Will Israel Strike Iran?

[igloo]

WILL ISRAEL STRIKE IRAN?

By JIM HOAGLAND

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Email Archives

Print Reprint

August 13, 2003 -- A grim warning from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to President Bush that Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than U. S. intelligence believes has triggered concern here that Israel is seriously considering a pre-emptive strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor.

Sharon dramatized his forecast by bringing Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant, a three-star army officer who serves as his military secretary, to a meeting with Bush in the Oval Office two weeks ago, U.S. and Israeli sources tell me. Galant showered a worried-looking Bush with photographs and charts from a thick dossier on Iran's covert program.

So much for the news. Now the analysis: Oy. And vey.

Sharon's description of the unacceptable risks of Iran being able to launch "a nuclear holocaust" comes just as the Bush administration is making headway in constructing a diplomatic containment strategy for the nuclear weapons programs of Iran and North Korea. Unilateral Israeli action against Iran would destroy this strategy and gravely complicate Bush's reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.

Bush's frequently warring senior policymakers have reached a consensus (now there's news) in recent weeks that the United States has no attractive military options in Iran or North Korea. Instead, Washington must work with its allies to impede these rogue efforts to create nuclear arsenals. Europe and Russia have responded by increasingly distancing themselves from Iran and by joining the Bush team in pressuring North Korea into multilateral talks.

Knee-jerk Bush critics will no doubt poke fun or scorn at these post-Iraq multilateralist efforts. As someone almost said once, let them eat yellowcake. An improving climate in trans-Atlantic relations as the bitterness over Iraq recedes makes this strategy the best bet for the next six months, and probably beyond. U.S. officials believe they can use that time to put new obstacles in the way of the Iranian and North Korean programs.

But Sharon's presentation to Bush challenges the assumptions and viability of the emerging U.S. nonproliferation strategy on Iran. U.S. intelligence estimates that put Iran's covert nuclear weapons drive about four years short of being able to turn plutonium into a workable nuclear warhead overstate the time factor by at least 100 percent, Sharon argued. One to two years is his projected timeline.

To be sure, Sharon would face formidable logistical and political problems in trying to update Israel's successful pre-emptive 1981 strike against Iraq's Osirak reactor. His Oval Office briefing may have been designed to pressure Bush to move more forcefully on Iran rather than to advertise an impending Israeli action.

Israeli leaders have consistently warned Americans for two decades that Iran's Islamic regime is a mortal enemy for the Jewish state and must not be underestimated. Sharon's account, while apparently more urgent and dramatic than past presentations, fits a pattern of Israel "treating a nuclear-arming Iran as an immediate existential threat," says one U.S. official, while Washington does not.

But it is Israel's experience with Osirik that makes Sharon's alarming words impossible to ignore. The trigger for that strike was intelligence that the Iraqi reactor was about to be loaded with nuclear fuel. Hitting it after the loading would have risked spreading radioactive contamination across a wide area in the Middle East. And after the 1991 Gulf War it was discovered that outside assessments - including Israel's - underestimated how close Saddam Hussein had been to getting the bomb.

Russian delivery of fuel to the Bushehr reactor that it will complete for Iran later this year could be taken by the Israelis as a similar point of no return. The Iranians also have a covert uranium mining and enrichment effort under way that could be tied into the Bushehr reactor, international inspectors have reported.

"The enrichment effort is the bigger unknown for us," says a U.S. official. "But our estimate is that Iran does not now have a completely indigenous nuclear capability. Efforts to prevent it from reaching that point of no return are worth pursuing. The longer you can keep Russia from delivering the fuel, the better off you are."

A yearlong effort led by Undersecretary of State John Bolton to convince Russia and other countries to be more wary of Iran seems to be making inch-by-inch progress. Moscow has joined in summit-level statements critical of Iran, and Germany and France recently blocked shipment of aluminum tubes useful to Iran's enrichment program. Bolton will seek new action from the International Atomic Energy Agency at a Sept. 8 meeting.

Hope that he gets it. Whatever his purpose, Sharon has usefully sketched one awful alternative to the Bush administration making multilateralism work for it.

[seximofo2k]

Lets be consistent in our "texas justice'' Georgy weapons of mass destruction in Iran yet u do nothing?

[sassa]

wtf??? israel is allowed to have nukes, but no one else isn't??? two faced. but then again, jews have the US by its balls.

[igloo]

I wonder how different history would have turned out if Israel did not launch a pre-emptive strike in 1981 against a nuclear site......

[igloo]

Originally posted by seximofo2k

Lets be consistent in our "texas justice'' Georgy weapons of mass destruction in Iran yet u do nothing?

Who says the U.S. is not doing something?---don't be such a simpleton......pre-emptive defines itself beyond just military action

[sassa]

Originally posted by igloo

Who says the U.S. is not doing something?---don't be such a simpleton......pre-emptive defines itself beyond just military action

:blank:

[igloo]

Originally posted by sassa

:blank:

How much does it pain you when you lower your inner shield and realize how big of an imbecile you really are?.....must sting bad

[seximofo2k]

Originally posted by igloo

Who says the U.S. is not doing something?---don't be such a simpleton......pre-emptive defines itself beyond just military action

But not for iraq? I'll stop being a simpleton when you start using your brain and realizing the inconsistency in the Bush's foreign policy. Hmmm preemptive attack for Iraq, negotiate with North Korea, avoid the Iran issue

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by seximofo2k

But not for iraq? I'll stop being a simpleton when you start using your brain and realizing the inconsistency in the Bush's foreign policy. Hmmm preemptive attack for Iraq, negotiate with North Korea, avoid the Iran issue

WOW you can't see it huh

12 year history with numerous resolutions and sanctions before we entered Iraq now you are crying we are not rushing to war with the other members of the axis of evil?? You are disappointed were not skipping diplomacy but probabbly cried when in your eyees we rushed to war in Iraq... make up your mind simpleton!!!!!

[igloo]

Originally posted by seximofo2k

But not for iraq? I'll stop being a simpleton when you start using your brain and realizing the inconsistency in the Bush's foreign policy. Hmmm preemptive attack for Iraq, negotiate with North Korea, avoid the Iran issue

simpleton

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by sassa

wtf??? israel is allowed to have nukes, but no one else isn't??? two faced. but then again, jews have the US by its balls.

Isreal never threatened to nuke one of it's neighbors as a act of GOD...

Isreal is a ally..

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by igloo

I wonder how different history would have turned out if Israel did not launch a pre-emptive strike in 1981 against a nuclear site......

Easy.

Grand Canyon ptII where Isreal once stood.

[sassa]

Originally posted by mr mahs

Isreal never threatened to nuke one of it's neighbors as a act of GOD...

Isreal is a ally..

how long will this argument be beaten to death? israel is an ally? well, buddy, ever stopped to think WHY theyre an "ally" ??? and while israel never threanted a country using an act of God (which would make them look like their arab cousins, which would sabotage their position as a supposed democracy, see they're smart!)

Originally posted by mr mahs

Easy.

Grand Canyon ptII where Isreal once stood.

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by sassa

Originally posted by mr mahs

Isreal never threatened to nuke one of it's neighbors as a act of GOD...

Isreal is a ally..

how long will this argument be beaten to death? israel is an ally? well, buddy, ever stopped to think WHY theyre an "ally" ??? and while israel never threanted a country using an act of God (which would make them look like their arab cousins, which would sabotage their position as a supposed democracy, see they're smart!)

Originally posted by mr mahs

It was the current mullah who made that threat I didn't make it up.

Easy.

Grand Canyon ptII where Isreal once stood.

don't be simple minded. that would mean absolute suicide for themselves as well. they just want the fucking zionists out of there. jews have lived in that area and the middle east for a very long time. but this zionist shit has got to go. israel is not just jewish land. and they need to realize that and stop trying to steal land from everyone else.

but i realize you probably have some smart comeback for me, so let's have it and have a laugh.

[breakbeatz2]

you have NO comprehension as to what is really going on politically in the middle east. altohugh i see you think you really do. so me a fav, go bck to your 9-5 and leave the big talk to people who actually understand things.

you really dont understand the complexity of politics and cant understand how politics is connected to people. you only isolate the two, which is convenient for your baseless arguments.

Originally posted by sassa

Originally posted by mr mahs

Isreal never threatened to nuke one of it's neighbors as a act of GOD...

Isreal is a ally..

how long will this argument be beaten to death? israel is an ally? well, buddy, ever stopped to think WHY theyre an "ally" ??? and while israel never threanted a country using an act of God (which would make them look like their arab cousins, which would sabotage their position as a supposed democracy, see they're smart!)

Originally posted by mr mahs

Easy.

Grand Canyon ptII where Isreal once stood.

don't be simple minded. that would mean absolute suicide for themselves as well. they just want the fucking zionists out of there. jews have lived in that area and the middle east for a very long time. but this zionist shit has got to go. israel is not just jewish land. and they need to realize that and stop trying to steal land from everyone else.

but i realize you probably have some smart comeback for me, so let's have it and have a laugh.

[sassa]

Originally posted by breakbeatz2

you have NO comprehension as to what is really going on politically in the middle east. altohugh i see you think you really do. so me a fav, go bck to your 9-5 and leave the big talk to people who actually understand things.

you really dont understand the complexity of politics and cant understand how politics is connected to people. you only isolate the two, which is convenient for your baseless arguments.

]

i suppose you do.

please don't make me laugh. i don't believe you know anything about it more than myself. so get off your high horse, little boy.

[breakbeatz2]

its pretty clear i do. simply from what you say and how you simplify things.

you are totally oblivious to the motives of the terrorist organizations, and you make wild, completely baseless claims, about the governments of Israel and the US like "Israel is making money of the violence"

you dont keep up an intelligent debate, but pick sentences out of context, like you did with that Annan quote, and randomly spew them out. your only point is to go against common sense, which in your mind is a worthy cause, but only makes you 1) look like a fool and 2) support organizations of murderers who you think are doing noble deeds while they are in fact motivated by intentions completely opposite of what you think

little boy? thats another wild baseless accusation just like the rest of your blabber. do you even have any idea who i am or what i do, or how old i am? i didnt think so. but i'm sure you'll go look up some random article and post a quote "the boy was 17 years old" from some random article and say that it was about me. cause that is pretty much all that you do.

[igloo]

Originally posted by breakbeatz2

its pretty clear i do. simply from what you say and how you simplify things.

you are totally oblivious to the motives of the terrorist organizations, and you make wild, completely baseless claims, about the governments of Israel and the US like "Israel is making money of the violence"

you dont keep up an intelligent debate, but pick sentences out of context, like you did with that Annan quote, and randomly spew them out. your only point is to go against common sense, which in your mind is a worthy cause, but only makes you 1) look like a fool and 2) support organizations of murderers who you think are doing noble deeds while they are in fact motivated by intentions completely opposite of what you think

little boy? thats another wild baseless accusation just like the rest of your blabber. do you even have any idea who i am or what i do, or how old i am? i didnt think so. but i'm sure you'll go look up some random article and post a quote "the boy was 17 years old" from some random article and say that it was about me. cause that is pretty much all that you do.

:rock:

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by breakbeatz2

its pretty clear i do. simply from what you say and how you simplify things.

you are totally oblivious to the motives of the terrorist organizations, and you make wild, completely baseless claims, about the governments of Israel and the US like "Israel is making money of the violence"

you dont keep up an intelligent debate, but pick sentences out of context, like you did with that Annan quote, and randomly spew them out. your only point is to go against common sense, which in your mind is a worthy cause, but only makes you 1) look like a fool and 2) support organizations of murderers who you think are doing noble deeds while they are in fact motivated by intentions completely opposite of what you think

little boy? thats another wild baseless accusation just like the rest of your blabber. do you even have any idea who i am or what i do, or how old i am? i didnt think so. but i'm sure you'll go look up some random article and post a quote "the boy was 17 years old" from some random article and say that it was about me. cause that is pretty much all that you do.

[skince55]

Originally posted by breakbeatz2

its pretty clear i do. simply from what you say and how you simplify things.

you are totally oblivious to the motives of the terrorist organizations, and you make wild, completely baseless claims, about the governments of Israel and the US like "Israel is making money of the violence"

you dont keep up an intelligent debate, but pick sentences out of context, like you did with that Annan quote, and randomly spew them out. your only point is to go against common sense, which in your mind is a worthy cause, but only makes you 1) look like a fool and 2) support organizations of murderers who you think are doing noble deeds while they are in fact motivated by intentions completely opposite of what you think

little boy? thats another wild baseless accusation just like the rest of your blabber. do you even have any idea who i am or what i do, or how old i am? i didnt think so. but i'm sure you'll go look up some random article and post a quote "the boy was 17 years old" from some random article and say that it was about me. cause that is pretty much all that you do.

Talk about being on point

[sassa]

Originally posted by breakbeatz2

its pretty clear i do. simply from what you say and how you simplify things. oh jeez, what an ego.

you are totally oblivious to the motives of the terrorist organizations, and you make wild, completely baseless claims, about the governments of Israel and the US like "Israel is making money of the violence" if they're completely baseless, then disprove them. i don't wish to divulge everything i know to you on the internet. if this was a live debate in a safe environment, maybe i'd tell you what i know about this. but i won't. and now that i know how you feel about this topic, i choose not to either. so call me ignorant, that's your right. but my so-called 'accusations' are not pointless, as you so eagerly try to point out. it's rather common sense to see how they can make money. first of all, consider how much money they get from the US in order to battle these so-called terrorists. $5 billion. there are a great number of poor countries in the world who do not even get that in 10 years! as one idiot pointed out about this, they need this money to buy weapons because they have hostile neighbors. they have a decent economy. they do not need 5 billion. but jewish organizations like the JDL and AIPAC do their most to pressure congress into funding the zionists. why? so they can continue to do what they do best: kill. the IDF on a daily basis kills civilians daily. now, i bet you're going to argue what about hamas and islamiyy jihad?? they're not the military though. they aren't supported and funded by the US. then, consider how many american corporations give israel money. philip morris alone donated 12% of its profits to israel each year. i believe that would be around $800 million, if not more. now, i'd like to see you discredit what i have said, not just in this reply, but in general. how is the zioinst movement NOT making money off of this fight? you have to be pretty simple minded to not see. like arafat is doing with the palestinian people, the more conflict continues, the more people in power get rich. plain and simple.

you dont keep up an intelligent debate, but pick sentences out of context, like you did with that Annan quote, and randomly spew them out. your only point is to go against common sense, which in your mind is a worthy cause, but only makes you 1) look like a fool and 2) support organizations of murderers who you think are doing noble deeds while they are in fact motivated by intentions completely opposite of what you think this is not even worth a response. according to you, i look like a fool, and according to you i support terrorists. what is ironic is that i can say the very exact same thing about you. just because they aren't branded terrorists by the US and other world organizations doesn't mean that they are. the CIA are the biggest terrorists in the world, but no one dares call them that in public. you have some nerve also assuming i think these terrorist groups are performing noble deeds. don't be a jackass. you have to be a pretty cold hearted person to assume that. maybe you are, but i am not. your assumptions kill whatever sense you might have in your words.

little boy? thats another wild baseless accusation just like the rest of your blabber. do you even have any idea who i am or what i do, or how old i am? i didnt think so. but i'm sure you'll go look up some random article and post a quote "the boy was 17 years old" from some random article and say that it was about me. cause that is pretty much all that you do.

quite frankly, i couldn't care less who you are, or how old you are. but you definitely have a lot to learn about what goes on in this region. this is all pretty much bullshit so i'll stop here. do yourself a favor and stop believing everything cnn and itv tells you, and choose alternative neutral sources to base your conclusions on. otherwise, you sound pretty biased, narrow minded, and ignorant. everything you accuse me of. but then again, it's hilarious also. you actually think you're right.

[seximofo2k]

Originally posted by mr mahs

WOW you can't see it huh

12 year history with numerous resolutions and sanctions before we entered Iraq now you are crying we are not rushing to war with the other members of the axis of evil?? You are disappointed were not skipping diplomacy but probabbly cried when in your eyees we rushed to war in Iraq... make up your mind simpleton!!!!! [/quote

Mr Mahs please explain where i started "crying we are not rushing to war with the other members of the axis of evil??" Cause as far i remember i never said that I hope you dont have to make up shit to argue with a simpleton? Never was %100 against takin out Saddam after all he is a piece of garbage and the resolutions he has been evading. What i didnt cry about but disliked was that we went in without UN support its funny everyone talks about the UN resolutions but yet the UN wanted more time but when that happened the UN became now a relic of anti-americans with no backbone. I guess we use the UN when it suits our purposes.

I dont want to get into anti-american rhetoric i am far from that type of person. What I said and ill state it before is that the lack of action the Bush people are putting towards Iran and North Korea. We have a man Like Kim Jong Il who is a paranoid psycho with nothing to lose with ICBM's that the CIA confirmed could reach west coast cities. That my friend is more a threat than Saddam having some Anthrax that noone can find. Once again i dont believe we should jump into any situation I am just commenting on where i see inconsistency............

[seximofo2k]

Originally posted by igloo

simpleton

:laugh: :laugh:

You got it all figured out dont you igloo

:laugh: :laugh:

[breakbeatz2]

i am right.

i dont think theres much doubt about that.

and about israels govt.

it is completely different form that of the arab countries, and actually wnts its people to prosper. which is where your argument that israel is just like the palestinian people falls apart.

aid to israel would continue whether there was violence or not. thus, why need violence? two, israel is losing MUCH MORE money in its economy from the fighing that it is getting in aid. its politicians would get much richer in peace time, because unlike the palestinians, Israel actually has a developed economy which is being suppressed with all this violence.

israel is LOSING money. its obvious. you have no evidence to prove otherwise. its clear israel is losing money. Israel fought for its independence to develop itself as a country and it has, and it has become richer internally than foreign aid could possibly make it alone.

the killing of israelis is to keep the palestinians down and to keep poverty and fear in the region. the killing of palestinian terrorists is in the hopes of restoring peace, and bringing stability (yes both socially and ECONOMICALLY because ISRAEL WOULD BE WEALTHIER IF THEIR WAS PEACE) to the region.

thats the bottom line, and why your argument is totally flawed. the only reason you are being so foolish about all this is because you can afford the luxury. hopefully the UN blast will open th eeyes of the europeans which they have held tightly shut for so long. i have NO IDEA what can possibly open your eyes.

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by seximofo2k

Originally posted by mr mahs

WOW you can't see it huh

12 year history with numerous resolutions and sanctions before we entered Iraq now you are crying we are not rushing to war with the other members of the axis of evil?? You are disappointed were not skipping diplomacy but probabbly cried when in your eyees we rushed to war in Iraq... make up your mind simpleton!!!!! [/quote

Mr Mahs please explain where i started "crying we are not rushing to war with the other members of the axis of evil??" Cause as far i remember i never said that I hope you dont have to make up shit to argue with a simpleton? Never was %100 against takin out Saddam after all he is a piece of garbage and the resolutions he has been evading. What i didnt cry about but disliked was that we went in without UN support its funny everyone talks about the UN resolutions but yet the UN wanted more time but when that happened the UN became now a relic of anti-americans with no backbone. I guess we use the UN when it suits our purposes.

I dont want to get into anti-american rhetoric i am far from that type of person. What I said and ill state it before is that the lack of action the Bush people are putting towards Iran and North Korea. We have a man Like Kim Jong Il who is a paranoid psycho with nothing to lose with ICBM's that the CIA confirmed could reach west coast cities. That my friend is more a threat than Saddam having some Anthrax that noone can find. Once again i dont believe we should jump into any situation I am just commenting on where i see inconsistency............

What makes you think we aren't focussing enough attention to Iran and N KOREA.