My piece in Souciant this week understandably has generated some questions. The sort of thing in that piece is precisely the kind of thinking I often try to counter. And, under the current circumstances, where whatever the goals and motivations, Netanyahu and Barak are obviously trying to stir up fear and pressure through the media, it is a level head that is called for. It doesn’t help that the article came out around the same time as another blogger was embroiled in controversy, and opened to questions of having been manipulated by Israel’s hasbara efforts, over an obviously bogus document he presented as an Israeli plan for an attack.
Of course, I strongly considered the idea that I was falling victim to some sort of hasbara scheme. It’s possible that’s just what this was, though I don’t think so. Of course, if I thought so, we wouldn’t have this discussion in the first place, would we?
I don’t buy what my source told me whole cloth, in any case. As I stated repeatedly in the piece, I still don’t think Israel is going to attack Iran unilaterally. But where I was once 95% sure of that, now I’d say I’m 85% sure, because I do give some weight to what I was told. So why is that?
A reasonable question. Obviously, since I remain 85% sure, as I said numerous times in the piece, that the attack will not come off, I remain dubious. On the other hand, it did cause me to doubt my assessment more than I have in the past, and this is the case for a number of reasons.
1. The Source. Although I don’t know who the inside source is on this, the person I got it from is an someone I’ve known for a decade and who I trust very much. I also know, first-hand, that this person has genuine inside sources in the Israeli governmental and military establishment, and they have proven themselves sound to me numerous times over the years. Thus, even though the view I presented in my piece doesn’t line up well with my thinking, and I have serious questions about it, I can’t dismiss it out of hand. Continue reading