Heres how Israel would destroy Irans nuclear program

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by alib, May 15, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From Haaretz
    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. 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
    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. 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. 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. 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

    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.
    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.
     
  9. 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"?

    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.

    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.
     
  10. 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...
     
  11. 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?
     
  12. 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.
     
  13. 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
     
  14. mercurydancer

    mercurydancer LE Book Reviewer

    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."