Israel Bombing Iran Soon?

[holden]

Ex-UN envoy John Bolton: Israel should attack Iranian nuclear plant now, before it's too late

BY MICHAEL SHERIDAN

Tuesday, August 17th 2010, 12:11 PM

Israel, it's now or never.

The former United States envoy to the UN warned on Monday that if Iran's nuclear facility in Bushehr, which is set to be unveiled in little more than a week, isn't destroyed soon it should never be attacked.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/worl...efore_its.html

[Red Slinger]

Bolton is a dellusional wind-bag.

Israel has never needed to be prompted to defend itself, even pro-actively. Say what you will about Israel but they certainly have their finger on the pulse of some of the more radical nation-states around them. If there was a real threat to Israel or the region they would have done something about it already- and that doesn't necessarily mean by way of a military strike.

If Israel were to attack Iran at this point, it could be disastrous for both countries.

Rather than getting their Middle-East attack dog to go after Iran, the US needs to put pressure on Russia and China to in turn put pressure (economic primarily) on Iran.

I'm not an expert in nuclear energy by any means but I'm pretty sure there are types of reactors that are weapons grade and others that are not weapons grade (like the CANDU reactors IIRC). Are we to presume that the Iranian reactors are weapons grade? Does anyone know for certain?

[North East Goon]

China has got to start taking a lead role in these types of matters.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

Bolton is a dellusional wind-bag.

Israel has never needed to be prompted to defend itself, even pro-actively. Say what you will about Israel but they certainly have their finger on the pulse of some of the more radical nation-states around them. If there was a real threat to Israel or the region they would have done something about it already- and that doesn't necessarily mean by way of a military strike.

If Israel were to attack Iran at this point, it could be disastrous for both countries.

Rather than getting their Middle-East attack dog to go after Iran, the US needs to put pressure on Russia and China to in turn put pressure (economic primarily) on Iran.

I'm not an expert in nuclear energy by any means but I'm pretty sure there are types of reactors that are weapons grade and others that are not weapons grade (like the CANDU reactors IIRC). Are we to presume that the Iranian reactors are weapons grade? Does anyone know for certain?

There are reactors that are meant to just create weapons grade material. The other advanced warning is Iran purchasing 164 gas centrifuges for purification of nuclear fuel.

Right now they're enriching to 20% purity which is fine for peaceful purposes, its going past that where you get into creating bomb materials.

While the IAEA is given access to inspect the reactor and purification sites there are other facilities where they are not allowed access for inspection.

While I doubt Israel will launch a strike on Iran at this time because it would firmly put them in the bad guy camp, I'm betting that when that reactor goes live, Israel will retarget most of their nuclear capability on Iranian cities.

We're going to see MAD in the Middle East.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

China has got to start taking a lead role in these types of matters.

China thinks a nuclear-armed North Korea is a good idea and Russia is giving the Iranians uranium.

Why are you expecting those two countries to help you out?

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

China and Russia also get a lot of cold hard currency from Iran for weapons systems. Why would they turn that off.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

There are reactors that are meant to just create weapons grade material. The other advanced warning is Iran purchasing 164 gas centrifuges for purification of nuclear fuel.

Right now they're enriching to 20% purity which is fine for peaceful purposes, its going past that where you get into creating bomb materials.

That being the case, it's hard to justify saying to any nation that they can't create a source of energy for their country.

While I doubt Israel will launch a strike on Iran at this time because it would firmly put them in the bad guy camp, I'm betting that when that reactor goes live, Israel will retarget most of their nuclear capability on Iranian cities.

I think Israel is already firmly in the 'bad guy' category among most Middle-Eastern states. I'm fairly confident in saying that Israel's international popularity would take a back seat to their survival. As it stands now, I'm sure Israel has a good number of weapons pointed directly at Tehran and all of their infrastructure and weapons facilities.

We're going to see MAD in the Middle East.

That's been a constant threat for several decades now. Call me naive but I think there are still some diplomatic measures that can be taken to avoid a large scale (nuclear or 'conventional') war in the Middle-East. I don't believe it's in anyones best interests, Russia and China included, to allow Iran to produce nuclear weapons.

Bolton talks like he's the only one who recognizes the threat and his only course of action is a pre-emptive military strike. Neither Russia nor China want war in the Middle-East. It not only doesn't help them but it also becomes a threat to their countries, especially to Russia and their issues with their own Muslim terrorist problems (Chechnya). China seems more interested in economic growth these days. A catastrophe in the Middle-East would not help their cause.

[worth]

I don't see anywhere where Bolton says Israel should attack Iran. He merely says, if they are going to, they should do it now. There's a difference.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

Bolton is a dellusional wind-bag.

Israel has never needed to be prompted to defend itself, even pro-actively. Say what you will about Israel but they certainly have their finger on the pulse of some of the more radical nation-states around them. If there was a real threat to Israel or the region they would have done something about it already- and that doesn't necessarily mean by way of a military strike.

If Israel were to attack Iran at this point, it could be disastrous for both countries.

Rather than getting their Middle-East attack dog -- The US -- to go after Iran, Israel needs to put pressure on Russia and China to in turn put pressure (economic primarily) on Iran.

I'm not an expert in nuclear energy by any means but I'm pretty sure there are types of reactors that are weapons grade and others that are not weapons grade (like the CANDU reactors IIRC). Are we to presume that the Iranian reactors are weapons grade? Does anyone know for certain?

Fixed your post.

[Huntingwhale]

[Azure]

Well since the US and everyone else thinks leveling sanctions that only make the people already in need suffer is the 'solution'....maybe Israel should be bombing them.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well since the US and everyone else thinks leveling sanctions that only make the people already in need suffer is the 'solution'....maybe Israel should be bombing them.

If you see Israel massing on the Lebanese border, ready to extinguish Hezbollah's Iranian-supplied rockets . . . . . then you might be looking at a strike on Iran.

The two go together.

That's been a constant threat for several decades now. Call me naive but I think there are still some diplomatic measures that can be taken to avoid a large scale (nuclear or 'conventional') war in the Middle-East. I don't believe it's in anyones best interests, Russia and China included, to allow Iran to produce nuclear weapons.

Most of Iran's Islamic neighbours would step out of the way if Israel over-flew their territory and bombed Iranian nuclear facilities.

If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, then its neighbours, like Saudi Arabia, will have to think they do as well . . . . or they'll need a protector and that's probably the USA.

MAD applies to rational people.

I never worried in the 70's and 80's about something nuclear happening between the USA, China or the Soviet Union. MAD essentially assured a global peace or, more precisely, local wars by proxy instead of a global conflageration. MAD has even worked with Pakistan and India, although a close call a few years ago apparently.

The problem with Iran is that you can't be quite sure MAD actually applies since religious fervor - for example the President truly believing he was surrounded by a green glow while addressing the UN a few years ago - trumps rational thought.

When GW Bush 1 was campaigning against Ronald Reagan in the Republican primaries in 1979, he loved telling this joke as the Iranian hostage crisis dragged into 444 days: "What's flat and black and glows all over? Answer: "Iran five minutes after Reagan becomes President."

A few minutes before Reagan became President, Iran released the American hostages.

Does the MAD principle really apply to religious fanatics? Or are the Iranians actually pragmatic? Those are the questions.

For Israel, if MAD actually applies to Iran, they'll have to get used to fighting more in Lebanon and Gaza, the proxy clients of Iran.

Cowperson

[VladtheImpaler]

/\

Good post...