sourmìlk wrote:So, Israel isn't bluffing.
Of course Israel is bluffing. A country that attacks another country 75 times its size? That's a first in world history. Besides, Israel really intended to attack, it would never make so much noise about it.
Israel has been carrying out covert operations for a while, but why wouldn't it make this much noise? It's not as though they'd be able to keep the operation a secret anyways. What they need to do is drum up international (see: American) support for it while discouraging Iran.
Also, Israel has single-handedly fought Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Pakistan all at once with no international support. I think they'd be okay taking on Iran. I really don't know what leads you to think Israel's threats are a bluff. I'd like to see you find a single political figure (aside from, perhaps, the Iranian regime itself) who actually agrees with that. Israel can't get away with not attacking Iran should they continue their program.
And it's been discussed why Israel would need to do something about Iran's nuclear program. Do you have another method that you think would prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons?
if all options only make your situation worse, the best option is to do nothing.
It's not the case that all options make the situation worse. In fact, no options make the situation worse, because the situation if Israel does nothing is as bad as it could possibly be.