Article

2004-07-16 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dutchgeek 2004-07-16 15:31|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The USA's involvement in a pre-emptive strike against Iran would also undermine the Bush administration's last vestiges of credibility as an 'honest broker' in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

Where in the hell is Jane's coming up with that? Anyone with half a brain can see that the US has given up on the Paleos, based upon their actions toward Israel, especially with Paleo suicide/homicide booms of Israeli civilians. I am sure that we are providing Israel with as much intel as our satellites and other remote sensors can gather.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2004-07-16 4:09:52 PM|| 2004-07-16 4:09:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 If the USA was to participate in such an operation, Washington's allies would undoubtedly denounce what would be seen as yet another example of dangerous US unilateralism.

Respect meter loo.sing.pow.er

Posted by Dragon Fly 2004-07-16 4:12:24 PM|| 2004-07-16 4:12:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 I think a lot of Jane's writers moonlight at the BBC. Gosh there would be whining, seething and calls for DIRE REVENGE (TM) on the Arab street. BFD. Europe would have their knickers in a twist. Boo Hoo. The Pak's would get an itchy nuke trigger finger. Not likely if they want to live to see tomorrow. Just as with Osirak, the world would bitch publicly but cheer privately.

Posted by remote man 2004-07-16 4:30:25 PM|| 2004-07-16 4:30:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 If the USA was to participate in such an operation, Washington's allies would undoubtedly denounce what would be seen as yet another example of dangerous US unilateralism ... The US administration also faces the dilemma of insisting that Iran has no right to develop nuclear weapons while Israel is believed to have several hundred in its arsenal.

Any risk of "dangerous US unilateralism" is minuscule compared to the potential for nuclear exchange should Iran obtain atomic weapons. How is the outside world able to ignore this glaring fact? Also, there is no "dilemma" about denying Iran weapons while permitting Israel to have them. Unlike Iran, Israel has not avowed to annihilate any of their neighbors.

#1 I am sure that we are providing Israel with as much intel as our satellites and other remote sensors can gather.

I'm not. I think we have capabilities that we do not share, even with the Israelis. That said, I'm confident that we are giving Israel fairly detailed intel, just not everything.

#3 Just as with Osirak, the world would bitch publicly but cheer privately.

And it's precisely this sort of sh!t that's gotta end. Just like Arabs publicly expressing horror at 9-11 and quitely cheering at home, Europe and other putative US allies need to get onboard with crippling rogue nations like Iran or North Korea.

The time is past for petty rivalries when it comes to combating international terrorism. In an age of proliferated nuclear weapons the chance for horrendous slaughter far outweighs any small differences. What was France doing participating with the PRC's recent exercise? Everyone knows that China is proliferating nuclear technology to Iran, yet no one stands up and takes notice.

In the long run, this sort of subterfuge is simply suicidal. Better that America begin unilaterally decapping governments like Iran than run the risk of waiting too long for our supposed allied to get a clue.

Posted by Zenster 2004-07-16 4:41:53 PM|| 2004-07-16 4:41:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Where in the hell is Jane's coming up with that?

What I want to know, is what the hell does Iranian pursuit of The Bomb and a possible joint pre-emptive U.S./Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities have to do with Palestinians?

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-07-16 5:55:38 PM|| 2004-07-16 5:55:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 I just read over at Strategy Page that Israel is taking delivery of new F-16I's that put Iran in range of an attack. They have been receiving 2 per month since February. Call that 10 aircraft. They used 8 to attack Osirak as I recall. Break out the popcorn?

Posted by Zpaz 2004-07-16 9:28:20 PM|| 2004-07-16 9:28:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 what the hell does Iranian pursuit of The Bomb and a possible joint pre-emptive U.S./Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities have to do with Palestinians?

Who funds Hamas?

Posted by rkb 2004-07-16 9:46:07 PM|| 2004-07-16 9:46:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Iranian OPEC oil exports are earn billions which in turn are re-exported to Hamas, Hiz'ballah, Syria and a number of other Shi'ite rooted jihadists around the globe.

Bush will deal with this general pressing geostrategic issue most likely within weeks of being re-elected. Will it be a cake walk? No! But it is an absolute in order to break the back on well financed Shi'ite Islamic terrorism.

The Axis of Terror (Iran-Syria-Lebanon) have at the most 6 months to carry on as 'normal' against our troops in Iraq, bombers attacking, or failing to self detonate against Israelis, plus the scores of other 'infidel' targets' world-wide.

Posted by Mark Espinola 2004-07-16 11:08:21 PM|| 2004-07-16 11:08:21 PM|| Front Page Top

Any risk of "dangerous US unilateralism" is minuscule compared to the potential for nuclear exchange should Iran obtain atomic weapons. How is the outside world able to ignore this glaring fact?

Simple, Zenster. They think the nukes in the hands of terrorists (which includes the Iranian mullahs) would be used against Israel and the US, which they approve of (yes, even the EUnichs do, jealous little bastards that they are). They never think farther ahead about who would be next.

And the Froggie threat to use their nukes doesn't scare the jihadis AT ALL.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-07-16 11:22:02 PM|| 2004-07-16 11:22:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Yikes, is Jane's reduced to this sort of drivel? (though I must say, in its pure form like this, it still is funny) One can get this sort of idiotic recitation of myths and non-facts from NYT/WaPo/Newsweek/ABC/BBC any day of the week -- Jane's used to be for good military geek-stuff.

Posted by Verlaine 2004-07-16 11:27:34 PM|| 2004-07-16 11:27:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 still good for mil news/ stats..just bad on analysis (lately)

Posted by Frank G 2004-07-16 11:29:18 PM|| 2004-07-16 11:29:18 PM|| Front Page Top

16:51 Tom
16:25 Tom
15:43 Anonymous6534
10:11 Anonymous6360
07:04 Howard UK
06:53 Sock Puppet of Doom
06:14 Travis
21:11 cingold
20:33 rex
20:13 cingold
10:16 raptor
09:34 Frank G
09:32 raptor
00:44 Mark Espinola
00:41 CrazyFool
00:36 Zenster
00:09 trailing wife
23:56 rex
23:55 Mike Kozlowski
23:52 Bomb-a-rama
23:43 Mike Kozlowski
23:40 Barbara Skolaut
23:36 A Jackson
23:35 trailing wife