If Israel targets Iranian nuclear sites Iran would give it a lesson which it could not forget forever

[link to www.ynetnews.com]

Saudi paper: Sharon presented Bush with satellite photos, said Israel would not wait forever before attacking
Roee Nahmias

Israel has proposed to the United States to strike Iran on several occasions this year, Saudi newspaper al-Watan reported Sunday morning.


According to the report, the latest proposal was raised during the Knesset Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee’s visit to Washington several days ago, where Committee members apparently attempted to “market one agenda: Launching a war on Iran.”


The newspaper quoted Knesset Member Arieh Eldad saying that “nothing will restrain Iran aside from the use of force” and adding that Teheran’s nuclear project will not end “unless it is convinced it will be destroyed through military force.”


Meanwhile, Knesset Member Yosef Lapid reportedly said threats of sanctions and isolation have no effect on Iran.


“We won’t accept the fact we need to live under the threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb and therefore we feel we should warn our friends we don’t see any solution except for acting on our own,” Lapid said according to the Saudi report.


Israeli deadline


The newspaper says this was not the first time Israel demanded to strike Iran. President Bush rejected Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s offer to use military force during the latter’s latest visit to Washington, the report said.


Sharon reportedly presented Bush with satellite photos of Iran’s nuclear facilities and asked to attack them. The president apparently “coldly” referred him to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who told the PM the U.S. chose to pursue the diplomatic channel, in conjunction with European states, to resolve the problem.


Earlier reports said Sharon informed Washington in a special letter that Iranian nuclear arms would threaten the safety of Israelis more than any other nation. The PM reportedly said Israel would consider postponing military action against Teheran out of consideration for the U.S., but added Israel would not “wait forever.”


According to al-Watan, Israel made it clear that it would only be able to wait until a certain date next year and would strike at Iran if no progress is made by that time.

Wul!!

Was just posting on Aussie´s thread about Israel and the reactor. Don´t look good.


Will Israel Start World War Three?
[link to www.prisonplanet.com]

Sharon needs a good public spanking..

You may find the following facts interesting if you care to take the time to read it. Draw your own conclusions...

It was reported on July 18, 2003 that the IAEA inspectors had detected traces of enriched uranium in the samples taken at Natanz, but Iran said that the source of the trace is the equipment brought to Natanz from elsewhere and bought on the international market. Subsequently, it was announced on September 25 that a trace amount of enriched uranium has also been detected at the Kaalaa-ye Electric Company in the northwest suburb of Tehran, a non-nuclear site (the Company produces watches, as well as certain components for the centrifuges) that the IAEA suspects Iran is using for her nuclear enrichment activities. Since Iran had declared to the IAEA that the instruments at Natanz had been stored at the Kaalaa-ye Electric site before being transported to Natanz, and given that no trace of enriched uranium has been detected anywhere else in Iran, the Kaalaa-ye Electric discovery may actually confirm Iran´s contention regarding the origin of the enriched uranium. But, once again, the situation is not clear, unless Iran provides the IAEA a list of suppliers that provided her with the instruments and equipments.

On September 12, 2003, the 35-member governing board of the IAEA gave Iran an ultimatum until October 31 to prove that her nuclear program is strictly for peaceful purposes, by providing ALL the deatils of her nuclear program. Iran´s reaction was mixed: On one hand, she reacted with indignation, calling the ultimatum "premature" and "unfair," while stating, on the other hand, that she will continue working with the IAEA.

It should be pointed out that even Ms. Melissa Fleming, the spokeswoman for the IAEA, conceded that the ultimatum was "highly unusual" in that it was adopted WITHOUT A VOTE. At the same time, the IAEA itself had conceded that Iran had expanded her cooperation with the Agency, even allowing many sites that are not covered by the NPT, such as the Kaalaa-ye Electric Company, to be inspected. Therefore, the ultimatum has much to do with Iran´s poor international standing and isolation, which are, of course, justified.

Before analyzing the present situation between Iran and the IAEA, we must keep in mind that...

(1) according to the original IAEA safeguard agreements, Iran was not obligated to declare the start of construction of the Natanz facility. These agreements stipulate that, only 180 days before introducing any nuclear material, does Iran have to declare the existence of the facility. Therefore, construction of the undeclared Natanz facility is NOT by itself a vilation of the NPT.

(2) The NPT does allow Iran to legally build any nuclear facility, including one for uranium enrichment, so long as it is declared to, and safeguarded by, the IAEA, and is intended for peaceful purposes.

Keeping these important points in mind, the problematic aspects of Iran´s nuclear program, so far as the IAEA is concerned, are as follows.

(a) The origin of the trace amounts of highly-enriched uranium at Natanz and Kaalaa-ye Electric Company near Tehran is not yet clear. This was already described and discussed above.

(b) Iran declared to the IAEA that since approximately seven weeks ago, she has begun some uranium enrichment activities at Natanz using a single centrifuge. Since this was declared to the IAEA, and because the Natanz facility is now monitored by the IAEA, this activity does not represent a violation of the NPT (although, given the current international conditions, some may regard the timing of this as unfortunate). The important point of contention is: How can Iran be so sure that the centrifuges at Natanz work with high levels of reliability, if no prior (undeclared) tests have been carried out? Iran has countered that she has used modelling and simulation, mentioned above, which is plausible, but does not, of course, exclude the possibility of actual physical tests.

(c) The IAEA has demanded that Iran provide it with all the details of the work at Kaalaa-ye Electric Company. Iran has provided some (but presumably not all) of the details, and has allowed the facility to be visited by the IAEA inspectors, even though this inspection is not covered by the NPT, although, at first, Iran refused to grant the IAEA the permission to visit this site. If Iran does sign the Additional Protocol, then she would have to completely open the facility to the IAEA inspectors.

(d) In 1991, Iran received from China 1,000 kgr of natural uranium hexafluoride, 400 kgr of uranium tetrafluoride (UF_4), and 400 kgr of uranium dioxide (UO_2), without reporting them to the IAEA. The question then is: What happened to these uranium compounds? Iran has declared that some of the compounds have been converted to other uranium compounds, some of which have medical applications, while others may be of dual use. Given that Iranian medical scientists who work in Iran have published the results of their research involving such uranium compounds, Iran´s explanation IS plausible, but does not provide an explanation for the fate of ALL the undecalred uranium compounds.

None of these problems is intractable, and so far as their scientific and technological aspects are concerned, can be addressed to the satisfaction of the IAEA. The main problem is that much of the dispute with the IAEA is political, rather than scientific or technological. To see this, consider the following indisputable facts:

(1) As recognized by the NPT, peaceful use of nuclear technology, and in particular nuclear energy, is Iran´s fundamental right, so long as her nuclear program is completely transparent to the IAEA.

(2) Article 22 of the agreement between Iran and the IAEA allows for an "arbitral tribunal," if there is still any dispute after Iran provides sufficients details of her nuclear program to the IAEA. Therefore, October 31, 2003 is not necessarily a rigid deadline.

It is highly important how Iran responds to the IAEA´s reasonable demands. She can react by dragging her feet, without having any active, efficient, and logical diplomacy, which will eventually result in agreeing to all the IAEA demands but under highly unfavorable circumstances, hence bringing about severe set backs to Iran´s nuclear program, if nothing else (which could include economic sanctions and military threat). Alternatively, Iran can come forward with all the details of her nuclear program, while being firm in demanding assistance for acquiring advanced nuclear technology, in which case the EU, Russia, Japan and the non-aligned countries may help Iran.

=====================

Fast forward to September 3, 2005...

The UN nuclear watchdog said questions remained about Iran´s nuclear program and confirmed Tehran had resumed activities suspended under a deal with the EU, setting the stage for possible referral to the UN Security Council.

The confidential report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the agency was "still not in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran."

The report, authored by IAEA chief Mohammad al-Baradei, said: "In view of the fact that the agency is not yet in a position to clarify some of the important outstanding issues after two and a half years of intensive inspections and investigation, Iran´s full transparency is indispensable and overdue."

In Tehran, Iran´s chief nuclear negotiator said the report contained some negative points but his country would continue to cooperate with the agency.

"This report has both positive and negative points," Ali Larijani told state television. "Because of the close cooperation of Iran with the agency ... fortunately many of the questions have been answered from a legal and technical point of view."

"There are some minor questions remaining and our cooperation with the agency will continue in order to answer those questions," he added.

Among the unanswered questions, according to the report were gaps in the documented development of Iran´s centrifuge program used in uranium enrichment and in what was received, and when, from the black market network headed by Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan.

The report makes it clear that Iran has not been entirely forthcoming.

"Two and a half years have passed and patience is wearing thin," the senior official close to the IAEA said.

Overall, the report confirmed earlier recent revelations that most of the traces of weapons-grade uranium were imported to Iran on equipment from Pakistan that it bought on the black market - even though it said that "it is still not possible at this time to establish a definite conclusion," particularly about the origins of other traces enriched to less than weapons grade.

That finding hurts U.S. arguments that the traces were likely the result of enrichment done in Iran, as part of attempts to make weapons-grade uranium.

But the key issue was uranium conversion - changing raw uranium into gas that then is spun by centrifuges into enriched uranium.

Tehran had angered the EU by resuming uranium processing work last month at a plant in Isfahan - a move which has brought talks between Iran and the EU close to collapse and led EU officials to threaten UN Security Council referral.

The report said Iran was still refusing to allow IAEA inspectors visits to the Parchin military site, where it has been to only one part of what is a huge complex where weapons explosive work is suspected, and to the Lavizan site in Tehran where there is suspicion that enrichment work was carried out and where the soil has been razed.

Confirmation that Iran refused to resume the suspension, which was the cornerstone of a November deal with France, Britain and Germany, would likely prompt the EU to join Washington in pushing for Iran´s case to be referred to the Security Council for punitive action, EU diplomats have said.

The IAEA board of governors demanded on August 11 that Iran resume the suspension and asked Baradei to report on Tehran´s compliance by September 3.

The report says Iran needed to give the IAEA access to all documents, individuals and sites that were relevant to its nuclear program, which Washington says is aimed at developing atomic weapons.

Iran, which denies wanting the bomb, says it has answered almost all of the IAEA´s questions about its atomic activities and shown its ambitions are limited to harnessing nuclear power to generate electricity. The report said Iran´s history of hiding its nuclear activities meant it would take longer to conclude that Tehran was no longer concealing anything.

"In view of that past undeclared nature of significant aspects of Iran´s nuclear program, and its past pattern of concealment, this conclusion can be expected to take longer than in normal circumstances."

Yes, I´ve read that before Eagle, it´s a good article. It may well be that Iran has such a program, but in their shoes, wouldn´t you? US aggression has jump-started the global arms race, Iraq is a prime example. All the US has managed to do is make sure everyone wants them.
Either way, Israel seems determined to take out Bushehr. Iran would never dare harm Israel, Sharon knows that bloody well.

Is it illegal to work on nuclear reactors for power supply and to refine the fissile material to create a bomb?

If so many countries around the world are breaking the "law"

Including the one country that has a large arsenal of weapons and is completely ignored by the IAEA and the USA and UK. That one country that has decided that Iran cannot have this technology and will attack them soon to stop it.

The thing thats really ironic is a few missiles loaded with nerve agents can as much damage as a nuke...

Iran is sabre rattling, and everyone knows it. If Israel bombs Iranian installations, Iran will resort to trying to canvas support form the reset of the Arab/Muslim world, and we all know how united that is, right?

Wul!



Great work as usual.

I see the screaming beagle´s jumped on this one early. Must´ve hit a nerve, Wul. Good going.

How many nations have nuclear weapons? About 20 or so...and we should start a war over Iran getting them, while Israel has had them for 30 years and lied about it the whole time?
Fuck Israel. I hope Iran puts a hurtin on em. Let´s watch this from the sidelines.

Its usually a sure sign when a post on Iran gets peoples attention, there is truth and imminent danger in its contents...

As usual BMG shows his true intelligence by name calling.

<sigh>

=================================

Wul... I agree with your post, just merely trying to point out the POLITICAL motives behind this mess.

Good lets let Israel and Iran destroy each other, and let us stay out of it. I´m not very fond of either, so maybe Iran can procure a couple nukes and they´ll vitrify each other...two problems down.

I really believe if the U.S. had not had such a
prolonged war trying to "free the Iraqis" and it
had gone as they had thought it would, we would
have by now bombed (possibly nuked)the Iranian
possible nuked facilities. Our "free the Iraqis"
is not going well at all and now we have a problem.
The Israelis are pressuring us, of course, to take
action, using the "nuclear card" to blackmail us
into fighting their war for them.

I don´t want anybody to nuke anybody, and I don´t
see how if Israel were to nuke Iran it would start
WWIII. Yes, Russia might nuke Israel but that´s it,
nobody wants their country destroyed while fighting
for another country. It would be a limited nuclear
war, not good for anybody admittedly, but at least
the U.S. would not be destroyed if it stayed out
of it.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Right and wrong 1875. Right that the mess in Iraq is (probably) why Iran hasn´t been attacked yet, and wrong that the US would be allowed to stay out of it.

"Right that the mess in Iraq is (probably) why Iran hasn´t been attacked yet, and wrong that the US would be allowed to stay out of it."

By "allowed" I assume you mean the nearly total
control of our government by the buying and or
coercing of most of our leaders by the jewish
(can we still say that?) faction sympathizers
in this and other countries.

Oh yeah, I´m afraid and nearly sure this is true,
but what a shame the world could be destroyed
because one little insignificant (to my mind)
country had blackmailed the most powerful country
in the world into destroying itself and the world.

Just think 1875, does the world need WWIII or naughty photos of president Bush with a homosexual?

So what you´re saying, essentially, is that you´re insulting all those who served in the 101st Airborne Division, my father included?

Hope you´re not taking the piss out of my budgerigar, either, BMG,dude, coz the poor little soul would be mortified; even if the shades of departed heroes are forever immune to your foul mockery my budgie twitters & chirps in the here & now,

so just f******* watch it, please.

Well, it sure beats Franklin´s choice...

the turkey

Iranians would bag for their existence if Israel attacked them.

>>Iranians would bag for their existence if Israel attacked them.<<

Iran is not Iraq. It´s beyond stupid to think US/Israel could subdue a well-armed and wealthy nation when they cannot subdue a poor sanctioned war-torn and disarmed one. Think Iraq is taking it´s toll on the US in terms of $, credibility and lives? Ha.

well did you know the united ststes pays israel millions of dollors each year to keep the peace over there.but i bet you did know israel takes that money ans buys,buys our senators and congressmen. now you can see how and why they vote the way they do. bribe.

If Israel has commanded Bush to attack, either he attacks or the press will bring him down. That´s how it works. The control is in the press, legal system and financial system. It´s all under Israeli control.

The problem for you if you teach me a lesson that I cannot forget is that I will not forget it and may want to do something about it.

Witness, that´s downright bloody scary, hope like hell you´re wrong....