| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| IDF says Iran will have nukes within six months |
| 2007-07-12 |
| NATO says Israel must ‘go it alone’ According to the IDF, Iran will be able to produce nuclear weapons within six months. NATO says Israel must ‘go it alone’ according to Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman. The IDF Military Intelligence (MI) assessment was reported Tuesday to the Knesset and included a concrete assessment determining that Iran could cross the technological threshold required to produce nuclear weapons in the next 6-12 months and possess an operational warhead by the middle of 2009. The assessment is at odds with US estimates that put the date between 2010 and 2013. Both agree, however, that military strikes could set back the technology for years. IDF MI also is of the opinion that sanctions against Iran have not weakened the regime, because huge oil reserves still proivide all the money necessary to neutralize any pressure created by the international community. The assessment also revealed that Israel’s withdrawals – from Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005 – have added precedents and solidified belief throughout the Middle East that armed struggle can achieve the destruction of Israel within this generation. Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman (Yisrael Beiteinu party), whose government portfolio was created specifically to deal with the Iranian threat, met with NATO’s Assistant Secretary-General Alexandro Minoto Rizo and the European Union’s representative Franco Partini earlier this week. Lieberman reported that NATO’s senior officials said Israel should not assume that the international community will stop Iran just to help Israel. “Israel should prevent the threat, herself, and should not expect support of other countries,” Lieberman reported as the conclusions reached at the meeting. “NATO is stuck in Afghanistan and European and American troops are wallowing in the Iraqi quagmire, which is something that is going to prevent the leaders of countries in Europe and America from deciding on the use of force to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities,” he said. "Winds of Chamberlain are blowing in Europe," Lieberman told Army Radio, referring to that leader’s conciliatory policy toward the Nazis in WWII. "When I hear from a respected prime minister like [Italian Prime Minister] Romano Prodi that Israel should agree to a peaceful Iranian nuclear program, it seems like something surreal. The political situation is such that they are trying to turn this into our problem alone." Lieberman said that although Europe or the US could not be relied upon to attack Iran on Israel’s behalf, they would support Israel’s actions. “If we start military operations against Iran alone, then Europe and the US will support us,” he said. |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #17 So far there have been few consequences to Iran for conducting war via proxies, or supplying weapons to our enemies, or developing their nuclear capability. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2007-07-12 18:38 |
| #16 It has been one of my perpetual challenges to Rantburg that we here manage to identify some sort of functional deterrent to Islamic terrorism. You have to admit to some facts that simply do not exist in modern Western wordview. (a) The basic unit among Muslims is not an individual but a family---any retaliation for Jihadism should be addressed against perp's (especially if he's a suicide boomer) entire family. IMO, Bush could've won War Against Terror (but not against Jihad) by exterminating Bin Laden's entire family---but you've to get all of them. It's a matter of eliminating his blood, not individual sex, age, or competence to take responsibility. I've specified terrorism and not Jihad, because (b) Muslims as a group support Jihad because their experience in the last few hundred years is that their societies cannot compete, as societies, against infidels' societies. In the last few decades Muslims living in the West found out that they cannot compete as individuals against infidels. That is, they must conquer or perish. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-07-12 17:58 |
| #15 To be honest, I don't know how effective MAD will be to a culture that worships death. Your observation is entirely salient to this discussion, AHM. To quote the late Ayatollah Khomeini's speech at Qom in 1980: "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah; For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world." As can be seen, Islam is so wide spread and dispersed that obliterating a single country would have little effect upon the ummah as a whole. This is why the strategy mentioned by Mrs. Davis and Jack is Back! is so important. Only the complete and total extermination of this world's entire Muslim population can represent an actual deterrent to a death cult. If there is no one to worship Allah left alive, then Islam no longer exists. It would be one of the few disincentives that would give Islam pause to reconsider. It has been one of my perpetual challenges to Rantburg that we here manage to identify some sort of functional deterrent to Islamic terrorism. Total annihilation still stands as one of the only viable methods. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-07-12 14:24 |
| #14 So ... if it is that bad for Israel... when are THEY going to do something about it. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-07-12 14:08 |
| #13 To be honest, I don't know how effective MAD will be to a culture that worships death. The Sauds aren't as likely to pull the trigger despite MAD, but you know Ahm-a-dinnerjacket would have no qualms about assuring the demise of his own people. These aren't Rational Russians we are dealing with, Muslims are insane. |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2007-07-12 13:07 |
| #12 Jihad and banging your head on the ground several times a day are basic to Islam. So is making the pilgrimage to Mecca. At some point that could become impossible, or at least impossible to survive for long afterwards. This idiots could nuke it themselves (they do seem to have problems with 'work accidents') or create a state of vengeful wrath where we do it for them. I'm not looking forward to it, but they should at least be aware of the possibility as they make their plans (though logic and cause-effect relations have never been their strengths.) |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-07-12 11:55 |
| #11 if the Saudis know we wipe them out based on what Iran or Pakistan does it will make a difference in attitude towards these states. This is something that Mrs. Davis suggested many years ago and I agree wholeheartedly. We need to place responsibility for fighting terrorism squarely back into Islam's court. If the MME (Muslim Middle East) knew that their continued collective existence on this earth hinged upon stopping any and all further terrorist atrocities, jihad would be snuffed out like a candle in a typhoon. Islam must be made to feel the West's pain. End of story. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-07-12 11:30 |
| #10 You know its basically simple. You tell Iran and the world, that if one nuclear device explodes anywhere, we will promptly destroy you and every muslim state in the universe. Indonesia included. Just tell them that MAD only applies to them. Let them fret and steam and let the Euros go nuts but if the Saudis know we wipe them out based on what Iran or Pakistan does it will make a difference in attitude towards these states. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2007-07-12 10:51 |
| #9 I got a song by Pat Travers that answers what must happen in Iran... OldSpook: Thanks for that blast from my past! |
| Posted by: xbalanke 2007-07-12 10:31 |
| #8 We are a whipping boy, true. But tribal and ethnic hatreds will trump out us anyday. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-07-12 10:19 |
| #7 What BrerRabbit said. I still hold to my prediction that the first nuclear exchange will be between Middle Eastern countries. I think you're far too optimistic, Darth, unless one of those Middle Eastern countries is Israel. Islamic hatred of America runs too deep and cuts across all sectarian lines to such an extent that there is little to convince me the USA will not be hit first. Rest assured that a nuclear armed Middle East will certainly immolate itself. As Wretchard notes in his "Three Conjectures": Even if Islam killed every non-Muslim on earth they would almost certainly continue to kill each other with their new-found weaponry. Revenge bombings between rival groups and wars between different Islamic factions are the recurring theme of history. Long before 3,000 New Yorkers died on September 11, Iraq and Iran killed 500,000 Muslims between them. The greatest threat to Muslims is radical Islam; and the greatest threat of all is a radical Islam armed with weapons of mass destruction. Just because Islam is its own worst enemy in no way imaginable precludes the likelihood that they will first stab at us from Hell's heart. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-07-12 09:46 |
| #6 Iran is gonna be a nuclear power. There is no stopping it since the west doesn't have the will to stop it. Saudi will quickly follow, since the Persians are a traditional enemy. Syria too will try to buy nukes from Iran to counter Israel. Egypt will go nuclear to counter SA. Things will get ugly real fast. I still hold to my prediction that the first nuclear exchange will be between Middle Eastern countries. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-07-12 09:19 |
| #5 Its obvious Iran will have a weapon unless they are stopped and convinced as a country to not pursue having one. The answer then is for us to pick the time and place and attack and not wait till we are forced to react. |
| Posted by: BrerRabbit 2007-07-12 07:50 |
| #4 Will Iran demonstrate its nuclear capability before launching conventional attacks against Israel (& Iraq?) in order to deter counter-attacks, at least by the US? Or will they launch conventional attacks once the bombs are ready, and when they are counter-attacked, use that as an 'excuse' to nuke Tel Aviv? I vote on the former. Too risky to bet your nukes will work without having tested (ask Kimmie). |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-07-12 07:38 |
| #3 A six-month timeline fits better with the behavior of Iran and its proxies than a longer timeline. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-07-12 05:39 |
| #2 Nuclearized Weaponized Radical Iran = Nuclearized Weaponized Radical Islamism = USA-West will inevitably face Nuclear-WMD Terror on their own soil. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-07-12 03:15 |
| #1 I got a song by Pat Travers that answers what must happen in Iran.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DnpR4zr6TY |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2007-07-12 01:45 |