Skip to comments.
U.S. Air Force: Israel has 400 nukes, building naval force
World Tribune ^
| 7/4/02
Posted on 07/04/2002 7:51:59 AM PDT by truthandlife
A United States Air Force report asserts that Israel is building a nuclear naval force meant to respond to any nuclear strike by such countries as Iran or Iraq.
It is the first time a U.S. military institution has stated that Israel has produced a hydrogen bomb. The number of purported Israeli nuclear weapons cited in the report is double that of previous assessments.
The report, sponsored by the air force's Counterproliferation Center, asserts that the navy can deploy any of what it asserts is Israel's 400 atomic and hydrogen weapons, Middle East Newsline reported. The center is located in the Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama.
In a report entitled "The Third Temple's Holy of Holies: Israel's Nuclear Weapons," U.S. Army Col. Warner Farr said Israel's nuclear arsenal has grown from an estimated 13 nuclear bombs in 1967 to 400 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons. Farr said Israel's navy could deploy nuclear weapons on the fleet of three German-built Dolphin-class diesel submarines.
"Israel will then have a second strike capability with nuclear cruise missiles, and this capability could well change the nuclear arms race in the Middle East," the report, which Farr said is based on unclassified sources, read. "Israeli rhetoric on the new submarines labels them 'national deterrent' assets."
The report said these nuclear missiles could have a range of 350 kilometers. Israel would try to base its nuclear naval force near Oman, with which Israel has informal relations, the September 1999 report, which was recently published by the center, said.
"The first basing options for the new second-strike force of nuclear missile capable submarines include Oman, an Arab nation with unofficial Israeli relations, located strategically near Iran," the report said.
The U.S. Air Force Counterproliferation Center was established in 1998. The center is meant to help prepare air force commanders counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction. The report did not deem Israel's purported nuclear arsenal as a direct threat to the United States.
The report said Israel's Defense Ministry has requested from the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorization for a retaliatory nuclear strike. Israel could also use Jordanian air space for a nuclear strike on Iran, which the report said could produce a nuclear warhead as early as 2004.
TOPICS: Front Page News; Israel
KEYWORDS: hydrogenbomb; israel; navy; nuclearweapons; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-186 next last
To: Classicaliberalconservative
Israel is surrounded and outnumbered by enemies bent on its destruction. They are descended from an ethnic group that was nearly systematically exterminated not only culturally but genetically. They continue to be hated by many in the world even today. They have never used nuclear weapons, it is a deterrent to hordes of Arabs invading and wiping out their people. Saddam Hussein wants ONE thing, and that is to use Weapons of Mass Destruction for terrorism against Israel and the United States.
To: anu_shr
Wow! 36 Billion Virgins! But are they no longer virgins after the first time are do a new supply of 36billion appear instantly?
To: All
Let us hope that this 400 is just the major warheads.
I certainly hope we have at least 4000 or so of the little so-called neutron-bomb, tactical nukes as well.
43
posted on
08/28/2002 9:07:23 AM PDT
by
crystalk
To: truthandlife
The writer in me can envision a positively evil scenario in which the US could take care of the problem that is Iraq without expending a fortune on a military campaign.
Any FReeper guesses on what that might be?
44
posted on
09/26/2002 9:39:05 AM PDT
by
tracer
To: Quix
Nobody has said that the "martyrs" will marry the virgins in question.....
45
posted on
09/26/2002 9:41:49 AM PDT
by
tracer
To: anu_shr
Israel won't shoot off everything because of one attack. However, if the enemy has made serious gains and is close to destroying Israel, then the weapons will be used as a last resort. The purpose won't be to save Israel, because Israel will already be lost, but to destroy the enemy. No winners. Guaranteed.
To: Publius6961
FYI: I have heard/read that the most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity... And your point is?
FLAG! Tweeeeet!
Dead ball! Personal foul, unnecessary roughness; Number 6961 on the offense.
That's a fifteen yard penalty. Repeat first-down.
;-)
47
posted on
09/26/2002 9:46:51 AM PDT
by
rdb3
To: anu_shr
The MAD doctrine IMHO won't work against insane arab leaders that are ......Mad.
I agree on trashing any "individual" country that does launch WMD "first" be they chemical, biological or nuclear.
Slap em down like the mad dogs they are.......
Stay Safe !
48
posted on
09/26/2002 9:54:26 AM PDT
by
Squantos
To: MinuteGal
WELLL, evidently Dashole speaks stickly and carries a small soft.
49
posted on
09/26/2002 10:19:27 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: Grut
Jer 8:22 has had it's validity and may again for a time. Ultimately there will be much balm for Jacob's seed. Alas, less for significant chunks of Ismael's though his too are slated for eventual blessing. Not until they accept God's decrees on the associated matters, however.
50
posted on
09/26/2002 10:23:46 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: BigBobber
If one thinks that the Jewish people who brought us Einstein and most of the advances of the last 150 years would have trouble extending the range of a critical armament, then I think one's thinking needs expanded.
51
posted on
09/26/2002 10:25:01 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: Pythagoras
I guess you see no linguistic, meaningful, significant, useful, functional difference between:
DEFENSIVE
vs
OFFENSIVE?
HOW would you like to be president of Israel responsible for her survival with their geography among sworn enemies who have been persistently destroying their civilian population for decades???
If you have that much trouble with the disctinction between defensive and offensive, I wouldn't want to be an Israeli citizen with you as president.
52
posted on
09/26/2002 10:31:02 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: tracer
Guess I'm thickheaded about martyrs or virgins . . . I don't get your point.
53
posted on
09/26/2002 10:34:18 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: RightWhale
Anyone who thinks Israel will be a destroyed loser hasn't considered seriously the weight God brings to an equation regarding Israel.
54
posted on
09/26/2002 10:35:30 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: Squantos
Am inclined to agree with you.
55
posted on
09/26/2002 10:38:34 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: Quix
If one thinks that the Jewish people who brought us Einstein and most of the advances of the last 150 years would have trouble extending the range of a critical armament, then I think one's thinking needs expanded. One word: "Arrow"
56
posted on
09/26/2002 10:39:25 AM PDT
by
js1138
To: js1138
Is this use of "arrow" a secret code word for an extended range cruise missle? I don't get your point. Maybe my reading is deficient.
57
posted on
09/26/2002 10:41:17 AM PDT
by
Quix
To: Quix
the weight God brings to an equation Sure, God intercedes in human affairs. Has previously and will again. Doesn't mean Israel will specifically be preserved; can't say what will happen, except it won't be another Flood.
To: Quix
I was replying to your post wherein you said:
"Guess they just don't believe Jesus when He said there was neither marrying nor giving in marriage in Heaven. . . . or Paul when he said that in Christ there's neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek."
Not a point of contention, but, rather, an observation that these folks are not talking about marriage in the next life. All the best.....
59
posted on
09/26/2002 10:46:12 AM PDT
by
tracer
To: RightWhale
You really think God's commitment to curse those who curse blood Israel and bless those who bless Israel's seed has no functional, real, tangible import?
60
posted on
09/26/2002 10:54:04 AM PDT
by
Quix
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-186 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson