• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Heres how Israel would destroy Irans nuclear program

#1
From Haaretz
...
One of the conclusions from Toukan and Cordesman's study is that it is questionable whether Israel has the military capability to destroy Iran's nuclear program, or even to delay it for several years. Therefore, if the diplomatic contacts the Obama administration is initiating with Iran prove useless, and if in the wake of their expected failure the American president does not decide to attack Iran, it is likely that Iran will possess nuclear weapons in a relatively short time. It seems, therefore, that policy makers in Jerusalem should begin preparing, mentally and operationally, for a situation in which Iran is a nuclear power with a strike capability against Israel.

This is the place to emphasize Israel's mistake in hyping the Iranian threat. The regime in Tehran is certainly a bitter and inflexible rival, but from there it's a long way to presenting it as a truly existential threat to Israel. Iran's involvement in terror in our region is troubling, but a distinction must be made between a willingness to bankroll terrorists, and an intention to launch nuclear missiles against Israel. Even if Iran gets nuclear weapons, Israel's power of deterrence will suffice to dissuade any Iranian ruler from even contemplating launching nuclear weapons against it.

It is time to stop waving around the scarecrow of an existential threat and refrain from making belligerent statements, which sometimes create a dangerous dynamic of escalation. And if the statements are superfluous and harmful - then this is doubly true for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.
...
The Haaretz headline writer is somewhat at odds with the piece here. An IAF raid is clearly of marginal usefulness, and a ICBM strike of the non-genocidal sort ain't much better. The extract above is on the money.

Once the Israelis get over their fear of population flight real politk will take grip by necissity. Given the inherently devious natures of both Qom and Tel Aviv a mutually convenient alignment between the Shi'a crescent and Israel is the likely outcome of a decade long nuclear standoff. They can threaten to wipe each other from the pages of history but their sworn enemies are mostly Egypt, the Gulf Kingships and all their assets around the Hindu Kush. Persian imperialism, or let's call it the Shi'a march to freedom that Bush started in Iraq leads that way.

Now if a Gulf Kingship gets the bomb that's a different matter. IN that case the Joos can expect about as much mercy as a Kingship prince with a .50 BMG on his SUV would show a herd of gazelles.
 
#2
alib said:
Now if a Gulf Kingship gets the bomb that's a different matter. IN that case the Joos can expect about as much mercy as a Kingship prince with a .50 BMG on his SUV would show a herd of gazelles.
Or a grain merchant believed to be thieving. :)
 
#3
There should be some kind of international pressure on Iran, firstly to stop its nuclear program immediately, and secondly to stop harassing Egypt and Israel. Hezbollah is constantly funded by Iran to create unrest and violence in these neighbouring nations. Iran ought to be dealt with very sternly, so that it can come down on its nuisance value.
 
#4
"Israel's Covert War on Iran" Richard Sale via Pat Lang's blog
...
Reva Bhalla, a senior analyst for Stratfor, a U.S. private intelligence company, commented publicly that key Iranian nuclear scientists were the targets of the strategy. “With cooperation from the United States, Israeli covert operations have focused both on eliminating key (Iranian) assets involved in the nuclear program and the sabotaging of the Iranian nuclear supply chain.”
But U.S. opposition to the program has intensified as President Barack Obama has made overtures aimed at thawing decades-old tension between the two countries. Part of this is due to America’s desire to use Iran’s roads into Afghanistan to help resupply U.S.-NATO forces there.
But Israel’s interests in the region are not America’s, several U.S. officials said.
Pat Clawson, director of research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said of the Israeli killings, “That’s what the Israelis would do, what we would expect them to do. They would kill Iranian scientists.”
Asked about the mounting administration disapproval, Clawson said of the killings, “It would be implausible to call off all covert ops.” He added, “If the U.S. pressures Israel, then the Israelis will simply stop talking to us about it.”
Israel’s targeted killing program has taken on new urgency since Washington made clear last year that an Israeli air attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities was out of the question. “The goal now is to delay for as long as possible, Iran getting to the point of having a nuclear weapon,” a former U.S. intelligence official said.
Asked to comment, Middle East expert Tony Cordesman, said of the killings, “There’s not that much of it going on,” and its success was dubious in any case. Israel’s targeting killing program was done in concert with the Bush administration, former U.S. sources said.
A former senior CIA official described several joint U.S.-Mossad operations to derail Iran’s nuclear program as “something out of slapstick.” All had failed miserably, he said.
...
Don't think I'd call it slapstick, one thing the Israelis are very good at is arranging hits abroad. It was rumored a while back that Kidon dealt with at least one Iranian white coat and good luck to them.

Covert ops against the Iranian nuke program was the last administrations sop to Tel Aviv after ruling out air strikes. If DC is now backing away from even that token support while hinting Bibi should sign up to the NPT it suggests an impressively sordid back stairs courtship of Qom.

The lack of good military options against the Iranian program, a pressing need to abandon the draining Iraqi project to the locals, problems with our LOS for the Pashtun war and the late dawning realization that the frothing beards of Pakistan are a far more pressing threat to DC's interests than the slippery Mullahs may be injecting a little realism.
 
#5
Daniel.jose said:
There should be some kind of international pressure on Iran, firstly to stop its nuclear program immediately, and secondly to stop harassing Egypt and Israel. Hezbollah is constantly funded by Iran to create unrest and violence in these neighbouring nations. Iran ought to be dealt with very sternly, so that it can come down on its nuisance value.
So you don't think people have been trying to deal with Eyeran?

Question - who do you think runs Eyeran?

Edited to add:

How do we deal sternly with them?
 
#6
rickshaw-major said:
Daniel.jose said:
There should be some kind of international pressure on Iran, firstly to stop its nuclear program immediately, and secondly to stop harassing Egypt and Israel. Hezbollah is constantly funded by Iran to create unrest and violence in these neighbouring nations. Iran ought to be dealt with very sternly, so that it can come down on its nuisance value.
So you don't think people have been trying to deal with Eyeran?

Question - who do you think runs Eyeran?

Edited to add:

How do we deal sternly with them?
I think we should do exactly the opposite. Iran is ripe for a change of regime, few actually like the Mullahs but at the moment they appear to be preferable to getting malleted by the US/Israel. So threatening them just strengthens the current regime.

Long term I think we need them onside, we have a lot more in common with the Persians than we do with the Arabs.
 
#7
One_of_the_strange said:
rickshaw-major said:
Daniel.jose said:
There should be some kind of international pressure on Iran, firstly to stop its nuclear program immediately, and secondly to stop harassing Egypt and Israel. Hezbollah is constantly funded by Iran to create unrest and violence in these neighbouring nations. Iran ought to be dealt with very sternly, so that it can come down on its nuisance value.
So you don't think people have been trying to deal with Eyeran?

Question - who do you think runs Eyeran?

Edited to add:

How do we deal sternly with them?
I think we should do exactly the opposite. Iran is ripe for a change of regime, few actually like the Mullahs but at the moment they appear to be preferable to getting malleted by the US/Israel. So threatening them just strengthens the current regime.

Long term I think we need them onside, we have a lot more in common with the Persians than we do with the Arabs.
I agree with you. What I am trying to ask our American friend is what HE proposes we should do about it.
 
#8
From JPo Security and defense: Dialogue maneuvers

...
THAT SAME day, OC Military Intelligence Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin appeared before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and explained how, while we tend to think that the world's attention is on us - and only us - Obama's list of priorities is currently topped by the global economic crisis, the growing violence in Afghanistan, the instability in Pakistan and the Iranian nuclear threat.

"Only then does he get to the Middle East," Yadlin concluded.

This assessment is shared by most of the defense establishment. In a recent briefing, Defense Minister Ehud Barak asserted that Pakistan was a more pressing threat than Iran, even for Israel. In contrast to Iran, he explained, Pakistan already has nuclear weapons; if the government there falls, who knows who could end up in possession of those weapons?

Yadlin's briefing reflects a deeper understanding within the defense establishment - that the country's level of influence over the Obama administration is limited. As Barak recently explained: "Israel cannot tell the US not to talk to Iran. What we can do is try to influence the framework of that dialogue."


This is exactly what the government is trying to do. During his visit to Washington next week, the US-Iranian dialogue will feature prominently in Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's meeting with Obama.

A few weeks later, Barak will visit Washington for meetings with Gates and National Security Adviser James Jones, and he, too, will try to influence the framework of the dialogue, likely to begin shortly after Iran goes to presidential elections next month.

While the Americans have not announced what the time frame of the talks with Iran would be, Israel is recommending that the dialogue be limited to three-to-five months. At the same time, it is hoping that the US will set benchmarks for the talks, like telling Teheran that it has two months to stop enriching uranium.

The ultimate question that the defense establishment feels it does not yet have a clear answer to is: What, exactly, is the so-called success that Obama is seeking in a dialogue with Iran?

TALKS WITH the US are taking place on many different levels. There is the Netanyahu-Obama meeting, Barak's planned visit, frequent conversations between Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi and his American counterpart, Adm. Michael Mullen, and a visit some two weeks ago by CIA Director Leon Panetta for talks on Iran.

Officials in the Obama administration say that their goal is to stop Iran from going nuclear. This is a tough goal to meet, since its program is already at an advanced stage, and the leadership there will likely not just dismantle its facilities.

What could be a goal, according to Israel, is a transfer - or outsourcing - of all enrichment activities from the underground bunker facility in Natanz to a third-party country. An offer to have Russia enrich uranium on its behalf was made several years ago by the Europeans, but was rejected by Iran.

This potential goal was presented last week in a speech (entitled "The Middle East Security Agenda: An Israeli Assessment") before the Washington Institute for Near East Policy by Barak's chief of staff Brig.-Gen. Mike Herzog. Herzog, a candidate to become the next coordinator of government activities in the territories, and one of Barak's closest advisers, laid out four potential scenarios vis-à-vis Iran's nuclear program and its true intentions.

The first option, he said, is that Iran really intends to develop a nuclear weapon and draws inspiration from North Korea, which succeeded in outwitting the world, and which has since failed to disarm Pyongyang.

The second option is that Iran intends to continue enriching uranium at low levels, but will stop at the threshold of nuclear weapons. Its goal will be to stockpile enough fissionable material for several nuclear devices - possibly four - and then wait for the right moment to move forward with its weapons program. "If they feel that the international community is not strong enough, not pressurizing them enough and they have an opportunity, then they might break ahead," he said.

The third possibility is that Iran will work with the existing inspected materiel it has, estimated at close to two tons. But this would make it very difficult to then move forward at a later stage to a nuclear weapon, even though, Herzog said, it would likely be able to enrich the uranium it has at a higher rate, without the International Atomic Energy Agency ever noticing.

The fourth scenario is possibly the most frightening of all. It is called the "bomb in the cellar," or the possibility that Iran already has a fully clandestine production line and enrichment program in unknown facilities. On this, Herzog said: "We suspect that they will want to have some sites unknown to us. But, again, you don't know what you don't know. I can't rule out this possibility."

What is clear from Herzog's analysis is that there still is a lot Israel does not know about Iran's nuclear program, its facilities and intentions. It is within this cloud of uncertainty that Netanyahu and Barak will try to push the US to hold a quick dialogue with Iran and ratchet up diplomatic pressure - through sanctions - or even military pressure if all else fails.
My bold. This is a bit of a no brainer. While the Israelis have had cautious links with the Pak military they are well aware that a lot of folk in Lahore think of Tel Aviv as a target rich environment. Pakistan's large very real nuclear arsenal under their thumbs would be a very real threat to Israel. Unlike the Twelver Mullahs they are the sort of folk who regard the holy places as temples of idolatry suitable for irradiation.

Just pop over to Pakistani Defence to sample opinions on whether ttheir country is a threat to Israel.
Off course it is & Inshallah their fears will come true one day.
Here we also have the Israelis acknowledging DC has its own policy priorities and- despite all the best efforts of AIPAC- that it is even a free actor. You don't hear that often.
 
#10
But Mr Obama's hand in confronting Mr Netanyahu was strengthened last week by a new Zogby poll revealing that voters who backed him in the election overwhelmingly support a policy which amounts to "get tough with Israel" - ending illegal Israeli settlements within Palestinian territory and establishing a Palestinian state. Jewish voters, 78 per cent of whom voted for Mr Obama, are among the strongest supporters of the plan.
That's some powerful ju-ju right there. How many independent American Jewish contributors to Israel will follow Obama in saying "No more money till you get it sorted out"?

The Obama administration has also broken a long-standing taboo against discussing Israel's nuclear weapons, by calling for Israel to declare and give up its weapons arsenal, said to number around 50 warheads. A senior State Department official said the US wants Israel to sign the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty and commit to disarmament. What he has not done yet, is query the $3 billion in military aid which US taxpayers send Israel every year, although that could yet happen given the straitened times.
That's going to happen next . A strong element of support as illustrated by the Zogby poll is very much "Charity begins at home". I suspect if he announced cuts to Israel's handouts, he'd get a rousing cheer. Getting Israel to fess up over Nukes, will also strengthen DC's hand against Iran.

As he scans the Oval Office for friendly faces, Mr Netanyahu's eyes may light on two of Mr Obama's most trusted advisers, the White House chief of staff and former congressman Rahm Emanuel and the Presidents chief political adviser, David Axelrod. Both men are veterans of Chicago's rough and tumble politics, where Mr Obama cut his teeth - and both are also closely connected to Americas Jewish community
Good luck with that, both of them have served their purpose as the American Jewish vote swings hard behind Obama himself. If either attempts to fight this adminstrations' efforts to bring sanity to the region, they'll be clutching a P45 I suspect.

But they're both shrewd cookies, and they know the Israel right or wrong days are over.
 
#11
I tend not to don the tin foil hat much but i'm beginning to worry about Obama's security.

If this does come to pass, the Israelis would dearly love to be rid of him and there's not exactly a shortage of Septic nutjobs who would be only too happy to oblige.

Avoid young interns and open-air motorcades Barack...
 
#12
Taz_786 said:
I tend not to don the tin foil hat much but i'm beginning to worry about Obama's security.

If this does come to pass, the Israelis would dearly love to be rid of him and there's not exactly a shortage of Septic nutjobs who would be only too happy to oblige.

Avoid young interns and open-air motorcades Barack...
Are you sure?

Cutting money to Israel might please any number of Septic whack jobs.

Though the Christian Fundamentalist crowd might fancy a pop.

Would Israel want anything that could so easily have American fingers pointed at them to take place?
 
#13
PartTimePongo said:
Taz_786 said:
I tend not to don the tin foil hat much but i'm beginning to worry about Obama's security.

If this does come to pass, the Israelis would dearly love to be rid of him and there's not exactly a shortage of Septic nutjobs who would be only too happy to oblige.

Avoid young interns and open-air motorcades Barack...
Are you sure?

Cutting money to Israel might please any number of Septic whack jobs.

Though the Christian Fundamentalist crowd might fancy a pop.

Would Israel want anything that could so easily have American fingers pointed at them to take place?
There weren't a lot of pro-Israeli supporters around last time I was in Dixieland and that was only a couple of years ago. However there were a fair amount of thick rednecks who didn't realize that there was life beyond the County Line.
 
#14
Taz_786 said:
I tend not to don the tin foil hat much but i'm beginning to worry about Obama's security.

If this does come to pass, the Israelis would dearly love to be rid of him and there's not exactly a shortage of Septic nutjobs who would be only too happy to oblige.

Avoid young interns and open-air motorcades Barack...
I seriously think you might have a point there, Taz. Let's just hope the Secret Service wallahs are on the ball.

On the other hand, they'd then have Joe Biden to contend with. He's made his feelings on the subject quite plain for yonks now. See here:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-us-mideast6-2009may06,0,6986104.story

MsG
 

mercurydancer

LE
Book Reviewer
#15
First of all Pakistan's nukes arent under any threat. They are quite secure and they are doing a fine job in Swat with the Taleban.

As for getting stern with Iran... why? Impeding their development of nuclear weapons is one thing but even then they have unreliable delivery systems.

Even if Iran does develop nuclear waepons they will only find themselves in the same situation as the rest of us. "OK Mr Imadinnerjacket. So you have nukes. Maybe one or two. Welcome to the club. Now you have nukes we can target you with ours. We have shyteloads more of them than you do. And we have far more reliable delivery systems too. Frankly using them scares us in the west and scares the Russians too, so anyone who looks a little trigger happy is going to find out that life just aint fair. Have a nice day."
 
#16
mercurydancer said:
First of all Pakistan's nukes arent under any threat. They are quite secure and they are doing a fine job in Swat with the Taleban.

As for getting stern with Iran... why? Impeding their development of nuclear weapons is one thing but even then they have unreliable delivery systems.

Even if Iran does develop nuclear waepons they will only find themselves in the same situation as the rest of us. "OK Mr Imadinnerjacket. So you have nukes. Maybe one or two. Welcome to the club. Now you have nukes we can target you with ours. We have shyteloads more of them than you do. And we have far more reliable delivery systems too. Frankly using them scares us in the west and scares the Russians too, so anyone who looks a little trigger happy is going to find out that life just aint fair. Have a nice day."
Are the Pakistanis using nukes against the Taleban? :twisted:
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#17
Whoever wipes Israel off the map gets to be the unchallenged leader of the Muslim world. Saddam wanted to do that and that's why he had to go; although frustrated in his endeavours to produce a real nuke he had delivery systems for other weapons. Going back, Nasser was after this bit of kudos too but his forces weren't up to it.

The baton has now passed to Iran which has the aggravation of an aggressive Saddam out of the way. Watch this space. It seems unlikely that Israel will announce ion advance what it intends to do about this, and if the US (Obama not understanding the issues) goes flaky on them, why then, Israel has to look after itself, and defend its citizens via an away match as being less nasty for them than a home fixture.
 
#18
PartTimePongo said:
...
As he scans the Oval Office for friendly faces, Mr Netanyahu's eyes may light on two of Mr Obama's most trusted advisers, the White House chief of staff and former congressman Rahm Emanuel and the Presidents chief political adviser, David Axelrod. Both men are veterans of Chicago's rough and tumble politics, where Mr Obama cut his teeth - and both are also closely connected to Americas Jewish community
Good luck with that, both of them have served their purpose as the American Jewish vote swings hard behind Obama himself. If either attempts to fight this adminstrations' efforts to bring sanity to the region, they'll be clutching a P45 I suspect.
mighty
But they're both shrewd cookies, and they know the Israel right or wrong days are over.
Well you'd have to bear in mind Rahmbo's middle name is Israel. There are rather a lot of Clinton goblinmen that are very good friends of Israel. Dennis Ross formerly of the JPPPI springs to mind.

The Dark Mother herself is a good friend of Bibi, pushing Mossad's outed former DC operative Uzi Arad in her face can't have been endearing.

Of course the last administration was even more riddled with AIPAC's drones. What has changed is DC's interests are now very clearly in conflict with Israel's. After 9-11 staunch support for Israeli interests could be made to look like outraged American patriotism. After all in a unipolar world why shouldn't mighty DC coddle its most cherished friend with strategic grace and blinkered favor?

Eight years on DC is hemmed in by the results of this folly. It must now pursue national interest ruthlessly in a frightening multi-polar world. Gone are the dreamy days of not talking to evil. Enemies must now be cultivated, friends restrained and sternly guided towards action that serves DC.
 
#19
seaweed said:
Whoever wipes Israel off the map gets to be the unchallenged leader of the Muslim world. Saddam wanted to do that and that's why he had to go; although frustrated in his endeavours to produce a real nuke he had delivery systems for other weapons. Going back, Nasser was after this bit of kudos too but his forces weren't up to it.

The baton has now passed to Iran which has the aggravation of an aggressive Saddam out of the way. Watch this space. It seems unlikely that Israel will announce ion advance what it intends to do about this, and if the US (Obama not understanding the issues) goes flaky on them, why then, Israel has to look after itself, and defend its citizens via an away match as being less nasty for them than a home fixture.
Yeah right. Poor defenceless little Israel and a US President that doesn't understand how vulnerable they are :roll:

Do you think Obama got up one morning, and thought "F*ck Israel" , or do you think he ordered in depth analysis and advisories, as well as launching State and CIA on fact finding missions?
 
#20
seaweed said:
Whoever wipes Israel off the map gets to be the unchallenged leader of the Muslim world. Saddam wanted to do that and that's why he had to go; although frustrated in his endeavours to produce a real nuke he had delivery systems for other weapons. Going back, Nasser was after this bit of kudos too but his forces weren't up to it.

The baton has now passed to Iran which has the aggravation of an aggressive Saddam out of the way. Watch this space. It seems unlikely that Israel will announce ion advance what it intends to do about this, and if the US (Obama not understanding the issues) goes flaky on them, why then, Israel has to look after itself, and defend its citizens via an away match as being less nasty for them than a home fixture.
Well, the Israelis themselves could do a lot to defuse the situation by curtailing their totally unnecessary barbaric treatment of the Palestinians for a mad Zionist dream.

In addition, there are certain practical difficulties in the whole venture. There are around 200 known sites that would have to be destroyed. Some of them could be decoys and nobody knows where all the secret sites are, or how many they comprise.

Bunker busters won't work, neither can they lob nukes at them, unless they want the wrath of the whole world down on their Gregories.

The truth is that the Israelis are just farting in a bottle. They simply don't have the means to get rid of the Iranian facilities.

MsG
 

Latest Threads