Israel prepares to launch attack....

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
...on Iran nuclear sites

(The Express On Sunday Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)ISRAEL is set to strike nuclear targets in Iran if the United Nations fails to take action against the rogue state, intelligence sources claim.

Military chiefs have told the United States that they are ready and able to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons facilities - with an attack as early as March.

The revelation comes as Iran faces growing isolation over its decision to restart its uranium enrichment programme in defiance of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA).

The UN-backed authority has warned that the country could be just three years away from building a nuclear weapon after it broke UN monitors' seals at its Natanz plant on Tuesday to restart work on its nuclear programme.

Iran's hardline president Mahmoud A hmadinejad, announced: "Iran is not frightened by threats from any country and it will continue the path of production of the nuclear energy. Iranian people do not allow foreigners to block their progress."

The decision, which sparked alarm across the Middle East and western powers, follows an earlier call by President Ahmadinejad for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

He has also suggested that the Jewish state be moved to Europe and denies that the Holocaust ever happened.

Britain, France and Germany last week called for an emergency session of the IAEA to refer Iran to the UN Security Council with the implied threat of sanctions as international fears grow that Iran's "civilian" nuclear programme conceals an ambitious secret effort to build atomic bombs.

Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, backed the move, accusing Iran of a "provocative" and "deliberate escalation" w hile, in a surprise development, Russia signalled that it would also give its support.

It is thought unlikely, however, that China, a permanent member of the UN security council, will bow to diplomatic pressure and join calls for sanctions against Iran for breaching its international nuclear obligations.

Israeli military chiefs say their plans to strike Iran's nuclear sites are "feasible", say intelligence sources.

They claim the Israelis are certain that an attack by their military machine would be as effective in destroying the Iranian project as it was against the Iraqi Ossiraq nuclear site in 1981. An Israeli missile attack would be expected to set back Iran's nuclear weapons programme by up to 10 years. The new government of acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also wants President Ahmadinejad to understand that the incapacitation of Ariel Sharon, following his stroke, would not affect Israel's state of military readiness.

A recent statement by the Israeli military chief of intelligence, General Aharon ZeeviFarkash, indicated that Israel had set a March 1 time limit for diplomatic means to deter Iran's plans. Sources in Tel Aviv say the general's remarks were based on a military planning timetable and could indicate a likely date for the missile strike. General Dan Halutz, Israel's chief of staff, said last week that there were several military means to deal with the problem.

He ordered a report as part of strategic cooperation talks with the United States and it was discussed recently when senior Israeli military figures met the heads of several US intelligence agencies.

President George W Bush's administration has attempted to quell any serious discussion of an attack following homegrown intelligence assessments that claimed the administration could wait until at least 2008 before Iran emerged as a nuclear threat.

Israel's military brass has concluded, however, that an Israeli or US strike on Iran could eliminate that nation's nuclear weapons facilities.

Israeli air force fighter pilots have been training for the past 10 years to survive antiaircraft and radar threats from Soviet antiaircraft systems which have been sold to Iran and other Middle Eastern states.

The Israelis have also received help from former Soviet or Russian anti-aircraft officers who emigrated to Israel.

The Israeli air force also chose recently to reveal details of its cooperation with Iran's neighbour Turkey, including the deployment of Israeli fighter jets there and Turkish squadrons in Israel as part of a joint training programme.

Earlier this month, President Ahmadinejad publicly called for Islam to prepare to "rule the world".

He said Islam did not restrict itself to national borders, saying: "We must believe in the fact that Islam is not confined to geographical borders, ethnic groups and nations. It's a universal ideology that leads the world to justice."

He added: "We don't shy away from declaring that Islam is ready to rule the world."

Link
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Why does the world put up with this garbage? Iran agreed to have the I.A.E.C. monitor what they were doing. Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons and they can't accept an internationally monitored reactor in Iran used for peaceful purposes? Hypocracy, plain and simple.
 

Semperfi_dani

Electoral Member
Nov 1, 2005
482
0
16
Edmonton
RE: Israel prepares to la

Iran's hardline president Mahmoud A hmadinejad, announced: "Iran is not frightened by threats from any country and it will continue the path of production of the nuclear energy. Iranian people do not allow foreigners to block their progress."

Replace Iran with USA and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with Bush..and it sounds likes something dubya would say...but i'm digressing. Sorry... :p

One thing first..why the hell is China a permanant member of the Security Council??? Do they EVER agree with anything the UN says????

Back to the point, what Juan said was spot on. I would ever so humbly add USA to the same argument. From what I can tell...and correct me if i'm wrong, the USA and Isreal basically only they can have unmonitored nuclear capabilities, but no other nation can?

I am ignorant on this issue however, so my comment at best may be naive ( i gather these thoughts from what i read in the newspaper, on the news etc...so my info on the issue is shaky) so if people can fill me in with more detail...
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
The decision, which sparked alarm across the Middle East and western powers, follows an earlier call by President Ahmadinejad for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

I suspect that comment makes Israel a "tad" nervous.
 

Semperfi_dani

Electoral Member
Nov 1, 2005
482
0
16
Edmonton
RE: Israel prepares to la

Heheh..yah, i suspect that too....

I can't imagine what it would be like to live in that part of the world and always fear, whether you are jewish or arab, that your neighbour is going to go schitzo on ya...
 

Graciously Yours

New Member
Jan 20, 2006
35
0
6
Within Myself
RE: Israel prepares to la

Yes, because as we all know punching someone in the head, because he "might" hit you later is perfectly alright....

right?

BTW - is Isreal ever going to honour their UN requirements? They aren't even supposed to have Nukes anyway are they? Heck they jailed someone for 20 years for outing them in the first place...

Iran may not be a "good guy" but neither is Isreal, and Isreal has broken far more UN orders than most countries combined.

I say we build a gaint wall, ala China, to contain them all. Let them kill each other, they simply are incapable of acting like adults.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
The decision, which sparked alarm across the Middle East and western powers, follows an earlier call by President Ahmadinejad for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

It is unfortunate that this guy makes these rash comments. It is also a fact that Iran has absolutely no weapons to achieve that "wiping off the map". Israel should know it is just bluster, and so should the U.S..
 

unclepercy

Electoral Member
Jun 4, 2005
821
15
18
Baja Canada
And to make matters even worse, now Syria is accusing Israel of assassinating Arafat. Look at this article:

*Saturday 21st January, 2006

*******************************************************************************
The President of Syria, Bashar Assad, has accused Israel of assassinating former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

Reuters quoted the Syrian president as making the claim during a gathering of Arab lawyers on Saturday.

"Of the many assassinations that Israel carried out in a methodical and organized way, the most dangerous thing that Israel did was the assassination of President Yasser Arafat," Assad said.

URL: http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=02d625512bf87f8d
********************************************************************************
Seems the neighbors are honking their horns too.

Uncle
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
I think not said:
...on Iran nuclear sites

(The Express On Sunday Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)ISRAEL is set to strike nuclear targets in Iran if the United Nations fails to take action against the rogue state, intelligence sources claim.

Military chiefs have told the United States that they are ready and able to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons facilities - with an attack as early as March.

The revelation comes as Iran faces growing isolation over its decision to restart its uranium enrichment programme in defiance of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA).

The UN-backed authority has warned that the country could be just three years away from building a nuclear weapon after it broke UN monitors' seals at its Natanz plant on Tuesday to restart work on its nuclear programme.

Iran's hardline president Mahmoud A hmadinejad, announced: "Iran is not frightened by threats from any country and it will continue the path of production of the nuclear energy. Iranian people do not allow foreigners to block their progress."

The decision, which sparked alarm across the Middle East and western powers, follows an earlier call by President Ahmadinejad for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

He has also suggested that the Jewish state be moved to Europe and denies that the Holocaust ever happened.

Britain, France and Germany last week called for an emergency session of the IAEA to refer Iran to the UN Security Council with the implied threat of sanctions as international fears grow that Iran's "civilian" nuclear programme conceals an ambitious secret effort to build atomic bombs.

Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, backed the move, accusing Iran of a "provocative" and "deliberate escalation" w hile, in a surprise development, Russia signalled that it would also give its support.

It is thought unlikely, however, that China, a permanent member of the UN security council, will bow to diplomatic pressure and join calls for sanctions against Iran for breaching its international nuclear obligations.

Israeli military chiefs say their plans to strike Iran's nuclear sites are "feasible", say intelligence sources.

They claim the Israelis are certain that an attack by their military machine would be as effective in destroying the Iranian project as it was against the Iraqi Ossiraq nuclear site in 1981. An Israeli missile attack would be expected to set back Iran's nuclear weapons programme by up to 10 years. The new government of acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also wants President Ahmadinejad to understand that the incapacitation of Ariel Sharon, following his stroke, would not affect Israel's state of military readiness.

A recent statement by the Israeli military chief of intelligence, General Aharon ZeeviFarkash, indicated that Israel had set a March 1 time limit for diplomatic means to deter Iran's plans. Sources in Tel Aviv say the general's remarks were based on a military planning timetable and could indicate a likely date for the missile strike. General Dan Halutz, Israel's chief of staff, said last week that there were several military means to deal with the problem.

He ordered a report as part of strategic cooperation talks with the United States and it was discussed recently when senior Israeli military figures met the heads of several US intelligence agencies.

President George W Bush's administration has attempted to quell any serious discussion of an attack following homegrown intelligence assessments that claimed the administration could wait until at least 2008 before Iran emerged as a nuclear threat.

Israel's military brass has concluded, however, that an Israeli or US strike on Iran could eliminate that nation's nuclear weapons facilities.

Israeli air force fighter pilots have been training for the past 10 years to survive antiaircraft and radar threats from Soviet antiaircraft systems which have been sold to Iran and other Middle Eastern states.

The Israelis have also received help from former Soviet or Russian anti-aircraft officers who emigrated to Israel.

The Israeli air force also chose recently to reveal details of its cooperation with Iran's neighbour Turkey, including the deployment of Israeli fighter jets there and Turkish squadrons in Israel as part of a joint training programme.

Earlier this month, President Ahmadinejad publicly called for Islam to prepare to "rule the world".

He said Islam did not restrict itself to national borders, saying: "We must believe in the fact that Islam is not confined to geographical borders, ethnic groups and nations. It's a universal ideology that leads the world to justice."

He added: "We don't shy away from declaring that Islam is ready to rule the world."

Link

Good.

Excellent, in fact.

The sooner, the better.
 

MMMike

Council Member
Mar 21, 2005
1,410
1
38
Toronto
I think not said:
The decision, which sparked alarm across the Middle East and western powers, follows an earlier call by President Ahmadinejad for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

I suspect that comment makes Israel a "tad" nervous.

No shit. And come on.... one of the most oil rich countries of the world needs an alternative souce of energy? :roll: It's obvious that they are trying to acquire nuclear ballistic missiles. And Iran is a signatore to the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), Israel is not.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
 

cyberclark

Electoral Member
My good friend Allen Dane the Electrial Engineer tells me that there is more to the Iraq atomic deal than what is shown on the TV news.

He has explained the US method of producing uranium is far more complex and far more expensive than then Iraq process. As such it stands to push the US product off the world market.

I have come to respect greatly these nuggests that Allen passes on!
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Technically Iran is in full compliance with the NPT. They have never said they want nukes, nor does any proof exist they are developing nukes. Under the terms of the NPT, the IAEA is supposed to assist non-nuclear nations like Iran acquire and develop peaceful nuclear technology in return for inspection of their facilities for safety and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons reasons.

For over two years the IAEA has held back Iran's legal nuclear research and interfered with Iran's NPT right to peaceful nuclear technology in violation of their mandate. With no end in sight to the IAEA's stalling, Iran decided to exercise their legal right under the terms of the NPT to continue researching nuclear technology with IAEA oversight in compliance with the NPT.

The IAEA is supposed to be an objective party, not a puppet of western nations.

Technically the US, like most nuclear powers, is in violation of the NPT. When they signed the NPT 30 years ago, they and the other nuclear powers agreed to reduce and eliminate their nuclear arsenals. The US under George W. Bush not only has no plans to eliminate their nuclear arsenal, it has restarted research into new kinds of nukes. Another NPT violation occurred when Bush threatened to use nukes against non-nuke Iraq.

Israel like Pakistan and India is not a signatory of the NPT. Therefore they do not get any assistance from the IAEA, nor are they required to allow the IAEA to monitor their nuclear activities. If Israel is allowed to possess nukes for security reasons, why is it unreasonable to expect that Iran would not also want nukes for the same reasons.

Obviously the NPT is full of loopholes. It allows nations like the US to keep its nukes without penalty and nations like Iran to develop nuclear technology to the brink of possessing the ability to manufacture nukes. Nations which continue to possess nuclear weapon with no sign of eliminating their nuclear arsenals in violation of the NPT are hardly in a postion to legitimately criticise NPT compliant Iran.

That said, obviously an Iran armed with nukes and the means to deliver them anywhere in the world would be far safer from an unprovoked US/Israel attack. Likely Iran noticed what the US does to unarmed oil rich countries it doesn't like. If Iran possessed nukes its unlikely they would use them or any other WMDs against Israel, the US or any other nation first. Nukes are really only useful as a retaliatory deterrent, not as a first strike. Also, its unlikely Iran would share nukes with organizations it cannot control. It has possessed CWs and BWs for over 20 years and no evidence exists that Iran has ever given anything but money and conventional weapons to organizations resisting Israel's occupation of Palestine. In that respect that makes Iran just as guilty as the US of taking sides in this dispute and the resulting violence.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
After you're done with all of that analysis, I wonder
earth_as_one, whether you can be comfortable that
you are right that Iran does not seek nuclear weapon
know-how, and TWO, whether your gamble on that
belief is acceptable and THREE, whether you really
don't find it too threatening to allow one more nation gain
access to the BIG BOY'S CLUB.

I wonder if we will draw the line on Nigeria, if they
want to go this route?

Perhaps the MAD (mutual assured destruction) DOCTRINE
between Russian and America should extend to all nations?

Where do we draw the line ?
 

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
Now we know, that france, Britain, America, Russia, Israel, China am I missing anyone have nuclear weapons.

Now Iran, North Korea, and Brazil want nuclear weapons.

Nut-ball, God hearing, Bush wants to create even more nuclear weapons allowing the chance of terrorists getting their hands on the materials needed to make a bomb.

Why doesn't every one just get rid of the bomb, like was started in the 1990s.

You just want to tempt fate and hope one guy doesn't press the button or what.

Just scrap it all, for all countries, not just Russia and America.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Jersay, you know as well as I do that no nation
will give up their nuclear weapon know-how.

You can bang your head against that wall and will
just accomplish nothing.

You did forget India and Pakistan, who had a very
testy showdown about a year ago.

I fear the liberals of the world get stuck on total
disarmament to the point they give up trying to
hold the line on further nuclear proliferation.

Mistake.
 

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
Jersay, you know as well as I do that no nation
will give up their nuclear weapon know-how.

You can bang your head against that wall and will
just accomplish nothing.

You did forget India and Pakistan, who had a very
testy showdown about a year ago.

I fear the liberals of the world get stuck on total
disarmament to the point they give up trying to
hold the line on further nuclear proliferation.

Mistake.

Sorry to India and pakistan. But back to nuclear proliferation that is the point.

Other nations want nuclear weapons for the sole fact that the big powers have nuclear weapons. They feel that with a nuclear weapon that they would be some big shot power, and could stand up to America, if in fact they are in a row with America. But that is all it is, the feeling of being important or holding world or regional power.

However, if the nations with nuclear weapons gave up their weapons, it wouldn't be easy for terrorists to activate a nuclear bomb. And the other nations will not want a nuclear weapon.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
However, if the nations with nuclear weapons gave up their weapons, it wouldn't be easy for terrorists to activate a nuclear bomb. And the other nations will not want a nuclear weapon.

-------------------------Jersay--------------------------

Like I said before:

I fear the liberals of the world get stuck on total
disarmament to the point they give up trying to
hold the line on further nuclear proliferation.

Mistake.

In addition there is a much more deeper way to look at this.
Knowledge of nuclear power is established. If nations
gave it up, there is no guarrantee a new nation would not
seek it.