Biden: US will not stand in Israel's way on Iranian issue

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
The Ayatollahs have framed the current mindset of hardcore leaders in Iran. Just a few days ago the Ayotollah said the views expressed by Ajad on foreign policy issues were his own and called the protedts against the elections as a Zionist conspiracy.
Ajad maybe a puppet, but his policies are those of the Ayatollahs. Puppets cannot have views and policies of their own.
 

prahladh

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
864
Likes
152
Will there be a fallout if the uranium is still not enriched and Israelis attack. Either Israel have to attack before they start with enrichment or sit ducks.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
ONGC Videsh and Reliance Petrochemicals own many oil wells in Iran. What would happen to them in case of war?
Oil wells will not be a target in a war. None were targetted during the Iraq war.
There will not be an occupation. Just air strikes to cripple the Iranian nuke program if not destroy it completely.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
US over here is playing smart. It alway have a policy of "Ek Teer Say Do Nishan" or you can say "Saap mare aur laathi bhe na tutai". In this case Iran will be destroyed and US will not suffer any damage or loss with respect to money, men, material or image. All looses would be suffered by Israel.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,876
Likes
48,564
Country flag
Iran may not be destroyed only setback, and it may make their will to acquire nukes that much greater and also there would be reactions from countries that have investments in US from the middle east who could dump some assets and send US into economic turmoil as well as reactions from Iranian allies syria and Lebanon, and Iran also has strong support from China and Russia in UNSC, Israel truly is in a very difficult position.
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
Oil wells will not be a target in a war. None were targetted during the Iraq war.
There will not be an occupation. Just air strikes to cripple the Iranian nuke program if not destroy it completely.
Any attack on Iran by anyone means burning the whole middle east and direct effects on the world economy . The whole world is under the grip of recession and trying to come out and on that any war in Middle East means more chaos .

Air strikes against Iran means counter attack by Missles .
 

Ratus Ratus

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
114
Likes
0
Will there be a fallout if the uranium is still not enriched and Israelis attack. Either Israel have to attack before they start with enrichment or sit ducks.
They have started.. So it is an issue.
Also there is more than one site and they are not just sitting about on the surface. Iran learned from the Iraq incident.
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
They have started.. So it is an issue.
Also there is more than one site and they are not just sitting about on the surface. Iran learned from the Iraq incident.
Yes Iranian Scientists have mastered the Enriching technology and according to IAEA there is no prove that Iran is having any weapons programme . If anyone strikes on Iran's Nuclear sites that time Iran can divert its Nuclear programme .

Brazil ,South Korea and Japan can even enrich and on that South Africa and Argentine are going to start enrichment under IAEA .

Enrichment is not any issue . here some big powers doesnt want Iran to have this enrichment process and Case of Iran is no different from that of Brazil .
 

Ratus Ratus

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
114
Likes
0
I-G:
I think you may have missed my point.

I was replying to this:
"Will there be a fallout if the uranium is still not enriched and Israelis attack"

This is where the issue arises.

Enrichment, as such, is not any issue, the fallout of any dust cloud, from an attack, if there is a cloud of sorts is the issue.
 

youngindian

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,365
Likes
77
Country flag
Kingdom denies deal with Israel

Tuesday 7 July 2009 (14 Rajab 1430)

JEDDAH: Saudi Arabia on Monday denied a British newspaper report that it had established contacts with Israel and allowed Tel Aviv to use its airspace in the event of airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“A responsible source expressed the Kingdom’s surprise at and condemnation of the publication of such false reports that go against the Kingdom’s clear and firm policies toward its relations with the Israeli occupation authorities and of not allowing the use of its territory or airspace to attack another country,” the Saudi Press Agency said.

Earlier, Israel also denied the report carried by The Sunday Times that Saudi officials had secretly agreed to this arrangement.

The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the report was “completely false and baseless.”

The Times report quoting unnamed diplomatic sources came amid mounting speculation in foreign and local media of a possible Israeli attack on Iran. The Kingdom denied a similar media report last month that it intends to allow Israeli military planes to fly over its airspace.


Kingdom denies deal with Israel
 

youngindian

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,365
Likes
77
Country flag
US not giving Israel 'green light' to attack Iran

Jul 6 05:57 PM US/Eastern

The Obama administration poured cold water Monday on any notion it is giving Israel the green light to attack Iran or that it is reconsidering plans to engage diplomatically with the Islamic republic.

Vice President Joe Biden said in an interview broadcast Sunday that the United States would not stand in the way of Israel in its dealings with Iran's nuclear ambitions.

But State Department spokesman Ian Kelly rebuffed suggestions from reporters that Biden could be seen as giving the Jewish state a green light to attack Iran, which it views as an existential threat.

"I certainly would not want to give a green light to any kind of military action," Kelly said, repeating Biden's point that Washington considered Israel a "sovereign country" with a right to make its own military decisions.

"We're not going to dictate its actions," Kelly added.

"We're also committed to Israel's security. And we share Israel's deep concerns about Iran's nuclear program," the spokesman said.

He also refuted any idea that President Barack Obama's administration would drop its policy to engage diplomatically with Iran.

"I wouldn't read into it any more than what you see, then, as I said, that we respect Israel's sovereignty," Kelly said when asked if Biden's comments indicated the administration is reconsidering its policy toward Iran.

Analysts say Iran's crackdown on demonstrators disputing the June 12 presidential election has made it harder for the Obama administration to pursue diplomatic engagement with Iran.

In his interview with ABC television, Biden said: "Israel can determine for itself -- it's a sovereign nation -- what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else."

"We cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination, that they're existentially threatened," he said.

But Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, speaking on "Fox News Sunday," warned of the dangers posed by any military strike against Iran, even if military options should be left on the table.

Obama has said he wants to see progress on his diplomatic outreach to Iran by year's end, while not excluding a "range of steps," including tougher sanctions, if Tehran continued its controversial nuclear drive.

Hawkish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not ruled out a possible military strike against Iran.


US not giving Israel 'green light' to attack Iran
 

youngindian

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,365
Likes
77
Country flag
Israel: Iran speeds up missile production

Published: July 6, 2009 at 1:30 PM


TEL AVIV, Israel, July 6 (UPI) -- Iran is driving to produce up to 1,000 long-range ballistic missiles with a range of 1,550 miles, as well as 500 mobile launchers, over the next six years, according to Israeli military experts.


"The Iranians are making great efforts to obtains a significant number of missiles," according to Tal Inbar, head of the Space Research Center near Tel Aviv.

"They already talk of how one of the ways they will overcome (Israel's) missile defense systems is by firing salvoes of missiles."

Iran's current production capabilities are not known with any great exactitude, but these have been concerned primarily with the manufacture of Shehab-3 intermediate range ballistic missiles.

The Israelis, who see Iran's nuclear and missile programs as an existential threat, claim that Iran's missile development is more advanced than the West believes.

At present, the liquid-fueled Shehab is the mainstay of the Islamic Republic's strategic missile forces. Tehran is believed to have deployed 100-200 of these weapons, which have an estimated range of 1,250 miles.

But with the successful May 20 launch of a new ballistic missile, the solid-fuel Sajjil-2, with a reported range of 1,200 miles, Western specialists believe that Iran is now on the threshold of producing a new generation of long-range missiles.

It is likely that Iran will concentrate its production capabilities on the new missile. Solid-fuel missiles can be launched faster than liquid-fueled systems, which can take up to an hour to fuel.

Thus solid-fuel missiles are harder to detect in launch mode than liquid-fueled weapons, and thus less vulnerable to pre-emptive strikes.

A third ballistic missile, the Ashura, also solid-fueled, was unveiled in 2007 and test-fired in 2008. The Jerusalem Post reported on May 18 that the two-stage Ashura was believed to have entered production, possibly to replace the Shaheb-3.

However, some Western experts believe that the two-stage Sajjil-2 -- Sajjil-1 was test-fired in November 2008 -- may be another name for the Ashura, intended to confuse the United States and Israel about Iran's missile program.

Still, recent assessments of Iranian capabilities by two major think tanks have sought to downplay the missile threat posed by Tehran.

The EastWest Institute in New York, a non-partisan organization that focuses on global challenges, said Iran would not have a long-range weapon capable of delivering nuclear warheads for many years.

The six U.S. and six Russian scientists who authored the report released May 19 said that Iran might develop a missile with a nuclear warhead and a 1,200-mile range in six to eight years.

But they concluded that it was "virtually impossible" to predict how long it would take to produce a modern intercontinental ballistic missile.

Without considerable outside assistance and technology, it would be "at least 10 to 15 years," they said, noting that there was no evidence that the Tehran regime has even decided to go for an intercontinental ballistic missile.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies in London noted that with the Sajjil launch, "Iran appears to have established the industrial infrastructure and technological foundation to begin efforts, on its own, to support the eventual development, design and production of much larger, more powerful rocket motors.

"If so, these developments are similar to those achieved by Tehran in the nuclear arena, where Iranian engineers have mastered the ability to enrich uranium sufficiently to power a civilian nuclear reactor, and established the wherewithal to produce highly enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb in the future, if so desired."

However, the analysis cautioned that considerable obstacles remain before Iran can achieve assembly-line production of ballistic missiles.

"Before being able to deploy the Sajjil missile, Iran would first need to establish a production line for solid-fuel rocket motors to strict performance criteria," it said.

"This would require many static test firings and test launches over the next three to five years. … Missile advances will not occur suddenly."


Israel: Iran speeds up missile production - UPI.com
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
I-G:
I think you may have missed my point.

I was replying to this:
"Will there be a fallout if the uranium is still not enriched and Israelis attack"

This is where the issue arises.

Enrichment, as such, is not any issue, the fallout of any dust cloud, from an attack, if there is a cloud of sorts is the issue.
yes its an issue .. any attack on Iranian nuclear sites means whole middle East will burn . Iran will try to destroy Dimona Nuclear reactor which again can cause more damage .
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
1000 missiles in 6 years is quite a lot. Does Iran have that kind of capability? i dont think so.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
They want to scare their government into getting what they want.
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
They want to scare their government into getting what they want.
its nothing but propaganda from Israeli side . Israelis are very desperate now and trying to convince Arab regimes that Iran is big danger for them .
 

youngindian

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,365
Likes
77
Country flag
Israel turns to cyberware to foil Iran nukes

Last update - 18:06 07/07/2009



In the late 1990s, a computer specialist from the Shin Bet security service hacked into the mainframe of the Pi Glilot fuel depot north of Tel Aviv.

It was meant to be a routine test of safeguards at the strategic site. But it also tipped off Israel to the potential such hi-tech infiltrations offered for real sabotage.

"Once inside the Pi Glilot system, we suddenly realized that, aside from accessing secret data, we could also set off deliberate explosions, just by programming a re-route of the pipelines," said a veteran of the Shin Bet drill. Advertisement


So began a cyberwarfare project which, a decade on, is seen by independent experts as the likely new vanguard of Israel's efforts to foil Iran's nuclear ambitions.

The appeal of cyber attacks was boosted, Israeli sources say, by the limited feasibility of conventional air strikes on the distant and fortified Iranian atomic facilities, and by U.S. reluctance to countenance another open war in the Middle East.

"We came to the conclusion that, for our purposes, a key Iranian vulnerability is in its on-line information," said one recently retired security cabinet member, using a generic term for digital networks. "We have acted accordingly."

Cyberwarfare teams nestle deep within Israel's spy agencies, which have rich experience in traditional sabotage techniques and are cloaked in official secrecy and censorship.

They can draw on the know-how of Israeli commercial firms that are among the world's hi-tech leaders and whose staff are often veterans of elite military intelligence computer units.

"To judge by my interaction with Israeli experts in various international forums, Israel can definitely be assumed to have advanced cyber-attack capabilities," said Scott Borg, director of the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, which advises various Washington agencies on cyber security.

Technolytics Institute, an American consultancy, last year rated Israel the sixth-biggest "cyber warfare threat", after China, Russia, Iran, France and extremist/terrorist groups".

The United States is in the process of setting up a "Cyber Command" to oversee Pentagon operations, though officials have described its mandate as protective, rather than offensive.

Asked to speculate about how Israel might target Iran, Borg said malware - a commonly used abbreviation for "malicious software" - could be inserted to corrupt, commandeer or crash the controls of sensitive sites like uranium enrichment plants.

Such attacks could be immediate, he said. Or they might be latent, with the malware loitering unseen and awaiting an external trigger, or pre-set to strike automatically when the infected facility reaches a more critical level of activity.

As Iran's nuclear assets would probably be isolated from outside computers, hackers would be unable to access them directly, Borg said. Israeli agents would have to conceal the malware in software used by the Iranians or discreetly plant it on portable hardware brought in, unknowingly, by technicians.

"A contaminated USB stick would be enough," Borg said.

Ali Ashtari, an Iranian businessman executed as an Israeli spy last year, was convicted of supplying tainted communications equipment for one of Iran's secret military projects.

Iranian media quoted a security official as saying that Ashtari's actions "led to the defeat of the project with irreversible damage." Israel declined all comment on the case.

"Cyberwar has the advantage of being clandestine and deniable," Borg said, noting Israel's considerations in the face of an Iranian nuclear program that Tehran insists is peaceful.

"But its effectiveness is hard to gauge, because the targeted network can often conceal the extent of damage or even fake the symptoms of damage. Military strikes, by contrast, have an instantly quantifiable physical effect."

Israel may be open to a more overt strain of cyberwarfare. Tony Skinner of Jane's Defence Weekly cited Israeli sources as saying that Israel's 2007 bombing of an alleged atomic reactor in Syria was preceded by a cyber attack which neutralized ground radars and anti-aircraft batteries.

"State of War," a 2006 book by New York Times reporter James Risen, recounted a short-lived plan by the CIA and the Mossad to fry the power lines of an Iranian nuclear facility using a smuggled electromagnetic-pulse (EMP) device.

A massive, nation-wide EMP attack on Iran could be affected by detonating a nuclear device at atmospheric height. But while Israel is assumed to have the region's only atomic arms, most experts believe they would be used only in a war of last resort.

Israel turns to cyberware to foil Iran nukes - Haaretz - Israel News
 

deltacamelately

Professional
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
134
Likes
6
Sir, air strike is the only option. What's interesting is that Biden was silent on the issue of granting over flight to Israel over Iraq. Does that mean he is open to it?
But another thought that cones to my mind is that it could be that it's part of the game to put pressure on Iran by letting it believe a strike is on it's way if it doesnt cooperate.
Yusuf,

Airstrikes doesn't fits in the scheme of things. Israel lacks the legs to carry any worthwhile operation over such distances. Many reasons-
Range, Route, RISTA, Refuel, SAMs, Iranian Interceptors..
And most crucially the geo-political fallouts.
Missile barrages aren't doing the job anyway, the accuracy isn't there and most of the critical sites are undercover and hardened.
And even if Israel goes for a Nuclear 1st strike to obliterate Iranian nuclear aspirations, the consequences will be devastating for Israel.

You have to understand that end of the day, the USA is the one and ONLY guarantee of a free and safe Israel. Iran might or might not be its existential threat but in all probablities, the US is its existential guarantee. Any move which pisses off the Yanks will strip Israel of this guarantee...

Imagine a Israel, post unilateral premptive strikes on Iran, devoured of US political support, devoured of US military supplies topped with multiple sanctions, alone amidst half a dozen angry and blood seeking Muslim countries backed by two major powers, at the receiving end of one missile salvo after another by a furious Iran.

Not a nice prospect imo.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Agreed with all you points Major. A lot of discussions have taken place here and elsewhere as well regarding this.
But if tomorrow Iran has a working bomb with its crazy regime, who will guarantee Israel its security from a trigger happy mad man? If the Iranians chose to self destruct then nothing will stop them

Obviously we are talking here in speculation, but im sure Israel would be considering all options.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top