Petraeus Says Israel Might Choose to Attack Iran

waraich

Banned Member
Petraeus Says Israel Might Choose to Attack Iran (Update3)
Share | Email | Print | A A A

By Tony Capaccio

April 1 (Bloomberg) -- Israel might choose to attack Iran to prevent it from developing a nuclear bomb, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East said today.

Petraeus Says Israel Might Choose to Attack Iran (Update3) - Bloomberg.com

Recent tour of obama for middle east peace is indication of Israel attack ,US wanted to isolate iran from arab world and then Israel might attack on Iran , Iran is biggest treath for Israel and for Arabs also.
 
Last edited:

waraich

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #2
'Israel will attack Iran before 2009'
Share: by Wim Bartelds | July 10, 2008 at 06:00 pm
2628 views | 6 Recommendations | 12 comments
Photos
'Israeli attack on Iran likely before 2009'
see larger image
(UPDATE July 16, 2008)


THE HAGUE - An Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear program "will most probably take place before 2009", western intelligence sources say. Israel now has completed the planning of three or four scenarios for an attack, and is now said to be contemplating the right time for it. Israel concluded early June that an attack would be inevitable. Since then, Israeli Air Force exercises have been underway, even using a US airbase in Iraq.


Credible sources indicate that the assumed 'necessity' of an Israeli attack is derived from three estimates: the first is that Iran, according to Israeli intelligence, will have nuclear missiles operational by the late summer of 2009; the second is that diplomacy and a package of economic incentives and sanctions will not bear sufficient fruit; the third is that an attack by the end of 2008 or later will result in insufferable losses.




Recent decision

Sources say the Israeli scenarios are based upon a recent decision by the country's government and military, that a peaceful solution is extremely improbable. The assumption that unilateral action without overt US military support will be necessary, given the probable inability of the US to open and keep up a third theatre of operations alongside those in Afghanistan and Iraq, is supposed to have played a significant part in the recent decision.


Furthermore, Israeli government circles interpret a recent US Navy exercise of the Aegis missile defense system's communications in the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf, as a clear sign of limited US involvement -the US has not sent carrier groups closer to the Strait of Hormuz, as recently requested by Israeli PM Olmert. President Bush gave Olmert the 'amber light' (i.e. veiled approval without immediate action) for an attack, and thus from an Israeli perspective confirmed the need to act anyway.





Closing window of opportunity

Israel's military planners see a rapidly closing window of opportunity: an attack must essentially be air-based, and since Iran will have its Russian-purchased S-300 air defence systems fully operational by year's end, an attack after that is believed to result in too many losses to ensure minimal success. The S-300 systems can take out aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missile warheads at ranges of over 90 miles and at altitudes of about 90,000 feet, with great effectiveness. Hence the planning: if non-military means don’t work, then military means must be deployed before 2009.


Last month's Israeli exercise over the Mediterranean, code-named 'Glorious Spartan', took place in cooperation with the Greek military. Greece uses the S-300 air defence system, and thus the exercise can be expected to have provided Israel with valuable information about that system.




Minimal success

According to sources familiar with Israeli planning, 'minimal success' is defined as the elimination of the five or six nuclear facilities that are the most essential in Iran's program of at least nineteen facilities, as well as the elimination of two facilities where Iran is working on modifying its ballistic Shahab-3 missiles for nuclear warheads. If this 'minimal success' is achieved, then Iran's offensive nuclear capability will be set back by at least a decade.




Nuclear experts estimate that the current number of nuclear centrifuges operated by Iran will provide sufficient enriched uranium for two or three one-ton nuclear warheads that, if fired at Tel Aviv, would kill 22,000 - 50,000 people and obliterate most of the city, thus taking out the heart of Israel's infrastructure on most levels.




According to military analysts, the total destruction of Iran's nuclear program is not an option since the scale, locations and defences of the entire Iranian program would require commitment of such a vast number of Israeli military assets that the operation would weaken Israel’s forces necessary to check Syria, Jordan and Lebanon-based Hezbollah.




Attack within weeks?


Sources would not comment on an intel rumour that an Israeli strike is to be expected in the near future -there is talk of "weeks". This rumour is based on the fact that Iran in recent months hastily began upgrading its current air defence systems, as well as on the expectation that the upgrade will be integrated and fully operational within weeks from now, thus raising possible Israeli losses in case of an attack.


Intel rumours that a strike may come soon are furthermore fed by the fact that Iran is nearing completion of its P2-type nuclear centrifuge which decimates the time needed to enrich uranium.

'Israel will attack Iran before 2009' | NowPublic News Coverage

If Israel is using Iraqi AIR bases its mean US is in favour of Israeli attack on Iran.
 
Last edited:

waraich

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
May 20, 2009 19:59 | Updated May 21, 2009 9:07
US to fully fund Arrow 3 missile system
By YAAKOV KATZ
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar
+ Recommend:


What's this?


Talkbacks for this article: 54
Article's topics: Arrow, Juniper Cobra,

The US has said it will provide the full funding for the development and production of the Arrow 3 anti-missile system, defense officials told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.


An Arrow 2 missile test.
Photo: AP [file]

SLIDESHOW: Israel & Region | World The American decision was revealed during a session of the Strategic Dialogue that Defense Ministry director-general Pinchas Buhris held with his US counterparts in Washington. The Dialogue is held annually but Wednesday's session was the first meeting of senior Israeli defense officials with the Obama administration's new staff at the Pentagon.

Israel has been concerned that the US - which has supported the Arrow project since its inception over 20 years ago - would end the funding due to major cuts made to the American defense budget by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. The development costs for the coming year will likely reach some $100 million.

The Dialogue was led on the American side by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michelle Flournoy. Buhris was joined on the Israeli side by outgoing ambassador to the US Sallai Meridor and the IDF military attaché to the US, Maj.-Gen. Benny Gantz.

RELATED
Defense officials: 'Iran missile launch threat to Europe'
The Iranians are coming, the Iranians are coming
Israel and the United States are also developing David's Sling - a missile defense system for medium-range missile with a range between 70 and 250 km. The Arrow 3 will be a longer-range version of the Arrow defense system currently in IDF operation. It will be capable of intercepting incoming enemy missiles at higher altitudes and farther away from Israel.

Last month, the IAF held its 17th test of the Arrow 2 interceptor, shooting down a missile mimicking an Iranian Shihab ballistic missile.



Later this year, the IAF will hold an unprecedented, massive exercise with the US military to test three different ballistic missile defense systems, the Israeli-made Arrow and the American THAAD and Aegis, which will be brought to Israel for the exercise. The drill, which will span several days, is called "Juniper Cobra."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1242212426298&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

Israel is strengthening its missile defence system against possible attack of iranian blastic missiles, Sale of Thaad missile defence system already signed between UAE and USA .It will also protect US Assets in GULF
 
Last edited:

jtm

New Member
Petraeus Says Israel Might Choose to Attack Iran (Update3)
Share | Email | Print | A A A

By Tony Capaccio

April 1 (Bloomberg) -- Israel might choose to attack Iran to prevent it from developing a nuclear bomb, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East said today.

Petraeus Says Israel Might Choose to Attack Iran (Update3) - Bloomberg.com

Recent tour of obama for middle east peace is indication of Israel attack ,US wanted to isolate iran from arab world and then Israel might attack on Iran , Iran is biggest treath for Israel and for Arabs also.
I think you've watched too much low budget worldwide plot theory movies.
Maybe Obama just did what he said he'd do during his campaign : trying to set a new relation with the muslims and with the arab world.
Actually if you hear carefully, he doesn't address the arab world, but everyone in the region, including chii muslims of iran (who are not arabs), jews in israel, or christians everywhere in the middle east.

To my opinion Israel is very isolated on this one, and they know they can't attack iran. They maybe think they can, but they won't. If they do, there'll be consequences.

- they might not do more than cripple Iran nuclear facilities, burried deep, without high penetration bombs the US have developped but have always refused to sell to the israeli (guess why)

- their attack should be massive, with maybe more than a hundred bombers, to strike simultanetely on various (and far away) parts of Iran. Two consequences : First one, such an attack can't be discreet, Iran will know hours before at least. Second one : Israeli Air Force is to face massive loss, which I'm not sure they can afford to pay the price, politicaly, militarily, and humanly.

Low expectations of success, high risk of loss...I let you do the math.


I'll add a thought. I think that Iran already has one or two nuclear heads, bought on the former-USSR black market. They have the cash, the will, and nukes are on the market, why would'nt they buy one ? Of course they continue to try to build their one, for domestic politics reasons, and to be recognized as a regional power.


I really really don't think Israel has any interest in attacking Iran, I just hope for them and for the fate of the whole region that logic will overwhelm passion on this one.
 

waraich

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
I think you've watched too much low budget worldwide plot theory movies.
Maybe Obama just did what he said he'd do during his campaign : trying to set a new relation with the muslims and with the arab world.
Actually if you hear carefully, he doesn't address the arab world, but everyone in the region, including chii muslims of iran (who are not arabs), jews in israel, or christians everywhere in the middle east.

To my opinion Israel is very isolated on this one, and they know they can't attack iran. They maybe think they can, but they won't. If they do, there'll be consequences.

- they might not do more than cripple Iran nuclear facilities, burried deep, without high penetration bombs the US have developped but have always refused to sell to the israeli (guess why)

- their attack should be massive, with maybe more than a hundred bombers, to strike simultanetely on various (and far away) parts of Iran. Two consequences : First one, such an attack can't be discreet, Iran will know hours before at least. Second one : Israeli Air Force is to face massive loss, which I'm not sure they can afford to pay the price, politicaly, militarily, and humanly.

Low expectations of success, high risk of loss...I let you do the math.


I'll add a thought. I think that Iran already has one or two nuclear heads, bought on the former-USSR black market. They have the cash, the will, and nukes are on the market, why would'nt they buy one ? Of course they continue to try to build their one, for domestic politics reasons, and to be recognized as a regional power.


I really really don't think Israel has any interest in attacking Iran, I just hope for them and for the fate of the whole region that logic will overwhelm passion on this one.
Obama himself admitted that one speach can not eliminate mistrusth between west and Islamic(Arab) world.

Agreed that it will not be easy for Israel to attack on Iran but now it is matter of their servival and to keep the treathening Iran ,Syria and Hizbullah in peace mode .

Next few months are important ,Iran is very close to nuke test and N Korea already tested.

Overall peace satuation is not very good .
 

jtm

New Member
Obama himself admitted that one speach can not eliminate mistrusth between west and Islamic(Arab) world.

Agreed that it will not be easy for Israel to attack on Iran but now it is matter of their servival and to keep the treathening Iran ,Syria and Hizbullah in peace mode .

Next few months are important ,Iran is very close to nuke test and N Korea already tested.

Overall peace satuation is not very good .
I don't fully agree on this.
History showed us that the good thing about nuclear weapons is that they're not used...If Iran gets the bomb, they won't use it or will be totally destroyed 10 seconds later. My guess is that Israel is to aknowledge they are a nuclear power within months, especially if they have intel that Iran is close to a nuke test. This way they will be able to add dissuasion openly in their military doctrine, which will calm down Iran for a while.

By the way the US will NEVER let Israel attack Iran. The last thing they want is a united 70 millions country full of deserts and mountains ready to mess openly in their military affairs in the region (imagine Iran raiding Irak, Afghanistan, UAE, or Kuweit...). They won't let Israel wake up the Iranian tiger. They won't give air clearances, they won't let them refuel on USAF tankers, they won't help them with AWACS. Frankly, I don't believe it...

The real risk of Iran getting a bomb is proliferation. The day they do get a bomb, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Turkey and Syria launch or re-launch a military nuclear program.

That's the risk.

Iran nuking Israel or Israel nuking Iran...? hum...I don't believe it. I hope History won't prove me wrong for the sake of this region and for the sake of the world.
 

caucesco

New Member
Obama himself admitted that one speach can not eliminate mistrusth between west and Islamic(Arab) world.

Agreed that it will not be easy for Israel to attack on Iran but now it is matter of their servival and to keep the treathening Iran ,Syria and Hizbullah in peace mode .

Next few months are important ,Iran is very close to nuke test and N Korea already tested.

Overall peace satuation is not very good .
let me asure you that you will not hear or see any nuclear tests in iran
our officials have always talked about peacefull nuc,ear energy,so even if they make one they wont use it for the world to find out.
btw iran may not have a good airforce or navy,but has a good missile force with liquid fueled shahabs and the new solidfueld sejils.
you would proberly say that israeli patriots and arrows would shoot them down but how many will they be able to hunt down in the sky?!we have the ability to barage them with 2000 missile in the first few hours,as the officilas say
 

caucesco

New Member
something to add,
few years ago admiral shamkhani one of the high rank officials was sent to local arab neighbours to warnt them,that of any attack on iran happens throught their airospace they will face th harsh consequences.
this threat still remains that if any attack is carried from KSA or other arabs space,they will be missile baragged,specialy saudis oil stations in the persian gulf and shore countrys like UAE others like jordan.

so if anything happens to iran ,apart from israel,our neighbours will have to bear the deadly consequences aswell,so its better that they think twice before giving the green light to the zios

NOT TO FORGET THAT OUR ZELZAL MISSILES WITH RANGE OF 300KM ARE JUST ENAUGH TO SHOW THOSE ARABS A GOOD LESSON NEVER TO FORGET,WE'LL KEEP THE 2500KM SHAHABS AND SEJILS FOR OTHERS TO COME
 
Last edited:

jtm

New Member
ain't it off-forum-rules ?

(I know that by writing a one line post I'm off-rule too...:X)
 

caucesco

New Member
ain't it off-forum-rules ?

(I know that by writing a one line post I'm off-rule too...:X)
which part of my 2posts do you say is off post?i just explained the current situation and how thing might be,in case of any move
 

Ozzy Blizzard

New Member
Most of the open source intel i have read states that Iran is a golden mile away from having a nuclear device. NK is still years away from weaponizing its device, Iran is decades away from being able to launch something at somebody. The Israeli's wont do anything because if any has a clue where Iran's program is at, and they know if they act the Iranians can be a real pain in the ass with Hezbollah, not to mention destabilizing Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't think anything will happen.
 

layola05

New Member
Empty talk

something to add,
few years ago admiral shamkhani one of the high rank officials was sent to local arab neighbours to warnt them,that of any attack on iran happens throught their airospace they will face th harsh consequences.
this threat still remains that if any attack is carried from KSA or other arabs space,they will be missile baragged,specialy saudis oil stations in the persian gulf and shore countrys like UAE others like jordan.

so if anything happens to iran ,apart from israel,our neighbours will have to bear the deadly consequences aswell,so its better that they think twice before giving the green light to the zios

NOT TO FORGET THAT OUR ZELZAL MISSILES WITH RANGE OF 300KM ARE JUST ENAUGH TO SHOW THOSE ARABS A GOOD LESSON NEVER TO FORGET,WE'LL KEEP THE 2500KM SHAHABS AND SEJILS FOR OTHERS TO COME
There is no doubt in my mind that Isreal by itself would not be able to subdue Iran.At best,they may only delay the Iranian nuke program by a few months.Without bunker busting bombs from the United States,all Isreal will end up doing is having a really expensive fire works show that will solve nothing.I dont think the Obama administration will commit suicide by targeting and shooting down Isreali jets.Joe Bidens admission that Isreal just like the United States has the right to do what is best in its natural security interest is also an admission that Isreal may attack at the end of the year or early next year.Think about this,the United States does not really want Isreal to attack Iran,if they do,what justification would the U.S give to the Russians as to placing a missile defence system in Europe.:confused:Also the shabab or whatever is called will be shot right outta the sky by the Aegis system.The only Hope Iran would have against air raids would be the S-300.Isreali F-16's cant knock it out even if they flew really low next to the ground.The only fighter capable of knocking out the S-300 is the F-22 raptor and i dont think Obama would sell the F-22 to the Isreali's(they couldn't even afford it).As for talk of Shabab or what ever its called being a threat,its childish and empty talk.Stop it,its ignorant to think the shabab is even credible.Dont be fooled,with the help of the U.S,Iran would be back to the stone ages in a matter of 2weeks.
 

turin

New Member
our officials have always talked about peacefull nuc,ear energy,so even if they make one they wont use it for the world to find out.
Without testing you dont have a functional, let alone operational weapon. It is possible to build a very primitive warhead that would work without said testing, but such a device would hardly have any strategic value.

And that talk about peaceful purposes doesnt hold water for one second. Not for anyone remotely educated in the logistics of nuclear development. It does not matter what they say, just what they do. The world does not need tests to "find out". Certainly not with the degree of observation that exists in Irans case.
 

Arc Light

Banned Member
Actually IAF possesses American made EGBU-28 bunker buster bomb with BLU-122 penetration warhead. Israeli F-15I strike planes can carry this weapon. Its penetration potential allows IAF to destroy underground Iranian nuclear facilities by targeting two EGBUs at the same aimpoint and multiplying penetration value by factor of two that way.

Also for attacking less hardened targets IAF has its own stand-off weapons like SPICE glide bombs including those with BLU-109 warhead with 60+ km range and F&F capability. No way S-300P system could defend Iranian nuclear and missile sites or even itself against such a multiple strike.
 
Last edited:

A.Mookerjee

Banned Member
This is not possible, according to my opinion. The United States needs the positive feelings of the Muslim world on Iraq, and Afghanistan, and towards their own policies in those countries. The 'War on Terror' would be counter productive, otherwise. The United States could easily have harbored aggression against Pakistan, but did not.
 

Arc Light

Banned Member
This is not possible, according to my opinion. The United States needs the positive feelings of the Muslim world on Iraq, and Afghanistan, and towards their own policies in those countries. The 'War on Terror' would be counter productive, otherwise. The United States could easily have harbored aggression against Pakistan, but did not.
This is perfectly possible because Israel could attack Iran without receiving green light from US. Of course US would be condemned by Islamic World for not stopping Israel but this is not very important obstacle to Jewish State because they afraid much more about Iranian nuclear bomb than American PR image in the region.
 

The Swordman

New Member
choices

Technically speaking, Isreal got all the necessary hardware to hit any Iranian location and doing enough damage (remeber Osirak? That was 1987 if I remeber well), they just demonstrated that hard targets are not a problem bombing a facility in Syria.
The matter is political. USA do not want another war in Middle East, there is too much at stake with Iraq and Afghanistan,not to mention Pakistan.
 

turin

New Member
Osirak happened in 1981 and the nature of the targets in Syria not too long ago was quite a bit different from whats present in Iran. from my point of view. Still I do not dispute the notion that Israel is, in principle, capable of inflicting serious damage to all four relevant sites in Iran (which are Arak, Bushehr, Natanz and Isfahan). This damage would not throw back the Iranian efforts by months, but years.

Israel is also familiar with all relevant assets Iran might use to counter any such attack. This includes the potential (but unlikely) presence of long-range defence systems like S-300 and the more real Tor M1, which are operational with Greece, where Israel "happened" to conduct just such a strike operation exercise last year.

Of course such a strike will have severe political implications, especially in Afghanistan, probably in Pakistan. I would not be too much concerned about larger parts of the Arab world, since the powers there, esp. Saudi Arabia, do not look kindly on the Iranian progress. Its even possible that SA would silently tolerate an Israeli strike, even though they would of course not do so publicly.

Now as far as the green light from the US is concerned, this might be a tad trickier than it seems, I think. The US cannot and will not forbid Israel the right to conduct an airstrike if they feel its necessary to preserve their existence. As far as I recall its not too long ago that certain US officials publicly recognised Israels right to defend itself. These are words careful chosen at a time when it counts. Certainly a shoot-down of Israeli planes by US-assets will never happen. So basically if Israel decides to get started, the US is in a very uncomfortable position.
 

willowjones

New Member
Re:

If this happens then there are severe chances of having a war between both countries. And as we all know that war is not a good thing for any of us neither Israel nor Iran and the rest of the world. So hope we will see peace in the future.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Still I do not dispute the notion that Israel is, in principle, capable of inflicting serious damage to all four relevant sites in Iran (which are Arak, Bushehr, Natanz and Isfahan). This damage would not throw back the Iranian efforts by months, but years.
In my oppinion, if Iran really building nuclear weapons capability, then the attack on those sites won't throw them back in years/long time..since it's more likely the real facilities will be much more concealed.

If the 4 sites being attack and really push them back much longger...then Iran more likely do not have hidden nuclear weapons activities...and their nuclear projects as it is as they claim to be.
This will be a PR coup for Iran behalf and will further pushing down Israel images (as if they're really care anyway).
 
Top