Ya'alon: Israel Can Hit Iran Nuke Sites

Jerusalem Post ^ | 03/10/2006 | Nathan Guttman

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Ping

[CrawDaddyCA]

The former Chief of Staff did acknowledge the fact that any Israeli strike against Iran would lead to a harsh retaliation against Israel.

Conventional retaliation now or nuclear retaliation when they develop a bomb. Have no illusions, they will use it as soon as they get it.

[Erik Latranyi]

Have no illusions, they will use it as soon as they get it.

No, they will disseminate the technology and materiel necessary to build additional bombs to their terrorist friends in Hezballah and Al Qaeda first. They will ensure that fundamentalists have parity with the west. Even if Iran decides to use a device against Israel later, the dissemination of the technology is assured.

[backhoe]

Old, but of interest:

The Samson Option-- what is known about Israel's Nuclear Weapons?

U.S. Air Force: Israel has 400 nukes, building naval force

The latter report is illuminating, given that it is 4 years old, and the most commonly-quoted number of Israeli warheads is 200... wonder how many they really have?

[ZULU]

This guy is right. We should take them out - the sooner the better.

[ken5050]

WE have finally worked out the key issues with Israel. Israel take out the Iranian nuclear sites, the US writes the environmental impact statement.

[madconserv]

Shortly before the governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency voted Saturday to report Iran to the United Nations Security Council, the normally cautious IAEA staff made a sensational disclosure. It publicly announced it had found Iranian files "clearly related to the fabrication of nuclear weapon components," and records of other activities suggesting a "military-nuclear dimension" to Iran's self-proclaimed peaceful nuclear energy research, according to The New York Times. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1593678/posts
Looks like he's right about the 6 to 18 months. It's ridiculous and hopeless to think that any reasonable deal can be made with Iran.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

the dissemination of the technology is assured.

I agree. That makes them harder to find and harder to find who to blame.

[JRandomFreeper]

Gut check time. May as well. No-one is going to hate us any more than they do now.

Execute.

/johnny

[rogue yam]

Ya'alon, in his speech at the Hudson Institute, said that striking a nuclear facility in Iran is no more difficult than targeting a terror suspect in the territories as Israeli air force has been doing for the past five years.

This isn't even close to being true! Distance counts, bigtime. So does the fact that Iran has an air force and surface air defense systems and the Paliwhackers do not. This guy does Israel no good by saying dumb things.

[ZULU]

You're right.


The Iranians are merely stalling for time.

Its time for some neotiating with the Euroweenies and Russians and then we should turn Iran into a smoking ruin from the sky.

No ground troops. No invasion.

AND NO NATION BUILDING!

Let them rot in their own juices. If they try a come-back, bomb them again.

Turn Iran into a smoking warning for the other Islamic Kook states in the area.

[Joe Boucher]

You don't need planes or cruise or other missles to destroy with a nuke. It simply assures larger destruction area. Israel ain't that big.
And in the name of allah,Iran would gladly martyr the west bank and gaza and its pali citizens.

[JRandomFreeper]

the fact that Iran has an air force and surface air defense systems

Bwahahahahahahaha! Sure they do. Do they mean anything? The same as Iraq, only faster to crush.

/johnny

[rogue yam]

You don't need planes or cruise or other missles to destroy with a nuke. It simply assures larger destruction area. Israel ain't that big. And in the name of allah,Iran would gladly martyr the west bank and gaza and its pali citizens.

I don't have any idea what you're trying to say with this reply to me.

[rogue yam]

Bwahahahahahahaha! Sure they do. Do they mean anything? The same as Iraq, only faster to crush.

/johnny

You are being unrealistic and illogical. It was not Israel who crushed Iraq's air defenses, it was the United States. Further, Iran is a larger, wealthier country that has had very different experiences over the last 15 years than has Iraq (e.g. no U.N. sanctions, no Gulf War I, no no-fly zones, no ongoing U.S. airstrikes targeting their air defenses, etc.) I commented on a specific comparison made in the article; Iran vs. West Bank. Your reply has missed this point entirely.

[JRandomFreeper]

IAF or USAF against Iranian forces.... IAF or USAF win. Period. Iran isn't a third rate power.

Islamists can't fight in the air.

I really feel for Iran, and wish it wasn't under the heel of the islamists, but as long as it is, and it's a threat, it needs to die.

/johnny

[rogue yam]

Dude! I am bored by your non sequiturs. Please talk to someone else. I prefer to talk to those who make sense.

[JRandomFreeper]

Ok. Give me numbers of available ADF AC to the Iranian forces, types of AC, sortie rate. Then the same for the IAF. Number and disposition of SEAD assets... and on.

It's not rocket science. Well, maybe just a little.

/johnny

[rogue yam]

Bite me.