PDA

View Full Version : Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran



FRED
01-07-07, 12:02 PM
Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310,00.html)
January 07, 2007 (The Sunday Times)

Uzi Mahnaimi, New York and Sarah Baxter, Washington

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.

“As soon as the green light is given, it will be one mission, one strike and the Iranian nuclear project will be demolished,” said one of the sources.

AntiSpin: The Times is a credible newspaper. Further, the story was, according to Google News, picked up by 275 news (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1112494011) organizations world wide–not a subtly leaked story. Why, if the report is true, should "several Israeli military sources" reveal the plan?

Either the story is untrue, or there deep rifts within the Israeli military, or the Israelis are now playing the "bate 'em" game that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been playing by declaring that “Israel must be wiped off the map” and testing rarified Russian and Chinese anti-sub and anti-ship weapons.

Iran Calls Test of New Missile Successful (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-04-02-iran-missile_x.htm)
April 3, 1006 (USA Today)

Iran conducted its second major test of a new missile within days on Sunday, firing a high-speed torpedo it said no submarine or warship can escape at a time of increased tensions with the U.S. over its nuclear program.

Russia went ahead and shipped Tehran 29 TOR M1 mobile surface-to-air missile defence systems in April 2006 against U.S. objections:

Missile exports to Iran alarm US (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4932814.stm)
April 21, 2006 (BBC)

Washington has asked Moscow to reconsider selling Iran anti-aircraft missiles as the crisis over its nuclear programme continues. Russia plans to sell Tehran 29 TOR M1 mobile surface-to-air missile defence systems in a deal said to be worth about US $700 million (£392m). "This is not time for business as usual with the Iranian government," a top US state department official said.

What is Russia thinking since the passage of UN resolutions against Iran? This May 8 story offers a clue.

Russia says UN plan for Iran is 'first step to war' (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article362745.ece)
May 8, 2006 (The Independent)

Russia will seek the removal tonight of the core of a UK-sponsored draft United Nations resolution on Iran because it fears that it could pave the way to unilateral military action to curb the Iranian nuclear programme. Yury Fedotov, the Russian ambassador in London, said his country opposed the Chapter VII reference because it evoked memories of past UN resolutions on Yugoslavia and Iraq that led to US-led military action which had not been authorised by the Security Council.

Russia's partners in the Security Council had argued in the past that the reference was needed to obtain "robust language," he said. But "afterwards it was used to justify unilateral action. In the case of Yugoslavia, for example, we were told at the beginning that references to Chapter VII were necessary to send political signals, and it finally ended up with the Nato bombardments."

Hard to say exactly what this newly "leaked" report means. We'll look for Stratfor's take tomorrow AM.

Tet
01-07-07, 12:45 PM
Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310,00.html)
January 07, 2007 (The Sunday Times)

ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans
LMAO, secret plans published in the Sunday Times, I guess you can't get more secret than that. I always publish my secret plans in the Sunday Times.

Why, if the report is true, should "several Israeli military sources" reveal the plan?
My guess would be it's more Israeli bullshit.



Iran Calls Test of New Missile Successful (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-04-02-iran-missile_x.htm)

April 3, 1006 (USA Today)

Iran conducted its second major test of a new missile within days on Sunday, firing a high-speed torpedo
Israel only attacks kids throwing rocks and countries that most would consider to be defenseless. Considering Iran is not defenseless, Israel or the US/UK won't attack.


Russia went ahead and shipped Tehran 29 TOR M1 mobile surface-to-air missile defence systems in April 2006 against U.S. objections:
Russia has installed their best surface to air missile system the S-300 manned with Russian troops to protect their investment to build twenty nuclear power plants in Iran.



Hard to say exactly what this newly "leaked" report means. We'll look for Stratfor's take tomorrow AM.
Stratfor? Why not Debka? Articles that don't mention China's over $100 billion of commited investment going on in Iran or India's over $40 billion of investment going on in Iran don't look at the bigger picture. The question to ask is what would China, Russia and India do if Israel did this? Understanding Israel won't survive the response from those three countries tells everyone Israel does nothing.

EJ
01-07-07, 01:01 PM
My guess would be it's more Israeli bullshit.



To what end?

Tet
01-07-07, 01:41 PM
Israel, London and Wall Street are very tightly aligned. The bags I'm going to invest in if there is a war are going to be completely different than the bags I invest in if there's not a war.

If there was I war I would consider holding the gold bag, the commodity bag, the oil bag and continued defense spending contractor bag. Without a war I don't consider any of these bags to be worth holding. In fact I would be trying to exit my positions from these bags and would be very busy telling anyone who would listen what a great investment, gold, commodities, defense stocks and oil are. I would be hyping articles like the above in order to exit my positions.

Israel, London and Wall Street work by getting you and I to hold the wrong bag. For the hypsters on Wall Street to steal a billion you need to steal thousands from millions of people like you and I, how do you do that except by painting false impressions in the press? The chances of war in this case is less than zero, yet articles continue to come out that the war will start any day now. As always, best to listen to the music and guess when it's going to stop and what chairs are left to sit in. I'm thinking they're getting ready to pull the gold chair, the commodity chair, the oil chair and the defense chair. I'm betting that the d0llar chair and the Tech chair are still there when the music stops. TWT, best of luck.

Jim Nickerson
01-07-07, 01:55 PM
Unless something changes in Iran, which it might, I have long thought that Israel will ultimately not allow Iran to develop a nuclear bomb. When lots of people keep saying they want to wipe you out, and if I personally did not want to be wiped out, I would defend myself and when necessary act preemptively. If I were humane, I would tell someone they should back off before I killed them. If they didn't back off, I would kill them.

Again, unless something changes significantly in Iran with its present regime, I expect before it is over, Israel will strike the Iranian nuclear facilities, and I don' think it will start WW IV.

Jim Nickerson
01-07-07, 02:04 PM
Israel, London and Wall Street are very tightly aligned. The bags I'm going to invest in if there is a war are going to be completely different than the bags I invest in if there's not a war.

If there was I war I would consider holding the gold bag, the commodity bag, the oil bag and continued defense spending contractor bag. Without a war I don't consider any of these bags to be worth holding. In fact I would be trying to exit my positions from these bags and would be very busy telling anyone who would listen what a great investment, gold, commodities, defense stocks and oil are. I would be hyping articles like the above in order to exit my positions.

Israel, London and Wall Street work by getting you and I to hold the wrong bag. For the hypsters on Wall Street to steal a billion you need to steal thousands from millions of people like you and I, how do you do that except by painting false impressions in the press? The chances of war in this case is less than zero, yet articles continue to come out that the war will start any day now. As always, best to listen to the music and guess when it's going to stop and what chairs are left to sit in. I'm thinking they're getting ready to pull the gold chair, the commodity chair, the oil chair and the defense chair. I'm betting that the d0llar chair and the Tech chair are still there when the music stops. TWT, best of luck.

Tet, what is a "Special Member."

I like your cynical thoughts. What does "TWT" mean?

Tet
01-07-07, 02:20 PM
Tet, what is a "Special Member."

I like your cynical thoughts. What does "TWT" mean?

Thanks, it's always best to think like a crook when investing your hard earned money so you're not left holding the bag. Wall Street NEVER robs the Wells Fargo wagon AFTER the payroll has been delivered, always before. Ask yourself the question, Where's the money to steal from? Gold, Oil, commodities, defense stocks are where the money is, definitely time to pass the bag. Where was the money in 2000?

TWT equals Time Will Tell and when it comes to investing that's all we've got.

Tet
01-07-07, 02:46 PM
Unless something changes in Iran, which it might, I have long thought that Israel will ultimately not allow Iran to develop a nuclear bomb. When lots of people keep saying they want to wipe you out, and if I personally did not want to be wiped out, I would defend myself and when necessary act preemptively. If I were humane, I would tell someone they should back off before I killed them. If they didn't back off, I would kill them.

Again, unless something changes significantly in Iran with its present regime, I expect before it is over, Israel will strike the Iranian nuclear facilities, and I don' think it will start WW IV.
I love half quotes and misquotes and when the press just flat out makes crap up, because that tells me to do the opposite. All these half quotes of Dr. Ahmadinejad’s speech crack me up. Obviously you haven't read the speech in it's entirety or you wouldn't be a believer in what our wonderful fantasy press is telling us cows. Dr. Ahmadinejad’s speech refers to Israel being wiped off the map the EXACT same way that the Soviet Union was wiped off the map. How many nuclear bombs were required for the Soviet Union to be wiped off the map?

What is the political situation in the middle east? Why doesn't the press mention Iran and Syria's mutual defense pact when they talk about about Israel's fantasy of attacking Iran? Why don't they mention the hundreds of billions Russia, China and India have at stake with their investments in Iran? Nothing is going to happen, that is a guarantee. Israel's very survival rests on it's not attacking Iran and with this in mind they will do nothing.

Jim Nickerson
01-07-07, 03:13 PM
Obviously you haven't read the speech in it's entirety or you wouldn't be a believer in what our wonderful fantasy press is telling us cows. Dr. Ahmadinejad’s speech refers to Israel being wiped off the map the EXACT same way that the Soviet Union was wiped off the map. How many nuclear bombs were required for the Soviet Union to be wiped off the map?

Correcto, I didn't read Ahmadinejad's speech, nor will I. I don't see or understand Israel as the the Israeli Union of Kosher States, thus I can see no analogy to anyone referring to Israel's disappearance as being the same as dissolution of the USSR. While the USSR existed, I personally never had any basis for antipathy for all those who populated its territories. Such lack of antipathy does not seem generally to be the attitude of the Middle East Arabs and Muslims. I take it that a whole lot of the Islamic world would do away with Israel in a second if it could. There seems to be no lack of affinity when it comes to killing in the Middle East. If you can't spite or kill a Jew, then kill a Sunni, or a Shiite, or a Kurd, or a westerner.


What is the political situation in the middle east? Why doesn't the press mention Iran and Syria's mutual defense pact when they talk about about Israel's fantasy of attacking Iran? Why don't they mention the hundreds of billions Russia, China and India have at stake with their investments in Iran? Nothing is going to happen, that is a guarantee. Israel's very survival rests on it's not attacking Iran and with this in mind they will do nothing.

I'll stick with my prediction: Israel will nuke the nuclear facilites in Iran before Iran develops full capability of annihalating Israel, unless something changes in Iran.

P.S. What is a special member? TWnT, you must tell.

DemonD
01-07-07, 04:09 PM
I'll stick with my prediction: Israel will nuke the nuclear facilites in Iran before Iran develops full capability of annihalating Israel, unless something changes in Iran.



No way. Why would israel use a nuke bomb when conventional bombs would work just as well? And the witticism up before... yeah, I too always make my secret plans for nuking Iran known in the Sunday times.

Look, if you wanted to nuke a nuclear facility, you would only need to have maybe 6 people know. The prime minister, the general, the 2 pilots (assuming 2 planes), and the 2 guys to load the bombs. Everyone else could be easily kept in the dark, since the Israeli Air Force flies sorties and training missions all the time.

And a nuclear airstrike would completely damage Israel's standing as a country. If Israel were to nuke Iran, it is likely they would be immediately retaliated against by Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc. (all the muslim countries which are basically neutral towards israel). It would be political suicide. Just like Iran bombing Israel would be political suicide. If a nuke gets detonated, it will be a pearl harbor type event.

Now, if you use conventional bunker-buster methodology, that's different.

But even still, what if Israel blows up the nuke plant? It's not going to stop the Iranians from developing nuclear weapons. The only way to prevent Iran from attaining and using nukes is through political means.

I'm with Tet on this one. No way Israel ever uses a nuke against anyone... unless it's in retaliation for a nuke against them. And even then... remember in 1991, Saddam was launching missiles against israel, they did not retaliate at the US's request.

jk
01-07-07, 05:17 PM
if the "plans" are in the sunday times they are meant to be read and considered by somebody. who is the intended audience?

fred says lets wait for stratfor to figure it out. not a bad suggestion. debka tends toward the overly dramatic, but might also provide ideas.

tet nominates the general public/investors, with the goal of moving them towards or keeping them in certain investments.

amadinejad? maybe. or maybe the higher ranks of the iranian clergy, who may be in the process of selecting a successor to khamenei [sp?], who is ailing. would such a threat cause the iranians to get more belligerent or more cautious? i don't have a clue, but perhaps the mossad does.

richard nixon once said that it was in the american interest for the soviets to think that he, nixon, was a little crazy. because only a crazy person would launch nuclear weapons. so maybe there's an element of making crazy faces here.

plans are not intent. i have no doubt that the israeli military has plans to bomb iran. and plans to bomb a dozen other countries. militaries are paid to have all kinds of plans. so the existence of plans says "we could do it if we decide to do it."

maybe the intended audience is washington. the only thing worse for washington than attacking iran itself would be for israel to attack iran.

i doubt we'll ever know the intentions behind this story. but it's fun [not quite the right word] to speculate.

FRED
01-08-07, 05:20 PM
This just in, and time to flog a paid subscription service:

IRAN: Iran could block oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for imposition of international sanctions, Basij commander Gen. Majid Mir Ahmadi said. Ahmadi said the move would be specifically directed against U.S. allies in the region, adding that Iran's strategy for the Persian Gulf is "security for everyone or for nobody."

To Stratfor with iTulip 50% introductory rate... (https://www.stratfor.com/offers/061110-awinback/email.php?ref=061110-itulip&)

metalman
01-11-07, 01:27 PM
this just in...

US forces storm Iranian consulate

US forces have stormed an Iranian consulate in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil and seized six members of staff.

The troops raided the building at about 0300 (0001GMT), taking away computers and papers, according to Kurdish media and senior local officials.

The US military would only confirm the detention of six people around Irbil.

Tehran said the attack violated all international conventions. It has summoned ambassadors from Switzerland, representing US interests, and Iraq.

A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry described the raid as an attempt to sabotage Tehran's relations with Iraq. One Iranian MP said it showed America's cruelty and meanness.

The raid comes amid high Iran-US tension.

In a major speech on Wednesday, President George W Bush said the US would take a tough stance towards Iran and Syria, whom he accused of destabilising Iraq.

The US also accuses Iran of seeking nuclear arms. Iran denies both charges.

Tehran counters that US military involvement in the Middle East endangers the whole region.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6251167.stm

FRED
01-11-07, 03:01 PM
this just in...

US forces storm Iranian consulate

US forces have stormed an Iranian consulate in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil and seized six members of staff.

The troops raided the building at about 0300 (0001GMT), taking away computers and papers, according to Kurdish media and senior local officials.

The US military would only confirm the detention of six people around Irbil.

Tehran said the attack violated all international conventions. It has summoned ambassadors from Switzerland, representing US interests, and Iraq.

A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry described the raid as an attempt to sabotage Tehran's relations with Iraq. One Iranian MP said it showed America's cruelty and meanness.

The raid comes amid high Iran-US tension.

In a major speech on Wednesday, President George W Bush said the US would take a tough stance towards Iran and Syria, whom he accused of destabilising Iraq.

The US also accuses Iran of seeking nuclear arms. Iran denies both charges.

Tehran counters that US military involvement in the Middle East endangers the whole region.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6251167.stm

Bush Advisers Promote His New Plan for Iraq (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6808971)

Other news from the press conference:

—Secretary Rice offered more harsh words for Iran and Syria. Although the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended diplomatic engagement with the two countries last month, the Bush administration has ruled that out. "Syria and Iran should end their destabilizing behavior in the region," Rice warned. "The United States will defend its interests and those of our friends and allies in this vital region."

jk
01-11-07, 03:40 PM
and oil is going down today???

DemonD
01-11-07, 09:34 PM
and oil is going down today???

JK -

Time to buy. :)