Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by jonwilly, Jun 12, 2010.

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:


    The four main targets for any raid on Iran would be the uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom, the gas storage development at Isfahan and the heavy-water reactor at Arak. Secondary targets include the lightwater reactor at Bushehr, which could produce weapons-grade plutonium when complete.

    The targets lie as far as 1,400 miles (2,250km) from Israel; the outer limits of their bombers’ range, even with aerial refuelling. An open corridor across northern Saudi Arabia would significantly shorten the distance. An airstrike would involve multiple waves of bombers, possibly crossing Jordan, northern Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Aircraft attacking Bushehr, on the Gulf coast, could swing beneath Kuwait to strike from the southwest.

    Passing over Iraq would require at least tacit agreement to the raid from Washington. So far, the Obama Administration has refused to give its approval as it pursues a diplomatic solution to curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Military analysts say Israel has held back only because of this failure to secure consensus from America and Arab states. Military analysts doubt that an airstrike alone would be sufficient to knock out the key nuclear facilities, which are heavily fortified and deep underground or within mountains. However, if the latest sanctions prove ineffective the pressure from the Israelis on Washington to approve military action will intensify. Iran vowed to continue enriching uranium after the UN Security Council imposed its toughest sanctions yet in an effort to halt the Islamic Republic’s nuclear programme, which Tehran claims is intended for civil energy purposes only. President Ahmadinejad has described the UN resolution as “a used handkerchief, which should be thrown in the dustbin”.

    Israeli officials refused to comment yesterday on details for a raid on Iran, which the Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has refused to rule out. Questioned on the option of a Saudi flight path for Israeli bombers, Aharaon Zeevi Farkash, who headed military intelligence until 2006 and has been involved in war games simulating a strike on Iran, said: “I know that Saudi Arabia is even more afraid than Israel of an Iranian nuclear capacity.”

    In 2007 Israel was reported to have used Turkish air space to attack a suspected nuclear reactor being built by Iran’s main regional ally, Syria. Although Turkey publicly protested against the “violation” of its air space, it is thought to have turned a blind eye in what many saw as a dry run for a strike on Iran’s far more substantial — and better-defended — nuclear sites.

    Israeli intelligence experts say that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are at least as worried as themselves and the West about an Iranian nuclear arsenal.Israel has sent missile-class warships and at least one submarine capable of launching a nuclear warhead through the Suez Canal for deployment in the Red Sea within the past year, as both a warning to Iran and in anticipation of a possible strike. Israeli newspapers reported last year that high-ranking officials, including the former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, have met their Saudi Arabian counterparts to discuss the Iranian issue. It was also reported that Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad, met Saudi intelligence officials last year to gain assurances that Riyadh would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets violating Saudi airspace during the bombing run. Both governments have denied the reports.

  2. I'm guessing (I really am) that the only way Isreal will be able to get to the targets will be by taking out the (guessing again) well dig in anti-air first? And the only way they can get hold of the co-ordinates of the AA is from the yanks? So the Obama administration would have to leak it to them....again.
  3. So what are the chances this will actually kick off, and not become more posturing about by the Israeli's?
  4. Posturing? If there's one thing that Israel can't be accused of, it's gobbing off without the will to back it up with action. They've shown themselves to be only too willing to launch offensive strikes when they feel the need to - against Syria, Lebannon, the Palestinians and aid ships in the last few years alone.
  5. It seems that the Israelis have had satellites since 1988(?) and have been putting the Kodak Instamatics in them for some time.
    They have even had satellites put in orbit for them by the Russians; that would seem a bit like the enemy of my enemy is my friend

  6. Fair one, not exactly my strongest subject. :D
  7. This good news is giving me a semi, could one presume that switching off air defences and allowing aircorridors is not the only assisance the Sunnis are going to offer the Children of David against the heritic.
  8. The Israelis usually lash out when the PM is in trouble.

    Not the case at the moment. Bibi is sitting pretty according to Haaretz.
    How quickly they forget, Tzipi was the beloved hammer of Gaza not so long ago.
  9. Has it been a month since the last Times 'Israel to attack Iran' article? They normally come along every 3 or 4 weeks regurgitating the same old stories in an attempt to convince the public that it's all some foregone conclusion.

    If it's all so easy for the Israelis, why haven't they done it already?
  10. as much as i dislike both countries i cant help admiring their "u dont like us, we dont care" attitude they have in common. especially iran. they've basically been givving 2 fingers and sayin fcuk u we'll do wat we want, for the last few years
  11. Waiting for this, maybe?

    Russia now says Iran sanctions ban S-300 missiles

    A bit safer for F-15 drivers now. I agree with you though, The Times have been pushing this "imminent attack" story for years now with little apparent evidence and obviously no action to date. The Iranians don't seem particularly concerned either.
  12. The solution is in theory quite straightforward. Israel strikes from the air, supported by the Americans. We use the armies stationed next door to move in and take over the country, (after all we did this with the Sadaam regime) once overtaken we then dismantle the nuclear facilities. Whatever regime follows so long as it is not a lunatic theocracy will no longer threaten the rest of the world.
  13. And in reality quite different.
  14. Absolutely, after all, it went so smoothly smoothly in Iraq...

  15. It did indeed. Iraq with its miserable army was fought to a standstill by iran. Equal or what? The world does not need theocracy regimes. There are no intenational barriers, Russia will do absolutely shag. Civilisation has a chance to stop them NOW. We might not have the same chance 10 years down the road.