Reply
Sun 7 Jan, 2007 09:09 am
I've made a mental note of A2Kers that I think will be hell bent for leather in favor of this..... but I'm interested in hearing everyones feelings and opinions.....
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310,00.html
Basically, Israel is trying to blackmail the US into attacking Iran first by threatening to go nuclear.
Put me in the negative column.
Any lunacy is on the table, in the Bush era.
CNN this morning said that Israel is denying that the info came from them, and said that according to Israel, it's actually coming from our WH as a scare tactic for Iran to shape up.
I doubt that the report is anything but imaginative. The Israeli's aren't exactly known for security leaks and breaches. They may indeed have contingency plans, but who doesn't? They are almost certainly capable, but the approach and recovery of the attacking forces would be difficult, with success only moderately possible.
On the other hand the Israeli's also have a reputation for not standing around sucking their thumbs when they perceive a threat to their national security. They can be very audacious, and that is often a plus in planning military operations. If the Israeli's decide to make a raid on Iran, I expect they will do it and the world be damned. Such a raid would be calculated for maximum surprise, and would be extremely tightly held by only a very small number of high officials.
Whether the Israeli's should, or should not, attack the Iranian facilities is moot, and the outcome might be either beneficial or a disaster. Just the sort of uncertainty that argues against rash behavior. Israel isn't run by stupid people, so their decision will be considered carefully. And, BTW. I rather suspect they won't be checking with the UN or even Washington before making their decision. They may inform Washington shortly in advance of any attack, or they may just do it.
Neither do I believe that Washington is the source of this story.
Asherman - That's why the statement that it is coming from our White House made more sense to me. Israel does intelligence the way I wish we did.
squinney wrote:Asherman - That's why the statement that it is coming from our White House made more sense to me. Israel does intelligence the way I wish we did.
I have to say, my jaw hit the floor when I read that.
As long as we are talking of potential nuclear strikes, what is happening in Afghanistan?
gustavratzenhofer wrote:As long as we are talking of potential nuclear strikes, what is happening in Afghanistan?
When I left Afghanistan in Oct. the NATO peace keeping forces had taken over in the south. They did this on Aug 1st in Kandahar and we left Kandahar at the end of Aug. Last I heard they were doing ok but not as well as the US forces had been doing. As for the North, I think it is still primarly run by the US. That is the story for when I left in Oct.
Re: So What Do You Think Of This
Wonder if that's why Bush replaced an army general with a navy admiral? Navy will protect oil facilities and pipelines with ships and plans.
BBB
Re: So What Do You Think Of This
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Wonder if that's why Bush replaced an army general with a navy admiral? Navy will protect oil facilities and pipelines with ships and plans.
BBB
"ships and plans?"
[gasp] A spelling error?! How cogent and germane...
BBB
Funny how my typo makes sense. If we had more plans and not just planes, Iraq might have turned out differently.
BBB
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:34 am Post: 1868137 -
An Israeli air strike will be what takes out the nuclear facilities...............................?
Of course a low level nuclear strike puts a whole new twist on this...
Paul Erdman's Crash of '79 coming true in a roundabout way?