Der Spiegel reported last September that, in coordination with the United States, Israel is planning an air strike against 6 suspected Nuclear facilities in Iran:
The German weekly Der Spiegel reported Saturday that the Mossad has marked six Iranian nuclear facilities as targets for an Israeli Air Force pre-emptive strike. An unnamed IAF pilot told the weekly that such a mission would be “complex, but feasible.” The Los Angeles Times reported that Israel has modified U.S.-made Harpoon cruise missiles so it can launch nuclear warheads from submarines.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered Mossad chief Meir Dagani to devote “utmost efforts” to gather information about Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities, Maariv reported today. According to Maariv, Sharon told associates that “Iran is the greatest danger to Israel” and that he was coordinating intelligence gathering efforts with the United States “down to the last detail.”
In a recent related story in the Jerusalem Post, senior Israeli officials have been quoted as claiming Iran will have nuclear capability within 2 years:
“Iran is one to two years away, at the latest, from having enriched uranium,” said Mossad Chief Meir Dagan during his annual report to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee late Tuesday morning.
“From that point, the completion of their nuclear weapon is simply a technical matter. If Iran goes undisturbed, they will reach technical nuclear development independence in the coming months,” said Dagan.
The comments echoed those of IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz, who earlier this month said it is possible that Iran would be able to complete building a bomb as early as 2008 or as far as 2015.
Just last week it was reported in the Jerusalem Post that Iran recently acquired 12 cruise missiles with a range of up to 3,000 kilometers. OC Intelligence Maj.-Gen. Aharon Ze’evi (Farkash) noted the missiles had the ability to carry a nuclear warhead.
This is more than a little frightening. To my mind, these stories did not come out of the blue. I suspect a coordinated campaign to garner Israeli and American public support for a strike against Iran.
Meanwhile, there is this story from Sunday’s Washington Post regarding criticism of the Bush administration’s policy toward Iran by the Pro-Israeli group, AIPAC:
(Cross-posted at Daily Kos)
After years of unwavering support for the Bush administration, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC has begun to sharply criticize the White House over its handling of Iran’s nuclear program.
In lengthy news releases and talking points circulated to supporters on Capitol Hill, AIPAC describes the Bush administration’s recent policy decisions on Iran as “dangerous,” “disturbing” and “inappropriate.” One background paper suggests that White House policies are actually helping Iran — a sworn enemy of the Jewish state — to acquire nuclear weapons.
AIPAC, as many of you know, has myriad ties with the neo-conservative faction in the Bush administration. Why are they are taking such a strident action against the Bush adminsitration at this point in time? Is it an attempt to support Vice President Cheney and other neo-conservatives in the administration whose influence has reportedly been on the wane recently? Is it part of a coordinated strategy to coerce Bush to support a proposed Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, with or without US military assistance?
Whatever the reason behind this sudden rash of stories regarding the Iranian nuclear threat, and the potential Israeli response to it, it can only be extremely troubling to those of us who would like to see an American withdrawal from Iraq. Any attack on Iran, whether from Israel alone, or with US military assistance is likely to inflame the region, increase hostility toward the United States among Muslims world wide, Arab and Non-Arab alike, and quite possibley lead to a widening of current conflicts. There is no question in my mind that it would lead to increased attacks against our forces in Iraq, from both Sunni and Shi’ite gtoups.
Do I want Iran to get the bomb? No. But I also do not want to see Iran attacked by Israel or the United States at this time, before diplomatic efforts from Russia and Europe have been given the fullest opportunity to reach an accomodation with Iran over its nuclear ambitions, particularly in light of the fact that the most recent CIA report indicated Iran was at least ten years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Any military action now would be foolhardy and extremely dangerous for our nation’s future national security interests. I do not believe we can adequately anticipate all of the potential consequences for our troops in the region, or for the security of our homeland, should such a reckless military action come to pass.
i get it
we are going to fight a nuclear war over there so we dont have to fight it over here
good idea
this time, they’re saying that they are openly planning this.
Israel in the 1980s had several airstrikes against Iraq to keep it from attaining nuke capability, if memory serves these 51 year old brain cells.
Doesn’t surprise me at all that we are saber-rattling at Iran…at the same time their brother Shiites have won the Iraqi election and designated stooge Allawi may be on his way out.
…that such speculation has arisen.
I wrote Will Israel Blast Iran’s Nuclear Facilities? more than two years ago on Daily Kos. An excerpt:
The problem with an Israeli attack – beyond the diplomatic fallout – is that effectively striking at least a dozen suspected nuclear sites in Iran is complicated because it’s not certain where all of them are, some are near large population centers, and some are buried deep enough to survive a conventional assault for sure and possibly a nuclear attack. This won’t be another Osirak.
So what of value does Israel get for an attack? More opprobrium, a possible counterattack, another recruitment incentive for terrorists and perhaps half of Iran’s nuclear capabilities smashed, which might not include the most important half.
I wrote Will Israel Blast Iran’s Nuclear Facilities? more than two years ago on Daily Kos. An excerpt:
Well then, why did you let it get to this point? It can’t be that you don’t care about the situation because you obviously do. Have you been too busy to get to it?
…Is it why didn’t I keep writing on this subject? Or why didn’t I do something to stop Israel?
If it’s the latter, obviously, I don’t have much clout against Tel Aviv or DC.
If it’s the former, although I do occasionally write about Israel – acquiring brickbats from “both sides,” I continue to take the threat of an Israeli attack on Iran skeptically. That is, I think it’s mostly chest-thumping because, no matter how good Israeli intelligence is, even a nuclear attack on Iran’s scattered and hardened nuclear facilities would be no guarantee of success in taking out Iran’s incipient capabilities. As I noted, Iran’s operations are not like those in Osirak, which the Israelis took out in 1981.
Although there are some Israeli leaders who might use nukes unprovoked, I think that most see that the consequences of such an act would include the end of any sympathy or support for Israel.
That being said, I think it’s still possible Israel would attack despite all the problems I’ve outlined. Since Israel will NEVER sign the NPT and open up reactors to inspections (unless the U.S. were to cut off all financial aid – and THAT will never happen either), the best that can be hoped for is that diplomatic measures will stop Iran from building the Bomb, or that, once it gets the Bomb, it will behave as other nations have done since Nagasaki: refrained from using one because the political fallout would be far worse than the radioactive fallout.
Yeah, I was kidding about you not having the problem corrected.
I agree but I half expect a false flag operation to spark the sequence of eventual (perceived) justified mass destruction. The chess pieces are being moved into position with threats plans and posturing.
The American people are so gullible it’ll be eaten right up and the bloodlust will rage hotter than it was for Iraq. Still, the twins will not enlist and not many children of Congress will, either.
and Bibi has promised to attack Iran by March.
…Consul General for Israel in Los Angeles, I met Netanyahu at an editorial board meeting at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner. All of us on the board – including the two Jews – came away with the same sense: not trusting anything the guy said. His promises are dust.
It is Washington’s.
…very far away.
Meteorblades. Not sure what those guys will be doing or why but it isn’t just bombing from the air. Israel’s intelligence is far superior to anything we likely have on the subject I believe, it is only a gut feeling but I would bank the family nest egg on it. Killing innocent civilians……not sure after Hitler and the part the world played in it all if Israel gives a flying fuck if a few innocent people are killed in all of this.
I’m all for the safety and protection of Israel but I get a little tired of Israel being cast as the eternal victim without a reasonable amount of consideration of responsibility for their actions the past few decades.
The main advocates of the Islamist extremist jihadist theories come from Israel. Our country has been used a few times too by Israeli interests for the sole benefit of a small group’s ideology. A friend should not exploit a friend like that.
I believe though that their gut determination to survive as a people after the extermination that took place during WWII is much stronger than any caring or friendship they will ever have for us. They will act like caged aggressive murdering animals if need be with very little provocation, and then you have muslim extremists giving them every reason to act and be exactly that. It is simply something I have no answer to.
I understand that. I’m talking about the small groups of zealots and profiteers who have been exploiting that reaction. They exist on all sides and are a major part of the problem.
It also gets a Revolution in nuclear-armed Pakistan and in neighboring Egypt. The Israeli’s know this. I don’t think they will be making any unprovoked attacks on Iran in the near future. The odds of successfully securing security by such a move are too long.
But if the goal were to be destruction of a perceived enemy rather that a goal of security, then revolution in neighbors would be a success.
of US foreign policy. The greatest error westerners make when discussing US plans for securing its oil in the Middle East is forgetting that US is not Israel’s friend.
Anybody who thinks they aren’t going to do it or maybe they won’t or it is negotiable just hasn’t gotten much that has happened in the middle east for at least the past 75 years. Anybody who doesn’t believe that the big shots of this nation know that it is unstoppable and have only been using their time attempting to figure out how to best exploit the Kaboom! to serve them doesn’t get it either. After WWII Israelis are beyond asking for anybody’s opinion or “help” when it comes to their own survival and that is just the way it is and no judgement from me here and I have no idea how to fix this and I’m not sure it ought to be fixed even.
missile defense from the old Soviet Union. This strike will take place before they can get any decent anti aircraft weaponry in place. I can’t remember what they have ordered but of course my husband looked at it and said it would cause notice for anybody flying over attempting to bomb the facilities. They have been eyeing some better systems though that would be very good protection and have been trying to open negotiations for ordering them. Israel will be taking things out though before they can get any of this stuff online.
…it’s unlikely they’d sent bombers. If their Harpoons can be successfully launched from the submarines they bought from the Germans – and there is good reason to believe they can be. If Israel were to attack with planes, it would have to overfly at least two countries on the way to Iran. Why do that if you can put a sub in the Persian Gulf and fire Harpoons without the diplomatic hassles of cruising someone else’s airspace and the risk – though extremely low – that some of your F16s will be shot down?
Better still, attack them directly from space.
…with ballistic missiles?
I agree that if Israel’s subs are equipped properly they would like to launch from there. It could even provide deniability, possibly, if that were so desired.
But, I’n not sure the job can be done without bunker busters that may not be deliverable that way.
It sounds like you know more about the options available than I do, so this is a question.
…joke. A study by the National Research Council found that to effectively attack bunkers 650 feet underground would require a Bomb of 300 kilotons, 20+ times what the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima. At 1,000 feet, it would take a Bomb 67x larger than Hiroshima.
Even exploding at such depths, a Bomb would cause tremendous fallout and could kills hundreds of thousands.
For a military point of view, check out this.
It sounds like it would suit US purposes nicely.
I think I just heard Rumsfeld slap his hands together and heave a big sigh of delight.
Naw, I think they call them Rods from God, or one program, anyway. I would suspect the laser systems have come a long way since they last misinfomed us. This administration has hammered home some crucial points. They are not to be trusted or believed to be honest. They value pre-emptive massive strike above the value of life. They’re nuts. They said they would be active in space as a priority.
Imagine if they’ve been practicing on some of these fuel tanker trucks that all of a sudden have been in the news, randomly, involved in spontaneous fire/explosion accidents. Do you ever wonder why, when thousands of a particular type incident happen daily, like accidents and fires, does the MSM pick one to show on the news? I’ve wondered if it is a sublime message to somebody, somewhere.
…programs since my colleague S.K. Levin and I wrote the first newspaper look at “Star Wars,” a five-part, multi-sidebar newspaper series one month before Ronald Reagan’s March 1983 SDI speech, I’ve not seen anything that makes me believe the U.S. (certainly not Israel) has put railguns (rods from God) or penetrating lasers into orbit. Of course, I don’t have a security clearance.
The current issues of wiretap and electronic surveillance were in the news ten years ago. By the time we’re allowed to know what the govt is doing, we only know because it’s obsolete and they have something better.
My best uneducated estimate is to go back 5 years and see what was discussed and then consider technologies that were considered possibile that weren’t discussed.
Whatever it is, we can bet our ass it’s not a weapon of peace.
in which they claimed that they would be using a fighter to bomb with that does not need refueling to accomplish the task, that still leaves the airspace problems though. I don’t honestly suppose they would spell out their entire plan of attack either in the papers so clearly……Israel plans to “win” whatever must be “won” and they would inform us all later how that came about. The Harpoons are new information for me…….and who really makes all the money in all of this? The people who make and sell weapons.
on the ground aren’t going to accomplish a lot all on their own too and who knows what that entails. In fighting their fight in the middle east I think they are more willing and prepared to die accomplishing their missions than American special forces ever were or are.
negotiating for have the ability to intercept and detonate incoming ordinance. If they were able to really get the stuff up and running it would make it tough to take their nuclear facilities out.
It’s just doubly sweet when you can sell them the components that possession of will also justify the attack. Bonus points for a finger in both pies.
I see the answer to the question of whether Israel wil proceed to attack Iran this way.
The liklihood of such an attack increases dramatically in direct proportion to the threat that security and stability might breal out in the region. Or, in other words, if there’s any sign that a meaningful reduction in the levels of violence in the region might threaten to happen, Israel will be more likely to get the go-ahead to attack.
Peace and security are anathema to the neocons and to the Netanyahu Likudnik crazies. They will do anything, initiate any provocation, to keep the conflicts going and growing.
and found whole new motives for us to secretly “back” Israel’s attack of Iran in the spring of 2006. It makes too much sense, I must go take a long bath again.
Beat me to it Tracey. Steven D and the others here, need to read that one for sure.
The idea that military action against the nuclear sites in Iran will end any threat is ridiculous. Iraq did not have as sophisticated a setup as Iran does and within 10 years the world once again feared that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It must therefore be concluded that while such strikes are militarily feasible they are not a long term solution.
Again let me stress; though Israel successfully attacked Iraq in 1981 the United States is currently at war with Iraq because of a fear that they had acquired the technology that Israel had supposedly destroyed over a decade ago.
Had Bush engaged the Iranians in a serious and competent diplomatic fashion right from the start, we might not be at the point where strikes are considered. Bush is nutty enough to go along, but any suggestion that Israel would use nuclear weapons on Iran pre-emptively is preposterous.