Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Israelis draw a line in the sand

Israeli PM says Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons
Tuesday, January 17, 2006; Posted: 2:08 p.m. EST (19:08 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/17/olmert.iran/index.html

JERUSALEM (CNN) -- As Israeli diplomats departed for Russia on Tuesday to discuss deep concerns about Iran's nuclear facilities, acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the Jewish state cannot allow Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

Iran's Islamic government recently broke seals on its nuclear facilities and said it will resume research for civilian nuclear power purposes. International leaders fear Iran will use its nuclear technology to develop weapons.

"Under no circumstances, and at no point, can Israel allow anyone with these kinds of malicious designs against us [to] have control of weapons of destruction that can threaten our existence," Olmert said at a Tuesday news conference.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sparked widespread international condemnation in October when he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."

Israeli officials have said they hope to use diplomacy to diffuse any possible nuclear crisis with Iran, and only to use military force as a last resort. An Israeli attack ordered by Prime Minister Menachem Begin in 1981 destroyed a nuclear reactor in Iraq.

Olmert is acting as Israel's leader as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon remains hospitalized in a coma following a massive stroke January 4. Medical experts have said it is unlikely that he will be able to return to his duties, even if he survives. (Full story)

Israeli conservative Likud party leader Benjamin Netanyahu, a possible political rival of Olmert's, said this month that Iranian nuclear weapons would be "dangerous to Israel and dangerous, in fact, to the world. And I think we have to find ways -- which could include diplomatic and other ways -- to prevent that from happening."

President Bush, after discussing the situation Friday during a White House meeting with Germany's newly elected chancellor, said, "The current president of Iran has announced that the destruction of Israel is an important part of their agenda, and that's unacceptable. And the development of a nuclear weapon, it seems like to me, would make him a step closer to achieving that objective."

Iran's announcement that it would restart its nuclear program has prompted Britain, France and Germany to call for an emergency meeting next month of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran had been following a two-year suspension while it conducted talks with the European countries. (Full story)

Changed landscape
Sharon's stroke has changed the political landscape of the Mideast, with elections set for the Palestinian legislature next week and Israeli's parliament on March 28.

Olmert, who was named interim leader of Kadima in place of Sharon, said he hoped to resume peace talks with the Palestinians following the Israeli elections.

Olmert said the Palestinian Authority must disarm terrorist groups as condition for a permanent peace agreement.

The Islamic fundamentalist Palestinian group Hamas, which advocates the destruction of Israel, is expected to be the major challenger to the ruling Fatah Party in the upcoming Palestinian Authority legislative elections.

On the issue of Jewish settlers in the West Bank, Olmert said that Israel will not allow "lawlessness" to continue in Hebron and said that settlers who violate the law will be dealt with "harshly."

Israeli troops have battled rioters for the past four days in the Jewish enclave in Hebron. Rioters have tried to prevent Israeli troops from carrying out a court order to evacuate eight Jewish families who have been squatting in the city's wholesale market.

Israel Defense Forces have declared the Jewish settlement in Hebron a "closed military zone" and have set up road blocks around the Hebron to prevent protesters from entering the city.

Last week, Olmert worked quietly behind the scenes to consolidate the leadership of Kadima, the new centrist party that Sharon founded after leaving the right-wing Likud party he had belonged to for more than 30 years.

Recent polls show that if elections were held now with an ailing Sharon, Kadima would win the majority of seats in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. The polls predicted that Kadima would control more seats than the left-wing Labor Party, headed by Amir Peretz, and Likud.

Ishmael, son of Abraham = Muslims

Isaac, son of Abraham = Jews

So close, yet so far apart.

amen, wmac.
i think we all can envision the us - or the israelis - taking care of those reactors and other attendant equipment, as they should, if the iranians do not stand down.

The powderkeg has GOT to blow. Someone drop the match and let's get it over with, shall we?

Think I'm gonna start paying more attention to those Nostradamus specials on the History Channel.

If one of the rulers in either country starts wearing a blue crown, I'm diggin' a bomb shelter!








(actually, it probably isn't a bad idea to dig one anyway.)

Those sites are going to be hard targets, well protected with Russian weapons. I'm thinking it would be smart to go for the leadership. The next guy up might worry about his hide a bit more and STFU.

I certainly HOPE the USA allows Israel to "deal" with Iran without any interference from our government.

Given Israel's 100% assured retaliation record which followed Israel's prior "warnings" to the Islamic nations, Iran MUST realize the Israelis will most CERTAINLY do whatever it takes, including bombing the Iranian nuclear facilities into dust, to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon capability.

And... REMEMBER... those in the "know" have indicated Israel already HAS nuclear capability.

Israel KNOWS if any of the Islamic nations achieve a nuclear capability, they won't hesitate to use it against Israel or any other nation that is the focal point of Islamic hatred including the USA, England, France, Germany and any number of other nations world-wide.

Islam would do well to remember Japanese Adm. Yamamoto's comment that he uttered upon hearing that the attack on Pearl Harbor was considered a "sneak attack" by the American People. He gasp, [color:"red"]"I fear all we have done is arouse a sleeping giant and filled him with a great resolve!"[color:"/"]

Yamamoto was educated in America and was familiar with the American "sense-of-fair-play" and "honor". He realized it had been badly mauled by the Japanese attack... and he knew how Americans would (and "did") react to such an attack.

Ultimately, Japan become the ONLY nation on earth upon whom a nuclear weapon was... or ever has been... USED.

The American People are a fair and just people. However, I sense we are losing patience with the nations of Islam. We've been tolerating Islamic attacks on our citizens for well over 2 decades.

Therefore, it seems to me it would behoove the Islamic nations to "police" their own ranks because, as sure as the sun rises in the east, if an Islamic nuclear or "dirty bomb" attack was made on the USA, the American People wouldn't take the time nor have the inclination to make an attempt to decide WHICH Islamic nation or nations were at fault... they would DEMAND our government take full and final retaliation against Islam... possibly ALL of Islam!

Ron, you said--

"Israel KNOWS if any of the Islamic nations achieve a nuclear capability, they won't hesitate to use it against Israel or any other nation that is the focal point of Islamic hatred including the USA, England, France, Germany and any number of other nations world-wide."

Actually, one Islamic nation already has the bomb, but Pakistan seems more likely to use it on their Hindu neighbors than on Israel or the West. Particularly as long as al Quida keeps trying to blow up Musharraf.

The problem with the Iranian nuclear program is that it is spread out and in hardened sites---very difficult to hit it all. Unlike the Iraqi Osiris reactor which was a big fat target for the IDF.

I'm sure they will find a way to shut the program down, while the UN dithers and considers perhaps maybe someday possibly suggesting some kind of sanctions....or something...or not.

Jim--

Nostradamus over The Apokalupsis(unveiling) to John?
Revelation, that is. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Whether it's close or not I cannot say, but I fear the worst - "troubles of which the earth has not seen" - is yet to come.

Israel is the one country that I wouldn't screw with right now.........

I'm with VA and Marvin Gaye "Let's get it on!"

A few thoughts. Ymmv.

On one side:

First, Iran is in a declared state of war with Israel. Second,
Iran is paying off the Hizbollah of Lebanon to try and pick
fights with the Israelis along their northern border. It is
estimated that the Iranians, through Syria, have shipped
approximately 10,000. (Yup, ten thousand) rockets to
Hizbollah. Including some that theoretically have the
range to hit several of Israel's largest cities. Third,
Iran is attempting to infiltrate the Palestinian armed
groups and pay them to attack Israel. And it is thought
that several of the most recent attacks were instigated
by Iranian paymasters. Fourth, a lot of this is emanating
from the Iranians because the domestic popularity of the
regime is slipping and they want their population to rally
around their regime in the face of foreign enemies.

Balancing that:

Iran is a long way from Israel, over a lot of hostile territory.
And a lot of the airspace in between is owned by the US.
We would know who was there. We would want to know
why. And it would be blatently obvious that we allowed
passage through our airspace. And we have 150,000 soldiers
who would be targets for retaliation. Including kidnapping.
And including revenge by the Shiites in the south who are
assumed to be heavily infiltrated by the Iranians.

Second, Israel does not have the US's global capacity.
Nor do they have a large conventional strategic force.
Third, the Iranian target is huge, very hidden and
dispersed, heavily fortified, and highly protected.
Fourth, anybody who gets shot down is not likely to
be rescued. At least not in one piece. Fifth, there are
still 20,000 Jews living in Iran. (Who cant get out.)
Sixth nuclear Iran is a problem for everybody in the region.
If Iran nukes Saudi and Kuwait fields, then stirs up trouble
in southern Iraq, Europe and Asia are going to have to kiss
Iranian butts to get any oil. And they can always blackmail
the locals. With the exception of Israel, none of the other
countries can project much power outside of their borders.
And precious little inside. The locals would have no real
choice but to bow to the Iranians or eat a few nukes with
no possibility of retaliating. Seventh, there are still a few
years before the Iranians cross the line. Maybe something
might happen in the meantime.

My guess is that Israel cannot easily do it by themselves. And
the threat is almost as big against us and the Europeans. Plus
there appear to be a few more years before action must be
taken. If we can extricate ourselves from Iraq in the next
few years, we and a fig leaf of Europeans may take action
ourselves. (And I am not advocating cut and run in Iraq.)
I think that the Europeans would have the cojones if they
thought the cost-benefit analysis was "conveniently" in their
favor.

What a mess!


Chuck

Nice outline of what everybody is up against. The solution is to subvert and overthrow the government of Iran through student groups; the very same way the Shah was overthrown.

Naw, f'k it. Drop the match, light this puppy, and let's get the [bleep] settled once and for all. Look, Israel kicked the [bleep] out of ALL the Arab countries in less than a week... twice. Right now, all they'd have to do is scoot through Jordan low and fast, and their in Iraqi/U.S. controlled air space. Result? Iran gets blasted. Then, Syria and SA get in, along with Egypt. Big f'kin' deal. The U.S. holds the fort in the Gulf, Israel knocks the hell outta Syria, Lebanon and Egypt, and it's done. Finally.

Flip the switch. This one has been coming for a LONG time, and it's time has come.

Dude, the Iranians aren't Arabs. They're Persians and they know how to fight and they are fighters. This is the country that sent 100,000 men at a time, many of them unarmed, in giant human wave attacks against the modern army of our ally at the time, Saddam Hussein. Though they lost hundreds of thousands, they eventually won. They are not soft.

This is not a war to wish for even if it is necessary at some point.

Israel will have it's hands full with Syria. Iran has been pumping up it's military for years with American oil dollars and Russian parts and equipment. I think the Syrian's are as pumped up to attack Israel as Israel is to fight Syria. It will be a knife fight in a telephone booth. kwg

Joe---yes, those would be the human wave assaults that Saddam's troops broke up with nerve gas artillery shells---oops, no, that can't be because we know Bushitler lied about the WMDs. Those hundreds of thousands of dead Iranian soldiers are just playing possum. You can get up now, guys.


Seriously, a non violent solution is devoutly to be wished for, but I despair. We've got an Iranian despot who is either batsh!t crazy or doing a great imitation of Hitler---the MSM have been trying to soft pedal his ravings, but he's been pretty explicit about what he's going to do to the Jews--in Israel and elsewhere--and the Brits, as the mother of evil---that would be us. This guy simply can't be allowed to get an operational deliverable nuke. And we can't ignore him and hope he's just kidding. Doesn't this all have a kind of 1938 feel about it?

And the fact that he's a religious fanatic looking forward to an apocalypse means he won't respond to events the way a rational western (even Communist) leader would. He may very well feel that a nuclear armaggedon with Israel and the Great Satan is a good thing---the ultimate jihad.

No happy ending in sight here.

Yep. And, as we should have done then, let's get this done now and be done with it. So it might be a knife fight in a phone booth, as one called it. Yes, it might very well be so. But, better a knife fight in a phone booth that a shoot-out in your own home, IMHO.

I have the utmost faith and confidence in the IDF. They can, and will, more than hold their own. With us, and I suspect the Brits, that's plenty to do this, do this right, and do it fast.

Cynically, we just need the Iranian nutcase to throw the first punch so we (U.S., Israel, and U.K.) can drop the gloves and bust open the biggest cans of whoop-azz in our arsenals. And, no, even if one of our places (Israel, U.K., U.S.) gets a nuke in a city, I don't think that a nuclear response will be sent. No need for it, and by NOT doing it, everything else possible can be, and will be, used.

the syrians have no shot against the israelis, period.
the iranians have got to be handled - now.
did you notice condi's attitude in today's 'papers?
look for it, boys: heavy duty strikes against those supposedly hardened sites. some of them artillery tube aerial darts filled with HE soon will be delivered.

I don't know how many of you have been to the Holy Land, but I worked for a company ten years ago that sent me there to do some radio engineering, and it is very depressing there....I spent half my time in a bomb shelter. We need to end this madness over there.....SOON.