Israel has plan to attack Iran nuclear plants with low velocity nuclear bombs
 

Headline in today's Sunday Times - Israel have a plan that would be put into effect if the need arose to launch a strike on Iran's main nuclear facility - the one that is capable of providing enriched uranium.

It's quite a detailed report showing the attack plan involving conventional laser-guided bombs that would open a channel to the underground facilty whereupon a pinpoint-targetted nuclear bomb with the velocity of about a tenth of the Hiroshima bomb would be used to blow open and destroy the production plant.

Online edition here for more details.

Now why do I feel that this isn't going to help any Middle East peace process....?:(

Yes, and?

Its no different than the fact that EVERY country with nukes has MANY different attack plans ready to implement. The US probably has a plan to put a bomb on EVERY major city or capitol worldwide. That doesnt mean they will.

In the Middle East, this is considered diplomacy.

Read the article and on page 3 it's recounted how Israel attacked Iraq's nuclear plant in 1981 - while the USA nor any other western govt would ever consent to an attack, history showed that these govts didn't exactly go overboard to condemn Israel after it happened in 1981.

It may be sabre-rattling at the moment but Israel has a habit and history of defending itself by attacking first. Maybe it was meant as a manoeuvre to get the Iranians to comply with the UN. However, as a result of the adversaries concerned it just leaves one feeling a little more uneasy than usual.

chuckle

You know, the quote above about Israel having a 'history of defending itself by attacking first' and then somehow being able to appear to be the under dog makes me think about how the old testament was mostly about the Jews and mostly written by Jews.

I wonder how twisted that story is too.

A careful read of the Old Testament does not reflect well on the Jews ... especially when you get through Kings and Chronicles, which basically say over and over ...

"Yea, King (insertname) did make burnt offerings to the abomination and was smote by the God of the Hebrews."

Over and over and over again.

They never seemed to "get" it. Make a pleasurable odor unto the Hebrew God, you're good. Burn the same cow to the idol of the God from the nearby town, you're toast.

Israel denys the claims. Doesn't mean anything though.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/....ap/index.html

It's best to have a clear strategy when attempting to penetrate a bad place.

So many posts and yet where are the esential details even mentioned? A 2000 mile trip cannot happen without numerous mid-air refuelings; not possible without American cooperation. Look at the map. How do Israeli fighter get there and back? Yes, the story has merit. But notice what / how are also necessary to execute nuclear war - as if there were no consequences.

This would not be an Israeli only attack as should have been obvious to all who read Cyclefrance's first post. Of course, an America on a religious crusade - that is acceptable. If it goes bad, the mental midget actually thinks Israel can take all the blame. George Jr administration is that dumb - and dangerous. Only someone with an Urbane cannot fodder intelligence would not see how severe those consquences would be. Worse, that is exactly the attitude and mentality of President Cheney - who also insists the US presidency does not have enough power.

That Israel has the most to lose if an Arab state goes nuclear is W's fault?

I think I missed a step in there somewhere.

Israel would be nothing without the US backing it up. It's military is a lot weaker than it was twenty years ago and the whole Middle East seems to be gaining up on it (I wonder why...). Israel would never break relations with the US even if shrub did start a nuclear war that turns Israel into one big crater.

Where have you been all these years? Iran that did not go for nuclear, biological and other weapons after being told that American will "Pearl Harbor" Iran - an Iran that did not build every weapon it could, instead, would be its own worst enemy.

We have told the world who we will attack unilaterally, without a declaration of war, and with total disregard for international law - Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. That is not even disputable.

Meanwhile, did you notice what happened to the Iranian reform movement - people who once advocated friendship with the US? That completely disintegrates as soon as the US obviously and clearly announced intent to "Pearl Harbor" Iran. Of course it would. What hope did a reform movement have once the US made it impossible to be a moderate? This too is so miserably obvious that only an Urbane Guerrilla mentality could deny it.

What is worse, the boisterous threats on Iran even violate principles in “Art of War”. Intelligent nations just do not do what George Jr did in his 2002 State of the Union Address. Yes, it again goes right the heat of ‘big dic’ intelligence from a president who therefore said “Bring ‘me on”. We now have the problem we wanted.

Had you been watching, majority of Iranians wanted their extremist leadership removed. Iranians were slowly moving in that direction until America's worst president ever opened his mouth. Only 'big dic' thinkers did not realize the consequences of that 'axis of evil' speech.

We now reap what we sowed.

The Lockheed F-16 has a range of 3200+ miles. The Israeli F-16I 'Fighting Falcon' has modified internal fuel tanks that they claim are 50 % larger, plus 600 gallon wing tanks.:cool:

There's an internal power struggle between the Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani group. Seems that many Iran people, especially the higher educated are sick of Ahmadinjihad's 12th Iman rethorics and threats to the West. The last elections showed that Rafsanjani's influence is growing. Any action from the US or Israel will destroy this delicate balance and for sure Ahmadinejad will benefit from that.

A strike from Israel on Iran will give free hand to the suicide bombers to flock all over Israel and I can imagine Hezbollah will have free hand from Iran to use their latest Iran missiles which have not been used the last war. They can reach Israel at any place with devastating effect.

Iran offered the US direct negotiations 2-3 years ago which the US blatantly refused with war talks. After that the election of Ahmadinejad was just a question of time.

Sometimes when the wheels are rolling, it's difficult to stop the War Machine. The Dogs o' War are barking again.

The outright refusal of Bush to even look at Baker's Middle East Realpolitik gives me an image of a nixonian madman desperately hanging on to his outdated principles, no matter what doom it may bring to the world. Can't this man be impeached?

Not really something I'm concerned about nor is it something I think we should become involved with.

Nah you have to get a BJ from an intern for that.

Given Israel's military reliance on America, I think you are likely to be disappointed.

America no longer talks to anyone who does not already agree. A perfect formula for multiple wars AND how those who love wars get what they want. Exactly why America now so alienated even allies.

When America had smarter presidents, the United States would report to Eastern European nations (those behind the Iron Curtain) details of what was discussed. US rather than the USSR kept East European nations informed because a smart America talked to everyone. Warm relations between the US and those East European nations would result.

But today, 'god's chosen' US does not talk with anyone. US now dictates even TO Tony Blair what will be.

This same nation also does not do nation building? A lying president even learned that was neocon fiction.

Details of a defective George Jr were obvious beginning months after his inauguration. Norway's foreign minister accurately predicted that George Jr would destroy the Oslo Accords. Not only did the mental midget do that (fear of anything Clinton). He also invented a scam cover to replace it: Roadmap for peace. Those who were learning details back then therefore suspected - accurately.

Even George Jr's first meeting with allies (Chancellor of Germany) went very badly - long before 11 September. George Jr was alienating allies even in early 2001.

Impeachment will not work. George Jr does not make decisions. Cheney and Rumsfeld made the decisions. Sec of Treasury Paul O'Neill makes that obvious in his book. Impeach George Jr and the real president also becomes an official president. All this hatred for the world and a need for a dictatorial presidency comes directly from the head dictator himself - Cheney.

Why could George Jr not even ask a single question as Katrina charged towards New Orleans? Cheney was on a hunting trip compeltely unaware of impending disaster. Therefore the mental midget ignored Katrina; instead went to CA to collect campaign contributions. Impeaching the idiot will not go after America's enemy - Cheney.

Without arms, the plane may do 800 miles. To find military aircraft that go thousands of miles, they are slow and optimized for efficiency - bombers and transport aircraft.

To attack Iran, Israel must have complete cooperation of the US or must launch attacks through nations that are not so friendly to Israel. The exception: Turkey. But would Turkey cooperate with israel to attack Iran? Again, that very first post means immediatley consulting maps. Do you think for one minute such an attack would not have severe nuclear consequences for the entire region? Well, neocons would deny it using 'political agenda' justification - ie Cheney, George Jr, and Urbane Guerrilla.

Probably the best thing, then, that the plan came into the public domain - denial by Israel or not, nothing like a bit of unwanted exposure to help dampen the fire - even if temporarily.

Judging by the majority of commentary here, there's more belief in the story than disbelief. And that means we have good reason to be concerned. Let's face it, the architects of the Iraq situation don't exactly have a glowing CV to their name - and the idea that someone else (oy vay) might do the dirty work must be appealing. Are the perpetrators likely to conduct an objective consequences risk assessement? Why change a lifetime's habit?

That second "quote" you put up, is the first sentence from a two sentence paragraph. The second sentence is; "The extended flight range enables the IAF to attack targets well within Iran and Libya without having to refuel."
This is because they modified the internal tanks and added wing tanks. which you left out, when you quoted me. Bad tw.:rtfm:

splittin' hairs, gravyboy. Israel has had, and probally always will have, the tacit backing of the US in all it does. Check out the UN Security Council archives.... see who has most vetoed any resolutions against Israel.

How? Libya is trivial and easy. Only ocean. But will Israeli fighters fly over Syria and across the entire of Iraq without anyone asking questions? Of course not. Also your numbers assume not carrying massive bombs required to bust bunkers. Will they fly across Saudi Arabia and not be challenged? Your quote makes those assumptions. This is not buzzing Assad’s Palace. Flight parameters must be completely different. Other nations must permit that flight path. Again, did you first look at maps? Your quote assumes great circle routes.

Yes, Israel might do as you have assumed if other nations are complicit. Add those fuel tanks and the plane cannot carry so many munitions. What is 600 gallons? 5000 more pounds? What is left to carry a bomb? Yes I read the entire paragraph and did these calculations. Did you?

It will take more than balls. Such an attack requires other nations to be complicit. You tell me that makes the region safer especially when it involves nuclear weapons? And then what happens in the Straits of Hormuz?

I am not saying it cannot be done. Obviously. However the consequences of such 'big dic' actions then should be massive civilian deaths – the only way to restore any sanity and to not provide Americans religious anti-American extremists with what they want – Armageddon. This is not some trivial attack on Saddam's nuclear reactor (which I always wondered was performed with French complicity). This is something far more severe that has nothing but bad consequences for American soldiers and for American citizens elsewhere in the world. Are you ready to die for Israeli 'big dics'?

Really the question we should be asking is why was this leaked? A mission so unlikely and then leaked? I am looking for a bigger agenda here. For example, is this really an American ploy to blame others for an American stealth attack? Does Turkey really so fear a nuclear Iran (since Turkey has already declared a nuclear Iran means they must go nuclear). I don't buy this Israeli attack at face value. The mission is just too unlikely. But such leaks can have alternative agendas. What are they? Were you asking this question with Cyclefrance's first post? I was - and other questions.

Airframe numbers, national boundaries, and political interests just don't make sense for the story as leaked. There must be much more here because success of that attack is just too improbable and risks excessive.

Could Israel pulled it off? Maybe if Israel was not so busy making enemies everywhere. Just another lesson for the Americans reading this.

Israel is kind of harsh on leakers they don't want to leak. They will hunt you down to every corner of the planet, kidnap you and cart you back to Israel to sit in prison. It probably doesn't even matter if your leak is true.

So, two probabilities. One is that it was intentionally leaked. The timing seems right for such a thing.

The other possibility is that the reporter(s) involved are making it up: It probably doesn't matter, flip a coin.

So you expect me to believe that if Israel was attacking Iran with nuclear weapons they would be concerned with air space protocol of their enemies? Grow up. Did your calculations include the 50 % larger internal tanks and 600 gallon wing tanks along with larger engines and more payload, that ALL F-16Is have ,ALL the time. This ain't your daddy's F-16.No it doesn't, they can do it all by their lonesome. The only question, if the story is true, is would they. :unsure:

The story is most likely true because Israel probably has a defense strategy against every country, even the US. The chances of Israel going through with the attack is slim for obvious reasons.

From your source: "We have the military option and the fact that we can fly to Gibraltar shows that we have the range. It’s in your interest to get back to the negotiation tables."

Reality shows that this strategy isn't working at all. The more sabre rattling the more defiant Iran is and the more support Ahmadinejad gets. Due to it's geographics Israel is very vulnerable for a first strike. Air strikes won't solve the problem at all, it will only emphasize it.

So if this story ain't true, then what is the US/Israel strategy? Maybe the fact that Negroponte was replaced by McConnell at the NIE could indicate things. As National Intelligence Director Negroponte countered the administration position that Iran was an immediate threat and that its alleged nuclear weapons program was in an advanced stage. McConnell is another Cheney-puppet who will go anywhere the Vice-President will tell him to go.

In order for Iran's program to move forward at George Jr's accelerated prediction, manufacture and installation of fine tolerance centrifuges had to be on the order of thousands - maybe tens of thousands. Based upon intelligence, Iran apparently only has enough manufacturing to maybe (worst case) make a prototype bomb. Iran may also have been using a process that is crude - not extremely productive as George Jr people assume.

Of course, the US has been building nuclear bombs to attack these bunkers. This was part of a program originally intended to "Pearl Harbor" Iran in 2006. But then things fell apart. Bases and cooperative governments necessary for the northern attack were lost. Iraqi's got patriotic and started attacking their common enemy - Americans. American military is now woefully short of equipment and abilities. Afghanistan was falling to the Taliban. And in America, people were finally acknowledging facts that were known to the administration in late 2003 - we were losing "Mission Accomplished".

Iran is only a threat if the US continues to empower Iranian extremists. Iran is much like Cuba. As long as the US rattles sabers, then the government only becomes more powerful. How does the US get spies in Iran? We stop all this militaristic nonsense; stop empowering people like Chavez of Venezuela with wacko 'them is evil' rhetoric. We let nationalism rise up and demand reforms. We let our friendly Arab neighbors tell us what is really happening. None of that could happen with George Jr's lying administration.

Unfortunately, Iran may become a nuclear power. Time to have averted that may have long past - required a president with intelligence. But continuing same mistakes will only guarantee a nuclear Iran. Even the George Jr administration has quietly conceded to a viable solution - and that means cooperation from Russia and China. Cooperation that only started after the US stopped its 'big dic' threats and the intention to 'Pearl Harbor' Iran imploded.

Israel has options. But that too means Israel must put its own house in order so as to be talking diplomatically rather than rattling sabers even against Palestinians. The Arab League does not want a nuclear Iran. But why say anything when Israel's actions imply a greater threat to all? ‘Big dic’ actions of Israel (encouraged and financially supported by American extremists Christians) only make it easier for Iran to have time and find material to make nuclear processing equipment.

Apparently Iran has far less centrifuges than George Jr's administration proclaimed. Again, subverting intelligence for a political agenda is a Cheney / Rumsfeld modus operandi. Denouncing and firing anyone who says otherwise was also standard procedure by those who somehow know using a political agenda.

Yes, the US is completely depending on Russia and China in the ME for a diplomatic solution, especially after Junior dismissed the Baker plan. The only other option is military which is totally counter productive. In the meantime the US lifted Iran into the leading ME position, alienated it's old allies and have the worst global popularity record in history. Even Nixon talked to the Chinese. In short Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld made a complete and utter mess of it's foreign diplomcy, a legacy which could stretch over decades...

IMHO, Having 6 million of your friends and family members turned into air pollution, would give anyone an itchy trigger finger.

The Baker Hamiloton "Iraq Study Group" is not gone. But just like the 9/11 Commission (which neocons also tried to make fail and then tried to ignore), the ISG is probably waiting to George Jr's speech today (10 Jan 2007) where George Jr commits to escalation. Where George Jr says there is light at the end of the tunnel. Where Geroge Jr first makes it official that he will completely ignore the ISG. Then we should start hearing from ISG commission members - just like the 9/11 Commission had to do. Remember, the president is only concerned with his legacy. You are the scum he uses - and has no respect for - because his legacy and political opinion polls are more important.

George Jr may try to fall back on some 'rushed' Pentagon Study that the White House commissioned after to became obvious how realistic the ISG report would be. IOW George Jr will spin more lies. And don't let anyone forget this reality. Repeatedly in the second half of 2003, all those administration people who served in Iraq (and that includes Bremers and Gen Garner) were telling George Jr, Cheney, and Rumsfeld that the war was being lost ... in 2003. George Jr has ignored it and has been lying that long.

Meanwhile, also as embarrassing are decisions (lack of) made by Condi Rice who was more concerned with saying the 'right thing' rather than confront Rumsfeld and Cheney. So also was a classic example of a nay-sayer - a tea leaf reader who simply learned how to say the right things sooner. She also was told repeatedly how bad Iraq was even in 2003 - and ignored it completely.

Israeli analyst*suggests turning nuclear Iran against Egypt.
He argues that Shia dominance is prefereable to the Sunni's.
See this: http://samsonblinded.org/blog/use-ir...inst-egypt.htm

Whoa folks. TW and Bruce, specifically.

I am the resident armchair expert on military aircraft.

Last I checked, the F-16 I model had a COMBAT range (approx, the actual range is classified) of 2100 km. That translates to 1130 nm and 1300 sm.

That range is calculated by taking the tested range if the F100-PW-229 engine with which it comes equipped, adding in the extended range afforded by the drop tanks (600 gal) and taking away a small fudge factor to allow for armament.

The ferry range is twice that because the plane doesn't have to return to it's base. Often, the "Operational Range" number put forth by the various websites offering information on the type is the same as the ferry range or even the Maximum range, which doesn't allow 45 mins of fuel available at landing, as ferry range does.

Any further questions, ask away!

You're saying the F-16I, with internal tanks, 450 gallon conformal tanks, and 600 gallon wing tanks, has a range of only 1300 miles? Pshaw. :headshake

actual range is classified.

The Israelies have not consulted with me in the design of the F16I Sufa.

Though much disapproved of by those like tw who don't want America to win, in their, ah, sophistication.

And only someone with a tw "cannot copyedit" intelligence would let a sentence that badly written out of the chute -- just to undermine anyone's perception that his argument might have wisdom. Boo.

Calling you a nutcase merely names the problem. It does not cure.

So your conclusion is ... ?

My conclusion is: details matter. When something incorrect like a statistic glares at me from the screen, I have to say something, especially when I actually know of which I speak.

http://therewaschocolate.com/ZenCart...bes(600px).jpg for Iran?