardian of freedom, Russia and China are replacing her with alacrity and great rewards politically, geographically, militarily and economically
    His legacy will be remembered as one of the worst in US history
    IQ al Rassooli
    Kafir & Proud!

  • Amy

    If Israel wants a war with Iran, that is its right. If Iran plans to prepare for its self-defense, it is their rightful decision. Prepared for self-defense is a security against wars for any nation.
    However, Israel, standing firm in its call for action,
    will cost the lives of its own people as well. Declaring war is not a good strategy for peace, and could be a pointless invasion.
    Other nations can enter to punish aggression, and uphold the principle that one nation can not tell another nation what they can or cannot do. The United States should be opposed to involvement, for it would be the cruelest dilemma of war.

  • Otto Waldmann in Sydney

    The poll indicates, though, that, at least at home , Bibi has solid support. It means that we could expect Israel to act in its own interests and oblivious of what ANYBODY else outside its area of serious concerns may think and or advise. If comprehensive success on the ground ( and under it ) can be assured, there are no major risks for pre-emptive action by Israel. One me conjure that Iran is quite aware of it as it has been toning down its rhetoric n hope for gaining greater confidence in attempting what WE KNOW it really wants to do ( has vSholem !!).
    Bottom line, Israel can and Israel will do whatever necessary to protect herself regardless of contrary opinions !!!!

  • john

    Iran would like nothing more than a strike from Israel,
    then U.S would send aid, food medical supplies , etc ..Iran has so much money they can buy whatever they want , spend all monies on war stuff , not their people .Iran knows what they are doing , bunch of Arabs but shrewd people ..where are they getting all materials to build all this stuff ,anyway? I know you cant make all that out of sand .somebody is supplying them with it , who? how?

  • Hopefully Bibi realizes by now that Obama will, if permitted, allow Iran to gain nuclear weapons. He backed away from the “red line” that he gave with Syria. He shamefully lied to the American public over their health care in order to get re-elected. When faced with those lies, he says, in words applicable here, that he is “sorry that people are in that situation”, that he “fumbled the ball”, that it was not his “intention” to lie.
    One can easily imagine him saying that he is “sorry” that Israel is in its “situation” where Iran has a nuclear bomb, that it was not his “intention” that this happen. This is 1938 and Obama is Chamberlain. Hopefully, Netanyahu is Churchill.

    • Talia

      Sorry to disappoint you, Steve, Netanyahu is not Churchill. Anyone that releases terrorist BEFORE starting negotiations is not a true leader. And I’m from the right wing. Netanyahu is an appeaser with no direction.

    • Montlasky

      WELL PUT!!!

    • Michael Garfinkel

      It’s a bit too facile to compare Obama to Chamberlain, although the comparison is made repeatedly.

      Chamberlain was an honorable and experienced statesman who sought to spare Europe form the carnage of another war, and Britain from a military contest in which she was clearly over-matched.

      Not incidentally, it was Chamberlain’s government that declared war on Germany on September 1, 1939 – a fact often overlooked.

      Obama, on the other hand, is an amateur and a third-rate poseur, and yes, he is every bit as dangerous as you suggest all the same.

  • Obama avoids confronting Islamic Nations, as promised. USA Inactions against Iraq,Egypt,Syria,Lebanon,Libya,Gaza,Iran,Afghanistan,Pakistan,NKorea over the past five years is evidence of the current Palestine and Iran stances.
    Russia and China have supplanted the USA. Obama has crafted a way to elevate Nuclear Weapons Armed Iran, NPT MEMBER, into UNSC/with veto using false hopes, weak and ineffective sanctions, allowing no sanctions for trade with Russia, China, Pakistan, NKorea, India, Venezuela, Argentina and others.

  • Bernard Ross

    its a silly poll to ask non military laymen whether it would be successful

    • Barbara

      Since most Israelis including women)serve in the army starting at age 18, and serve reserve duty afterwards, very few citizens are non-military.

    • Frumious Falafel

      I understand of course why you say that — and at a military level, you are correct. However the poll is very good I think for giving Netanyahu (and/or any/all Israeli leaders) helpful feedback on how the public would view a potential strike.

      After all, we’re talking about something which *necessarily* will affect virtually the entire country when Iran responds in whatever way it will. It may be a weak response but there will still probably be a response.

      Also a poll like this factors in the very real worry of Israelis not wanting Iran to even have the capability to strike them in the first place — or at the least, to have such a capability pushed off by a few years (during which time *anything* can happen as we all learned with Iraq).

    • June Grant

      Actually, there is no such thing as a non-military Israeli since the army is citizen-based and conscription is compulsory. Even if there are individuals do not, or did not serve in the armed forces,we all have someone in the family or among friends and their families who do serve.

      As to the poll itself, nobody asked me.

  • S. Klein

    I believe the 70% of Israelis who say an Israeli strike or strikes would succeed are right.

    • Muhd Rafiq

      So what who ,with all due respect, are you?

    • Bernardo Hermano Apsan

      I understand your calculations: 70% of 70% = 49%, which according to you means the attack will not be successful. But some of the other 30% may be right, which tips the scale again

Algemeiner.com