Israel considers military option for Iran nukes

[Praxius]

F-16I fighter plane

German Dolphin Submarine

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080807/israel_Iran_080807/20080807?hub=World

JERUSALEM -- Israel is building up its strike capabilities amid growing anxiety over Iran's nuclear ambitions and appears confident that a military attack would cripple Tehran's atomic program, even if it can't destroy it.


Such talk could be more threat than reality. However, Iran's refusal to accept Western conditions is worrying Israel as is the perception that Washington now prefers diplomacy over confrontation with Tehran.


The Jewish state has purchased 90 F-16I fighter planes that can carry enough fuel to reach Iran, and will receive 11 more by the end of next year. It has bought two new Dolphin submarines from Germany reportedly capable of firing nuclear-armed warheads -- in addition to the three it already has.


And this summer it carried out air maneuvers in the Mediterranean that touched off an international debate over whether they were a "dress rehearsal" for an imminent attack, a stern warning to Iran or a just a way to get allies to step up the pressure on Tehran to stop building nukes.


According to foreign media reports, Israeli intelligence is active inside Iranian territory. Israel's military censor, who can impose a range of legal sanctions against journalists operating in the country, does not permit publication of details of such information in news reports written from Israel.


The issue of Iran's nuclear program took on new urgency this week after U.S. officials rejected Tehran's response to an incentives package aimed at getting it to stop sensitive nuclear activity -- setting the stage for a fourth round of international sanctions against the country.


Israel, itself an undeclared nuclear power, sees an atomic bomb in Iranian hands as a direct threat to its existence.


Israel believes Tehran will have enriched enough uranium for a nuclear bomb by next year or 2010 at the latest. The United States has trimmed its estimate that Iran is several years or as much as a decade away from being able to field a bomb, but has not been precise about a timetable. In general U.S. officials think Iran isn't as close to a bomb as Israel claims, but are concerned that Iran is working faster than anticipated to add centrifuges, the workhorses of uranium enrichment.


"If Israeli, U.S., or European intelligence gets proof that Iran has succeeded in developing nuclear weapons technology, then Israel will respond in a manner reflecting the existential threat posed by such a weapon," said Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz, speaking at a policy forum in Washington last week.


"Israel takes (Iranian President) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's statements regarding its destruction seriously. Israel cannot risk another Holocaust," Mofaz said.

Morons.... get a clue... it was a poor translation and misunderstanding of what he meant, which he and other Iranian officials cleared up a month or two ago.

The Iranian leader has in the past called for Israel's elimination, though his exact remarks have been disputed. Some translators say he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map," while others say a better translation would be "vanish from the pages of time" -- implying Israel would disappear on its own rather than be destroyed.


Iran insists its uranium enrichment is meant only for electricity generation, not a bomb-- an assertion that most Western nations see as disingenuous.


Israeli policymakers and experts have been debating for quite some time whether it would even be possible for Israel to take out Iran's nuclear program. The mission would be far more complicated than a 1981 Israeli raid that destroyed Iraq's partially built Osirak nuclear reactor, or an Israeli raid last year on what U.S. intelligence officials said was another unfinished nuclear facility in Syria.


In Iran, multiple atomic installations are scattered throughout the country, some underground or bored into mountains -- unlike the Iraqi and Syrian installations, which were single aboveground complexes.


Still, the Syria action seemed to indicate that Israel would also be willing to use force preemptively against Iran.


"For Israel this is not a target that cannot be achieved," said Maj. Gen. Aharon Zeevi-Farkash, former head of Israel's army intelligence.


However, it's unlikely Israel would carry out an attack without approval from the United States.


Recent signs that Washington may be moving away from a military option -- including a proposal to open a low-level U.S. diplomatic office in Tehran and a recent decision to allow a senior U.S. diplomat to participate alongside Iran in international talks in Geneva -- are not sitting very well with Israel.

Suck it up Princesses.

That may help explain recent visits to Jerusalem by Mike McConnell, the U.S. director of national intelligence, and Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, each of whom delivered a message to Israel that it does not have a green light to attack Iran at this time.


Senior Israeli officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they do not wish to appear at odds with their most important ally, said they were concerned about a possible softening of the U.S. stance toward Iran.

Yeah, facts, lack of evidence and past screwups will do that.

Apparently to allay Israeli concerns, Bush administration officials last week assured visiting Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak that the U.S. has not ruled out the possibility of a military strike on Iran. And the U.S., aware of Israel's high anxiety over Iran's nukes, is also hooking Israel up to an advanced missile detection system known as X-Band to guard against any future attack by Iran, said a senior U.S. defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions over the issue have not been made public.


With sanctions and diplomacy still the international community's preferred method to get Iran to stop building the bomb, an Israeli strike does not appear imminent.

Idiots, you still have to prove they're intending to build a bomb before you can stop them from building one.

If it did attack, however, Israel would have to contend with upgraded Iranian defense capabilities, including 29 new Tor-M1 surface-to-air missile systems Iran purchased from Russia last year in a $700 million deal.


Russia has so far not gone through with a proposed sale to Iran of S-300 surface-to-air missiles, an even more powerful air defense system than the Tor-M1. An Israeli defense official said the deal is still on the table, however. This is a big source of consternation for Israel because the system could significantly complicate a pre-emptive Israeli assault on Iran.


Military experts say an Israeli strike would require manned aircraft to bombard multiple targets and heavy precision bombs that can blast through underground bunkers -- something Israel failed to do in its 2006 war against Hezbollah. It's widely assumed that Israel is seeking to obtain bunker buster bombs, if it hasn't already done so.


Elite ground troops could also be necessary to penetrate the most difficult sites, though Israeli military planners say they see that option as perhaps too risky.


America's ability to take out Iran's nuclear facilities is far superior to Israel's.


Unlike Israel, the United States has cruise missiles that can deliver high-explosive bombs to precise locations and B-2 bombers capable of dropping 85 500-pound bombs in a single run.


Yet the cost of an attack -- by the U.S., Israel or both -- is likely to be enormous.


Iran could halt oil production and shut down tanker traffic in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, which could send the price of crude skyrocketing and wreck Western economies.


It could stir up trouble for the U.S. in Iraq by revving up Shiite militias there just as Washington is showing some important gains in reining in Iraqi chaos.


It could activate its militant proxies in both Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, from where Israel could come under heavy rocket attack. And it could strike Israel with its arsenal of Shahab-3 long-range missiles -- something Israel is hoping to guard against through its Arrow missile defense system.


Perhaps most importantly, any strike on Iran -- especially if it's done without having exhausted all diplomatic channels -- could have the opposite of the desired effect, "actually increasing the nationalist fervor to build a nuclear weapon," said Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born Israeli and expert on Iranian affairs.


Whether an attack on Iran would be worth its cost would depend on how long the nuclear program could be delayed, said Chuck Freilich, a former Israeli deputy national security adviser and now a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School.


"A two, three-year delay is not worth it. For a five to 10-year delay I would say yes," he said.

Once again, you have to still prove they're building a nuclear weapon.... or else you'll be attacking more innocent people, yet again.

 

[Avro]

Iran has no ambitions to build nukes and has no homosexuals.

Honestly, I can't blame Isreal for being nervous considering Iran has declared Isreal should be wiped off the map.

 

[lone wolf]

The threat would be an empty one if Israel didn't feel they're owed the swimming lessons

 

[Praxius]

Iran has no ambitions to build nukes and has no homosexuals.

Honestly, I can't blame Isreal for being nervous considering Iran has declared Isreal should be wiped off the map.

Please stop being so ignorant, it wastes good debating time:

The Iranian leader has in the past called for Israel's elimination, though his exact remarks have been disputed. Some translators say he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map," while others say a better translation would be "vanish from the pages of time" -- implying Israel would disappear on its own rather than be destroyed.

And in more detail:

"Wiped off the map" or "Vanish from the pages of time" translation

Many news sources have presented one of Ahmadinejad's phrases in Persian as a statement that "Israel must be wiped off the map", an English idiom which means to "cause a place to stop existing", or to "obliterate totally", or "destroy completely".

Ahmadinejad's phrase was " بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود " according to the text published on the President's Office's website.

The translation presented by IRIB has been challenged by Mr. Arash Norouzi, who proposes that the statement "wiped off the map" was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the "regime occupying Jerusalem". He says that the Iranian government News Agency IRIB/IRNA translation is the source of the confusion:

One may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate? Who is responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide controversy? The answer is surprising. The inflammatory 'wiped off the map' quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran's Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.

​

According to Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, Ahmadinejad's statement should be translated as:

The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).
​

Norouzi's translation is identical. According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian". Instead, "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel


Next time, try to look for the proper information before you start running your mouth with the same crap the warmongers in Israel and the US want you to believe. They ran with "Wiped off the Map" because it suited their agendas, just like countless times in the past where they skewed their information or took false information and used it, without actually confirming it's true details.

Ignorant.

 

[Avro]

Running my mouth off?

Please!

All I said was that the Iranian leader has stated he would like to see Isreal wiped form the map, perhaps if there were a miscomunication he could clarify that himself in English.

Also since there are no homosexuals in Iran like the dear leader of Iran says I guess we can take his word there are no nuclear ambitions in that country as well.

 

[Just the Facts]

So we can change the title of this thread to "Israel hopes Iran's nukes collapse"

 

[Praxius]

Running my mouth off?

Please!

All I said was that the Iranian leader has stated he would like to see Isreal wiped form the map, perhaps if there were a miscomunication he could clarify that himself in English.

First as already explained, he never said that.

Secondly, he doesn't have to pamper you or I or anybody else to speak in our preferred language..... where are you from? Quebec?

He wasn't even addressing the rest of the world or even the West when he was saying what he said.

If you want to blame anybody, blame the people who misquoted him and blame the news media who jumped on the poor translation and tried to sell it as factual without confirming the proper translation.... also, blame the politicians who keep referring to that misquote..... but you can't blame him for something he never said, that's just dumb.

Also since there are no homosexuals in Iran like the dear leader of Iran says I guess we can take his word there are no nuclear ambitions in that country as well.

There are not as many homosexuals in Iran because it is illegal and most, if they were smart, would leave the country or face the consequences of their laws..... so in a matter of speaking, he's partially correct as the nation as a whole doesn't appear to accept that sort of behavior.

Also, I would bet that too was misquoted.... which it was:

Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Says He Was Misquoted on Gays
http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/2007/10/irans-ahmadinej.html

According to an aide to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian President was misquoted when he told an American audience last month were no gays in his country.

The aide maintains the President actually meant there were not "as many" as in the United States.

Which of course doesn't suprise me that he'd be misquoted yet again.

Try looking this stuff up for yourself for once.

So.... let's recap shall we?

• The President of Iran did not say he wanted Israel itself wiped off the map, just the current government so that proper talks can ensue and some balanced agreement can be met.
• The President of Iran did not say there were absolutely no homosexuals in his country, just less compared to the US and other Western countries.
• The President of Iran, as well as other officials in the Government have repeativly explained they are only seeking nuclear energy and not nuclear weapons, which is permitted and allowed for them to do, based on the treaty they signed, which Canada also signed onto as well. And if we're allowed to have nuclear power plants.... which we do.... why can't they?

Think about this logically for a second:

If Iran really wanted the distruction of Israel, and the president truly said he wanted the nation wiped off the map, why would they stop there and then claim they wern't seeking nuclear weapons to carry this through? I mean, logically if the above was true, those would have been direct threats...... so why would they stop with the threats and just say "Yeah we trying to get nukes, wtf are you guys gonna do about it?"

It doesn't add up, except for those who are blind to the actual truth and just want another war.

 

[Just the Facts]

According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian". Instead, "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."

That pretty much convinces me that the wipe Israel off the map translation is correct. As a speaker of multiple languages, I well understand that many idioms cannot be literally translated without losing their meaning, becoming nonsense or often amusing. That leads me to believe the original translators knew what they were doing. They translated for meaning rather than being literal word for word.

I mean come on, wiped off the map vs vanish from the pages of time. Lets see how many hairs we can split.

Mistranslate this:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=45d_1178512793

 

[Avro]

That pretty much convinces me that the wipe Israel off the map translation is correct. As a speaker of multiple languages, I well understand that many idioms cannot be literally translated without losing their meaning, becoming nonsense or often amusing. That leads me to believe the original translators knew what they were doing. They translated for meaning rather than being literal word for word.

I mean come on, wiped off the map vs vanish from the pages of time. Lets see how many hairs we can split.

Mistranslate this:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=45d_1178512793

Oh no, it's being mistranslated or perhaps doctored by the Jews.

 

[Avro]

First as already explained, he never said that.

Secondly, he doesn't have to pamper you or I or anybody else to speak in our preferred language..... where are you from? Quebec?

He wasn't even addressing the rest of the world or even the West when he was saying what he said.

If you want to blame anybody, blame the people who misquoted him and blame the news media who jumped on the poor translation and tried to sell it as factual without confirming the proper translation.... also, blame the politicians who keep referring to that misquote..... but you can't blame him for something he never said, that's just dumb.



There are not as many homosexuals in Iran because it is illegal and most, if they were smart, would leave the country or face the consequences of their laws..... so in a matter of speaking, he's partially correct as the nation as a whole doesn't appear to accept that sort of behavior.

Also, I would bet that too was misquoted.... which it was:

Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Says He Was Misquoted on Gays
http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/2007/10/irans-ahmadinej.html



Which of course doesn't suprise me that he'd be misquoted yet again.

Try looking this stuff up for yourself for once.

So.... let's recap shall we?

• The President of Iran did not say he wanted Israel itself wiped off the map, just the current government so that proper talks can ensue and some balanced agreement can be met.
• The President of Iran did not say there were absolutely no homosexuals in his country, just less compared to the US and other Western countries.
• The President of Iran, as well as other officials in the Government have repeativly explained they are only seeking nuclear energy and not nuclear weapons, which is permitted and allowed for them to do, based on the treaty they signed, which Canada also signed onto as well. And if we're allowed to have nuclear power plants.... which we do.... why can't they?

Think about this logically for a second:

If Iran really wanted the distruction of Israel, and the president truly said he wanted the nation wiped off the map, why would they stop there and then claim they wern't seeking nuclear weapons to carry this through? I mean, logically if the above was true, those would have been direct threats...... so why would they stop with the threats and just say "Yeah we trying to get nukes, wtf are you guys gonna do about it?"

It doesn't add up, except for those who are blind to the actual truth and just want another war.

Dosen't need to pmper us? Are you nuts? He is accused of wanting Isreal wiped form the map, why can't he clarify what he actually meant.

Perhaps while he is at it he should tell us why he thinks the holocaust is a myth.

How do you know there aren't as many homosexuals in Iran, you do have something to back that up right? Plus he said there aren't any at all in Iran, either he is lying or is a complete idiot.

Nobody wants another war, least of all me since I opposed the Iraq war and to some degree the Afghan war but that dosen't mean I want a nation who hates Isreal and who wants them wiped form the map to have nukes. Seems you couldn't care less about anybody but yourself.

 

[lone wolf]

Dosen't need to pmper us? Are you nuts? He is accused of wanting Isreal wiped form the map, why can't he clarify what he actually meant.

Perhaps while he is at it he should tell us why he thinks the holocaust is a myth.

How do you know there aren't as many homosexuals in Iran, you do have something to back that up right? Plus he said there aren't any at all in Iran, either he is lying or is a complete idiot.

Nobody wants another war, least of all me since I opposed the Iraq war and to some degree the Afghan war but that dosen't mean I want a nation who hates Isreal and who wants them wiped form the map to have nukes. Seems you couldn't care less about anybody but yourself.

Did it ever occur to you there are some things for which there is no literal translation into English? Even from French to English, joi de vivre loses something in the translation....

 

[Avro]

Did it ever occur to you there are some things for which there is no literal translation into English? Even from French to English, joi de vivre loses something in the translation....

That's fine, if this is indeed the case then please clarify it in English to prove us all wrong.

Instead they have parades destroying Isreal and the great satan, what are people suppose to think?

 

[lone wolf]

That's fine, if this is indeed the case then please clarify it in English to prove us all wrong.

Instead they have parades destroying Isreal and the great satan, what are people suppose to think?

I don't speak Iranian, know-it-all ... and if there is no literal translation, how do you translate anyhow? Use your head for more than scarfing down doughnuts....

 

[Avro]

I don't speak Iranian, know-it-all ... and if there is no literal translation, how do you translate anyhow? Use your head for more than scarfing down doughnuts....

sigh

Like I said genious, if there is confusion in this matter why dosen't he just say it in English?

Should I type it slower so you idiots can understand it?

 

[lone wolf]

sigh

Like I said genious, if there is confusion in this matter why dosen't he just say it in English?

Should I type it slower so you idiots can understand it?

He's saying it to Israel.... Are you normally this obnoxious or did someone kick your favourite mop pail? Tell us all you know, troll.... We have a second.

 

[Avro]

He's saying it to Israel.... Are you normally this obnoxious or did someone kick your favourite mop pail? Tell us all you know, troll.... We have a second.

So what? Do they speak his language?

Is this not an issue the Americans have brought up? Do they not speak english?

If you actually stopped being a jerk you'd realise how stupid you are.

 

[lone wolf]

So what? Do they speak his language?

Is this not an issue the Americans have brought up? Do they not speak english?

If you actually stopped being a jerk you'd realise how stupid you are.

No ... they speak 'merikun, boa. Wake up! You'd be the one to recognize when someone's rattling your jerk tree....

 

[Avro]

No ... they speak 'merikun, boa. Wake up! You'd be the one to recognize when someone's rattling your jerk tree....

Still lost in translation. Perhaps if you spent less time defending a tyrant you could see that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an a-hole who doesn't care much Jews.

 

[Zzarchov]

I'd like to point out Praxius is incorrect.

It isn't that he didn't say "wipe Israel off the map", Its that he said something that means either that, or "will fade in time".

It does not mean that he didn't mean to imply the imminent destruction of Israel, just that he could also be taken as saying "will fade in time".


In the same way you could translate "I will take you out" to "I will kill you" or "I will go out on a date with you".

Although It could be taken either way (depending on context), the net result is I said "I will take you out", so if you ducked behind a chair (or if you were armed shot me) as I reached quickly into my coat you couldn't really be found at fault....even if you were a beautiful police officer and I was getting you a hidden rose..

 

[lone wolf]

Still lost in translation. Perhaps if you spent less time defending a tyrant you could see that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an a-hole who doesn't care much Jews.

Yeah ... coming from you, I can see how it would be lost - not so much in the translastion, but in the transition from neutral to park as the thought tries to process in that abyss between your ears. I'm not defending a tyrant - despite the delusions with which you comfort yourself. I am, however, wincing as I watch the effort it takes to for you to wrap your little pea mind around anything larger than a booger.