The toughest decision you have to make about Iran is whether you are willing in the final resort to attack its nuclear facilities to stop it getting a bomb. Everything else flows from that call" ("Subject: Iran," The Economist, Dec. 20, 2008). These are the sobering words of U.S. Senator John McCain, former Republican presidential candidate. He further stated that "the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be an Iran with a bomb."

It seems highly unlikely that the United States will use military means to deal with a persistently defiant Iran. The state of Israel, however, could present an altogether different scenario. If this tiny nation perceives that its national survival is in serious jeopardy, it could decide to act independently.

As The Jewish Chronicle notes, "Retired General, Professor Yitzhak Ben Yisrael, who headed the air force's Intelligence Department and the Defence Ministry's Research and Development Directorate, has said that Israel is 'technically capable' of neutralising the Iranian threat" ("Israel Ponders Going It Alone on Iran Strike," March 27, 2009).

Should Israel choose to act, its air force would be exposed to Russian-supplied Iranian antiaircraft missiles. Iranian nuclear sites are at the end of the Israeli jets' range, and America has so far refused to sell Israel aircraft that could be used for refueling in the air. Further, Israel would realistically have to cross Jordanian, Syrian and Iraqi air space to reach Iran.

Is the Israeli clock ticking faster than the American clock? Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that "time is slipping through our fingers" regarding Iran. "'What is needed,' he added, 'is a two-pronged course of action which includes ironclad strenuous actions . . . and a readiness to consider options in the event these sanctions do not succeed" ("Obama's Iran Crisis," The Wall Street Journal, March 3, 2009).

Voices like Israel's President Shimon Peres have previously warned against a strike. He said, "I don't believe in the military option—any kind of military option" (The Times, Sept. 7, 2008). But new Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed entirely different views in the past. Certainly he is facing perhaps the toughest decision of his life. It is, however, hard to conceive of him taking military action without tacit American approval. He is scheduled to travel to Washington, D.C., in May.

Still, London Times foreign editor Richard Beeston stated that "Tehran's growing nuclear capability mixed with the Netanyahu Cabinet's military experience . . . could be a lethal cocktail" ("Only Obama Can Save Iran From Israeli Bombs," April 3, 2009).

Meanwhile, the clock telling us when it will be too late continues to tick. According to an Arutz Sheva Israel National News article: "IDF Intelligence Chief Gen. Amos Yadlin confirmed . . . that ayatollah-
controlled Iran has the technology to develop a nuclear bomb . . . 'Iran has crossed the technological threshold,' Yadlin said . . . 'Iran continues to amass hundreds of kilograms of low-grade enriched uranium,' Yadlin said, and is hoping to take advantage of the dialogue with Washington to buy time to advance towards the ability to build a bomb" ("Iran Can Make A Bomb," March 9, 2009).

Iranian officials have recently stated that the nation "had successfully tested a new long-range air-to-surface missile" that could theoretically carry a nuclear warhead. "Some see [President] Obama's approach of talking with Tehran [as] a modern form of the appeasement that enabled Nazi Germany to actualize its threats." It is "a clear break with the Bush policy of viewing Iran as part of an 'axis of evil'" (ibid.).

We all need to understand the biblical background to what is now happening in the Middle East. Read our free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy. (Sources: The Jewish Chronicle, The Times [both London], The Wall Street Journal, Arutz Sheva Israel National News.)