Avash Media, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
The primary reason given for the joint US/Israeli attack on Iran was that Iran would not give up its nuclear program, which it claimed was for peaceful purposes only. The US and Israel viewed this claim as merely a cover story for producing a nuclear weapon to be used as a first strike on Israel and perhaps the US itself. I posit that even if we accept the US/Israeli position as true, there was no reason to attack Iran anyway.
The lynch pin for accepting the US/Israeli rationale is that the current ruling party in Iran is suicidal and would accept the complete retaliatory nuclear annihilation of the country as a worthy price to pay for wiping the Great Satan, the US, and the Little Satan, Israel, off the face of the earth. Therefore, the world should accept as justifiable the Pearl Harbor-style sneak attack on Iran while it was engaged in negotiations with the US over its nuclear program. But what if Iran is NOT suicidal?
There is a wealth of evidence that Iran would respond to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) the same as other nuclear armed countries; i.e., by refraining to attack a detested enemy that can retaliate with nuclear weapons of its own. John Leake has addressed this issue in great detail, and I encourage the reader to study his evidence carefully. It is nothing less than damning to the propaganda that Iran is a special case and that MAD would not deter its so-called Islamic fanatics from launching a nuclear first strike once it attained that capability.
Once this evidence becomes widely known the entire support for the attack on Iran melts away. Left are serious questions about why our government proceeded with its attack when it is incomprehensible that voices within its own government did not know about the counter argument. Did the government know about this argument but decided to attack Iran anyway? Was this argument suppressed, and If so, who suppressed it and why?
The decision to go to war, especially pre-emptive war, must be thoroughly examined by top decision makers, leaving no evidence and no counter argument unanswered. Our government owes this to our valiant war dead and to the fallen citizens of so many countries who have already died in this terrible war. It is not too late to discuss this issue in order to prevent further bloodshed. Examine it carefully and let the chips fall where they may.
© Patrick Barron 2026 Website
