Israel shows abilities for Iran strike. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080620/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_israel_iran By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer Fri Jun 20, 10:02 AM ET A large Israeli military exercise this month may have been aimed at showing Jerusalem's abilities to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. In a substantial show of force, Israel sent warplanes and other aircraft on a major exercise in the Eastern Mediterranean early this month, Pentagon officials said Friday. Israel's military refused to confirm or deny that the maneuvers were practice for a strike in Iran. Russia's foreign minister Friday warned against the use of force on Iran, saying there is no proof it is trying to build nuclear weapons with a program that Tehran says is for generating power. U.S. officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the sensitive matter for the record. "They have been conducting some large-scale exercises — they live in a tough neighborhood," one U.S. official said, though he offered no other recent examples. The big exercise the first week of June was impossible to miss and may have been meant as a show of force as well as a practice on skills needed to execute a long-range strike mission, one U.S. official said. The New York Times quoted officials Friday as saying that more than 100 Israeli F-16s and F-15s staged the maneuver, flying more than 900 miles, roughly the distance from Israel to Iran's Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, and that the exercise included refueling tankers and helicopters capable of rescuing downed pilots. "It was noticed that a significant exercise took place — dozens and dozens of aircraft participated," one U.S. officials said Friday. "We watch globally everyday, and this was noted." A second U.S. defense official said the maneuver could be taken as a demonstration that Israel is serious about the need to challenge Iran's nuclear program — and could be prepared to do so militarily. "That's one of the assessments you could make out of the exercise," the official said. Asked to comment, the Israeli military issued a statement saying only that the Israeli air force "regularly trains for various missions in order to confront and meet the challenges posed by the threats facing Israel." Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev offered no comment beyond the military's statement. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said he prefers that Iran's nuclear ambitions be halted by diplomatic means, but has pointedly declined to rule out military action. Bush administration officials have said the same. In an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel published on Wednesday, Olmert said the current international sanctions against Iran would probably not succeed alone, saying there were "many things that can be done economically, politically, diplomatically and militarily." Asked if Israel was capable of taking military action against Iran, Olmert said, "Israel always has to be in a position to defend itself against any adversary and against any threat of any kind." Israeli military analyst Martin Van Creveld of Jerusalem's Hebrew University said military preparations for a possible attack are indeed under way. "Israel has been talking about this possibility for a long time, that it would not take an Iranian nuclear weapon lying down. And it has been practicing the operation or operations for a long time," he said. But though an Israeli strike would likely be able to "paralyze the most important Iranian nuclear installations," it probably wouldn't be able to destroy the program entirely, Van Creveld said. "I would be very surprised if Israel can really knock out every part of this program, which by all accounts appears to be large and well concealed and well dispersed," he said. There are precedents for unilateral Israeli action in such cases. In 1981, Israeli jets bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility to end dictator Saddam Hussein's nuclear program. And last September Israel bombed a facility in Syria that U.S. officials have said was a nuclear reactor being constructed with North Korean assistance. A U.S. intelligence report released late last year concluded that Iran has suspended its nuclear weapons program, but Israeli intelligence believes that assessment is incorrect and that work is continuing. Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said Iran should be engaged in dialogue and encouraged to cooperate with the U.N. nuclear monitoring agency. Lavrov made the statement when asked to comment on an Israeli Cabinet member's statement earlier this month that Israel could attack Iran if it does not halt its nuclear program. "I hope the actual actions would be based on international law," Lavrov said. "And international law clearly protects Iran's and anyone else's territorial integrity." ---------------------------------------------- Here's another article on Iran's response: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2008062...80620163420;_ylt=AhQAYY6gzEU.nBSD9H6WXfKWwvIE And some highlights: Tehran Friday warned its arch-enemy Israel of a "strong blow" if it takes forceful measures, after the US media reported military exercises by the Jewish state were a possible practice for a strike against Iran. Last month the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's atomic watchdog, expressed "serious concern" that Iran is still hiding information about alleged studies into making nuclear warheads and defying UN demands to suspend uranium enrichment. ---------------------------------------------- Also another article about how Iran would retaliate: http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080620/wl_csm/oresponse;_ylt=AvvHxzipHXXC9C9vxGodghJbbBAF The most interesting thing I gathered from this article is: Even Admiral William Fallon, who publicly opposed a US strike on Iran before he resigned in April, dismissed Iran as a military threat. "Get serious," Adm. Fallon told Esquire in March. "These guys are ants. When the time comes, you crush them." This is interesting because it shows a lot of confidence on our part. But Iran is not looking to win a conventional war, they're looking to fight a psychological guerrilla war using terror tactics. They would be using something called "asymmetric warfare." "They say: 'Conventional warfare is not something we can win against the US, but we have other assets in the toolbox,' " says Mr. Vatanka, noting that the IRGC commander appointed last fall has been "marketed as this genius behind asymmetric warfare doctrine." Very interesting. What do you all think? Another false alarm or could Israel really be ready to strike Iran? Discuss.
Perhaps Israel wants to nudge the issue while GWB is still in office? Perhaps the GOP wants to nudge the issue to better highlight McCain's credentials? Perhaps Israel does not want Obama to win the election? Perhaps Obama is eagerly awaiting to join Ackma-dingleberry in a spot of tea, and fix the problems for good?
IMO the Israelis were just sending a friendly little warning to one and all -- to the Iranians to give them reason to reflect on possible consequences of their nuclear ambitions; to the European community to give them reason not to give away the farm in negotiations with the Iranians; and to the United States to remind us that Israel will not shrink from a fight in case our collective anal area puckers up over a confrontation with Iran or Syria.
While I hope there is no strike, $200 per oil barrel is inevitable given the fact that the U.S. is dragging its feet on drilling.
I hoping this was some oil speculators making this up. If this happens this won't be good for a lot of people, not just at the pump. After 2000 years can't they stop fighting.
Drilling is not the solution, I wish they would allow it, but it is merely a quick fix for our oil addiction.
It's always been a finite resource. It becomes scarce only when it isn't found and taken. There is plenty of oil waiting for us, we are just succumbing to world demand and the limited production, succumbing to the middle east. Great feeling it is.
While oil is a finite resource, it is still plentiful. In the short term, drilling and utilizing our oil resources would bring the price down. The long term goal needs to be an alternative energy source. Until that becomes a reality, we need to utilize our oil resources so that the economy does not collapse while people stand there and decry our oil addiction as they drive home in their SUV.
Given it's history, the possibility of an Israeli strike is very real. I hope one doesn't occur, certainly not while we have the current President, but one can't dismiss the fact that Israel has always acted unilaterally in what it perceives as it's national interest, if she reaches the conclusion that no one else will take action it deems necessary. Impeach Bush.
Fix your own posts. I use edit when I feel the urge to fix one. We have enough oil to satisfy demand until we develop a better (read cleaner, cheaper and more strategically sound) source of energy. I'm all for alternative energy sources and their development, but why should we be hostage to the Middle East when we have more than enough oil of our own? And don't tell me about polluting our shores. China is drilling right off the Miami coast and they are nearly as ecologically friendly as any American oil company. American companies have proved they can drill without major spills -- not even Katrina caused an offshore spill.
This may surprise you but drilling isn't a "quick" fix at all. It should be part of a long term strategy to both increase production and reduce consumption. If drilling really could produce quick results, I promise we would be doing it because of overwhelming pressure from the public. Quick fixes are the specialty of our government.
Because Iran has a right to enrich Uranium. There's no reason to hit Iran. But if they do, the U.S. will suffer in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's how it's going to work.
