Israel plans Iran nuke attack Options

[jonathan83]

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
Uzi Mahnaimi, New York and Sarah Baxter, Washington

ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.
Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.
The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb.
Under the plans, conventional laser-guided bombs would open “tunnels” into the targets. “Mini-nukes” would then immediately be fired into a plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce the risk of radioactive fallout.
“As soon as the green light is given, it will be one mission, one strike and the Iranian nuclear project will be demolished,” said one of the sources.

more here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310,00.html

Teheran: Israel will regret any attack
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

Iran came out strongly in response to a report on Sunday that Israel planned to attack Teheran's nuclear sites, declaring that any attack would be met with a response and that "anyone who attacks will regret their actions very quickly."

[Mommy]

I dont have a problem with Israel having nukes.

I do have a problem with a bunch of Arabs having nukes.

This might be illogical, but I dont care. Jewish people are the nicest people ever. Iran needs to be wiped off the face of the map anyways.

[Psykopath]

I dont have a problem with Israel having nukes.

I do have a problem with a bunch of Arabs having nukes.

This might be illogical, but I dont care. Jewish people are the nicest people ever. Iran needs to be wiped off the face of the map anyways.

...

You and those that think like you are a testament to the lowest point in human intelligence. What a great commentary towards foreign policy..."wipe them off the face of the map." Yeah, that wouldn't cause any other problems now would it? Such an action wouldn't kill massive amounts of civilians, right? Plus, we (America) would look so COOL to the rest of the world after nuking into oblivion an entire nation! YIP-motherfucking-EEEE!

ALL ARABS SHOULD DIE CAUSE THEY'RE DIFFERENT AND DON'T SUCK OFF JESUS AND MASTERBATE WITH THE U.S. CONSTITUION DURRRRR

Yes, many in Iran despise the west. It's a problem that has been raging for over a thousand years and won't be solved within a year, 10 years, or even our lifetimes most likely. I don't have the answer. I don't think anyone today does. But I do know that such a sadistic foreign policy suggestion would never work on any level.

[Aaron]

Yes, many in Iran despise the west. It's a problem that has been raging for over a thousand years and won't be solved within a year, 10 years, or even our lifetimes most likely.

While Europe and the Middle East have a long history of animosity that dates back even before the first Crusades in the 11th Century, the origins of the current conflict can be dated back to the first half of the 20th Century.

1) The Anglo-American Alliance's role for establishing an independent Jewish state after World War I and, post 1948, their staunch support for the state of Israel. It should be noted that, during the first half of the 20th Century, most of the illwill in the Arab world for this act was pointed towards Great Britain.

2) The ignorant and arbitrary way that the victorious Allies sliced up the Ottoman Empire after World War I. They created the Kingdom of Jordan out of Syria, carved Lebanon out of Syria so that a Christian state could control most of the Syrian coastline and gave the Sunni minority control of Iraq.

3) During the Cold War, the Anglo-American Alliance fought the growth of nationalism in the region. The West encouraged division, rather than unity, within the Arab world.

Additionally, a lot can be blamed on the - let's face it - ignorance prevalent in the Arab world. Most Arab countries are poor, autocratic, uneducated and highly religious. Their ignorance is institutionalized. Some of this can be blamed on what the West did during the Cold War but not everything; the United States isn't holding a gun to the head of the Saudi Royal Family saying, "You better keep on oppressing women!"

All of this being said, I wouldn't mind one bit if Israel did our dirty work for us.

[The Fanatic]

While Europe and the Middle East have a long history of animosity that dates back even before the first Crusades in the 11th Century, the origins of the current conflict can be dated back to the first half of the 20th Century.

1) The Anglo-American Alliance's role for establishing an independent Jewish state after World War I and, post 1948, their staunch support for the state of Israel. It should be noted that, during the first half of the 20th Century, most of the illwill in the Arab world for this act was pointed towards Great Britain.

2) The ignorant and arbitrary way that the victorious Allies sliced up the Ottoman Empire after World War I. They created the Kingdom of Jordan out of Syria, carved Lebanon out of Syria so that a Christian state could control most of the Syrian coastline and gave the Sunni minority control of Iraq.

3) During the Cold War, the Anglo-American Alliance fought the growth of nationalism in the region. The West encouraged division, rather than unity, within the Arab world.

Additionally, a lot can be blamed on the - let's face it - ignorance prevalent in the Arab world. Most Arab countries are poor, autocratic, uneducated and highly religious. Their ignorance is institutionalized. Some of this can be blamed on what the West did during the Cold War but not everything; the United States isn't holding a gun to the head of the Saudi Royal Family saying, "You better keep on oppressing women!"

All of this being said, I wouldn't mind one bit if Israel did our dirty work for us.

You could add an example to three. Namely, the overthrow of Mossadegh. He was the first democratically elected prime minister in Iranian history. When he nationalized the oil industry, the British felt it was in their best interests to reinstate the shah.

The government of Britain had grown increasingly distressed over Mossadegh's policies and were especially bitter over the loss of their control on the Iranian oil industry. Despite Mossadegh's repeated attempts to negotiate a reasonable settlement with them they refused outright the same terms, and later total control over Iranian oil. [citation needed]

Unable to resolve the issue singlehandedly due to its post second world war problems, Britain looked towards the United States to settle the issue. The United States was falsely informed that Mossadegh was increasingly turning towards Communism and was moving Iran towards the Soviet sphere at a time of high Cold War fears. [8] [4][5][6]

Acting on the fears created by Britain, the United States and Britain began to publicly denounce Mossadegh's policies for Iran as harmful to the country.

In October 1952 Mossadegh declared that Britain was "an enemy", and cut all diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom. In November and December 1952 British intelligence officials suggested to American intelligence that the prime minister should be ousted. The new US administration under Dwight Eisenhower and the British government under Winston Churchill agreed to work together toward Mossadegh's removal. In March 1953 Secretary of State John Foster Dulles directed the US Central Intelligence Agency, which was headed by his younger brother Allen Dulles, to draft plans to overthrow Mossadegh [7].

On 4 April 1953 CIA director Dulles approved $1 million to be used "in any way that would bring about the fall of Mossadegh". Soon the CIA's Tehran station started to launch a propaganda campaign against Mossadegh. Finally, according to The New York Times, in early June, American and British intelligence officials met again, this time in Beirut, and put the finishing touches on the strategy. Soon afterward, according to his later published accounts, the chief of the CIA's Near East and Africa division, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., a grandson of Theodore Roosevelt, arrived in Tehran to direct it... Funded with money from the U.S. CIA and the British MI6, the pro-monarchy forces, led by retired army General and former Minister of Interior in Mossadegh's cabinet, Fazlollah Zahedi, gained the upper hand on 19 August 1953 (28 Mordad). The military intervened as the pro-Shah tank regiments stormed the capital and bombarded the prime minister's official residence

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

I would also add that Iran is NOT an arab state. The majority of Iranians are Persian in ethnicity NOT Arab.

This post has been edited by Dr. Gonzo: Jan 8 2007, 10:55 AM