This out of London, UK in The Sunday Times
Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
Is this a psy-ops? Or Israeli leaders gone mad?
ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.
Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.
The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb.
Under the plans, conventional laser-guided bombs would open “tunnels” into the targets. “Mini-nukes” would then immediately be fired into a plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce the risk of radioactive fallout.[.]
Robert Gates, the new US defence secretary, has described military action against Iran as a “last resort”, leading Israeli officials to conclude that it will be left to them to strike.
2007 is shaping up to be a very dangerous year.
This is really frightening. That anyone thinks using smaller nukes is a good idea is frightening of itself, but this is Israel preparing a suicide mission, or a mission that will result in massive deaths there and here.
My gawd.
Once you use nukes on Iran, you have no right to bitch about them developing nukes. Furthermore Israel maintains something called nuclear ambiguity, whereby they won’t officially acknowledge their nuclear weapons program, which is why they are not required to allow inspectors at their nuclear sites and Iran is.
only a scant month or so ago, P.M. Olmert cleared up all uncertainties – admitting Israel’s membership in the nuclear club – Israel is a member in good standing.
but the policy still officially stands.
(h/t TPM)
I am not saying they don’t have a plan BUT… Just some food for thought. 🙂
Good of you to provide the links.
I’m aware The Times, UK is a Murdock property that lends itself to psy-ops. But there have been alarms sounded elsewhere. We can’t overlook the build-up of U.S. maritime assets in the Gulf, the comfort given to Israel by Egypt, Saudis, Jordan, their collective anxieties on Iran’s ascendancy. Not to mention our decider-in-chief.
Last September at the UN, Bush is reported saying he’d understand if Israel dealt with Iran.
We have a choice here. Bush may give the green light for Israel to take a swift hasty decision and attack using taxpayers’ money and weapons – those buster bunker bombs supplied to Israel end of July ’06 or we can keep the door closed.
‘the US is in too weak a position in Iraq to crack the whip at Iran.’
Washington in a bind, So here comes Israel?
I know, and I am truely as concerned as you are. But like Josh Marshall said, “Consider the source.” I dropped those links in there just to make sure you have some balance in here when people weigh their thoughts on this.
The fact that Olmert has been on record hinting about “Israel’s Nukes,” in what may be ambiguous terms, is a HUGE step away from their near complete denial of them in the past.
This recent rehashing of the Time’s “psy-ops” (I kindof think that is still what it is) coupled with Israel’s recent hints does make this more than just the typical psy-ops message we may have seen in the past.
Hell yeah! It is something to worry about. But I am not sure if we should be more worried about the intent of the message more than the information contained within. Ya know what I mean?
Who is this message really directed at? Iran? The entire Middle East? Panicky Americans? Europe? A little bit of everyone?
And why? For Iran it is obvious. For everyone else?
Well, that is a lot (maybe too much? lol) of “what if?”, and I am not sure any, all, or none of it is on target.
Well, as far as I can see it – there are two ways to interpret this.
Because of the shifts I described in my post about Iran yesterday, and the warnings of people in a position to know, I think we’d be better off assuming #3 and lobbying our representatives in government to pressure Israel to back off and stay out of the Iran issue.
You are all over this stuff, eh? OK… Now I am even more concerned.
we can choose to dismiss this as psy-ops, pressuring Iran. Over the last 3 years, Iran has been an important issue that’s consumed pages of ink. I choose to take this seriously given those two imperial hands in the Oval Office.
Neither Israel or the U.S. can pressure Iran. The Limited sanctions just voted by the U.N. Security Council will be of no effect. Iran has been under U.S. sanctions for the past 26 years?
The Ayatollahs will pursue what is in their best interest – nuclear power for energy. And the horse shit about Iran having so much oil is just that. Only last week the National Academy of Sciences released a study that Iran’s claim to needing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes is plausible since its oil production will decrease in about 8 – 10 years.
I defer to experts that Bush has been preparing to attack Iran.
Note the article is written and dated for February publication, having nothing to do with The Times of London piece but facts do match up.
Imho, Bush feels the need to correct the unintended consequences of his Iraq misadventure – unleashing the Shiite genie, handing a supreme gift to Iran and in the process alienating close Gulf state allies.
Thanks for breaking this important story here. I’m glad to see Booman and Clammyc running with it.
I’d tend to call Bullshit, but only on the grounds that it is an utterly and completely mad idea. If it is a plan put to gether by Cheney, how don’t they think that the whole Arab world isn’t going to go up in flames over this? the neuclear attack on an arab nation is not going to play well, and the idea that the USA is not going to suffer any blowback from this particular event is frankly ludricous. Who controlls the Airspace between Israel and Iran? This mission is not possible without US permission. If the US wants to produce a united Iraqi government, this probably not the most positive way.
True, but there are powerful men in power who don’t give a fig’s seed on what we think. While we’ll be paying the price.
Despite the Israeli government denials, this out of Jerusalem via The Independent, UK
“Military strike is only way to stop Iran, says top Israeli strategist.”
and here’s the tone of The Independent’s lead Editorial:
“Israel should give diplomacy more time to work.”
I know that the powerful don’t care, but how does the IAF get to Iran without flying through Airspace that we control, thus making us accessories to a nuclear attack on a state? On top of that, it’s around 3,500 km round trip on any raid, that meaans staging refueling planes somewhere either over Iraq or Saudi. We aren’t going to be able to get away with claiming we didn’t know either.
I’ve never seen it mentioned anywhere that an Islamic state already has nuclear weapons – Pakistan – so it’s not about Muslims obtaining nuclear weapons. The thing is that Pakistan, like most Muslim nations, is Sunni – Iran is Shiite. I believe that the true target of Iran’s nuclear program is not Tel Aviv but Islamabad (deterrent) and Riyadh (for actual use). The absolute last thing that America would want to see is a nuclear civil war among the Muslims ($6 per gallon gas anyone?), and our problem is Israel’s problem, hence the saber-rattling (and planning) against Iran. I could be way out in left field on this but it seems like a plausible theory. If this theory is indeed the case then there is little that anyone can do to stop what will come next – Iran will not be deterred from developing nuclear weapons and they will be attacked, massively. I hope that I am wrong, but if I’m not then this is going to get extremely ugly, and we could well feel it over here – chickens coming home to roost and all that.