Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Jerusalem Post) Yuval Steinitz interviewed by Amichai Stein - Chairman of the Board of Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Yuval Steinitz, a former member of the security cabinet, was among the key architects of the security doctrine that placed the Iranian nuclear program at the top of Israel's national threat assessment. He said the recent attack on Iran will result in a delay of "at least two to four years" in Iran's nuclear program. "That's a dramatic setback. Especially in weaponization - what we call the 'finalization' phase. The enrichment they'd nearly mastered also suffered a setback. But the weaponization part? The parts and people needed to build the bomb: We might have wiped that clean." In 2011-2012, a strike against Iran's nuclear program was considered but ultimately shelved. Steinitz said, "The plan on the table then would have delivered limited damage; maybe delayed Iran by a year or two, but not dismantled the program. And the costs? Hizbullah was at full strength, Iron Dome was barely operational." "It's not enough to hit 20 or 30% of the nuclear program. That kind of partial damage only strengthens their motivation to rebuild. You have to destroy 70, 80, even 90% - leave them facing a decision to start from scratch. That's what changes their calculus. I'd say we damaged about 80% of the enrichment capacity and possibly 100% of the weaponization effort." "We targeted the brains. Scientists, senior engineers, lab technicians - eliminated. Experimental facilities - obliterated. Fordow was partially hit, but Natanz was likely wiped out. The conversion facility at Isfahan, which takes uranium gas and prepares it for use in a weapon - that was hit, too....Even if they have some enriched uranium left, they won't be able to weaponize it for a long time." "When people talk about the war, they focus on ballistic missiles, some of which managed to hit Israel. But let's not forget - Iran launched around 1,200 drones and cruise missiles. And only one hit anything significant....The rest were downed." 2025-07-06 00:00:00Full Article
Steinitz: We Set Back Iran's Nuclear Program "at least Two to Four Years"
(Jerusalem Post) Yuval Steinitz interviewed by Amichai Stein - Chairman of the Board of Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Yuval Steinitz, a former member of the security cabinet, was among the key architects of the security doctrine that placed the Iranian nuclear program at the top of Israel's national threat assessment. He said the recent attack on Iran will result in a delay of "at least two to four years" in Iran's nuclear program. "That's a dramatic setback. Especially in weaponization - what we call the 'finalization' phase. The enrichment they'd nearly mastered also suffered a setback. But the weaponization part? The parts and people needed to build the bomb: We might have wiped that clean." In 2011-2012, a strike against Iran's nuclear program was considered but ultimately shelved. Steinitz said, "The plan on the table then would have delivered limited damage; maybe delayed Iran by a year or two, but not dismantled the program. And the costs? Hizbullah was at full strength, Iron Dome was barely operational." "It's not enough to hit 20 or 30% of the nuclear program. That kind of partial damage only strengthens their motivation to rebuild. You have to destroy 70, 80, even 90% - leave them facing a decision to start from scratch. That's what changes their calculus. I'd say we damaged about 80% of the enrichment capacity and possibly 100% of the weaponization effort." "We targeted the brains. Scientists, senior engineers, lab technicians - eliminated. Experimental facilities - obliterated. Fordow was partially hit, but Natanz was likely wiped out. The conversion facility at Isfahan, which takes uranium gas and prepares it for use in a weapon - that was hit, too....Even if they have some enriched uranium left, they won't be able to weaponize it for a long time." "When people talk about the war, they focus on ballistic missiles, some of which managed to hit Israel. But let's not forget - Iran launched around 1,200 drones and cruise missiles. And only one hit anything significant....The rest were downed." 2025-07-06 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|