Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Israel buzzes over notion of attacking Iran
cs monitor ^ | January 16, 2007 | Ilene Prusher

Posted on 01/16/2007 10:37:38 AM PST by Flavius

JERUSALEM - When a US secretary of State comes to town, all eyes are on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

But as Condoleezza Rice's weekend visit here demonstrated, there is no issue dominating the agenda like the international standoff surrounding Iran's nuclear ambitions.

A report last week in one of Britain's leading newspapers, The Sunday Times, claimed that Israel was making preparations for a conventional attack on Iran to destroy its uranium enrichment facilities. Ms. Rice, asked in an Israeli television interview during her visit if the US would support such an Israeli strike, gave a reply that didn't exactly douse the smoldering signals emanating from Israel and Iran. Rather, the fact that some kind of a confrontation is now talked about openly, she said, is an indication of how grave the situation has become.


(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: geopolitics; iran; proliferation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

1 posted on 01/16/2007 10:37:38 AM PST by Flavius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Flavius

bttt


2 posted on 01/16/2007 10:39:31 AM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

I suspect that Olmert leaked that thinking that it would prompt Iran to change course and give up it's nukes. It's a really dumb thing to do, if that's true. Now the Iranians are busy moving their nuke material to safer and as yet undetected quarters. And Olmert has basically exposed Israel's strategy.


3 posted on 01/16/2007 10:40:15 AM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Time to buy a bicycle.


4 posted on 01/16/2007 10:41:18 AM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
Israel had better understand that if they fail to attack Iran,Europe 1933-1945 will seem like a walk in the park in comparison to what the mullah's have in store for her.
5 posted on 01/16/2007 10:42:38 AM PST by Gay State Conservative ("The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."-Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Condy sleeping with the enemy...again. An enemy whom unless we hit where they live, we may as well start preparing our prayer rugs and readying burqas.


6 posted on 01/16/2007 10:44:20 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

Well the Israelis better not do it the PC way they did with the Hezbos in Southern Lebanon, if they are then don't even bother.


7 posted on 01/16/2007 10:46:12 AM PST by Patrick1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
I suspect that Olmert leaked that thinking that it would prompt Iran to change course and give up it's nukes. It's a really dumb thing to do, if that's true. Now the Iranians are busy moving their nuke material to safer and as yet undetected quarters.

Do you really believe that the mullah's hadn't figured this out long ago? I'm not 100% sure what the PM had in mind in making this statement public but Israel's contingency plans regarding Iran's nukes came as a surprise to nobody....not in Tel Aviv...not in Tehran...not at UN Headquarters...and not in DC.

8 posted on 01/16/2007 10:46:47 AM PST by Gay State Conservative ("The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."-Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

"And Olmert has basically exposed Israel's strategy."

Israel would be ill advised to take on any major conflict with Olmert in office.


9 posted on 01/16/2007 10:49:24 AM PST by brownsfan (It's not a war on terror... it's a war with islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Some Iranians are also busily considering the quickest way to 'shallow grave' the monkey man, which may also be a motive of the Israeli leak.


10 posted on 01/16/2007 10:50:34 AM PST by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

>> I suspect that Olmert leaked that thinking that it would prompt Iran to change course and give up it's nukes.

Or, more likely, Olmert broadcast the move so that Iran WOULD move their nuke material to safer digs. Then when a military strike on the old site fails to accomplish anything, Olmert and the peaceniks can claim that there is no military solution and that Israel will just have to compromise.


11 posted on 01/16/2007 10:52:14 AM PST by vikingd00d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
It's a really dumb thing to do, if that's true. Now the Iranians are busy moving their nuke material to safer and as yet undetected quarters. And Olmert has basically exposed Israel's strategy.

It might turn out to be a dumb move, or it might turn out to be a smart move. We do know that moderates and "liberals" in Iran are a lot more vocal now in opposition to Ahmadinejad's anti-western stance. Israel's "leaked info" might have helped.

But like I said, I don't think we'll really know until the whole thing plays itself out.

12 posted on 01/16/2007 10:52:37 AM PST by The Blitherer (I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself. -Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Oh Boy, I wish I could turn the clock back to Jan 1, 2002 and re formulate the whole war policy. The reason is clear why we are in Iraq. The whole fuzziness about Saddam's wmd's and their capability was a waste of time. We need to guard the oil flow and we need a base of operations in the Middle East (being in Saudi Arabia wasn't working). Too bad the US wasn't a bit more straightforward with the American public back then. The whole philosophy of pre-emptive war and acting in our interest could have been put forth in a clearer manner. The real enemy as has been proven are the Iranians and the Syrians, who have done more than Saddam had ever done in regard to to spreading worldwide terrorism. Saddam was basically in a weakened state and his capabilities limited (that's why we chose him rather than Assad or the Iranians)---but surprise surprise Gomer, it looks like we're going to have to deal with Baathy Boy Assad and the Maniacal Mullahs after all.


13 posted on 01/16/2007 10:53:49 AM PST by brooklyn dave (I face Mecca 5 times a day and all I see is some guy's tuchas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Olmert leaked his intentions in the hopes of garnering US logistical support: air tankers, AWACS & emergency landing strips.

The Iranians will assume that if the Israelis strike that they had tacit as well as physical support from the US. They will be right, of course.

So this dance is all about nudging the US a bit.


14 posted on 01/16/2007 10:55:27 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
15 posted on 01/16/2007 10:55:47 AM PST by stm (Believe 1% of what you hear in the drive-by media and take half of that with a grain of salt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

I don't think Iran was ignorant to what Israel may or may not have in store for them. Iran is holding their own oil refineries hostage. Sort of like what Saddam did.

Israel would be better off threatening Iran's oil refineries then its nuke program. This would force China and the EU to pick a side because destroying Iran's ability to produce oil will cause China and the EU's economic collapse.

It will also force the US to reconsider their position on ANWR and other oil producing fields that are currently protected by laws benefitting the envirowhackos.

What we are seeing is a game of chess and it's only in the early stages of the game.


16 posted on 01/16/2007 10:55:56 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz ("Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted." Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

In my humble opinion only one military force in the world would be able to destroy ALL of Iran nuclear facilities and that is the United States military. The terrorist regime in Iran must be punished with a massive Air Campaign that will destroy its nuclear facilities, military infrastructures, and command and control centers. The islamic terrorist regime in Tehran must understand once and for all that they are not going to control the Middle East, and thus this terrorist regime must be broken and humiliated via an intensive and severe Air War against it.


17 posted on 01/16/2007 10:56:44 AM PST by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

What was a surprise was the notion that they'd use nukes. That, incidentally, is the reason I thought the Israeli leak had some credibility. If they'd leaked that they were planning a conventional strike, I'd have thought it was just a smoke screen. I've been saying for a couple of years now that a conventional strike won't do it. Only a nuke strike will do it. So the fact that Israel now comes out and proposes it suggests to me that it's not just talk. They've actually done the engineering. And I think that Tehran has figured that out as well.


18 posted on 01/16/2007 10:56:55 AM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: vikingd00d

Or more likely, to move them is to bring them out into the open where our satellites can find and target them.


19 posted on 01/16/2007 10:57:43 AM PST by stm (Believe 1% of what you hear in the drive-by media and take half of that with a grain of salt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer

I'm convinced that the only reason the "moderates" don't like Ahmadinejad's stance is that he's made it public. They'd prefer that he use a little more stealth.


20 posted on 01/16/2007 10:58:31 AM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson