But I completely understand the Israeli position.
If nothing else can be done, Israel should do everything it can to destroy Iran's nuclear program.

Exactly how many times has Israel cried "wolf" the last 10 years? 20?
If Obama loses the election the odds of an attack goes up during the
lame duck period. Otherwise I won't hold my breath.

William Pfaff writes: If they (the Iranians) intend to produce nuclear weapons,
it is to possess a deterrent to foreign aggression. The Israelis,
another highly intelligent and well-educated people, also know
nuclear history. Their present policy is not based on fear of a
nuclear attack by Iran (or by an Iranian proxy). It is calculated to
prevent the United States from imposing on Israel a solution to its
relationship with the Palestinians. They do not wish a permanent
legal frontier dividing them from some new and recognized Palestinian
state -- a frontier sponsored and also guaranteed by the United
States, as well as by international law...

Zionism is racism and unending war; Like it, or leave it.

Just study history.

I have been curious about this topic and decided to do some research. Your article has some useful information. Do you have any more on this subject?
Registered Nurse Salary

Considering that, between the sever sanctions, Threat of military strike on their nuclear sites, from some of the most powerful forces in the world, The Mullahs are just about to lose their puppet in Syria, thus rendering Hizbollah & Hamas useless to them. 80% of their population no longer support it, civil unrest, riots in the streets, losing their top scientists, All its neighbors are ready to help to overthrow the Mullahs. All designed to destabilize the regime, and through internal revolt - It seems we are not only in to neutralizes their nuclear programs - It is about regime change.

"Bergman reports what until now had generally been the subject of speculation: When Israel discovered the existence of an Iranian uranium-enrichment facility at Natanz in 2002, then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon decided not to authorize an attack. Instead, Bergman explains, "information about the site was leaked to a dissident Iranian group, the National Resistance Council." The news eventually made its way to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which sent a team of inspectors to the site. "

So you're telling me that - if the 'evidence' of nuclear armaments building were credible - instead of Mossad conveying the evidence directly to the IAEA, they'd instead "leak" it to a fringe dissident group, the Nat'l Resistance Council and then have them leak it to the IAEA?

Rather, it sounds like Israeli intel was attempting to bolster the credibility of its manufactured 'evidence' by having it first appear as if it were being discovered by an independent, disinterested party.

Former IAEA inspector, nuclear physicist Robert Kelley is highly skeptical of the report and gives an interesting interview on its inconsistencies and lack of transparency on the Real News Network:

"Former IAEA Inspector: Misleading Iran Report Proves Nothing
Robert Kelley: Latest IAEA report recycles old intelligence and is meant to bolster hard liners"
-November 15, 2011

"IAEA Iran Report Fit Facts to Strengthen Hardliners
Robert Kelley Pt2: The report misleads and manipulates facts in attempt to prove a forgone conclusion"
-November 17, 2011

"Former IAEA Inspector Calls for Transparency on All Sides
Robert Kelley: The IAEA should allow peer review of its data, Iran should resolve outstanding questions"
- January 20, 2012

Even if Iran were to obtain a nuclear missile, it is no match for Israel's 250-300 nuclear missiles. But Foreign Policy magazine doesn't like to talk about those.

"Moshe Ya'alon, Israel's vice prime minister and minister of strategic affairs, suggests that Iran is establishing bases in Latin America and developing relationships with drug cartels along the U.S.-Mexican border to smuggle ordnance into the United States for use in attacks"

This is preposterous balderdash nonsense. Clearly, a terrorist attack on US soil or forces would be the single most unstrategic move for the Iranian leadership imaginable. The US oil-hungry hawks - the same who killed its democratically elected president in 1953 along with the MI6 and scores upon scores of leaders throughout Latin America and Africa - have been trying to pin terrorism links on the Isalmic Republic for years. Such a move would provide a carte blanche causus belli and mandate for Iraq-style shock and awe, Carthage-in-flames destruction. If anything, Ahmadinejad is trying to strengthen ties with Bolivarian Alliance member states or sympathizers in order to buffer the effects of unjustified EU, US and Japanese trade embargos. Iran is simply practicing a last-resort diplomacy push to keep itself from falling into the pit of complete financial ruin under the draconian measures. It is negotiating deals with China for oil and rail for the same purposes. Now that the US has decided to pursue a full-out cold war on China, perhaps Beijing will be slightly more sympathetic.

Let us not forget that the US paid billions to Saddam to invade Iran in the 1980s so that it could divide up the spoils. Let us not forget that it was Israel/US forces that illegally killed its physicists and bombed a legal nuclear facility during the last 10 years.

If anything, if we are to be calling for a nuclear-free Iran, we need to be calling for the de-nuclearization of Iran's nearest threat: Israel. Mohammed Mossadegh forever bears witness.

Several writers treat Itran as though its policy were based on the same realist considerations they wish other countries had adopted. This is either wishful thinking or active disinformation.

Iran's leadership is dedicated to bringing on the Muslim apocalypse which, in their theology, will lead to the final triumph of Islam everywhere in the world. Ahmadinejad in particular claims that the "Hidden Imam" is speaking to him from the bottom of the well where he has been hiding for some thirteen centuries, and telling him what Allah wants him to do to bring this about. That apocalypse follows a period of widespread chaos and devastating wars throughout the world as Muslim forces kill the infidels and impose their faith on everyone who isn't a true-enough Muslim. Is it not totally clear where possessing nuclear weapons fits into this scenario?

That this vision sounds nuts to those of us in the West doesn't mean the Iranian leadership doesn't espouse this objective. That is why anyone who understands the situation and doesn't share the objective MUST act to prevent Iran from acquiring these weapons. That our Islamist-Firster president really is doing nothing tells us more about him than it does about the seriousness of the threat.