Posted on 12/10/2005 6:48:44 PM PST by rhainw
ISRAEL’S armed forces have been ordered by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, to be ready by the end of March for possible strikes on secret uranium enrichment sites in Iran, military sources have revealed. The order came after Israeli intelligence warned the government that Iran was operating enrichment facilities, believed to be small and concealed in civilian locations.
Iran’s stand-off with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) over nuclear inspections and aggressive rhetoric from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, who said last week that Israel should be moved to Europe, are causing mounting concern.
The crisis is set to come to a head in early March, when Mohamed El-Baradei, the head of the IAEA, will present his next report on Iran. El-Baradei, who received the Nobel peace prize yesterday, warned that the world was “losing patience” with Iran.
A senior White House source said the threat of a nuclear Iran was moving to the top of the international agenda and the issue now was: “What next?” That question would have to be answered in the next few months, he said.
Defence sources in Israel believe the end of March to be the “point of no return” after which Iran will have the technical expertise to enrich uranium in sufficient quantities to build a nuclear warhead in two to four years.
“Israel — and not only Israel — cannot accept a nuclear Iran,” Sharon warned recently. “We have the ability to deal with this and we’re making all the necessary preparations to be ready for such a situation.”
The order to prepare for a possible attack went through the Israeli defence ministry to the chief of staff. Sources inside special forces command confirmed that “G” readiness — the highest stage — for an operation was announced last week.
Gholamreza Aghazadeah, head of the Atomic Organisation of Iran, warned yesterday that his country would produce nuclear fuel. “There is no doubt that we have to carry out uranium enrichment,” he said.
He promised it would not be done during forthcoming talks with European negotiators. But although Iran insists it wants only nuclear energy, Israeli intelligence has concluded it is deceiving the world and has no intention of giving up what it believes is its right to develop nuclear weapons.
A “massive” Israeli intelligence operation has been underway since Iran was designated the “top priority for 2005”, according to security sources.
Cross-border operations and signal intelligence from a base established by the Israelis in northern Iraq are said to have identified a number of Iranian uranium enrichment sites unknown to the the IAEA.
Since Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981, “it has been understood that the lesson is, don’t have one site, have 50 sites”, a White House source said.
If a military operation is approved, Israel will use air and ground forces against several nuclear targets in the hope of stalling Tehran’s nuclear programme for years, according to Israeli military sources.
It is believed Israel would call on its top special forces brigade, Unit 262 — the equivalent of the SAS — and the F-15I strategic 69 Squadron, which can strike Iran and return to Israel without refuelling.
Voted. Thanks.
Very true, but the 19 terrorists were not state actors with a power base to maintain and a country to run. Countries don't knowingly commit suicide in the same way that terrorists do.
LOL.
All the middle eastern countries, other than Israel, all come form the lineage of Ishmael, and thus they are all related. Arab was just a generic term. Picky, picky, picky.
There are two ways for Iran to "save face":
1) Demand that Israel give up its nuclear weapons and engage the U.N. in a drawn out campaign to pressure Israel into doing so while they continue to enrich uranium.
2) Drag all of its choice components into the open and dare Israel to do something about it. This will take away any justification for using tactical nuclear weapons to destroy their program. It will also be an act of war which will allow Iran (and Syria) to retaliate in kind without being labeled as "aggressors". The question on everyone's mind will be, "does Iran still have a nuclear weapon somewhere?" and what will happen to all that oil if a nuclear exchange occurs?
The way I see it, Israel may have room for a conventional strike, with a hair-trigger on the nuclear option if it's not successful and Iran moves to retaliate with a nuclear weapon. I don't believe Iran will pre-emptively strike with a nuclear weapon. Not in a million years. But if Israel pre-emptively tries to destroy their facilities... well, all I can say is, they'd better finish the job.
I put this story in the same classification as the one below.
A Bush pre-election strike on Iran 'imminent'
www.lebanwire.com ^ | October 20, 2004 | Wayne Madsen
White House insider report "October Surprise" imminent
According to White House and Washington Beltway insiders, the Bush administration, worried that it could lose the presidential election to Senator John F. Kerry, has initiated plans to launch a military strike on Iran's top Islamic leadership, its nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, and key nuclear targets throughout the country, including the main underground research site at Natanz in central Iran and another in Isfahan.
Targets of the planned U.S. attack reportedly include mosques in Tehran, Qom, and Isfahan known by the U.S. to headquarter Iran's top mullahs.
The Iran attack plan was reportedly drawn up after internal polling indicated that if the Bush administration launched a so-called anti-terrorist attack on Iran some two weeks before the election, Bush would be assured of a landslide win against Kerry. Reports of a pre-emptive strike on Iran come amid concerns by a number of political observers that the Bush administration would concoct an "October Surprise" to influence the outcome of the presidential election.
Yes they know it, and most of them are not suicidal. You know many in the region would really rather Iran and the extremist groups just be quiet before they provoke an attack someday that results in mass casualties.
There is no doubt in my mind that if Israel gets any first strike, retalliation will be harsh, and you have to know the Arabs know this as well.
1) Demand that Israel give up its nuclear weapons and engage the U.N. in a drawn out campaign to pressure Israel into doing so while they continue to enrich uranium.
2) Drag all of its choice components into the open and dare Israel to do something about it. This will take away any justification for using tactical nuclear weapons to destroy their program. It will also be an act of war which will allow Iran (and Syria) to retaliate in kind without being labeled as "aggressors". The question on everyone's mind will be, "does Iran still have a nuclear weapon somewhere?" and what will happen to all that oil if a nuclear exchange occurs?
The way I see it, Israel may have room for a conventional strike, with a hair-trigger on the nuclear option if it's not successful and Iran moves to retaliate with a nuclear weapon. I don't believe Iran will pre-emptively strike with a nuclear weapon. Not in a million years. But if Israel pre-emptively tries to destroy their facilities... well, all I can say is, they'd better finish the job.
You have it about right - I think Iran will bide for option #1 - While knowing there is no good "military" option for Israel in the mean time - A preemptive nuclear strike by Israel I just don't see happening - The ramifications for Israel would probably result in its own destruction.
This is a much uglier / complicated situation then many seem to rationalize. The fact that there is no real good "military" option greatly heightens the complexities and seriousness of any actions actually taken.
Thanks. The problem I have with your premise, is that Iran is actively seeking nukes and we'll have hell to pay if it does get them. I do beleive something has to give on this shortly.
I do understand your hesitation to believe much of what you see in print these days.
The big factor when Iran gets nukes is what type of person is in charge of the country.
If it is a Muslim who believes in Allah, and follows the Koran to the letter, the bombs will be dropped on Israel regardless of the consequences.
On the other hand, if the leader of Iran is like the present King Abdullah of Jordan, a heretic and an infidel collaborator, the bombs won't be used. - Tom
"Countries don't knowingly commit suicide in the same way that terrorists do."
Your point is taken, but we don't know that for a country driven by religious fanatics who see death as a reward. Only in the most recent times have countries actually faced total annhilation as a possible outcome of total war. We, as a species are still learning. I would not be too quick to assume that MAD would deter the Iranians in charge -- as opposed to the Iranians as a people.
Neither of us knows for certain, but I'm not ready to exclude such an action on their part as impossible, just improbable.
Well said. No, we can't be sure. We musn't assume either that the operational link between Iran's nuclear weapons and the political leadership is all that firm either, just because it is here.
"We're already fighting WWIV."
Absolutely true. Just like the ones in the past, we have no choice BUT to fight and win this war. Our children and their children's safety is more at stake now then ever. May God bless America all the way through.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.