Bolton: Israel's response to Iran's strikes should be 'far stronger'

I want to bring in former US ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolt. He also served as national security advisor to President Trump. As you know, Ambassador, Israel's ambassador is calling for the United States Security Council to meet immediately following these attacks. What is your assessment of what is happening? Well, nothing is going to happen in the Security Council, I mean, what we had tonight was a massive failure of Israeli and American deterrence, a massive failure of 200 ballistic cruise missiles and drones. And I think, despite that, there seems to be very few fingers crossed until we get the final assessment.

And thank God if the death toll is low or non-existent. And while we're at it, let's thank Bush for exiting the 1972 ABM Treaty, freeing up American missile defense capabilities. But once we see what the dam is, I think it's up to Israel and the United States to restore deterrence in some form. And I think that means that in defining Israel's

response

, there

should

be a

response

that

should

not be proportionate. It should be much

stronger

, because when deterrence fails to be reestablished, the adversary must be taught that any gain that may help overcome any future attack will be more than offset by the damage it will cause.

So I hope President Biden is not. . Well, I'm sorry to interrupt, but give us your assessment of an appropriate Israeli response to what Iran has done now. Well, I think the most significant thing that Iran did tonight was the launch of ballistic missiles and cruise missiles from its territory directly into I. At this point almost certainly none of those missiles contained a nuclear warhead. But you never know when the next ballistic missile launch might contain a nuclear warhead. So I think that among the many objectives that Israel should consider, this is the opportunity to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons program.

And I hope that President Biden is not trying to dissuade Prime Minister Netanyahu from doing so. And if it succeeds, and if at some point in the future the ayatollahs succeed in carrying out what former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called a nuclear holocaust story, we will know who to blame. So, to be precise, Ambassador, are you recommending to Israel an airstrike? to try to destroy any nuclear capabilities the Iranians may have? Is that what I'm hearing? Good. I think they should go after the nuclear fuel cycle law, which is well known. Their locations are well known.

And I think that would be the appropriate goal, because at this point Iran has shown that it is not limited by any idea of ​​a direct attack on Israeli territory by its attack. By his own admission, he has fired ballistic and cruise missiles. And the only thing that has saved us is this amazing technology. Next time, if the attacks come from a different location that contains nuclear warheads, Israel might not be so lucky. This is not the time to play academics and send messages and signals. This is a question of power. People say they are worried about a broader war.

The broader war began on October 7th. That was not an Israeli war against Arabs or Palestinians. And it was Iran's attack on Israel using the ring of fire strategy. That is the strategic environment that Israel faces right now. And the main cause, the puppet master, the puppet master, is Iran. And if their nuclear capability is taken away, that would be a dramatic blow to the regime; it may be enough to topple it. Ambassador, my colleague Jim Shadow is here with me in Wa. He has a follow-up question for you. Go ahead, Jim. Ambassador Bolton, since Iran knows this as well as we do, Hezbollah and its enormous missile arsenal, many thousands of stones and missiles, intends to be partly a pressure point.

If Israel were to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, and I'm wondering, given the size an order of magnitude larger than, say, during the 2006 war, do you think Israel can today wage what would be a war on multiple fronts, in the south, Hezbollah to the north, Iran to the east. What if you then imagined the United States directly involved in such a conflict? Well, I think that for the foreseeable future, Gaza is not going to be a major battlefield, and it's certainly not something that the full Israeli military power is going to be involved in. I think Hezbollah put pressure.

It is one of the reasons why it took almost two weeks after Israel's Damascus attack for the Iranian counterattack to say that it is necessary to put skin in this game. So I'm not entirely sure what Hezbollah's response will be to Israel eliminating a nuclear power that has done nothing for Hez. The Israelis have clearly thought about what to do to neutralize H. Perhaps their response, which would also be pretty big for Iran, would be to go after H. Now, my point is there. There are a number of measures that Israel can take. Passivity at this time for Isra would be a big mistake.

I mean, I think from the Israeli point of view, they should remember what Winston Churchill said in World War II. Without victory, there is no certainty How close is Iran to actually having a nuclear bomb? Well, I think they can get about 72 hours if they send a wire transfer to North Korea's B headquarters in Pyongyang and give the North Koreans enough time. put a couple of warheads on a plane and take them to T. You know, there's a lot of talk about how close Iran is compared to how close they were four or five years ago or before the Trump administration withdrew from the nuclear deal.

All of which assumes perfect knowledge of Iran's nuclear weapons program. I think we should have enough experience with flawed intelligence by now to not be so sure that we don't know how much of Iran's uranium enrichment program is actually taking place under a mountain in North Korea. The fact is that they are very close. The fact is that the 2015 nuclear deal was flawed from the beginning by allowing Iran any uranium enrichment capability, whatsoever. Ambassador Bolton, thank you very much for joining us. We will continue this conversation. I'm glad to be with you.