PDA

View Full Version : Israel preparing to 'go it alone' on Iran



Smurf-Herder
12-06-2008, 09:02 PM
Israel preparing a 'go it alone' air strike against Iran's nuclear facilities without consulting the U.S.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/12/04/article-1091983-028EB036000005DC-596_468x348.jpg

Israel is preparing to go it alone in a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities, it was reported yesterday.

Officials in the Israeli Defence Ministry told the Jerusalem Post that while they prefer to act in consultation with the U.S., they were preparing plans that would allow them to act in isolation.

'It is always better to coordinate,' a senior Defence Ministry official told the newspaper. 'But we are also preparing options that do not include coordination.'

His comments came after President Bush refused to promise U.S. assistance in an attack, which would need to cross Iraqi airspace that is currently controlled by America.

According to the newspaper, Israeli military strategists are drawing up plans for an air strike against the emerging nuclear weapons programme in Iran, which experts believe is just three years away from becoming operational.

Israeli leaders fear that an Iranian regime armed with nuclear weapons will carry out Tehran's cold-blooded threat to destroy the Jewish state and destabilise the West.

At a military parade in Tehran in the summer, banners adorning six Shehab-3 missiles declared: 'Israel must be wiped off the map' and 'We will crush America under our feet.'

'While its preference is to co-ordinate with the U.S., defence officials have said Israel is preparing a wide range of options for such an operation,' the Post reported.

'Israeli officials have said it would be difficult, but not impossible, to launch a strike against Iran without receiving codes from the U.S. Air Force, which controls Iraqi airspace,' the report added.

Earlier this year, there were reports that Israel was holding major exercises along the length of the Mediterranean about the same distance as the 1,000-mile flight to Iran in what was seen as a dry-run for a possible attack.

But many experts believe a military strike against Iran is impossible without U.S. assistance, since many of the Iranian facilities are underground. Without American permission to fly over Iraq, and access to advanced U.S. intelligence, an Israeli strike is unlikely to succeed.

Last week, Iran's nuclear chief Gholam Reza Aghazadeh revealed that thousands of uranium enrichment centrifuges were already in operation at its nuclear plant in Natanz.

'At this point, more than 5,000 centrifuges are operating in Natanz,' said Mr Aghazadeh.
There were only 4,000 in operation in August.

Iran has been testing its upgraded Shehab-3 inter-continental ballistic missile, which is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead 1,242 miles more than enough to hit Tel Aviv.

Meanwhile western diplomats said that UN sanctions and other diplomatic pressure were proving ineffective in persuading Iran to give up its Russian-backed nuclear programme.

'I do not belong to the optimistic camp which believes there is a solution for the Iranian nuclear issue,' NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told reporters in Brussels today.

In September, US troops deployed an advanced radar system in Israel designed to help protect the country against a ballistic missile attack from Iran.

The Forward Based X-Band Transportable Radar system can detect an Iranian ballistic missile half-way into its 11-minute flight to Israel.

The X-Band radar is being linked to US satellite tracking stations and Israel's own Arrow II defensive rocket system, enabling them to detect and destroy an incoming Iranian missile before it enters Israeli airspace.

Japan deployed the same system two years ago to detect potential missiles launched from North Korea

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1091983/Israel-preparing-air-strike-Irans-nuclear-facilities-consulting-U-S.html


Israel provides NATO with intel on Iran nuclear program

The Israeli delegation focused on the Iranians' efforts to develop the Shihab-4 missile, with a strike range of 3,000 kilometers. When completed, the missiles will threaten parts of Europe.

Israel is extending its ties with NATO in order to prevent the smuggling of weapons into the Middle East, and to address roadside bombs and the war on terror.

Senior officials in Jerusalem and Brussels have said that the military cooperation between NATO and Israel would be extended in the near future. The NATO foreign ministers confirmed the agreement.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1044086.html

Bill
12-07-2008, 05:10 PM
That seems reasonable.

Too bad about Bush. At one time it looked like he was going to do something.

ROdger Right
12-07-2008, 05:26 PM
While Obama will do nothing. Iran will deserve to be annhilated if ti sends one nuke up. To set an example that those who start a nuke war will not survive it

Dale escondido
12-07-2008, 05:52 PM
GO JEWS:thumbsup:

Bill
12-07-2008, 07:44 PM
To set an example that those who start a nuke war will not survive it

You do know thats been american strategy all along right?

No, I'll bet you don't.

Nor is it the topic at hand.

Not that you know or care.

Being a kneejerk reactionary is it's own reward. It's funny to see how predictable that is.

ROdger Right
12-07-2008, 08:50 PM
There are times you have to let your intentions be known to everybody and stratgey can change with administrations. Obama with wanting to have talks with no pre-condidtions is a trip wire and ive seen the flares.
Predictable and unstoppable

Bill
12-07-2008, 09:14 PM
Ridiculous. Silly red agitprop.

You're modeling the US as a weak man who's afraid to appear weak, so has to bluster and threaten.

I model the US as a man so sure of their power they can afford to approach a frightened man without preconditions and talk them down.

The red obsession with other nations geting nukes just isn't borne out by the facts. Nation after nation has gotten them without our permission - and they use them as defenses, not offensivley, because even the dumbest government on the planet knows that if they fire one offensively they will be turned into smoking glass, and all the rest of the world will say - they got what they deserved.

Dale escondido
12-08-2008, 05:57 AM
Ridiculous. Silly red agitprop.

You're modeling the US as a weak man who's afraid to appear weak, so has to bluster and threaten.

I model the US as a man so sure of their power they can afford to approach a frightened man without preconditions and talk them down.

The red obsession with other nations geting nukes just isn't borne out by the facts. Nation after nation has gotten them without our permission - and they use them as defenses, not offensivley, because even the dumbest government on the planet knows that if they fire one offensively they will be turned into smoking glass, and all the rest of the world will say - they got what they deserved.

Still you have to draw a line somewhere in the sand.
Not to prove strength or weakness, just logic.
Every unstable player who moves into the nucleur arena increases the chance of " The Sons of whatever" getting their hands on one.
Iran is an educated people who have let themselves be led by idiots.
Let them deal with that before allowing them a bigger stick.
GO JEWS:thumbsup:

Smurf-Herder
12-08-2008, 07:32 PM
There are times you have to let your intentions be known to everybody and stratgey can change with administrations. Obama with wanting to have talks with no pre-condidtions is a trip wire and ive seen the flares.
Predictable and unstoppable

I don't think we can go by anything said during the campaign. Obama was trying to get votes and a lot was rhetoric.

Smurf-Herder
12-08-2008, 07:34 PM
Ridiculous. Silly red agitprop.

You're modeling the US as a weak man who's afraid to appear weak, so has to bluster and threaten.

I model the US as a man so sure of their power they can afford to approach a frightened man without preconditions and talk them down.

The red obsession with other nations geting nukes just isn't borne out by the facts. Nation after nation has gotten them without our permission - and they use them as defenses, not offensivley, because even the dumbest government on the planet knows that if they fire one offensively they will be turned into smoking glass, and all the rest of the world will say - they got what they deserved.

So that's like an eternal rule, that no country will ever brake?

Can I get your guarantee on that?

The red obsession? No Democrats worry about other countries getting nukes? Where do you get off with a comment like that?

Smurf-Herder
12-08-2008, 07:43 PM
GO JEWS:thumbsup:

They're trying to get Syria to disengage from Iran, before any strike.

We'll probably see a Persian Gulf war from it; with oil skyrocketing.

But I guess it's better than surprise Iranian nukes, either in a first strike, or pre-positioned.

Hey ........... they get one good-sized nuke, in a missile. They just have to get it launched off a truckbed in a cargo hold of a freighter off the coast. Get it up to 300 miles over the middle of the country, and they've blacked out most of North America for at least a year, killing communications and transportation; and destroyed millions of computers - without killing anyone directly with nuclear weapons. Nobody will even be sure who was responsible.

(It would appear on radar behind our missile defense line; making it impossible to intercept in time.)

SeedyROM
12-08-2008, 07:50 PM
Diplomacy may prevail with delaying the attacks. Bush is using a great stall tactic to delay till Obama takes over next year. The Jews will strike if we do not agree to help them. Israel is hellbent on the attacks and with good reason.

It is better to let Israel go it alone if diplomacy fails. The Iranians are hellbent on finishing thier projects at all locations. A hard and fast strike will be the best solution so as to hit when the Iranians least expect it. Otherwise they will remove the nuclear materials and hide them elsewhere or worse, allow the materials to leave the country.

When diplomacy fails, war is diplomacy by another means.

Smurf-Herder
12-08-2008, 08:07 PM
Diplomacy may prevail with delaying the attacks. Bush is using a great stall tactic to delay till Obama takes over next year. The Jews will strike if we do not agree to help them. Israel is hellbent on the attacks and with good reason.

It is better to let Israel go it alone if diplomacy fails. The Iranians are hellbent on finishing thier projects at all locations. A hard and fast strike will be the best solution so as to hit when the Iranians least expect it. Otherwise they will remove the nuclear materials and hide them elsewhere or worse, allow the materials to leave the country.

When diplomacy fails, war is diplomacy by another means.

The problem is there are over 100 sites - that we know of.

And the prevailing opinion was that there's a second complete program, that we have no idea of the locations.

It will have to be a massive raid, with little time over the area. And it will be responded to with missile attacks out of Iran and rockets out of Lebanon. The Gulf countries could be hit too; as well as the Fifth Fleet trying to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.

Moby
12-09-2008, 12:24 AM
Since Israel is going to attack using a lot of American tech and weapons I think that some how it's going to be on our door step. It won't matter to anyone that loses family. The only advantage of us staying out of it is to save face. It will still be our fight.

Dale escondido
12-09-2008, 05:02 AM
The problem is there are over 100 sites - that we know of.

And the prevailing opinion was that there's a second complete program, that we have no idea of the locations.

It will have to be a massive raid, with little time over the area. And it will be responded to with missile attacks out of Iran and rockets out of Lebanon. The Gulf countries could be hit too; as well as the Fifth Fleet trying to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.

Not going to happen.
Isreal will be done in a few hours.
Arabs know isreal wil kick their ass, they are more about getting world opinion on their side than actually beating isreal in conflict.
Some token attacks but nothing at us for sure.

Smurf-Herder
12-09-2008, 11:34 AM
Not going to happen.
Isreal will be done in a few hours.
Arabs know isreal wil kick their ass, they are more about getting world opinion on their side than actually beating isreal in conflict.
Some token attacks but nothing at us for sure.

Yet, their ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel ... or bringing about the return of the Imam Madhi, depending on who you listeten to.

I don't see it ending quick, not with Iran's rhetoric and Hezbollah having 3 times the rockets and missiles they had in 2006.

Dale escondido
12-09-2008, 04:20 PM
Yet, their ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel ... or bringing about the return of the Imam Madhi, depending on who you listeten to.

I don't see it ending quick, not with Iran's rhetoric and Hezbollah having 3 times the rockets and missiles they had in 2006.

Isreal will make it short I am sure.
I think Irans armageddon requires the nukes to start end of times according to their ideology.
Thats why we have to keep them neutered until more intelligent forces come to power there.
As far as Hezbollah and their missiles, there probably tired of losing over and over again. But who knows for sure?

SeedyROM
12-09-2008, 04:36 PM
The problem is there are over 100 sites - that we know of.

And the prevailing opinion was that there's a second complete program, that we have no idea of the locations.

It will have to be a massive raid, with little time over the area. And it will be responded to with missile attacks out of Iran and rockets out of Lebanon. The Gulf countries could be hit too; as well as the Fifth Fleet trying to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.

Definitely pandoras box. Taking out the centrifuges is the main objective. The missle sites second. There are 3 known centrifuge sites, could be unknown locations as well.

The Strait of Hormuz can be dealt with, Iran has a limited Navy. Thier suicide boat crews are the problem. But they will play hell getting past the Phallix guns and air support defenses.

If Russia chooses to back/protect Irans nuke program then its back to the drawing board.

ROdger Right
12-09-2008, 05:44 PM
Russia is in for the money nothing more. They know if they back iran theres a chance we back Isreal. When the truth is both our countries can do with out backing either of them.

Smurf-Herder
12-09-2008, 07:46 PM
Isreal will make it short I am sure.
I think Irans armageddon requires the nukes to start end of times according to their ideology.
Thats why we have to keep them neutered until more intelligent forces come to power there.
As far as Hezbollah and their missiles, there probably tired of losing over and over again. But who knows for sure?

I'm worried the game could be to lure Israel into attacking first; to justify in the eyes of the muslim world whatever follows in retaliation.

Don't get me wrong, I support Israel in this.

I'm just worried it's now a no-win situation.

What we need, if it's possible, is connections with high-ups in the regular Iranian military, who are sick of the mullahs' fundamentalist authoritarian rule. Who could help stage a populist coup against the ruling elite and the IRGC.

We need a long-range strategy; otherwise were just waiting for Iran to rebuild what Israel takes out ......... or surprise us with what they're hiding.

Cat slave
12-09-2008, 07:56 PM
GO JEWS:thumbsup:

But didnt they blow the last conflict they were in? Maybe not the best idea.

Smurf-Herder
12-09-2008, 08:01 PM
Definitely pandoras box. Taking out the centrifuges is the main objective. The missle sites second. There are 3 known centrifuge sites, could be unknown locations as well.

The Strait of Hormuz can be dealt with, Iran has a limited Navy. Thier suicide boat crews are the problem. But they will play hell getting past the Phallix guns and air support defenses.

If Russia chooses to back/protect Irans nuke program then its back to the drawing board.

They have an extensive arsenal of silkworm and sunburn cruise missiles. some with a range that can hit our ships in port at Bahrain from the Iranian coastline. Not to mention what insurance rates would be for tankers in the Gulf, if hostlities broke out.

BTW, Russia has had an agreement since 1921 that states Russia has the right to intervene in Iran, if foreign forces deploy troops on Iranian soil. An air attack would be a different matter. But I can see Russia getting involved very easily; with the way they've been posturing during the past year or so.

Moby
12-09-2008, 09:42 PM
BTW, Russia has had an agreement since 1921 that states Russia has the right to intervene in Iran, if foreign forces deploy troops on Iranian soil. An air attack would be a different matter. But I can see Russia getting involved very easily; with the way they've been posturing during the past year or so.
That's interesting. Basically Russia could get involved if we deployed any seal teams to act as spotters but theoretically couldn't (justifiably) get involved as long as it was all air and no laser guided missiles that require ground support.

Am I reading your comment right?

SeedyROM
12-10-2008, 04:21 AM
They have an extensive arsenal of silkworm and sunburn cruise missiles. some with a range that can hit our ships in port at Bahrain from the Iranian coastline. Not to mention what insurance rates would be for tankers in the Gulf, if hostlities broke out.

BTW, Russia has had an agreement since 1921 that states Russia has the right to intervene in Iran, if foreign forces deploy troops on Iranian soil. An air attack would be a different matter. But I can see Russia getting involved very easily; with the way they've been posturing during the past year or so.

I forgot about the 1921 agreement. So an invasion is out of the question unless we sit down with Putin. Putin plans to become President next year and he could hold office for 12 to 20 years.

Sillworms become less reliable the further they go. We can shoot them down with Strike Eagles or F-16's as can the jews. Insurance rates are going up for sure. Blackwater is foaming at the mouth over the contracts.

Dale escondido
12-10-2008, 06:19 AM
I'm worried the game could be to lure Israel into attacking first; to justify in the eyes of the muslim world whatever follows in retaliation.

Don't get me wrong, I support Israel in this.

I'm just worried it's now a no-win situation.

What we need, if it's possible, is connections with high-ups in the regular Iranian military, who are sick of the mullahs' fundamentalist authoritarian rule. Who could help stage a populist coup against the ruling elite and the IRGC.

We need a long-range strategy; otherwise were just waiting for Iran to rebuild what Israel takes out ......... or surprise us with what they're hiding.

There never any win in conflict.
Iran has been promoting an action here. I believe Iran is seeing world opinion turn against Isreal and taking advantage.
That doesnt lessen the threat from the present regiem and I think setting them back a few years is a positive action.
I say in most posts Irans population has well educated people and they are tired of this crap, but they still need something to get them taking action.
Kinda like us here at home.

Smurf-Herder
12-10-2008, 06:22 AM
I forgot about the 1921 agreement. So an invasion is out of the question unless we sit down with Putin. Putin plans to become President next year and he could hold office for 12 to 20 years.

Sillworms become less reliable the further they go. We can shoot them down with Strike Eagles or F-16's as can the jews. Insurance rates are going up for sure. Blackwater is foaming at the mouth over the contracts.

Russia will end up allying itself with Iran, in the end. It's just a question of how soon.

Consider all the potential targets in the Gulf. We wouldn't be able to defend every tanker and oil platform.

ROdger Right
12-10-2008, 02:56 PM
Im sure Russia will see it as a honor to stand by a 90 year old agreement.
I dont see anything in it for Russia. If Isreal attacks first everyone still has tthe problem of going through Iraqs airspace. We have the most milatary in the area trust me Russia wont want to fuck with that.

Dale escondido
12-10-2008, 03:53 PM
All the rheteroic about all these senerios is irrevelent.
Isreal sees this as a matter of survival.
They will inflict as much damage to the program as possible and hope time will change the situation later.
We need a good old special opts interference and help kick the goons out while putting in another pro american monster for now.

Smurf-Herder
12-10-2008, 06:27 PM
That's interesting. Basically Russia could get involved if we deployed any seal teams to act as spotters but theoretically couldn't (justifiably) get involved as long as it was all air and no laser guided missiles that require ground support.

Am I reading your comment right?

As long as that's what the literal wording says. I've only seen references to it, so I don't know how it could be interpreted.

But then there's also the possibility of Russian technicians being casualties in an air strike that spans most of Iran.

ROdger Right
12-10-2008, 06:32 PM
It would work out then on our end unless jews got exterminated. Isreal be better than somsouth vietnam soldiers going in there

Smurf-Herder
12-10-2008, 06:36 PM
Im sure Russia will see it as a honor to stand by a 90 year old agreement.
I dont see anything in it for Russia. If Isreal attacks first everyone still has tthe problem of going through Iraqs airspace. We have the most milatary in the area trust me Russia wont want to fuck with that.

Not necessarily.

Russia wants Caspian Sea oil.

Some have been encouraging Israel to go through Turkish airspace, like they did when they hit Syria.

And a Russian aircraft carrier group has been using a port in Syria for a supply base. In fact, they just deployed to the mediteranean again last week.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hYV66rpriSJi-rHcr_uBFK1zZIqwD94SIAA81

But IMO, Russia won't make a serious move for at least three years. And not until they have ground forces in Syria.

ROdger Right
12-10-2008, 07:14 PM
Yea its an on going situation but in the end id bet we still get oil