Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak says Israel is determined to use 'any option' to stop Iran's nuclear program should sanctions fail.

In a Wednesday interview with Al Jazeera television, Barak said while there is still time for diplomatic measures against Iran's nuclear program, other countries should not remove 'any option' from the table, an allusion to the military option. [...]

"The time is still for diplomacy and sanctions, but much more effective sanctions. We keep saying that we do not remove any option from the table. I propose to others not to remove any option from the table as well. But when we say it, we mean it," Barak said.

According to Pentagon officials, Israel conducted a military maneuver over the eastern Mediterranean and Greece in early June in preparation for a war on Iran.

Far more specific was Juval Aviv a former Mossad agent whose claim that he led a team to track down and assassinate the Palestinian terrorists responsible for the slaughter of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics in Munich was made into a Steven Spielberg movie. Now the head of an independent security firm based in New York, he was presented to various groups of Australian officials by independent Jewish organizations this week to publicly claim that Israel is already set on launching attacks against 3 out of 12 possible nuclear sites in Iran before Bush leaves office:

Among many bald statements, one stuck out: Israel is now ready to destroy three or four nuclear sites out of 12 in Iran.

"I believe that Israel is planning to act on these reactors before Bush leaves the White House," Mr Aviv said. "We've got to take a chance … the next president of America may not allow it." [...]

He may or may not be speaking for anyone but himself, but his sponsorship suggests Australian opinion-makers were being warmed up for an Iran strike. If so, it's an unsatisfactory level of discussion, and surely cannot reflect policy debate in a nation as sophisticated as Israel.

Bluster? Cheap talk? I don't know. But frightening all the same. And the current French President, Nicolas Sarkozy is doing his best to ramp up the warmongering talk, as well.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned Iran yesterday it was taking a dangerous gamble in seeking to develop nuclear weapons because one day its archfoe Israel could strike. [...]

"Iran is taking a major risk in continuing the process to obtain a military nuclear capacity," Sarkozy said at a meeting in Damascus with the leaders of Syria, Turkey and Qatar.

"One day, whatever the Israeli government, we could find one morning that Israel has struck," Sarkozy added.

"The question is not whether it would be legitimate, whether it would be intelligent. What will we do at that moment? It would be a catastrophe. We must avoid that catastrophe," Sarkozy said in comments broadcast on television.

Dangerous words to be bantering about for public discusssion. And frankly I don't see Iran's leaders backing down. Such talk only enhances their domestic political situation, since it deflects discussion of their poor economic performance with the threat of war and the generation of patriotic feelings among the Iranian populace, feelings which always seem to benefit the government in power. The longer these threats and counter-threats continue, the more likely, it seems to me, that Israel and the Bush administration will feel compelled to act, especially if Obama maintains a lead in the polls. Chance of any media in the United States actually reporting these allegations to the American public during an election campaign. Virtually nil. But it should be a topic on the front burner. At the very least, any Israeli strike on Iran will send oil prices into the stratosphere, likely triggering a global economic meltdown. Before we reach that point, I'd like to think that cooler heads will prevail. But this is the Bush administration we are talking about.

It's time for prominent Democrats to speak up against any attack on Iran. Which means Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Reid (and maybe both Clintons, as well). Past time actually. Unfortunately, Obama's performance in his interview with O'Reilly doesn't give me a lot of comfort.

(cont.)