Posted on 11/28/2001 1:45:41 PM PST by ex-Texan
Security officials warn of unconventional Iraqi attack
By Ellis Shuman
Senior Israeli security officials believe that if the United States would attack Iraq, threatening the stability of Saddam Hussein's regime, he would respond by launching a chemical or biological attack on Israel.
"If attacked, Iraq is liable to launch missiles and planes against Israel," said Deputy Chief of Staff Maj.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon in a lecture on Monday. Security officials believe that due to its shortage of long-range missiles and launchers, estimated at no more than five launchers and some 50 missiles, Iraq could send pilots on suicide missions towards Israel in planes armed with unconventional weapons.
During the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel, all armed with conventional explosives. Military analysts believe that Iraq now has very limited surface-to-surface missile capabilities. According to American intelligence reports, Iraq has recently resumed missile deployment exercises, hinting at its possible response if attacked.
The IDF General Staff this week discussed the various scenarios that could follow an American strike on Iraq. Security officials assume that the attack on Iraq could occur in two or three months, when military actions in Afghanistan are completed.
The brainstorming came following President George W. Bush's warning on Monday that Hussein must allow arms inspectors back into the country "to prove to the world he's not developing weapons of mass destruction.'' Iraq isn't afraid of American threats and is ready to defend itself against any attack, Iraq's Ambassador to the UN said the following day.
Israel did not respond to the Iraqi attacks during the Gulf War, bending to American pressure not to break up the American coalition lined up against Saddam. The situation is different now, said MK Moshe Arens (Likud), who served as defense minister during the 1991 war. Arens referred to Israel's Arrow anti-missile system, developed together with the United States.
"I think Israel can be pleased that the U.S. is turning its attention to a danger which faces not only Israel, but also the entire world," Arens told Israel Radio, referring to Saddam's attempts to acquire non-conventional weapons.
Syria has chemical missile capabilities "The Syrian army has type 'B' and 'C' Scud missiles, some of them equipped with chemical warheads," Yaalon said on Monday. "These missiles have a range of 500 kilometers, covering most of the area of the State of Israel," he added.
"The goal of Syria remains the return of the Golan Heights," Yaalon said. "The Syrians are hesitant of confronting the IDF directly," he said, attributing this to fears its army is inferior to the IDF. "They prefer to develop a deterrent force with the Scud missiles, Hizbullah-launched terror actions and encouragement of Palestinian terror."
Yaalon warned that an all-out war with Syria could result from the "explosive confrontation with the Hizbullah on Israel's northern border."
You say that as if it's a sign of instability or something.
How do you think we would/should react if Iraq killed "any group of Americans" from "just" one poison gas scud? "No matter how strongly" some third party nation urged us "to use restraint"?
Yes you are ready for Jerry Springer with snippy remarks like that, for sure.
Now don't you start that junk about who is an American and who is not.
Bump. Israel IS our ally after all.
Uh... The reason that "the Israelis sat things out like they did during Gulf War I" was pressure from the US, as well as the US witholding IFF codes from the IDF. Israel wanted to strike Iraq: They did it before, destroying the Iraqi nuclear plant before it came on-line. They wanted to take care of Iraq, but President Bush wanted to make sure that the coalition would hold, by keeping Israel out of the war.
Mark
Really?
Scary isn't it, but not surprising.
Don't know if it is Mossad based, but intelligent people know Israel will survive.
The US knows Israel will launch under certain parameters, so its a pretty safe bet we won't let that happen, even if we have to pay $4.00/gallon for our 8 mpg Ford Excursions.
WW III or a 250% price increase in fossil fuels, which will we choose? They won't cut us off because they know what will happen.
What I'd like to say shouldn't be posted here. So I'll leave you with this.
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.