Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Israel Stands Ready to Bomb Iran's Nuclear Sites
JERUSALEM - The Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government.
A satellite image of Iran's Bushehr nuclear facility. He added that it was unlikely that Israel would carry out the attack without receiving at least tacit approval from America, which has struck a more reconciliatory tone in dealing with Iran under its new administration. (File image/Times of London)
Among the steps taken to ready Israeli forces for what would be a risky raid
requiring pinpoint aerial strikes are the acquisition of three Airborne
Warning and Control (AWAC) aircraft and regional missions to simulate the
attack.
Two nationwide civil defence drills will help to prepare the public for the retaliation that Israel could face.
“Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defence official told The Times.
Officials believe that Israel could be required to hit more than a dozen targets, including moving convoys. The sites include Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium; Esfahan, where 250 tonnes of gas is stored in tunnels; and Arak, where a heavy water reactor produces plutonium.
The distance from Israel to at least one of the sites is more than 870 miles, a distance that the Israeli force practised covering in a training exercise last year that involved F15 and F16 jets, helicopters and refuelling tankers.
The possible Israeli strike on Iran has drawn comparisons to its attack on the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad in 1981. That strike, which destroyed the facility in under 100 seconds, was completed without Israeli losses and checked Iraqi ambitions for a nuclear weapons programme.
“We would not make the threat [against Iran] without the force to back it. There has been a recent move, a number of on-the-ground preparations, that indicate Israel's willingness to act,” said another official from Israel's intelligence community.
He added that it was unlikely that Israel would carry out the attack without receiving at least tacit approval from America, which has struck a more reconciliatory tone in dealing with Iran under its new administration.
An Israeli attack on Iran would entail flying over Jordanian and Iraqi airspace, where US forces have a strong presence.
Ephraim Kam, the deputy director of the Institute for National Security Studies, said it was unlikely that the Americans would approve an attack.
“The American defence establishment is unsure that the operation will be successful. And the results of the operation would only delay Iran's programme by two to four years,” he said.
A visit by President Obama to Israel in June is expected to coincide with the national elections in Iran — timing that would allow the US Administration to re-evaluate diplomatic resolutions with Iran before hearing the Israeli position.
“Many of the leaks or statements made by Israeli leaders and military commanders are meant for deterrence. The message is that if [the international community] is unable to solve the problem they need to take into account that we will solve it our way,” Mr Kam said.
Among recent preparations by the airforce was the Israeli attack of a weapons convoy in Sudan bound for militants in the Gaza Strip.
“Sudan was practice for the Israeli forces on a long-range attack,” Ronen Bergman, the author of The Secret War with Iran, said. “They wanted to see how they handled the transfer of information, hitting a moving target ... In that sense it was a rehearsal.”
Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.
Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would “train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning ... We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning”.
Israel will conduct an exercise with US forces to test the ability of Arrow, its US-funded missile defence system. The exercise would test whether the system could intercept missiles launched at Israel.
“Israel has made it clear that it will not tolerate the threat of a nuclear Iran. According to Israeli Intelligence they will have the bomb within two years ... Once they have a bomb it will be too late, and Israel will have no choice to strike — with or without America,” an official from the Israeli Defence Ministry said.
- Posted in
159 Comments so far
Show AllStop USA funding of the one of the worlds worst terrorists, Zionists.
Stop Iran, the irrational terrorist state, from getting nukes. I can't believe you hypocritical far-lefties are taking Iran's side in their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. The only possible reason you would take their side is plain old antisemitism. As long as the nukes are aimed at Israel, it's OK, right?
No, wrong. Why should Israel get to hold 200 nukes while Iran gets none? Where is the fundamental fairness in that? You sound like a Jewish-supremacist to me. There is nothing in international law, nor in any fundamental concept of decency, that permits Israel (or any other state) to bomb any nation to prevent its getting nukes. I can't believe you fanatical Jewish supremacists can't get that.
A real solution to this problem would be to convene a regional conference for the purpose of TOTAL nuclear disarmament of all the countries, Israel included. But you don't see Israel pushing for that. No, they arrogantly prefer to hold their stockpile of nukes over the region. At a global level, the US should start taking the Non-Proliferation Treaty seriously and working for the total elimination of the scourge of nuclear weapons. But the US isn't doing that, and never has sought that. As long as some powerful nations arrogate the "right" to hold these evil weapons over the rest of the world, other nations will seek to acquire them, if only for deterrent purposes. So our choices are: (1) get serious about verifiable global nuclear disarmament, or (2) continue the status quo and wait until more and more nations acquire nukes.
Since when is the world fair? Fairness is nice and all, but I'd rather not have dead bodies strewn across a dead Middle East.
Israeli supremacists would argue that the world should be run by Jews and that the whole Middle East should be Israel, or something like that. I never made that argument, so you're just name calling for effect.
I love the idea of total disarmament, but that's unrealistic. Stopping proliferation is realistic but hard. What's far more unrealistic is your belief that getting rid of Israeli nukes would change anything. A nukeless Israel would have no effect on Iran's desires. Israel is merely a red herring in their game of regional domination.
"I love the idea of total disarmament, but that's unrealistic"
Oh, so you find the idea regional or world wars more "realistic"? Apparently you prefer a world ruled by war to one ruled by law. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty was created to "stop proliferation," which you SAY, or at least imply you want to do. But apparently you don't. You just want YOUR favorite nations to have nukes - and tyrannize the rest of the planet with them. This is the sort of crackpot "realism" of which the world has seen quite enough.
"What's far more unrealistic is your belief that getting rid of Israeli nukes would change anything."
Of course it would. Why wouldn't it? It would mean Israelis wouldn't have anything to fear vis a vis getting nuked by their neighbor states. But what you refuse to acknowledge is that Israel has no interest in a verifiable system of nuclear disarmament in the Middle East.
Hey, "middle road," the only country I know of that has a plan to take the world down with it if it should fail in its desire for regional dominance is Israel. It's called "The Samson Option," and it was first revealed to the general public and written about by Seymour Hersh. Iran, by contrast, has not attacked anybody for a very, very long time, literally ages. Israel is also the only country in the region currently and long conducting policies that can be considered genocidal by international law, whereas the Iranians have to be misquoted to be falsely attributed with similar intentions, only to deflect attention from the reality of Israel's continued expansion and suppression of civil rights of its subject population. This is all very obvious to many people, but it still bears repeating every time the lies get trotted out again. Israel is a loose cannon, a mad dog that must be brought to heel, or half the world might go up in flames. After the hell of Gaza, If Obama will not speak the truth on this issue and put a stop to Israel's wild destructiveness, he's useless.
While MemoryHole seems to be doing a quite adequate job in exposing your one sided and mostly fallacious logic I would add a bit.
Israeli actions in Gaza are destabilizing the entire region. They are both unecessary and heartlessly cruel, murdering many times more innocents than Hamas gunmen. They are far more warlike than are AlQaeda and their incidents more numerous as well.
There is absolutely no proof that this nuclear installation is anything but what Iran claims it to be, an electrical generation plant. It is being supervised and the fissile materials manufactured by Russian techs. The demonisation of Iran is just another stupidity of the far right, who seem unable to envision peaceful solutions to any problem.
You are certainly welcome here but one might hope that you come to enlighten rather than propagandize as is the intent of your buddy below and th eusual stuff we get from hit and run righties.
theMiddleRoad,
If the world is not fair as you say and that gives you the right to advocate war, why worry about a little name calling? You want to risk ending Israel and maybe the rest of the world for your paranoia about Iran.
What threat does Iran pose to Israel besides lots of name calling.
You sound like a war criminal.
Far righties usually do.
If Israel bombs Iran, it will be living in the SEA some day soon.
Lets hope so. Israel should not exist. Oops, that makes me anti-semitic.
Israel, like every nation on this earth, has every right to exist. They also have an obligation to live in peaceful coexistence and harmony with their neighbors.
So, does that make me a Zionist?
"So, does that make me a Zionist?" That depends whether you think that Israel has the right to exist at the expense of Palestine or not.
So what part of 'every nation on earth has a right to exist' is unclear?
I condemn Israel's actions towards its neighbors as does every civilised person, but I think it uncivilized to call for the end of the State of Israel. Why not concentrate on peaceful solutions?
Israel could get rid of 90% of its stockpile of nuclear weapons and still have enough left over to turn all of Iran into radioactive carbon. If the Israelis are so concerned about the Iranian nuke program, why don't they use their nuclear weapons on the Iranians? That would show them you mean business. Or is the idea of conventional weapons somehow more humane? And I assume that you'd have no problem with the price of oil going back to $200 a barrel in a depression, as the Iranians would not hesitate to destroy everything in the Persian Gulf and Saudi refineries if they were attacked by anyone.
TheMiddleRoad, you sure sound like an extremist to me.
Karl Eysenbach
Welcome to our Common Dreams site, and thank you for sharing your ideas
Perhaps you have little technical background, but let me assure you that you are vastly misinformed at both the effects of A-bombs ( causing Iran to turn into radioactive charcoal ) and what Israel's 200 of them would do to Iran.
The blast effects obliterate almost everything standing, while melting the close to explosion ground into glass and causing hurricane-size pressure waves to knock over and demolish everything out to some number of tens of miles ( depending on the strength of that bomb ). There is no carbonizing of people standing, as proven by Hiroshima's evidence of only their cast shadows surviving the blast ( like a human shaped smudge left on the wall ).
War makers have thrown all sorts of bombs at millions of people for thousands of years, but A-bombs are entirely unprecedented in scope of devastation and understanding the impact of so much energy being released.
The fact is that many scientists believe that just a few nukes could completely change the World's climate in a matter of weeks, and the rippling impacts and effects of 200 of them might be the complete termination of the human race and most of life as we know it on this Earth.
My hope was to educate you to the potential cataclysmic release of nearly incomprehensible energy, if we should ever experience a nuclear war -- but as Einstein pointed out the next battles after that, would be fought with just sticks and stones.
Nukes are absolutely the least trivial of mankind's modern "toys" and have been directly associated with the power of God ( Oppenheimer quoting Vedas, "we have become Death the Destroyer" ) when experienced first hand.
Namaste
"Since when is the world fair? Fairness is nice and all, but I'd rather not have dead bodies strewn across a dead Middle East."
Your comment brings to mind the following from a commencement speech by JK Rowling:
"...many prefer not to exercise their imaginations at all. They choose to remain comfortably within the bounds of their own experience, never troubling to wonder how it would feel to have been born other than they are. They can refuse to hear screams or to peer inside cages; they can close their minds and hearts to any suffering that does not touch them personally; they can refuse to know."
No, the world isn't fair, but saying so from the platform of military strength or moral superiority takes neither imagination nor courage.
Pleae, for your own welfare, make an appointment at your mental health professional as soon as possible. The sooner you begin to grapple with your rage the better will be the rest of your life.
The vile and slime filled post you offer certainly is not a paeon for your political stupidities.
Re-read Kitty's post, it's actually quite sarcastic. Not at all vile and slimefilled, it might not be a 'modest proposal' but it was written in that style.
I believe Rick was referring to MiddleRoads posts.
No, Rick was having a senior moment, for which I apologize to Ms.Kitty. I actually stopped reading her post precisely where the sarcasm became evident, a lesson I will certainly take to heart.
Sarcasm and Irony
Exactly. It was intended to ridicule the position of middle-of-the road. Worthy of a Colbert skit. Well done.
Whenever it's against Israely policy, it's anti-semitic. Whenever it's about the shit Israel has done, then the world isn't fair. It gets old.
I think Israel is full of semitic ants.
Deleted.
Hello_Kitty, I like your sense of humor. So many of us share this frustration whether it's about the Palestinian Holocaust, the "feeler" threats towards Iran, or what our representatives have done to the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan.We are frustrated by the deliberate inaction of the U.N.'s (country club) reluctance to help the women in Congo, the people in Sudan, and other "hot spots" on this planet. Down with machismo! Up with the olive branch!
We are all sisters and brothers under the stars. If the crooks and liars in high places want war, let THEM fight on the battlefield. War would cease!
Hello, Kitty: So, you want to nuke us, huh? There are 1.6 BILLION MUSLIMS in the world. Ther are more people in NY state than there are Jews in the world. Do you really believe Zionism is going to be victorious over us in the long run?
We are raising educated, intelligent, informed children to take care of the zionitis outbreak in the future.
www.meetyourworld.com
Iran is signatory to NPT, Iran publicly says they have no interest in nuclear bombs.
Take your antisemitism and stick it up your ass. Nobody here is antisemetic except maybe you, you are a zionist right? That makes you a scourge of the Jews.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
And privately builds them. What else is new?
the evidence for your statement is completely non-existent. none, zippo, nada.
the last thing the world needs is more american delusions about phantom wmd's. it really amazes me that anyone could not be even a little suspicious about such claims. but the gullibility and stupidity of americans is boundless......
Privately building nukes? Iran? Is there any proof of that other than in the paranoid delusional minds of the rabid rightwing?
Sorry roadkill, your assertions have no proof. There is proof that Israel has built WMDs, and unlike Iran, Israel hasn't signed the NPT. Israel has also invaded it's neighbours far more often in the last 50 years than Iran has in the last 500. Israel has killed more people than all the 'terrorist atrocities' that Iran has been blamed for.
MiddleRoad,
Got Proof?
Of course not, all you have is your fear, hate and ignorance.
Get help.
You want to talk about anti-semitism? The world demonstrates it daily when it allows Israel to bully and bomb semitic peoples. The only weapons of mass destruction in the Mideast are in Israel. Israel has attacked most of its neighbors over the years because of its psychotic paranoia and obsession with stealing as much Arab land as possible. Israel's massacre in Gaza is just the latest and bloodiest example of Israel's racism and contempt for Arabs and Muslims. Israel is the world's 4th largest military power, yet it comes begging to the US for US taxpayer handouts. Iran has not attacked another country in several hundred years and is not breaking any international laws by building up its nuclear power. Israel has nuclear weapons and has already demonstrated to the world that it's a rogue nation--ignoring international law, spitting in the face of human rights, spying even on the US--the hand that feeds it--and violating every measure of morality and decency. If the international community allows Israel to build WMD, then it has no moral right to demand that Iran--or any other Muslim nation--not build them.
Listen, you chosen one: Jews are not semites, except for a few exceptions. They are German, Russian, Polish and American. The semites are the Palestinians. And, one day, technology will allow the Palestinians to come up with a medicine to treat Zionitis.
Once you guys are done taking control of ALL of our resources, the American people will wake up broke one morning, and we will take our media, our banks, our oil, gold, diamond, banking, education, publishing, etc...industries back.
Semitic is the name of a language group which has been erroneously applied to Jews. The expression "antisemitic" implies that the speaker or writer opposes a family of languages! A true antisemite is therefore a Jew who demands that Hebrew be abolished as a living language. Palestinians are not Semites either, they speak a Semitic language.
I have a hunch that the error came about when large numbers of Jews began to live in Europe where most people are classified by the native language they speak. A German was a person that speaks German, a.s.o.
My second hunch is that "antisemitic" is easier to pronounce than "antijewish". It is very well established that speakers tend to prefer easy pronunciations to harder ones. The succession of i, s, and e is smoother than of i, j, and e.
In linguistics and ethnology, Semitic (from the Biblical "Shem", Hebrew: שם, translated as "name", Arabic: ساميّ) was first used to refer to a language family of largely Middle Eastern origin, now called the Semitic languages. This family includes the ancient and modern forms of Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, Hebrew, Maltese, Phoenician, Tigre and Tigrinya among others.
As language studies are interwoven with cultural studies, the term also came to describe the extended cultures and ethnicities, as well as the history of these varied peoples as associated by close geographic and linguistic distribution.
The term Semite means a member of any of various ancient and modern people originating in southwestern Asia, including Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Arabs, and Ethiopian Semites. It was proposed at first to refer to the languages related to Hebrew by Ludwig Schlözer, in Eichhorn's "Repertorium", vol. VIII (Leipzig, 1781), p. 161. Through Eichhorn the name then came into general usage (cf. his "Einleitung in das Alte Testament" (Leipzig, 1787), I, p. 45). In his "Gesch. der neuen Sprachenkunde", pt. I (Göttingen, 1807) it had already become a fixed technical term.[1]
The word "Semitic" is an adjective derived from Shem, one of the three sons of Noah in the Bible (Genesis 5.32, 6.10, 10.21), or more precisely from the Greek derivative of that name, namely Σημ (Sēm); the noun form referring to a person is Semite.
The term "anti-Semitic" (or "anti-Semite") usually refers to Jews only. It was coined in 1879 by German journalist Wilhelm Marr in a pamphlet called, "The Victory of Germandom over Jewry". Using ideas of race and nationalism, Marr argued that Jews had become the first major power in the West. He accused them of being liberals, a people without roots who had Judaized Germans beyond salvation. In 1879 Marr founded the "League for Anti-Semitism".
The concept of "Semitic" peoples is derived from Biblical accounts of the origins of the cultures known to the ancient Hebrews. Those closest to them in culture and language were generally deemed to be descended from their forefather Shem. Enemies were often said to be descendants of his cursed nephew, Canaan. In Genesis 10:21-31, Shem is described as the father of Aram, Asshur, and Arpachshad: the Biblical ancestors of the Arabs, Aramaeans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Chaldeans, Sabaeans, and Hebrews, etc., all of whose languages are closely related; the language family containing them was therefore named Semitic by linguists. However, the Canaanites and Amorites also spoke a language belonging to this family, and are therefore also termed Semitic in linguistics, despite being described in Genesis as sons of Ham (See Sons of Noah). Shem is also described in Genesis as the father of Elam and Lud, although the Elamites and Lydians usually thought to descend from these spoke languages that were not Semitic.
The hypothetical Proto-Semitic language, ancestral to historical Semitic languages in the Middle East, is thought to have been originally from either the Arabian Peninsula (particularly around Yemen) or the adjacent Ethiopian highlands, but its region of origin is still much debated and uncertain. The Semitic language family is also considered a component of the larger Afro-Asiatic macro-family of languages. Identification of the hypothetical proto-Semitic region of origin is therefore dependent on the larger geographic distributions of the other language families within Afro-Asiatic.
I think Wiki may have its flaws but it has its uses as well.
P.S. 'German' was first coined by the Roman Army, 'gere' meaning club, thus 'club wielding' man....
Just couldn't stay away could you Joe?
Yeah a jews life is worth more than anybody elses.I know you believe that .Right middle road
Middle of which road?
That far left group, the "CIA," claims there's no nuclear arms program in Iran.
hey not-the-middle-road:
as far as "the irrational terrorist state(s)" go there are only two
the us and israel
your ignorance is beyond my disdain - you aren't a zion plant are ya
1. iran is, unlike the us and israel, compliant with all international law in its nuclear pursuits
2. israel has 600 nukes - many of which they just keep warm the the american corporations - so why would iran attack them with one or two war heads
3. they have, unlike the us and israel, no intention of attacking anyone - you listen to too much hate radio - i know you don't read much
you end your shit by saying: "As long as the nukes are aimed at Israel, it's OK, right?"
there are no nukes jerk
so they aren't aimed at anyone
oh you zion plants with your bullshit and lies
Exactly!
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
This comes on the heels of the Sunday Times report that the Kremlin is sending teams of nuclear experts to Tehran, and inviting Iranian nuclear scientists to Moscow for training, in response to US call for NATO expansion eastwards. 'Russia may respond by hitting America where it hurts most – Iran,' Russian source says.
Maybe the Zionists will bite off enough to choke themselves to death this time.
If Russia has human assets in Iran's nuclear facilities, it will want them protected. If the US continues to irritate Russia with NATO encirclement, they will be looking for some old fashioned balance of power allies. The next shoe to drop might be a squadron of MIGS flown by Russian top guns stationed in Iran.
There is some talk of Russian radar, SAMs and "sunburn" or "sizzler" cruise missiles already in Iran. Iran has old US and French fighter jets in unknown condition, but they might be armed with state of the art Russian missiles.
The jets would be on the radar for at least an hour, and Iran probably has spotters near Israeli air bases. Loaded down with bombs, even F-15s/16s would be sitting ducks. Even worse when they refuel. The Iranians will be ready, and there is no reason to think they will be as defenseless as the Iraqis and Syrians. The Israeils would be gambling on a suicide mission that would take out the best of its air force.
"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad." --Euripides
I'd like to see Russia tell the Zionists in Israel, "you touch Iran, we'll level your country, and if the United States retaliates, than, to use the acronym, it's MAD!"
No "survivors" this time around. Egads.
Wow, Peaceman, you want the end of the world? You're sick. You actually like nuclear proliferation and desire nuclear war!
The comment by Peaceman is just playing "Devil's Advocate", noting what could very well become a totally out-of-control situation (i.e. WWIII). The issue here is raging fascism on the part of the Israeli govt. in collusion with the fascists here in the U.S.
Mister Chips, Thanks for understanding the intention of my remark, and to your own addition to the article. I'm in agreement.
TheMiddleRoad, Do I want to end the world? Not hardly. Do I actually like nuclear proliferation and desire for nuclear war? Nope! Do I like weapons at all? Nope! Would I like to see the whole planet disarm and for "armed forces" to be a thing of the past? YES! Am I anti-military? Yes! Do I like a bully and people intimidating other people? Nope! How many times has the right-wing government in Israel threatened to bomb Iran. Have you any idea what the Zionists have done to the Palestinians? For a nation of 5-7 million people, Israel, per capita, has the most formidable military in the world. When any mention is made about their secretive stockpile of nuclear weapons, they cry "anti-semitism."
If Iran had the equivalent weaponry, including atomic bombs, I doubt they would use them, because it would be a death wish. It's self-protection, my friend.
When the US talked about dropping nuclear bombs in North Vietnam, another country we invaded and bombed, the Soviet Union said they would retaliate, and we paid attention.
I guess I am sick. But not by your prognosis. I'm sick of all this military posturing by the "world's only super bully" and the Zionist propaganda machine.
Funny, this propaganda piece does not say a word about the potential consequences to US interests: economic, military and political. Actually, this story is part of Netanyahoo's bid to preempt US demand to pursue a 2-nation solution. He and AIPAC want to shift the focus to a nonexistent Iran threat. Will we be held hostage to Likud ambitions? Nah. This is just the London Times creating a sensation, selling papers, collecting IOUs from Israelis.
Ahhh, so Iran pursuing nuclear weapons is actually a Zionist plot? Now I get it. Thanks.
How do you know Iran is trying to build a bomb? Do you believe they think like zionists?
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days