Recently, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is “trying to rally support in his cabinet for an attack on Iran”  with only a narrow majority of the Cabinet opposing the move. Netanyahu has also stated that in regards to Iran that “all options are on the table.” This truly shows how detached from reality he is as an attack on Iran would potentially spell disaster for Israel as while there is currently no proof that Iran is attempting to gain nuclear weapons, attacking Iran would ensure that the regime would then make it a goal to have nuclear weapons to use as a deterrent from future attacks. In addition to this, an attack on Iran could potentially anger the entire region against Israel as it “would produce a nightmare far more extensive than Chernobyl” and "The immediate and long-term human toll from the nuclear fallout and radiation from so many reactors and plants [would be] inconceivable;" it would potentially "strengthen extremist forces and impeded democratic reform in Iran, and it would ignite hatred against religious minorities throughout the Middle East."  Thus, an attack on Iran would not be in Israel’s interest in the slightest from a purely logical standpoint when one looks at the potential repercussions.
Unfortunately, this detachment from reality also extends to the US leadership as well. There are many in the Republican Party who are “reviving many of the arguments that neoconservative proponents of armed intervention against Tehran lost in the latter years of George W. Bush's presidency.”  Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney stated that if Obama was re-elected Iran would attain a nuclear weapon. He also openly stated that he would attempt to destabilize the Iranian regime, saying that “the U.S. should be ‘working with the insurgents in the country to encourage regime change’” but “if ‘there's nothing else we can do besides take military action, then of course you take military action.’”  Another Republican Presidential hopeful, Newt Gingrich, followed in the same vein, calling “for ‘maximum covert operations to block and disrupt the Iranian program.’”  By openly stating that they plan to engage in covert action against Iran, the Presidential hopefuls are effectively alerting Iran of their intent and allowing Iran to be on their toes should either person become President. In addition to this, how does either candidate expect to find money or troops for this? The US military is stretched thin, the US economy is in shambles, America is nearing a GDP to debt ratio of 1 to 1, and there is currently a super-committee which is planning to impose harsh austerity measures on the country.
Both the Israeli and US leadership are further detached from reality on the issue of Iran when both state that Iran is a threat. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman stated that “Iran poses the largest, most dangerous threat to the current world order”  and President Obama stated that the US was “’not taking any options off the table’” in regards to Iran’s nuclear program and that an “’Iran with nuclear weapons would pose a threat not only to the region but also to the United States.’”  This argument is quite ridiculous. The United States, a nation that has consistently been directly and indirectly involved in military conflicts every decade since the 1940s and Israel, the most aggressive militaristic regime in the region, are much greater threats to world peace than Iran could ever be.Iran is a threat to neither in the US or Israel. Israel is a regional superpower with a world-class army and nuclear weapons. The US is the world’s sole superpower and recently acquired 20 GPS-guided 30,000 lb bunker-busting bombs  and “held a successful test flight of a flying bomb that travels faster than the speed of sound and will give military planners the ability to strike targets anywhere in the world in less than a hour.”  (emphasis added) Thus, how would Iran pose a threat to either nation, much less the entire world?
The US and Israeli leadership are detached from reality and this could potentially prove quite dangerous and costly not only for their nations, but for the world at large.