Iran Capable of Hitting Israel

In message , robert
arndt writes
Tom is starting up again with his pro-Iranian BS. Well Tom, say what
you will but history proves you wrong time after time. The Israelis
have both the will to fight total war and the arsenal to win it.

....for as long as the US keeps signing the cheques.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam

(robert arndt) wrote in message . com...

snip

Tom is starting up again with his pro-Iranian BS.

What kind of "pro-Iranian BS"?

You're obviously too limited to understand the difference, yet explain
my post above for "pro-Iranian". By what? By pointing at the fact that
the striking Bushehr will have nothing like effects striking Tuweitha
had?

Well Tom, say what
you will but history proves you wrong time after time.

What kind of BS is this?

How about you first show me that the history proved me wrong -
especially "time after time".

Where has the "history" proved me wrong so far?

The Israelis
have both the will to fight total war and the arsenal to win it. They
have never faltered when the security of the State of Israel has been
in danger. Even in this current intifada running for almost 3 years
now, the Israelis are back to 3-to-1 superiority and killing Hamas
leaders like flies. Yasser Arafat has been effectively neutralized and
his PA in fragments. No one is going to tell Israel what to do in
their region.

But, who is talking here about Intifada and all the other BS you're
bringing into this discussion?

I pointed at the fact that many here - and obviously this includes you
too - think that "striking Bushehr = ending eventual Iranian projects
on the topic of nuclear weapons", because "striking Tuweitha =
destroying Iraqi project for development of nuclear weapons".

That is plain and simple wrong.

Why? I explained that above. If you can't understand what you read,
but consider this for "pro-Iranian BS", sorry, not my fault.


Now Iran wants to mouth off about its missiles and
hatred for Israel. So what? If they are so strong then let THEM make a
move on Israel and see what happens.

If you want some "pro-Iranian BS", here it is:
Who said the Iranians have any aggressive plans against anybody? Can
you at least name me one case the Iranians started some war against
somebody - without being victims of a foreign aggression?

Even the US could not prevent
(and probably wouldnt attempt to block) an overflight mission to
Tehran if Israel was determined to strike that evil nation.

For those in the rear rows: OK, strike Bushehr.

And, what would that bring?

You destroy a commercial light-water reactor, and leave something like
150 other places where the real bombs might actually be built.

Wouldn't you consider yourself stupid to do so?

Or do you expect Israel to send the whole IDF/AF over Saudi Arabia to
strike all the targets it would have to hit in Iran in order to stop
the nuclear projects there?


Dream on Tom.

What am I dreaming about?


Iran will someday pay the price for its membership in the
export-terror business club, just like Iraq.

Given this statement, should I now conclude that every country that
"exports terrorism" is "some day" going to pay for its deeds?

If yes, and you seem to imply this, then the USA and Israel are in the
row far ahead of Iran... Need few examples? I don't know what kind of
"terrorism export" you mean, but there are different sorts, the
leading of which is state-sponsored terrorism. It is undeniable, that
Iranian state-sponsored terrorism hit US targets in the Middle East.
But, I don't remember, just for example, the Iranians coming to the
USA to topple a democratically-ellected government: the USA did so in
Iran, in 1953. I don't remember Iran openly supporting an aggression
against the US soil, the USA did so, during the whole 1980s. I don't
remember the Iranians shooting down a civilian US airliner: the USA
did that too. Finally, I don't remember the Iranians actively
supporting a terrorist organization active on the US soil: the USA did
so (with MEK/MKO) for years.


Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.schifferbooks.com/militar...764316699.html

Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585

On 10 Jul 2003 05:26:44 -0700, Tom Cooper wrote:

I pointed at the fact that many here - and obviously this includes you
too - think that "striking Bushehr = ending eventual Iranian projects
on the topic of nuclear weapons"

But doesn't Iran need Bushehr to produce plutonium? Without it, they
lose the cabability fro a hime-produced bomb, don't they? (Although
I suppose they might be able to buy fissile material from another
country.)


--
Phil
"If only sarcasm could overturn bureaucracies"
-- NTK, commenting on www.cabalamat.org/weblog/art_29.html

"phil hunt" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. ..
On 10 Jul 2003 05:26:44 -0700, Tom Cooper wrote:

I pointed at the fact that many here - and obviously this includes you
too - think that "striking Bushehr = ending eventual Iranian projects
on the topic of nuclear weapons"

But doesn't Iran need Bushehr to produce plutonium? Without it, they
lose the cabability fro a hime-produced bomb, don't they? (Although
I suppose they might be able to buy fissile material from another
country.)

_That_ is the point: it does not.

The reactors at Bushehr stand in no connection to any kind of eventual
Iranian capability to produce plutonium: they will be (or already are)
perfectly capable to do so without the facilities at Bushehr.

LWRs are not ideal for that task any way, as their plutonium-output is too
slow: on the contrary, MTRs and gas-centrifuges are. But, the Iranians do
not have any MTRs, and their centrifuges are somewhere else but in Bushehr.
All that is left that they need is the source: given that they opened their
first Uranium mine earlier this year, this question was obviously solved.

One of the basic lessons from what happend to the Iraqis at Tuweitha, on 30
September 1980, and 7 June 1981 was: do not concentrate all your facilities
at one place.

Given that the Iranians were one of the parties that destroyed Tuweitha, and
that they have certainly learned that lesson, I wonder how can anybody
believe that - after the Iraqis attacked the place for seven times, between
1984 and 1988 - the Iranians would "nevertheless" concentrate all their
nuclear-research facilities (and especially those directly connected to
eventual work on nuclear weapons) at one place, and that again in Bushehr?


Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq; War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.schifferbooks.com/militar...764316699.html

Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
In message , robert
arndt writes
Tom is starting up again with his pro-Iranian BS. Well Tom, say what
you will but history proves you wrong time after time. The Israelis
have both the will to fight total war and the arsenal to win it.

...for as long as the US keeps signing the cheques.

What check did they sign in 1948? And FYI, aid is not a one way
street. Israel has gathered both intelligence and foreign weapon
systems that has been invaluable to the US for decades- far beyond any
monetary value. There is MORE than one reason we support the Jewish
State and it isn't just because of the Jews here in America... so
don't use that old line about check-writing.
Besides, Israel doesn't ask our permission to protect its national
security or its citizens. Recall Entebbe, the Iraqi reactor, Gerald
Bull's assassination, Lebanon, and the current intifada. Israel
doesn't play games- period. The fact that Israel sat out ODS is
because none of the Scuds had CB warheads. If just one did then Israel
would have struck back regardless of US assurances. OIF didn't require
an Israeli effort to remain neutral. Israel warned both Syria and Iran
well in advance not to attempt any secondary war against the Jewish
State or face the consequences. Notice how they did nothing, as
usual... except denounce Israel. Right now, Israel's economy is
suffering and the international pressure to make peace with the
terrorist Palestinians is unbearable. But Israel retains its tough
stance and the US is firmly on Israel's side despite frequent
administration "concerns" over the conflict.
I support Israel and the IDF and don't mind at all giving aid to the
Israelis. The day we stop aiding Israel will be detrimental to the US.
Judgement on the US is already happening since 9/11. Cutting Israel
off would be far worse. It would be seen in Arab eyes as weakness on
our part and a signal that terrorism does pay in the long run.
President Bush won't allow that to happen and neither would any
Republican administration.

Rob
Supporter IFCJ, FIDF, RNC

"Rob van Riel" wrote in message
om...
"Ulf Jørgensen" wrote in message
...
The Israelis have their own ballistic missiles.
Jericho 2 have an alleged range of 1500-2000 km which means there is no
need
to overfly any country.

And those missles don't have to travel through anyone's airspace? I
think the response to such a launch would be just as furious as that
to a strike package flying over.

Rob

I disagree.
What can USA/Iraq or anyone else do to stop a ballisitic missile in
flight??? Absolutely nothing!!
They can of course, afterwards, file a protest to the Israeli ambassador.

Whereas if the Israelis would overfly Iraq or Saudi-Arabia there is a much
bigger chance of detection; and of it being either shot down or forced to
land.
I think such an action would create a lot more anger than a missile launch.

Ulf

"robert arndt" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , robert
arndt writes
Tom is starting up again with his pro-Iranian BS. Well Tom, say what
you will but history proves you wrong time after time. The Israelis
have both the will to fight total war and the arsenal to win it.

...for as long as the US keeps signing the cheques.

What check did they sign in 1948?

Well, Washington was the first state to recognize Israel as independent -
which was, BTW, against a UN resolution...

And FYI, aid is not a one way
street. Israel has gathered both intelligence and foreign weapon
systems that has been invaluable to the US for decades- far beyond any
monetary value.

So what? As if the US haven't got much intel anywhere else? (In Iran, just
for example, which was far more important for the USA in the context of the
Cold War). The USA could have gathered far more intel for far less cost
almost anywhere else. Don't forget that such institutions like "Foreign
Technology Divisions" (the name from the 1980s) exist since the WWI....

There is MORE than one reason we support the Jewish
State and it isn't just because of the Jews here in America... so
don't use that old line about check-writing.

[chuckle]...

Besides, Israel doesn't ask our permission to protect its national
security or its citizens.

That's right. Israel doesn't cares about anything - not even really Israel.
During the 1980s the Israeli were selling US-high-tech to Iran. During the
1990s to China...

Recall Entebbe, the Iraqi reactor, Gerald
Bull's assassination, Lebanon, and the current intifada. Israel
doesn't play games- period.

So, and all the others "play games"?

I guess the US G.I.s in Iraq wouldn't share your opinion...

The fact that Israel sat out ODS is
because none of the Scuds had CB warheads.

No, but because the Israeli gov was said to sit down and shut up.

If just one did then Israel
would have struck back regardless of US assurances.

[caugh & chuckle] Yeah, and spoil everything the USA were actually doing for
Israel...

Israel warned both Syria and Iran
well in advance not to attempt any secondary war against the Jewish
State or face the consequences.

Has anybody asked Israel for its opinion? Haven't you ever noticed that
these countries have also warned Israel, or are you always absent when such
news were reported? Is the whole world turning around Israel, or only the
Middle East - in your opinion?

Notice how they did nothing, as usual... except denounce Israel.

Well, several posts above you complained about the Iranians building a
bombs. Besides, I haven't heard about any official communique either from
Tehran or Damasucs where they explained they will not support the
Palestinians or their terrorists against Israel any more.

Perahps you can decide now if they are doing nothing, or at least something
(especially as opposed by 99% of the "Arab" and "Muslim" world)?

Right now, Israel's economy is
suffering and the international pressure to make peace with the
terrorist Palestinians is unbearable.

Israel's own guilt.

But Israel retains its tough
stance and the US is firmly on Israel's side despite frequent
administration "concerns" over the conflict.

We'll join and sing a poem in that name.

I support Israel and the IDF and don't mind at all giving aid to the
Israelis.

That's your full right: after all, you're living in a democracy.

The day we stop aiding Israel will be detrimental to the US.
Judgement on the US is already happening since 9/11. Cutting Israel
off would be far worse. It would be seen in Arab eyes as weakness on
our part and a signal that terrorism does pay in the long run.

Of course. The USA would probably go down...

President Bush won't allow that to happen and neither would any
Republican administration.

Nor will he be a President forever. One like Reagan, and Israel would be far
more carefull about what its actions...

BTW, Robert,
you still owe me all the answers to my open quesitons. Somehow I still don't
see where I was "spreading pro-Iranian BS", or the "history proves me wrong
time after time"?

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq; War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.schifferbooks.com/militar...764316699.html

Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585

(robert arndt) wrote in message . com...
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
In message , robert
arndt writes
Tom is starting up again with his pro-Iranian BS. Well Tom, say what
you will but history proves you wrong time after time. The Israelis
have both the will to fight total war and the arsenal to win it.

...for as long as the US keeps signing the cheques.

What check did they sign in 1948? And FYI, aid is not a one way
street. Israel has gathered both intelligence and foreign weapon
systems that has been invaluable to the US for decades- far beyond any
monetary value.

Are you sure of that? How many foreign weapons systems have we
obtained from Israel, versus how many did we buy (proving that you can
indeed put a monetary value on such items) from other nations?

There is MORE than one reason we support the Jewish
State and it isn't just because of the Jews here in America... so
don't use that old line about check-writing.

But in fact that line is true enough. Go back and research what it
took to get the Israelis to keep out of ODS (and thereby tearing the
coalition apart). Hint--it was a combination of hard nose politics
(i.e., not providing the requested IFF codes) and money/arms.

Besides, Israel doesn't ask our permission to protect its national
security or its citizens.

They did during ODS...but then again, we paid them for the privaledge.

Recall Entebbe, the Iraqi reactor, Gerald
Bull's assassination, Lebanon, and the current intifada.

And you forgot the case where the Mossad team killed the *wrong* guy
in Norway?

Israel
doesn't play games- period.

I don't know about that. Lebanon in the early 80's was not to well
thought out ahead of time, and resulted in quite a few *Israelis*
being quite ****ed off at their own government.

The fact that Israel sat out ODS is
because none of the Scuds had CB warheads.

And the money. Do a google on it and you might find some interesting
stuff, or IIRC, you can go back and read that post-war book from the
writers at US News and World Report.

If just one did then Israel
would have struck back regardless of US assurances. OIF didn't require
an Israeli effort to remain neutral. Israel warned both Syria and Iran
well in advance not to attempt any secondary war against the Jewish
State or face the consequences. Notice how they did nothing, as
usual... except denounce Israel. Right now, Israel's economy is
suffering and the international pressure to make peace with the
terrorist Palestinians is unbearable.

So, all palestinians are terrorists? Including the current fellow
doing the negotiating on their behalf?

But Israel retains its tough
stance and the US is firmly on Israel's side despite frequent
administration "concerns" over the conflict.

Uhmmm....not *all* USians are quite so staunch in support of Israel,
if you had not noticed. Some of us get rather perturbed every time
they blow up some poor jerk's home because he had the unmitigated gaul
to be related by blood to a suicide bomber. The IDF habit of shooting
stone throwing Palestinian kids, while *never* shooting stone throwing
illegal Israeli settlers (and yes, they too have engaged in stone
throwing) also causes some degree of heartburn.


I support Israel and the IDF and don't mind at all giving aid to the
Israelis.

Fine. Maybe the best solution would be to handle this like we do the
election campaign contributions, with a box to check on the tax form
if you want to provide dollars (lots more than go to that election
program) to Israel, and that way those of us who are opposed to the
idea don't have to contribute to that $14K per Israeli we provide.

The day we stop aiding Israel will be detrimental to the US.
Judgement on the US is already happening since 9/11. Cutting Israel
off would be far worse. It would be seen in Arab eyes as weakness on
our part and a signal that terrorism does pay in the long run.
President Bush won't allow that to happen and neither would any
Republican administration.

Wasn't Bush the one who angered the israelis just a couple of years
back with his vision of a Palestinian state?

Brooks


Rob
Supporter IFCJ, FIDF, RNC

In message , robert
arndt writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
...for as long as the US keeps signing the cheques.

What check did they sign in 1948?

I was more thinking of the last thirty years.

And FYI, aid is not a one way
street. Israel has gathered both intelligence and foreign weapon
systems that has been invaluable to the US for decades- far beyond any
monetary value.

I'm sure the crewmen of the LIBERTY would gladly agree about the Israeli
contribution to US intelligence.

There is MORE than one reason we support the Jewish
State and it isn't just because of the Jews here in America... so
don't use that old line about check-writing.

Why not? Look at the 1973 war, and events subsequent: Israel has learned
a deep dependency on the US. Losing lots of aircraft? Call the US for an
emergency airlift. Losing a war? Get the US to help. Economic trouble?
Persuade the US to increase aid.

Israel used to be a lot more self-sufficient, but times changed.

Besides, Israel doesn't ask our permission to protect its national
security or its citizens.

Yes, I noticed.

The fact that Israel sat out ODS is
because none of the Scuds had CB warheads.

Israel sat out ODS because the US applied a mixture of threats and
bribery: Israeli retaliation would have destroyed the coalition the US
and its allies depended on for action against Hussein.

If just one did then Israel
would have struck back regardless of US assurances.

And that would have got the US thrown out of its Arab bases, with no
Israeli replacements, leaving Hussein in possession of Kuwait (and most
of his WMD, which were much more real then) Not exactly a long-term
winning strategy, which is why Israel didn't follow it.

OIF didn't require
an Israeli effort to remain neutral. Israel warned both Syria and Iran
well in advance not to attempt any secondary war against the Jewish
State or face the consequences. Notice how they did nothing, as
usual... except denounce Israel.

And continue to support assorted terrorist organisations.

Right now, Israel's economy is
suffering and the international pressure to make peace with the
terrorist Palestinians is unbearable. But Israel retains its tough
stance and the US is firmly on Israel's side despite frequent
administration "concerns" over the conflict.

Time will tell how this one plays out.

I support Israel and the IDF and don't mind at all giving aid to the
Israelis. The day we stop aiding Israel will be detrimental to the US.
Judgement on the US is already happening since 9/11. Cutting Israel
off would be far worse. It would be seen in Arab eyes as weakness on
our part and a signal that terrorism does pay in the long run.
President Bush won't allow that to happen and neither would any
Republican administration.

I think you may find yourself disappointed. Nobody's likely to cast
Israel to the wolves, but there's significantly less "Israel, right or
wrong" sentiment to be had.



Rob
Supporter IFCJ, FIDF, RNC

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam

In message - DAN
writes:

Arie Kazachin wrote:

Such increadible missions like attacking an Iraqi reactor or freeing
hostages from Enthebbe look very "sexy" but they have a drawback:
they can only be done once.

Not to mention that the flight path through to Iran has become a long more
complicated, politically, in the last 3 months...


DAN

The last 3 months isn't the issue. The issue are the 22 years that passed
since the Iraqi reactor destruction: long enough for Iran, Lybia and
others to prepare for such an attack and to bury important things deep
enough.

************************************************** ****************************
* Arie Kazachin, Israel, e-mail: *
************************************************** ****************************
NOTE: before replying, leave only letters in my domain-name. Sorry, SPAM trap.
___
.__/ |
| O /
_/ /
| | I HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO !!!
| |
| | |
| | /O\
| _ \_______[|(.)|]_______/
| * / \ o ++ O ++ o
| | |
| |
\ \_)
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\_|