Posted on 07/15/2009 11:44:23 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
A deal taking shape between Israel and Western leaders will facilitate international support for an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities in exchange for concessions in peace negotiations with the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, The Times reported Thursday.
According to one British official quoted by the paper, such an understanding could allow an Israeli attack "within the year."
The report in the UK paper quoted unnamed diplomats as saying Israel was prepared to offer concessions on the formation of a Palestinian state as well as on its settlement policy and on "issues" with Arab neighbors, in exchange for international backing for an Israeli operation in Iran.
"Israel has chosen to place the Iranian threat over its settlements," on senior European diplomat said.
According to Times report, the passage of two Sa'ar 5-class Israeli Navy ships through the Suez Canal on Tuesday was a message to Iran and a part of preparations being made by Israel for the possibility of a strike.
"This is preparation that should be taken seriously. Israel is investing time in preparing itself for the complexity of an attack on Iran. These maneuvers are a message to Iran that Israel will follow up on its threats," an unnamed Israeli defense official was quoted by the paper as saying.
"It is not by chance that Israel is drilling long-range maneuvers in a public way. This is not a secret operation. This is something that has been published and which will showcase Israel's abilities," another defense official said.
The passage of the ships comes several weeks after a Dolphin-class submarine passed through the international waterway for the first time.
One of the ships, the INS Hanit, already crossed the canal in June, in what an Egyptian source said was the first time a large missile ship used the strategic waterway, which is the fastest route to get Israeli Navy vessels from the Mediterranean, where they are based, to the Red Sea and beyond.
The other ship to cross on Tuesday was the INS Eilat.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said that under a long-standing treaty, warships can freely sail through Suez as long as they have no hostile intentions against the state that owns the canal. He declined to say whether the maneuver was aimed at sending a message, saying, "I don't want to analyze an issue that I am not fully aware of."
In the event of a conflict with Iran, and if Israel decided to involve its three Dolphin-class submarines - which according to foreign reports can fire nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and serve as a second-strike platform - the quickest route would be to sail them through the Suez Canal. Going through the canal would also be the only way to get to the Gulf of Oman without refueling.
Yaakov Katz contributed to this report
the antichrist is delighted.
Oh, yeah, that’s it. Let ‘em know they are coming. Why don’t the “west” just print the date and time also.
Israel should tell us all to phuck off...
I agree.
The strategy is flawed. Obama was silly to negotiate away a missile defense of an entire area in exchange for help from the Russians to deal with a single tactical threat. After all, if the deal holds, then it leaves that area undefended to the next tactical threat with nothing to show for it.
For the same reason, the Israeli’s should not be expected to make permanent changes to their borders and permanent concessions bearing on their future defense in exchange of a single tactical strike to deal with an individual tactical threat.
The people who dream these things up have no grasp of protracted conflict. Of course, we knew that!
If true, what a bunch of cowards. Basicly conceding: yes, Iranian nukes are a problem and unacceptable, but we’re not going to actually DO anything about it ourselves, we’ll just hold your coat and hide as you do the dirty work....and if it doesn’t go well for you, we’ll be right behind you as we tell you “see, we told you you shouldn’t have done that”
Exactly.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
If Iran isn't a threat, the "west" shouldn't back Israel at all. If Iran is a threat, the "west", should be aiding Israel, not holding out permission.
Don't know if the US is still part of the "west" since that implies support for democratic governments and allies, but the same applies to us.
This is a joke.
“in exchange for international backing for an Israeli operation in Iran”
We’ll let you risk your blood and treasure to take out these nukes that threaten all of us and in exchange we’ll give you our okay and demand concessions.
F*** you.
I was thinking of the Russian analogy also.
What does the US or the world think they have in the way of bargaining chips? Russia knew Obama wanted to scratch missile defense so they weren’t going to concede anything in exchange.
Israel understands that say what they will the world, US. UK, Europe, and all Sunni countries are counting on Israel no matter what they mouth off. So why should Israel concede anything.
If Israel does this the world may sound off publicly, but inside they will heave a collective sigh of relief.
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.