Israel plan to attack Iran with Nukes

Discussion in 'General Survival and Preparedness' started by Factfind, Jan 6, 2007.


  1. Factfind

    Factfind Old Hand

  2. stg58

    stg58 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+ Founding Member

    There is no doubt Israel has made plans for all kinds of contingencies and this is there biggest nightmare, an arab country with nukes.
    But I always wonder who leaked and for what reason.

    Someone inside the Israeli military/government who are against the strike and wants to try and mount political pressure.
    The Israeli's who want to do some saber rattling.

    Or?

    If they do it they will take a huge amount of international heat.
     
  3. Factfind

    Factfind Old Hand

    The introduction of nuclear weapons to the mideast is the wild card here. It may have the effect of galvanizing those untold hundreds of millions of “moderate Muslims” against the west like no other event in history. Or..it may send the message that enough is enough and they will find that moderation is not a bad idea.
    We do live in interesting times.
    Keep your powder dry.
     
  4. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    I like the idea of digging a tunnel with a conventional bomb than following it with the nuke,should cut back on the fallout.

    Think some incredibly brave ( selfless) israeli spec operator will be there to paint a laser on the hole after the conventional munition?Or just a technological solution, some last second mlitary precision gps coord.radioed back?

    I do think tel aviv civilians will suffer a nightmare afterwards ..then I think we are going to see b2's from whiteman peel off from an orbit point over iraq to put "a physics package hurtin" on tehran...Then soviets standing up for Iran?
    I heard during "armegeddon week"on the history channel: top physicist are claiming an exchange of a total of "only " 100 megatons from either side or both would be enough to cause climate consequences for a few years, God help us...don't eat the soylent green ( its the neighbors!!) Soylent blue however; is completely artificial.and "human protein" free.[booze]
     
  5. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    I predicted this back in 1998, and even wrote some editorials for Freedom TV back in 2000 and 2003 on the position of Israel taking on a military standing in the middle east. It wasn't terribly difficult if you follow the money trail. Rule of thumb: whenever you speak of the Israeli government, you are only speaking about the extended arm of the USA.
     
  6. Factfind

    Factfind Old Hand

    Clearly they are strongly influenced by US leadership. That being said Israel is the canary in the mine in the mideast.Regardless what one thinks about the politics of the region, if the Islamofascists are successful in destroying Israel do you think we are far behind?What the Israelis have still and we have appear to have lost is will.

    Iran's President AHMAMEANLITTLMIDGET has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. I think he will eat those words soon. The untold story will be what happens after.
     
  7. TailorMadeHell

    TailorMadeHell Lurking Shadow Creature

    I do not think that any outcome of this will be beneficial except to start a war. I predict there will be no peace negotiations. I think that if Israel nukes Iran, then they will definitely be a target for every extremist hiding in the woodwork. This will be the beginning of a very messy situation. I do not see Israel sitting back allowing Iran to make any nukes. They will hold to their statement that none will be made in Iran.

    They have shown that they will do what is necessary whether those around them like it or not. I think the only thing that they are waiting on is to see if the US will help them when some of their other neighbors attack them. If America helps them they will go ahead with the attack. If America doesn't help, then there is a 50-50 chance.

    Israel is not, nor has it ever shown it's hide cards. They are not as weak as some might wish to believe. They may use the low-yields for this attack though do not think they won't send in the big boys to finish the job if Iran retaliates. In my way of thinking, isn't this a pre-emptive self-defence case? Iran's leader has already threatened them.
     
  8. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    This is a big topic on the evening news on fox( 11p.m)
     
  9. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    Oh please, stop already. You are not convincing anybody with your guesswork. Take a brief look into history and you will find that the United States proliferated Iran. We installed the dictatorship, we provided nuclear capability, and we (along side Israel) will go in to clean up the mess. To the educated on this subject, it means that the power elite now has "justification" to do their deeds. Please don't pretend as though the Israeli state has any justification of its own because they were threatened. We built and funded Israel from the ground up.
     
  10. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    A recent strike by nuclear-armed Israeli Air Force fighter-bombers bound for targets in Iran was turned back after being intercepted by U.S. fighters over Iraq, this reporter has learned.

    Two sources have independently confirmed the encounter, which took place on January 7, 2007. Though the first informant offered few details beyond an initial tip, a second source long-known by this reporter to have well-placed U.S. and “non-U.S.” military and government contacts provided specific information regarding the raid, which was aimed at the radical religious ayatollahs holding ultimate power in Iran.

    Israeli nuclear strikes are not unprecedented. Soon after Desert Storm, U.S. Navy pilots told this reporter in Kuwait how in late 1990 Israel made good on its pledge to respond in kind to WMD attacks by launching nuclear-armed aircraft against Baghdad following a lethal assault on Tel Aviv by Scud missiles tipped with chemical warheads. That air strike was called off when the Americans refused to provide the vital IFF codes needed to fly through U.S.-controlled airspace.

    More here:http://www.willthomas.net/Convergence/Weekly/Israeli_Nuclear_Strike_On_Iran.htm
     
  11. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Info wars is also reporting this:
    http://www.infowars.com/articles/ww3/iran_israeli_nuke_strike_averted_by_us_fighters.htm


    This source added that visiting IAF warplanes are routinely “topped off” by American aerial refueling tankers, but only on condition that the Israeli jets fly a “racetrack” holding pattern—and do not continue “downtown” toward Iran.


    The designated turn back point is the “160 station”—a clearly charted tapline road located 160 kilometers from Baghdad. Any aircraft proceeding beyond this point must declare its intentions. Otherwise, a USAF F-15 will take position off its wingtip. After waggling its own wings to attract attention, if the interloper fails to turn back, the American Eagle “drops behind and gets tone” by locking a Sidewinder anti-aircraft missile onto the offending plane.
    According to this very reliable source, on two previous occasions Israeli fighter-bombers armed with nuclear bombs have headed “downtown” before being turned back over Iraq.

    The January 7th mission, which trespassed beyond 160 station before being recalled by Israeli authorities, comprised three IAF F-16s. Each carried conventional munitions—as well as a single 20-kiloton nuclear bomb.


     
  12. duanet

    duanet Monkey+++

    A good friend is an Iserali paratrooper and many years ago told me a few things I will not forget. He spent a night at Masada guarding the wall as some sort of training-graduation thing and it really stuck in his mind. He said that standing there in the dark, looking down to where the Roman army had been camped and thinking of how they had died rather then surrender was a life changing event. Kind of like if our troops had to walk guard duty at Valley Forge, after they were finaly taught what it really means. The Iserali attitude as I read it was they killed 6 million of us, one by one, and all the rest said that it either wasn't happening, or that they surrived the last event and God willing, they would survive this one. Their new attitude is that if we all have to die in order to save one, then so be it. Thus their actions don't make much sense in our mind set, where we are for the most part willing to give up everything, including your life, for another day of preceived security. The Iserali paratroopers in the capture of some of the Egyptian airfields in one of their wars had no way out except the planes that droped them, and the planes didn't have enough fuel to get back to their bases in Iseral. Could carry men and supplies or fuel, but not both. Kind of like our B-25 raid on Japan. Thus I don't know if the atomic thing is real or not, but I do know that if the Iserali's see things as bad enough, they will not hesitate to use them. We have a neighbor who was in supply during WWII. His job was getting things packed for the invasions, and then unpacking them on the beach and getting them to the invasion force. He did it several times, including Okinawa, and was on Okinawa packing for the invasion of Japan when the abombs were dropped. His only regret, even to this day, was that we didn't have it sooner and how many of his friends would have been alive if we could have done it before Okinawa. Dropping it he said probably saved his life and he knows that if we had invaded Japan we would of lost 100,000's of men. They can second guess the Iserali's on the news, but when it gets down to the "Truman" decision, they will make what they in their own minds think is the right decision and live with it. All we can do is pray to God that it doesn't set off that whole powder keg and destroy us all. History has a habit of hitting us right between the eyes and giving us an education that we don't want to get. During the Cuban missle crisis our military all said that we shouldn't back down and Bobby Kennedy talked his brother into compromising. After the cold war ended, we found out that the Russians already had a good number of missiles with abomb warheads based in Cuba and that their military was telling their leaders that they could win and not to back down. It looks like we were within a few hours of an all out war. Thus prepare for the worst and hope to God that our grandchildren will talk about the latest book about what really happened in Iraq way back in 2007.
     
  13. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    part of this article, pg2:Well this would explain the recent housecleaning of all those centcom generals.

    http://www.willthomas.net/Convergence/Weekly/Israeli_Nuclear_Strike_On_Iran.htm

    SAY WHAT?
    Faced with rising clamor for his own ouster among the American populace, and outright refusal by his top generals to carry out a previously ordered ground attack against Iran using B61-11 nuclear bombs, George Bush continues to defy nearly everyone, while claiming to receive his apocalyptic instructions directly from God. [New Yorker, Apr 17/06]

    Article goes on to say :


    The Washington Post agrees, reporting how “Bush began pondering how best to throttle Shiite expansionism” after the neocon fantasy “of a U.S.-orchestrated transformation of the Middle East had turned into a nightmare of rising Shiite radicalism.” [Washington Post, July 16/06]

    Bush’s closest advisers also blame Syria and Iran for supporting Iraq’s defenders. “Lacking the military and political capacity to expand the conflict beyond Iraq, the Bush administration turned to Israel and its new Prime Minister Ehud Olmert,” DEBKA says.

    By summer 2006, Israeli sources were describing Bush’s obsessive interest in finding a pretext to take down Syria and Iran. Toward this end, he removed the American Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad when that moderate Muslim objected to Bush’s decision to hang Saddam Hussein. (While governor of Texas, Bush set an all-time record for hangings there.)
    Parry also notes that on November 8, two days after Donald Rumsfeld’s memo urging a “minimalist” U.S. presence in Iraq, and the day after American voters threw the Republican majority out of the House and Senate, Bush fired his Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld “for going wobbly on the war.” [Consortium News Jan 8/07]

    On January 4, 2007 Bush replaced his two top Middle East commanders after Generals John Abizaid and George Casey opposed his military escalation in Iraq. Alluding to upcoming attacks on Iran and Syria, Bush stated, “I’m not predicting any particular theater, but I am predicting that it’s going to take a while for the ideology of liberty to finally triumph…” [Consortium News Jan 8/07]
     
  14. jim

    jim Monkey+++ Founding Member

    We don't hang in Texas (regretably), we inject.

    jim
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7