Thread by @tparsi

The @nytimes keeps on sticking this into its reporting and it's highly problematic.

Three heads of the Mossad in a row have publicly rejected this notion: Halevi, Dagan & Pardo.
Ehud Barak has consistently rejected it since 1992. Here's why: >>

As Barak and Halevy argue, Iran is a threat, but NOT an EXISTENTIAL threat because that notion belittles Israel's own power. Israel is indestructible Halevy maintains, and as such, Iran can't be an existential threat.

The data supports their argument. >>

Even if Iran had nukes - which it doesn't but Israel does - it would be suicidal for it to attack Israel due to Israel's 2nd strike capability. As a senior Israeli official told me, whatever Iran does to destroy Israel, it cant destroy Israel's ability to destroy Iran in turn. >>

This is because Israel has several nuclear equipped Dolphin submarines. Iran can't take those out.

So why do other Israeli officials use the talking point of Iran as an existing threat?
>>

The Iranian "existential threat" is a politically motivated talking point advanced primarily by Netanyahu designed to make it as difficult as possible for the US to end the US-Iran enmity while providing blanket justification for almost any Israeli action against Iran. >>

It is political spin, albeit extremely successful spin since it's almost universally accepted in Washington. This is partly because of Iran's own venomous rhetoric but also because of the completely uncritical way the @nytimes and other media repeats the spin. >>

For a more detailed background on all of this, see my book on the secret history of Israeli-Iranian relations: Treacherous Alliance: amazon.com/Treacherous-Al…