IDF preparing options for Iran strike

Cavey · 12-04-2008, 07:45 PM

The IDF is drawing up options for a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities that do not include coordination with the United States, The Jerusalem Post has learned.
While its preference is to coordinate with the US, defense officials have said Israel is preparing a wide range of options for such an operation.

"It is always better to coordinate," one top Defense Ministry official explained last week. "But we are also preparing options that do not include coordination."

Israeli officials have said it would be difficult, but not impossible, to launch a strike against Iran without receiving codes from the US Air Force, which controls Iraqi airspace. Israel also asked for the codes in 1991 during the First Gulf War, but the US refused.

Several news reports have claimed recently that US President George W. Bush has refused to give Israel a green light for an attack on Iranian facilities. One such report, published in September in Britain's Guardian newspaper, claimed that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert requested a green light to attack Iran in May but was refused by Bush.

In September, a Defense News article on an early warning radar system the US recently sent to Israel quoted a US government source who said the X-band deployment and other bilateral alliance-bolstering activities send parallel messages: "First, we want to put Iran on notice that we're bolstering our capabilities throughout the region, and especially in Israel. But just as important, we're telling the Israelis, 'Calm down, behave. We're doing all we can to stand by your side and strengthen defenses, because at this time, we don't want you rushing into the military option.'"

The "US European Command (EUCOM) has deployed to Israel a high-powered X-band radar and the supporting people and equipment needed for coordinated defense against Iranian missile attack, marking the first permanent US military presence on Israeli soil," Defense News wrote. The radar will shave several precious minutes off Israel's reaction time to an Iranian missile launch.

In a related article at about the same time, TIME magazine raised the possibility that through the deployment of the radar, America wants to keep an eye on Israeli airspace, so that the US is not surprised if and when the IAF is sent to bomb Iran, a scenario Washington wants to avoid.

The US army sent 120 EUCOM personnel to Israel's Nevatim Air Base southeast of Beersheba to man the new radar.

Last week, Iran's nuclear chief Gholam Reza Aghazadeh revealed that the country was operating more than 5,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz and would continue to install centrifuges and enrich uranium to produce nuclear fuel for the country's future nuclear power plants.

"At this point, more than 5,000 centrifuges are operating in Natanz," said Aghazadeh, who is also the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. This represents a significant increase from the 4,000 Iran had said were up and running in August at the plant.

The Islamic republic has said it plans to move toward large-scale uranium enrichment that will ultimately involve 54,000 centrifuges.

Israeli officials said last week that the drop in oil prices and the continued sanctions on Iran were having an effect, although they had yet to stop Teheran's nuclear program. The officials said that while Iran was making technological advancements, it would not have the necessary amount of highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb until late 2009.

"There is still time and there is no need to rush into an operation right now," another Israeli official said. "The regime there is already falling apart and will likely no longer be in power 10 years from now."

The IAF was preparing for a wide range of options, OC Air Force Maj.-Gen. Ido Nehushtan recently said, adding that all it would take to launch an operation was a decision by the political echelon.

"The air force is a very robust and flexible force," he told Der Spiegel. "We are ready to do whatever is demanded of us."

On Monday, Teheran dismissed the possibility of an Israeli strike, saying it didn't take Israel seriously.

"We think that regional and international developments and the complicated situation faced by Israel itself will not allow it to launch military strikes against other countries," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hassan Qashqavi told reporters in Teheran, according to the Press TV Web site. "Israel makes threats to promote its psychological and media warfare," he said.

**PorkChopSandwiches** · 12-04-2008, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavey

"There is still time and there is no need to rush into an operation right now," another Israeli official said. "The regime there is already falling apart and will likely no longer be in power 10 years from now."

I wasn't aware of that.

**Nemowork** · 12-04-2008, 08:11 PM

Were they aware of that?

Unless something insane happens the Iranian government seems fairly stable or is this Olmerts excuse for not doing anything?

**PorkChopSandwiches** · 12-04-2008, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemowork

Were they aware of that?

marquis · 12-04-2008, 08:22 PM

All forces have drawn up options for any number of possibilities.There's probably a Pentagon contingency plan for dealing with an attack from France.Just shout "BOO"

deepsepia · 12-04-2008, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemowork

Unless something insane happens the Iranian government seems fairly stable or is this Olmerts excuse for not doing anything?

Ahmadinejad is quite unpopular in Iran. A lot of his game playing is about stirring up nationalist feeling to support himself. I think in less than ten years, Iran will have a different government-- not a different political system, just someone else in charge, presumably with a different agenda.

The Israelis' "preparations" are a little too well-advertised to be credible. If they were actually preparing for action, they'd be saying nothing. The fact that they're all chatty about this suggests that they don't really have the capacity.

**Nemowork** · 12-04-2008, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marquis

All forces have drawn up options for any number of possibilities.There's probably a Pentagon contingency plan for dealing with an attack from France.Just shout "BOO"

Zut Alors

**Meursault** · 12-04-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemowork

Zut Alors

quelle horreur!

**Nemowork** · 12-05-2008, 12:03 AM

Vin rouge?

Tinysmasher · 12-05-2008, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepsepia

Ahmadinejad is quite unpopular in Iran. A lot of his game playing is about stirring up nationalist feeling to support himself. I think in less than ten years, Iran will have a different government-- not a different political system, just someone else in charge, presumably with a different agenda.

The Israelis' "preparations" are a little too well-advertised to be credible. If they were actually preparing for action, they'd be saying nothing. The fact that they're all chatty about this suggests that they don't really have the capacity.

What does that loud mouthed dumbass have to do with their regime?

He is just a figurehead and has no power. As far as I can tell, he's mostly there to be a loud jackass to make the other fanatics look moderate in comparison. Bad cop good cop, only they're all bad cops.

deepsepia · 12-05-2008, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinysmasher

What does that loud mouthed dumbass have to do with their regime?

He is just a figurehead and has no power. As far as I can tell, he's mostly there to be a loud jackass to make the other fanatics look moderate in comparison. Bad cop good cop, only they're all bad cops.

Oh, he's got a lot to do with it: he won two pretty fair elections. I don't think he's "just a figurehead"-- he's a shrewd, populist politician. He happens to be irresponsible and a thorn in our side. There's a mistake that often is made in underestimating our enemies. Just cause you don't like him, don't assume he's a joke. . . he's not.

Tinysmasher · 12-05-2008, 07:37 AM

There is only one decision maker in Iran, the supreme council headed by Khameini. This post of president is a powerless figurehead meant to deflect blame for their bad decisions in faux elections where a couple of equally powerless stooges selected by the supreme council face off. See, ideally, when after 20 years those terrorist fucks still haven't even replaced 1/2 the quality of life under the Shah as promised, he needs scapegoats. So it's a presidents fault. It obviously can't be the fault of the great revolutionary council.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader

Also, fair elections in Iran? roflmao. They barred something like 1700 moderate reformers from even running in the last elections.

From wiki also

"A few months before the election on December 14, 2007, twenty-one moderate and reformist parties formed a coalition centered around Mohammad Khatami to increase their chances in the election.[8] However, around 1,700 candidates were barred from running by the Guardian Council vetting body, the Supervisory and Executive Election Boards,[9] on the grounds that they were not sufficiently loyal to the Iranian revolution.[10] These included 90% of "independent and reformist candidates,"[11] 19 sitting MP's, and Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson, Ali Eshraghi. Consequently the election has been described as a "contest between conservatives who still support" president Ahmadinejad, and conservatives who don't"

Edit: You think I dismiss him because I don't like him - wrong. I dismiss him because I recognize what he is and that the real power in Iran does not remotely lie with him. He is an errand boy who carries out the Ayatollahs commands and is so outlandish primarily to make the rest of those nutbags look moderate. I don't think he's dumb, quite the opposite, I think he's done a very effective job of what Iran wanted him to do.

deepsepia · 12-05-2008, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinysmasher

There is only one decision maker in Iran, the supreme council headed by Khameini. This post of president is a powerless figurehead meant to deflect blame for their bad decisions in faux elections where a couple of equally powerless stooges selected by the supreme council face off.

The Iranian Presidency matters. You're quite right that there was a substantial effort to eliminate moderate candidates from the most recent Parliamentary elections . . . but the Mullahs wouldn't have made that effort if the Parliament and the Presidency didn't matter at all.

They do matter, and Iran has complex public opinion, and resentments of the Mullah's regime. Ahmadinejad is allied with the Ayatollahs, but I don't think he's simply their powerless stooge.

Tinysmasher · 12-05-2008, 11:37 PM

They matter up to and as long as they agree with the council. It's an allowed illusion to help mollify the people (much like blaming the west for all of Irans problems). When you replace nearly (they arrested many) 2k people the instant it appears there is dissenting opinion...

I'll ask you this: what can the Iranian presidency do that would go against the wishes of the supreme council?

deepsepia · 12-06-2008, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinysmasher

I'll ask you this: what can the Iranian presidency do that would go against the wishes of the supreme council?

I'd imagine quite a lot, since they were eager to get rid of Khatami.

The Khatami Presidency gives good evidence of both where Iranian popular sentiment lies and also what an Iranian President can (and can't) do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Khatami

I think the Mullahs are fairly weak-- thirty years on, my impression is that the Iranians are very tired of the Islamic Revolution.

12-04-2008, 07:45 PM	#1
Cavey Makin Jess say my name Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Midwest, US Posts: 2,686 Thanks: 10 Thanked 11 Times in 4 Posts	IDF preparing options for Iran strike The IDF is drawing up options for a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities that do not include coordination with the United States, The Jerusalem Post has learned. While its preference is to coordinate with the US, defense officials have said Israel is preparing a wide range of options for such an operation. "It is always better to coordinate," one top Defense Ministry official explained last week. "But we are also preparing options that do not include coordination." Israeli officials have said it would be difficult, but not impossible, to launch a strike against Iran without receiving codes from the US Air Force, which controls Iraqi airspace. Israel also asked for the codes in 1991 during the First Gulf War, but the US refused. Several news reports have claimed recently that US President George W. Bush has refused to give Israel a green light for an attack on Iranian facilities. One such report, published in September in Britain's Guardian newspaper, claimed that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert requested a green light to attack Iran in May but was refused by Bush. In September, a Defense News article on an early warning radar system the US recently sent to Israel quoted a US government source who said the X-band deployment and other bilateral alliance-bolstering activities send parallel messages: "First, we want to put Iran on notice that we're bolstering our capabilities throughout the region, and especially in Israel. But just as important, we're telling the Israelis, 'Calm down, behave. We're doing all we can to stand by your side and strengthen defenses, because at this time, we don't want you rushing into the military option.'" The "US European Command (EUCOM) has deployed to Israel a high-powered X-band radar and the supporting people and equipment needed for coordinated defense against Iranian missile attack, marking the first permanent US military presence on Israeli soil," Defense News wrote. The radar will shave several precious minutes off Israel's reaction time to an Iranian missile launch. In a related article at about the same time, TIME magazine raised the possibility that through the deployment of the radar, America wants to keep an eye on Israeli airspace, so that the US is not surprised if and when the IAF is sent to bomb Iran, a scenario Washington wants to avoid. The US army sent 120 EUCOM personnel to Israel's Nevatim Air Base southeast of Beersheba to man the new radar. Last week, Iran's nuclear chief Gholam Reza Aghazadeh revealed that the country was operating more than 5,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz and would continue to install centrifuges and enrich uranium to produce nuclear fuel for the country's future nuclear power plants. "At this point, more than 5,000 centrifuges are operating in Natanz," said Aghazadeh, who is also the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. This represents a significant increase from the 4,000 Iran had said were up and running in August at the plant. The Islamic republic has said it plans to move toward large-scale uranium enrichment that will ultimately involve 54,000 centrifuges. Israeli officials said last week that the drop in oil prices and the continued sanctions on Iran were having an effect, although they had yet to stop Teheran's nuclear program. The officials said that while Iran was making technological advancements, it would not have the necessary amount of highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb until late 2009. "There is still time and there is no need to rush into an operation right now," another Israeli official said. "The regime there is already falling apart and will likely no longer be in power 10 years from now." The IAF was preparing for a wide range of options, OC Air Force Maj.-Gen. Ido Nehushtan recently said, adding that all it would take to launch an operation was a decision by the political echelon. "The air force is a very robust and flexible force," he told Der Spiegel. "We are ready to do whatever is demanded of us." On Monday, Teheran dismissed the possibility of an Israeli strike, saying it didn't take Israel seriously. "We think that regional and international developments and the complicated situation faced by Israel itself will not allow it to launch military strikes against other countries," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hassan Qashqavi told reporters in Teheran, according to the Press TV Web site. "Israel makes threats to promote its psychological and media warfare," he said. __________________ Unless you live under such a huge shelter that you can’t see past the great naïve for the oncoming headlights, Nothing surprises me anymore! - Cavey

12-04-2008, 08:11 PM	#3
Nemowork Klompendance? Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Mobilis in Mobilii Posts: 25,341 Thanks: 6 Thanked 16 Times in 7 Posts	Were they aware of that? Unless something insane happens the Iranian government seems fairly stable or is this Olmerts excuse for not doing anything? __________________ “A wise man is superior to any insults which can be put upon him, and the best reply to unseemly behavior is patience and moderation.” Moliere "You do the unseemly behavior, I'll handle the moderation" - Nemo

12-05-2008, 12:03 AM	#9
Nemowork Klompendance? Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Mobilis in Mobilii Posts: 25,341 Thanks: 6 Thanked 16 Times in 7 Posts	Vin rouge? __________________ “A wise man is superior to any insults which can be put upon him, and the best reply to unseemly behavior is patience and moderation.” Moliere "You do the unseemly behavior, I'll handle the moderation" - Nemo

12-05-2008, 07:37 AM	#12
Tinysmasher Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 532 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	There is only one decision maker in Iran, the supreme council headed by Khameini. This post of president is a powerless figurehead meant to deflect blame for their bad decisions in faux elections where a couple of equally powerless stooges selected by the supreme council face off. See, ideally, when after 20 years those terrorist fucks still haven't even replaced 1/2 the quality of life under the Shah as promised, he needs scapegoats. So it's a presidents fault. It obviously can't be the fault of the great revolutionary council. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader Also, fair elections in Iran? roflmao. They barred something like 1700 moderate reformers from even running in the last elections. From wiki also "A few months before the election on December 14, 2007, twenty-one moderate and reformist parties formed a coalition centered around Mohammad Khatami to increase their chances in the election.[8] However, around 1,700 candidates were barred from running by the Guardian Council vetting body, the Supervisory and Executive Election Boards,[9] on the grounds that they were not sufficiently loyal to the Iranian revolution.[10] These included 90% of "independent and reformist candidates,"[11] 19 sitting MP's, and Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson, Ali Eshraghi. Consequently the election has been described as a "contest between conservatives who still support" president Ahmadinejad, and conservatives who don't" Edit: You think I dismiss him because I don't like him - wrong. I dismiss him because I recognize what he is and that the real power in Iran does not remotely lie with him. He is an errand boy who carries out the Ayatollahs commands and is so outlandish primarily to make the rest of those nutbags look moderate. I don't think he's dumb, quite the opposite, I think he's done a very effective job of what Iran wanted him to do. Last edited by Tinysmasher : 12-05-2008 at 07:42 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
German WestLB, Dekabank 'preparing merger'	TheLancinator	News and Views	1	10-01-2008 12:58 PM
North Korea preparing to restart nuclear facility	TheLancinator	News and Views	8	09-19-2008 05:11 PM
lightning strike in slo-mo	jibosity	SFW Links & Videos	3	08-18-2008 09:11 PM
Hollywood's strike: how come?	Gautier84	Serious Discussion	28	01-21-2008 08:01 PM
Comcast to ramp up Internet speed, TV tech options	TheLancinator	News and Views	6	01-08-2008 10:13 PM

12-04-2008, 08:22 PM	#5
marquis Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,060 Thanks: 3 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	All forces have drawn up options for any number of possibilities.There's probably a Pentagon contingency plan for dealing with an attack from France.Just shout "BOO"

12-05-2008, 11:37 PM	#14
Tinysmasher Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 532 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	They matter up to and as long as they agree with the council. It's an allowed illusion to help mollify the people (much like blaming the west for all of Irans problems). When you replace nearly (they arrested many) 2k people the instant it appears there is dissenting opinion... I'll ask you this: what can the Iranian presidency do that would go against the wishes of the supreme council?