Israeli paper says strike on Iran could delay bomb

[Xeric]

http://in.reuters.com/article/oilRpt...60776820090812

Israeli paper says strike on Iran could delay bomb
Wed Aug 12, 2009 5:03pm IST


JERUSALEM, Aug 12 (Reuters) - A major Israeli newspaper ran a front-page story on Wednesday quoting an unidentified "senior defence official" as saying Israel believed a military strike could disrupt what it says is an Iranian nuclear arms programme.

Under a photograph of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sitting the previous day in the cockpit of an F-15I long-range fighter-bomber, mass-selling Maariv quoted the official as saying Israel could carry out such a strike without U.S. approval but time was running out for it to be effective.

Neither the official nor the paper made any comment on the likelihood of Netanyahu ordering such an operation, speculation over which remains a major risk factor in investors' assessments of the Middle East region and in energy markets globally.

Israel rejects Tehran's assurances it is developing only civilian nuclear facilities and refuses to rule out armed force to stop its Islamist enemy acquiring atomic weaponry that the Jewish state says would threaten its very existence.

Israeli air strikes could "significantly delay" such an arms programme, Maariv quoted the official as saying. That is in line with previous, independent analysts' assessments.

Israel has backed efforts by U.S. President Barack Obama to persuade Iran to curb its nuclear programme.

Maariv said the official added there was "no point" in a strike in the near term, before such discussions had fully begun and before the Americans "despair of the effectiveness of the talks".

The official said: "The Iranians are creating fortifications and camouflage to defend against a strike from the air."

The official added: "The military option is real and at the disposal of Israel's leaders, but time is working against them."

(Writing by Ori Lewis; Editing by Alastair Macdonald and Sophie Hares)

 

[no_name]

Strikes won't help anything. Israel strikes Iran nuclear facility. Iran strikes back against Israel. Uncle Sam can now flog Iran.

regards,

 

[brahmastra]

Strikes won't help anything. Israel strikes Iran nuclear facility. Iran strikes back against Israel. Uncle Sam can now flog Iran.

regards,

how exactly Iran strikes back Israel.

 

[FreekiN]

Unless they already have the bomb...

 

[no_name]

how exactly Iran strikes back Israel.

How do you strike another person? Even someone meaner than you?
Where there is a will, there will be means.

regards

 

[gambit]

Unless they already have the bomb...

Despite all the boasting the Iranians spew, to date, for an indigenous nuclear weapons program, the best verification of success is to test detonate a nuclear explosive device. Notice I said 'device', not 'weapon'. You can have a nuclear explosive device the size of a conference room. What is called the 'weaponization' process is when the excess 'fat' is trimmed from the device to fit inside a container. Israel does not have to destroy all of Iranian nuclear refinement and assembly facilities. Just do enough damages to retard the nuclear weapons program's progress. This would be enough to make the program more expensive to pursue.

 

[Ahmad]

Despite all the boasting the Iranians spew, to date, for an indigenous nuclear weapons program, the best verification of success is to test detonate a nuclear explosive device. Notice I said 'device', not 'weapon'. You can have a nuclear explosive device the size of a conference room. What is called the 'weaponization' process is when the excess 'fat' is trimmed from the device to fit inside a container. Israel does not have to destroy all of Iranian nuclear refinement and assembly facilities. Just do enough damages to retard the nuclear weapons program's progress. This would be enough to make the program more expensive to pursue.

but why should we talk about bomb? there is no bomb in place and Iran have denied builing one and on the other hand it is israel having the biggest stockpiles of atomic bombs.

 

[gambit]

but why should we talk about bomb? there is no bomb in place and Iran have denied builing one and on the other hand it is israel having the biggest stockpiles of atomic bombs.

If you believe Iran then you have no choice but to believe Israel's ambiguity about being a nuclear weapons state because Israel have yet to officially admit to that status.

If having functional nuclear warheads is the qualifier, then why is the world so worried Iran and NKR even before a test detonation? The UN/IAEA inspectors are not fools. There are forensic evidences that strongly indicate Iran is enriching U-235 beyond the %20 level and that is the point of concern for everyone. Iran have tried to hide and delay inspectors but failed precisely because Iran failed to eliminate those evidences.

www.iaea.org/Publications/Factsheets/English/inspectors.pdf

If you read that brief by the IAEA, you will see there is nothing that tell inspectors to look for anything that 'look like' a bomb. The US have a history of Victor Alert aircrafts...

Shaw Air Force Base - 20th Fighter Wing

The wing first established its Blast Off (later named Victor Alert) capability in July, 1958.

VA fighter-bombers were nuclear armed. I used to work on them. I know what a nuclear weapon look like. Other than certain colored identifier, without a radiation detector, a gravity nuclear bomb is indistinguishable from a conventional one. It is pointless to have 'inspections' and sanctions at this stage of development if the goal is to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.

So the question is WHY is the UN/IAEA so interested in Iranian nuclear technology program?

 

[Xeric]

Dont worry guys, the yanks will simply apologize (for not finding the bomb) after the bomb the shyt out of Iran as they did in Iraq. It is just a matter of few words for them; "sorry we killed a million of yours, we are sorry, but we still would keep on killing you in the name of freedom"

Feel some shame!