ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.
Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.
The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb.
Under the plans, conventional laser-guided bombs would open “tunnels” into the targets. “Mini-nukes” would then immediately be fired into a plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce the risk of radioactive fallout.
“As soon as the green light is given, it will be one mission, one strike and the Iranian nuclear project will be demolished,” said one of the sources.
The plans, disclosed to The Sunday Times last week, have been prompted in part by the Israeli intelligence service Mossad’s assessment that Iran is on the verge of producing enough enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons within two years.
[…]
Israel has identified three prime targets south of Tehran which are believed to be involved in Iran’s nuclear programme:
# Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges are being installed for uranium enrichment
# A uranium conversion facility near Isfahan where, according to a statement by an Iranian vice-president last week, 250 tons of gas for the enrichment process have been stored in tunnels
# A heavy water reactor at Arak, which may in future produce enough plutonium for a bomb
Israeli officials believe that destroying all three sites would delay Iran’s nuclear programme indefinitely and prevent them from having to live in fear of a “second Holocaust”.
h/t to reader “Charles”.
This dovetails with news that an admiral has been moved into CentCom- Ralph Peters;
WORD that Adm. William Fallon will move laterally from our Pacific Command to take charge of Central Command – responsible for the Middle East – while two ground wars rage in the region baffled the media.
Why put a swabbie in charge of grunt operations?
There’s a one-word answer: Iran.
ASSIGNING a Navy avia tor and combat veteran to oversee our military operations in the Persian Gulf makes perfect sense when seen as a preparatory step for striking Iran’s nuclear-weapons facilities – if that becomes necessary.
While the Air Force would deliver the heaviest tonnage of ordnance in a campaign to frustrate Tehran’s quest for nukes, the toughest strategic missions would fall to our Navy. Iran would seek to retaliate asymmetrically by attacking oil platforms and tankers, closing the Strait of Hormuz – and trying to hit oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates.
Only the U.S. Navy – hopefully, with Royal Navy and Aussie vessels underway beside us – could keep the oil flowing to a thirsty world.
In short, the toughest side of an offensive operation against Iran would be the defensive aspects – requiring virtually every air and sea capability we could muster. (Incidentally, an additional U.S. carrier battle group is now headed for the Gulf; Britain and Australia are also strengthening their naval forces in the region.)
Not only did Adm. Fallon command a carrier air wing during Operation Desert Storm, he also did shore duty at a joint headquarters in Saudi Arabia. He knows the complexity and treacherousness of the Middle East first-hand.
Related (to say the least) …. Iran News – Ahmadinejad: Iran soon to celebrate nuclear victory.
A reminder – Memri is a good place to drop in for the view from the other side of the divide.
Like I’ve said earlier – Amadmanjihad
Who wrote this Times article? Or, another example of Islamic Kitman, Taqiyya? Are we dupes?
“Anyone reading the Sunday Times story and is waiting for the nukes to start dropping any moment can take a deep breath and relax. There are several reasons to doubt that such an attack is truly imminent or even imaginable.
First and foremost – one must consider the source of this story. The Sunday Times journalist in question Uzi Mahnaimi, is a controversial figure, who co-authored a book with Bassam Abu Sharif, former senior adviser to Yasser Arafat and PLO press officer.”
The story is bogus and the journalist is well known liar when it comes to Israel. I’ve got a link.
Cherniak: How do you know for absolute sure this story is “bogus”?
nuclear deterrence has 3 essential related aspects:
– motivation. self defence is the biggest motivator and best justification in any conflict.
– credibility, you have to have the capacity to deliver what you have threatened to do or its nothing but comical bluster.
– you MUST announce the threat of retaliation, ie you ARE going to answer in kind.
the first time I used nuclear deterrence was around 9 or 10.
I got so godam fed up being roughed up by the ‘sand box bully’ crowd right under the noses of the playground supervisors I brought my mother’s 9″ sewing scissors with me one day and busied myself brandishing them and ANNOUNCING I would stab the next person who picked a fight with me.
you can imaging the reaction that got.
weeks and months and many years later, reflecting on the fact the bullying incidents plummeted after that I realized the beautious exquisite essence of nuclear deterrence: leveling the threat in the described manner *is the very reason YOU DONT HAVE TO CARRY IT OUT* its all about credibility. this is what Israel is counting on.
you tap into the fear and sense of self preservation in the opponent. now they have to consider the odds of them getting hurt bad and is it that important to them to hurt you first. and that whatever you do, you do with a clear conscience and if serious injury should happen to the agressor they have only themselves to blame for initiating the assault.
you leverage that element of uncertainty. it is why WW III never came out of the cold war; both sides KNEW they would get hurt REAL BAD if they struck the first blow.
Ive used it since as well in street confrontations and other typical circumstances, the trick is to convey a full intention to inflict the maximum violence and injury you can *regardless* of who’s left standing.
and since then I also realized nuclear deterrence ONLY works against a rational thinking opponent who experiences normal sense of self preservation and dread at the thought of serious harm.
does this apply to n korea? iran? we shall see.