Israel getting ready to strike Iran

[shimmeh]

Jan 21, 9:00 PM (ET)

By JOSEF FEDERMAN
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel's defense minister hinted Saturday that the Jewish state is preparing for military action to stop Iran's nuclear program, but said international diplomacy must be the first course of action.

"Israel will not be able to accept an Iranian nuclear capability and it must have the capability to defend itself, with all that that implies, and this we are preparing," Shaul Mofaz said.

His comments at an academic conference stopped short of overtly threatening a military strike but were likely to add to growing tensions with Iran.

Germany's defense minister said in an interview published Saturday that he is hopeful of a diplomatic solution to the impasse over Iran's nuclear program, but argued that "all options" should remain open.

Asked by the Bild am Sonntag weekly whether the threat of a military solution should remain in place, Franz Josef Jung was quoted as responding: "Yes, we need all options."

French President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that France could respond with nuclear weapons against any state-sponsored terrorist attack.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Saturday that Chirac's threats reflect the true intentions of nuclear nations, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

"The French president uncovered the covert intentions of nuclear powers in using this lever (nuclear weapons) to determine political games," IRNA quoted Asefi as saying.

Israel long has identified Iran as its biggest threat and accuses Tehran of pursuing nuclear weapons. Iran says its atomic program is peaceful.

Iran broke U.N. seals at a uranium enrichment plant Jan. 10 and said it was resuming nuclear research after a 2 1/2-year freeze. Germany, France and Britain said two days later that talks aimed at halting Iran's nuclear progress were at a dead end and called for Iran's referral to the U.N. Security Council.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, will meet Feb. 2 to discuss possible referral.

Israel's Mofaz said sanctions and international oversight of Iran's nuclear program stood as the "correct policy at this time."

In Germany, Jung called himself "confident that there will be a diplomatic solution in the case of Iran."

Israeli leaders have also repeatedly said they hope the crisis can be resolved through diplomacy, and they said any military action would have to be part of an international effort. They have denied having plans for a unilateral preventive strike.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Tehran might still agree to Moscow's offer to move its uranium enrichment program to Russia, a step backed by the United States and Europeans as a way to resolve the deadlock.

Israel's concerns about Iran have grown since the election of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who said last year that Israel should be "wiped off the map."

On Friday, Iran's Students News Agency reported Friday that Central Bank governor Ebrahim Sheibani said Iran had begun moving its foreign currency reserves from European banks and transferring them to an undisclosed location as protection against possible U.N. sanctions.

Sheibani backed away Saturday from his statement that the transfers were already underway, and Iran's Central Bank said there had been no change in its currency policy.

Estimates put Iranian funds in Europe at as much as $50 billion.

[BlueBayou]

Good! I just hope they have the capabilities to completely destroy everything at all the sites. Iran has some underground facilities in hills and such (built with the significant aid of Russia) in an attempt to harden some of their facilities, especially around the Isfahan site. I just hope Israel has the bunker-busters or whatever is required to destroy these. Or whoever does the job. I'm sure (hope anyway) the plans are near or almost near complete by now though.

[shimmeh]

Originally Posted by BlueBayou

Good! I just hope they have the capabilities to completely destroy everything at all the sites. Iran has some underground facilities in hills and such (built with the significant aid of Russia) in an attempt to harden some of their facilities, especially around the Isfahan site. I just hope Israel has the bunker-busters or whatever is required to destroy these. Or whoever does the job. I'm sure (hope anyway) the plans are near or almost near complete by now though.

I'm sure we could lend them some

I would think the US might be involved aswell as far as logistics and maybe even in the bombing itself by B2s or F117s

I found what Chirac said about France retaliatting with nukes funny.

[BlueBayou]

Originally Posted by shimmeh

I'm sure we could lend them some

I would think the US might be involved aswell as far as logistics and maybe even in the bombing itself by B2s or F117s

I found what Chirac said about France retaliatting with nukes funny.

I think the most likely scenario that I could see would be cruise missiles for all of the above ground facilities and then the undergound stuff would have to be hit by JDAM bunker busters from B2's and other stealth aircraft. The Russians have also sold Iran grade A anti-aircraft missile systems which will make it difficult for a non-stealth aircraft to carry out the attack. I'll try to go find the link on this.

First action for the new F-22's ?

[ZeldaDBB]

The problem for Israel is that if they do strike first, the arabic nations will have a point in calling israel the agressor and this might trigger military actions from them. On the other hand they obviously can't afford to wait untill they are nuked themselves. One thing is certain though, this situation is going to escalate.

[sjl25]

If we are gonna go to war with other countries, it should be with countries like Iran and North Korea who are seeking to build nuclear weapons, not countries like Iraq.


Oh yeah, thank you to all the soldiers on these boards who are defending our country. Your courage and service is appreciated.

[Thinman]

I think we can go in with air power and do enough damage to their nuclear facilities to knock them back a number of years.

[NicVJ]

Originally Posted by ZeldaDBB

The problem for Israel is that if they do strike first, the arabic nations will have a point in calling israel the agressor and this might trigger military actions from them. On the other hand they obviously can't afford to wait untill they are nuked themselves. One thing is certain though, this situation is going to escalate.

True. But the rest of the non-Arabic world can't just sit back and let the Arabic nations take the lead. As history has shown and proven, rarely has any Arabic nation rein in one of their own and side with the Western powers or the rest of the world. I'd be surprised if the arabian cartel themselves refuse to admit that they're keeping mum on this issue deliberately even though they disagree with the actions of Iran. The best course of action would be through the UN, even with its bureacracies. The only country which may veto the vote should be China though they may want to side with the US on this issue to improve bilateral relationships and maybe even leverage slightly on the North Korean issue.

[PissingQuietly]

I just hope Israel has the bunker-busters or whatever is required to destroy these.

We recently sold them a few not to long ago.

If we are gonna go to war with other countries, it should be with countries like Iran and North Korea who are seeking to build nuclear weapons, not countries like Iraq.

We now have airbases in Iraq, Turkey, and Afghanistan...not to mention the ability to use the ports in kuwait and persian gulf...hehe

[Thinman]

Originally Posted by PissingQuietly

We recently sold them a few not to long ago.



We now have airbases in Iraq, Turkey, and Afghanistan...not to mention the ability to use the ports in kuwait and persian gulf...hehe

I have always thought one the reasons for going into Iraq, was so we would have bases there to strike against Iran or Syria.

[catmando]

Originally Posted by Thinman

I have always thought one the reasons for going into Iraq, was so we would have bases there to strike against Iran or Syria.

Yes of course. Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith advocated exactly that in PNAC's position papers. They want the US to protect Israel at all costs, which means confronting, and if necessary attacking, all Arab countries that threaten Israel.

We are building 14 bases in Iraq to house our Middle East military. Look for the jihadists to strike those bases as well as continuing to sever the oil pipelines.

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by catmando

Yes of course. Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith advocated exactly that in PNAC's position papers. They want the US to protect Israel at all costs, which means confronting, and if necessary attacking, all Arab countries that threaten Israel.

We are building 14 bases in Iraq to house our Middle East military. Look for the jihadists to strike those bases as well as continuing to sever the oil pipelines.

Oh, the US would risk a war to protect Israel?

And when did that happen, '48? '67?

[Dave22reborn]

Originally Posted by ZeldaDBB

The problem for Israel is that if they do strike first, the arabic nations will have a point in calling israel the agressor and this might trigger military actions from them. On the other hand they obviously can't afford to wait untill they are nuked themselves. One thing is certain though, this situation is going to escalate.

That's bull and you know it. Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear plants, and nothing happened. We stopped trading with them for maybe a month. And the Arabs just bitched for a while. Saddam swore revenge, and nothing happened.

[A & B]

I'm sure that Israel will strike Iranian facilities sooner or later.

But I don't believe they can take them all out themselves. They would require some measures of US complicity or assistance.

And IMO, a lot of people would say this was an aggressive action. I might have to agree with them... I don't know.

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by A & B

I'm sure that Israel will strike Iranian facilities sooner or later.

But I don't believe they can take them all out themselves. They would require some measures of US complicity or assistance.

And IMO, a lot of people would say this was an aggressive action. I might have to agree with them... I don't know.

I'd call all of Iran's provocative rhetoric aggressive too, and the development of nuclear weapons plus that rhetoric would qualify as an aggressive action.

[A & B]

Originally Posted by NuggzTheNinja

I'd call all of Iran's provocative rhetoric aggressive too, and the development of nuclear weapons plus that rhetoric would qualify as an aggressive action.

Yes, Iran's rhetoric is aggressive no doubt.

But we couldn't prove for certain that they are developing nuclear weapons. I mean, in terms of establishing a casus belli, I don't think Israel has one. If they did strike, it would be against international law IMO.

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by A & B

Yes, Iran's rhetoric is aggressive no doubt.

But we couldn't prove for certain that they are developing nuclear weapons. I mean, in terms of establishing a casus belli, I don't think Israel has one. If they did strike, it would be against international law IMO.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what their intentions are. You're right though, it'd be tough to prove until they have them.

Israel could pull something like "let us inspect your plants on a monthly basis", a la Saddam.

[ZeldaDBB]

Originally Posted by Dave22reborn

That's bull and you know it. Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear plants, and nothing happened. We stopped trading with them for maybe a month. And the Arabs just bitched for a while. Saddam swore revenge, and nothing happened.

I said it might trigger military action, what happened in the past is no guarantee that things wil evolve the same way this time. The situation is tense enough right now anyway.

[Memnoch]

One thing is certain though, Europe and the UN will do nothing to stop Iran, the most you'll get is a meeting or a harsh letter a la Team America.

The US is certainly not ready for another conflict and won't be for years due to Iraq, China would likely arm Iran with nuclear weapons if an Israeli/Iran conflict broke out as they have large business dealing with them, Russia is also a friend but would gladly stay neutral. IF they get nuclear weapons then they won't hesitate to use them even if it means poisoning the well in the face of defeat. Air strikes won't do it, there would need to be a ground invasion which isn't at all likely at the moment.

[WSUguy]

even if we knock out their ability to go nuclear they still have chem/bio options, and those are a lot easier to set up and run.

[BlueBayou]

Originally Posted by Memnoch

Air strikes won't do it, there would need to be a ground invasion which isn't at all likely at the moment.

Air strikes would do it. The whole point is the facilities. These are very large, extraordinarily complex and ultra-expensive facilities. Destroy them and youre out of the nuclear bomb experiment for a long time. These facilities have been being developed for decades. After having their facilities destroyed, it wouldnt be any time soon that Iran would be this close again, if they ever decided to even try again. But why would they even waste the time and money again just to have it bombed again? Highly unlikely. Iran will refuse cooperation, theyre going to have their nuclear facilities bombed, and they will not try again any time soon. The only reason the North Korean facilities didnt get bombed is because of the almost certainty that this would have instigated a War on the Korean peninsula, with a possible confrontation with China. This sort of scenario is unlikely to happen with the bombing of Iran's facilities.

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

this is risky. Iran is gonna get help from other countries. ****, this might be an emergence of another war of 7 arab countries going against Israel.

Israel might be preparing itself for a war it cant win.

[Canadian Nanook]

The Israeli military said that if the nuclear production is not stopped or prevented diplomatically, they will be prepared to move in by the end of march- not too far off
Also, although the israeli air force is the best in the world, i can see this as being a mossad mission, not military as it will be easier for mossad to infiltrate and thus eliminating the concept of war- no one was attacked if secret service are the ones carrying it out

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by WSUguy

even if we knock out their ability to go nuclear they still have chem/bio options, and those are a lot easier to set up and run.

Grossly ineffective against military targets.


Biological weapons are useful against civilians, whereas chemical weapons are effective but not efficient.

The amount of agent you'd have to dump in a given area is ludicrous.

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

this is risky. Iran is gonna get help from other countries. ****, this might be an emergence of another war of 7 arab countries going against Israel.

Israel might be preparing itself for a war it cant win.

I really doubt anybody will aid Iran in the event of war aside from Syria.

[shimmeh]

Originally Posted by BlueBayou

First action for the new F-22's ?

F/A 22 foolio

[mcxk]

Originally Posted by NuggzTheNinja

I really doubt anybody will aid Iran in the event of war aside from Syria.

Exactly, you have to remember that a lot of the Arab nations supported Saddam against Iran back in the Iran-Iraq war. Most of the Anti-Israel rhetoric done by arab leaders is usually to garner support from the common folk rather than their personal hatred towards israel. Arab leaders are more concerned about losing their prestigious positions and using the state money as their own personal accounts, and if they side with iran they are most likely going to lose this becuase they will not be on Americas side, which means they will eventually be stripped off their positions.

[Lloyd Braun]

Uh oh.

[Npeart]

Originally Posted by shimmeh

Jan 21, 9:00 PM (ET)

By JOSEF FEDERMAN
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel's defense minister hinted Saturday that the Jewish state is preparing for military action to stop Iran's nuclear program, but said international diplomacy must be the first course of action.

"Israel will not be able to accept an Iranian nuclear capability and it must have the capability to defend itself, with all that that implies, and this we are preparing," Shaul Mofaz said.

His comments at an academic conference stopped short of overtly threatening a military strike but were likely to add to growing tensions with Iran.

Germany's defense minister said in an interview published Saturday that he is hopeful of a diplomatic solution to the impasse over Iran's nuclear program, but argued that "all options" should remain open.

Asked by the Bild am Sonntag weekly whether the threat of a military solution should remain in place, Franz Josef Jung was quoted as responding: "Yes, we need all options."

French President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that France could respond with nuclear weapons against any state-sponsored terrorist attack.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Saturday that Chirac's threats reflect the true intentions of nuclear nations, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

"The French president uncovered the covert intentions of nuclear powers in using this lever (nuclear weapons) to determine political games," IRNA quoted Asefi as saying.

Israel long has identified Iran as its biggest threat and accuses Tehran of pursuing nuclear weapons. Iran says its atomic program is peaceful.

Iran broke U.N. seals at a uranium enrichment plant Jan. 10 and said it was resuming nuclear research after a 2 1/2-year freeze. Germany, France and Britain said two days later that talks aimed at halting Iran's nuclear progress were at a dead end and called for Iran's referral to the U.N. Security Council.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, will meet Feb. 2 to discuss possible referral.

Israel's Mofaz said sanctions and international oversight of Iran's nuclear program stood as the "correct policy at this time."

In Germany, Jung called himself "confident that there will be a diplomatic solution in the case of Iran."

Israeli leaders have also repeatedly said they hope the crisis can be resolved through diplomacy, and they said any military action would have to be part of an international effort. They have denied having plans for a unilateral preventive strike.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Tehran might still agree to Moscow's offer to move its uranium enrichment program to Russia, a step backed by the United States and Europeans as a way to resolve the deadlock.

Israel's concerns about Iran have grown since the election of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who said last year that Israel should be "wiped off the map."

On Friday, Iran's Students News Agency reported Friday that Central Bank governor Ebrahim Sheibani said Iran had begun moving its foreign currency reserves from European banks and transferring them to an undisclosed location as protection against possible U.N. sanctions.

Sheibani backed away Saturday from his statement that the transfers were already underway, and Iran's Central Bank said there had been no change in its currency policy.

Estimates put Iranian funds in Europe at as much as $50 billion.

LOL at the French president's quote. Him and his fellow gutless countrymen will be hiding under their beds, while our soldiers and the Israelis do all the heavy lifting

[Jazz_01]

Israelis 'rehearse Iran attack'

More than 100 Israeli F16 and F15 jets were involved in the exercise
Israel has carried out an exercise that appears to have been a rehearsal for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, US officials have told the New York Times.

More than 100 Israeli fighter jets took part in manoeuvres over the eastern Mediterranean and over Greece in the first week of June, US officials said.

Iran insists its programme is peaceful, but Israel sees Iran's development of the technology as a serious threat.

Tehran is defying a demand from the UN that it stop the enrichment of uranium.

More below...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/7465170.stm