(IsraelNN.com) Mossad head Meir Dagan informed the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Monday that Iran will achieve the ability to wage war with a nuclear weapon within three years.
In his report to the committee, Dagan warned that Iran remains the single most dangerous threat to the existence of the State of Israel, not only due to its nuclear capabilities, but also to its ability to influence regional enemies such as Hamas, Hizbullah and Syria.
Past security officials have said that Iran provides funds, training, equipment and weapons to Hizbullah, Hamas and Syria, as well as to the Islamic Jihad terrorist group, which receives Iranian support through Hizbullah.
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Ahmadinejad Proposes Relocating the 'Zionist State'
THE MIDDLE EAST MEDIA RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Special Dispatch Series - No. 1748
October 25, 2007 No.1748
Iranian President Ahmadinejad Reiterates Proposal for 'Zionist State' in Canada or Alaska, Suggests International Committee of 'Truth-Seekers' Examine Holocaust, 9/11
The following are excerpts from a public address delivered by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which aired on Channel 1, Iranian TV, on October 6, 2007.
To view this clip visit: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1585.htm.
To view more clips of Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad visit: http://memritv.org/subject/en/358.htm
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "The Western governments that bear the standard of secularism, anti-religion, and lack of respect for the rights of the peoples, and for the followers of all Abrahamic religions, themselves consider the defense of the Zionist regime to be the most sacred value in the world. Zionism and the existence of the Zionist regime are so important to them that they do not even allow the raising of questions about the preparations and pretexts that led to the establishment of this regime."
[...]
"In some of these superpowers, anyone who runs for president must first officially declare that he is committed to supporting Zionism and the Zionist regime, and he must prove this by his actions."
[...]
"If any country in Latin America, Africa, or Asia wants to sign an agreement with any Western country, it must first recognize the Zionist regime, support it, and maintain economic ties with it."
[...]
"They have created a certain organization, something sacred, a sacred phenomenon no one can oppose. They have all committed themselves to supporting this. This [Zionism] is the axis around which they unite. As a result, all the wars, animosity, and crimes of the Western countries have moved to other countries. They have moved these wars away from themselves, and by uniting around this [Zionist] regime, they have transferred the wars to other peoples."[...]
The Leaders of Several Western Superpowers "Created Something Called Zionism" and "Invented the So-Called 'Genocide of the Jews'"
"The leaders of several Western superpowers comprise the Zionist party. They are the ones who pull the strings. They created something called Zionism, and invented the so-called 'oppression' of the Jews. They themselves created the background for this, and today as well, it is they who are running the show."
[...]
"After World War II, they invented the so-called 'genocide of the Jews.' Throughout Europe, and in countries under the control of the Western superpowers, they established an anti-Jewish movement. By means of propaganda and a certain psychological atmosphere, and by using the issue of the so-called 'crematoria,' they created the sense that the European Jews were oppressed. They used the pretext that some Jews were oppressed and were harmed during World War II and by the wave of anti-Judaism in order to lay the foundations for the establishment of the Zionist regime. Later, of course, they called it 'the massacre of the Jews,' and only after World War II did they call it 'the Holocaust.' They made this issue more sacred than all the sacred things in the world."[...]
"You Have Turned This Phenomenon... Which You Yourself Invented After The War, And Which You Began Calling 'Holocaust' Only In 1975 – Into Something So Sacred...?"
"How can it possibly be that you have turned this phenomenon – a phenomenon which you yourself invented after the war, and which you began calling 'Holocaust' only in 1975 – into something so sacred that nobody is permitted to even raise questions about it? In World War II, there were several incidents similar to a plane crash. Later, under the pretext of these incidents, they have been perpetrating an ongoing genocide of historic proportions in Palestine. They have been perpetrating an ongoing crime in Palestine."
[...]
"They permit themselves, under the pretext of the Holocaust, to commit every type of crime. They even built secret prisons in Europe, and they kidnap people and publicly announce that they would kill them."
[...]
"Why don't you allow the deciphering of the code of the World War II 'black box?' Why don't you permit this? We want to help you. Let's open that 'black box,' and see what is happening there and who caused it. If people were killed there, who were they? Who was responsible? Who supported this? Let's examine the role played by other peoples in all of this. If the leaders of the Western countries are not members of the Zionist party, they should enable an international team of truth-seekers to unlock the mysteries of this phenomenon. What really happened there? Under the pretext of what happened, crimes are still being committed, and the [Nobel] Peace Prize is awarded to the Zionist criminals."
[...]
"It happened in Europe, so we proposed allocating them a place in Europe. They might say, as some of them already did: 'Oh really?! We worked so hard to drive those Jews out of Europe, and now you want us to take them back?' We say: 'Fine, you can't bear the presence of these Zionists in your region, but you want to impose them upon the peoples of this region? You have vast territories. Give them part of Canada or Alaska, so they can establish a state. After all, you give them $30 or 40 billion in aid every year – so give them that money in order to establish their state there.'"
[...]
"An Incident Occurred on September 11, and Look What They Did Afterwards... They Are Creating Another Incident Like the Holocaust"
"Politicians who dream at night of reconciliation with the Zionist regime should know that the Palestinian people is steadfast, the Iranian people and the free peoples of the world are steadfast, and they will not rest for a day until the entire land of Palestine is liberated."
[...]
"An incident occurred on September 11, and look what they did afterwards. They used this pretext to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq, they killed dozens of thousands of peoples, and they want to continue to kill. They are creating another incident like the Holocaust. We advise them not to create something sacred, not to fabricate another sacred lie, and to allow a group of truth-seekers to get to the bottom of things, to identify and expose those behind it, and get it over with."
Special Dispatch Series - No. 1748
October 25, 2007 No.1748
Iranian President Ahmadinejad Reiterates Proposal for 'Zionist State' in Canada or Alaska, Suggests International Committee of 'Truth-Seekers' Examine Holocaust, 9/11
The following are excerpts from a public address delivered by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which aired on Channel 1, Iranian TV, on October 6, 2007.
To view this clip visit: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1585.htm.
To view more clips of Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad visit: http://memritv.org/subject/en/358.htm
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "The Western governments that bear the standard of secularism, anti-religion, and lack of respect for the rights of the peoples, and for the followers of all Abrahamic religions, themselves consider the defense of the Zionist regime to be the most sacred value in the world. Zionism and the existence of the Zionist regime are so important to them that they do not even allow the raising of questions about the preparations and pretexts that led to the establishment of this regime."
[...]
"In some of these superpowers, anyone who runs for president must first officially declare that he is committed to supporting Zionism and the Zionist regime, and he must prove this by his actions."
[...]
"If any country in Latin America, Africa, or Asia wants to sign an agreement with any Western country, it must first recognize the Zionist regime, support it, and maintain economic ties with it."
[...]
"They have created a certain organization, something sacred, a sacred phenomenon no one can oppose. They have all committed themselves to supporting this. This [Zionism] is the axis around which they unite. As a result, all the wars, animosity, and crimes of the Western countries have moved to other countries. They have moved these wars away from themselves, and by uniting around this [Zionist] regime, they have transferred the wars to other peoples."[...]
The Leaders of Several Western Superpowers "Created Something Called Zionism" and "Invented the So-Called 'Genocide of the Jews'"
"The leaders of several Western superpowers comprise the Zionist party. They are the ones who pull the strings. They created something called Zionism, and invented the so-called 'oppression' of the Jews. They themselves created the background for this, and today as well, it is they who are running the show."
[...]
"After World War II, they invented the so-called 'genocide of the Jews.' Throughout Europe, and in countries under the control of the Western superpowers, they established an anti-Jewish movement. By means of propaganda and a certain psychological atmosphere, and by using the issue of the so-called 'crematoria,' they created the sense that the European Jews were oppressed. They used the pretext that some Jews were oppressed and were harmed during World War II and by the wave of anti-Judaism in order to lay the foundations for the establishment of the Zionist regime. Later, of course, they called it 'the massacre of the Jews,' and only after World War II did they call it 'the Holocaust.' They made this issue more sacred than all the sacred things in the world."[...]
"You Have Turned This Phenomenon... Which You Yourself Invented After The War, And Which You Began Calling 'Holocaust' Only In 1975 – Into Something So Sacred...?"
"How can it possibly be that you have turned this phenomenon – a phenomenon which you yourself invented after the war, and which you began calling 'Holocaust' only in 1975 – into something so sacred that nobody is permitted to even raise questions about it? In World War II, there were several incidents similar to a plane crash. Later, under the pretext of these incidents, they have been perpetrating an ongoing genocide of historic proportions in Palestine. They have been perpetrating an ongoing crime in Palestine."
[...]
"They permit themselves, under the pretext of the Holocaust, to commit every type of crime. They even built secret prisons in Europe, and they kidnap people and publicly announce that they would kill them."
[...]
"Why don't you allow the deciphering of the code of the World War II 'black box?' Why don't you permit this? We want to help you. Let's open that 'black box,' and see what is happening there and who caused it. If people were killed there, who were they? Who was responsible? Who supported this? Let's examine the role played by other peoples in all of this. If the leaders of the Western countries are not members of the Zionist party, they should enable an international team of truth-seekers to unlock the mysteries of this phenomenon. What really happened there? Under the pretext of what happened, crimes are still being committed, and the [Nobel] Peace Prize is awarded to the Zionist criminals."
[...]
"It happened in Europe, so we proposed allocating them a place in Europe. They might say, as some of them already did: 'Oh really?! We worked so hard to drive those Jews out of Europe, and now you want us to take them back?' We say: 'Fine, you can't bear the presence of these Zionists in your region, but you want to impose them upon the peoples of this region? You have vast territories. Give them part of Canada or Alaska, so they can establish a state. After all, you give them $30 or 40 billion in aid every year – so give them that money in order to establish their state there.'"
[...]
"An Incident Occurred on September 11, and Look What They Did Afterwards... They Are Creating Another Incident Like the Holocaust"
"Politicians who dream at night of reconciliation with the Zionist regime should know that the Palestinian people is steadfast, the Iranian people and the free peoples of the world are steadfast, and they will not rest for a day until the entire land of Palestine is liberated."
[...]
"An incident occurred on September 11, and look what they did afterwards. They used this pretext to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq, they killed dozens of thousands of peoples, and they want to continue to kill. They are creating another incident like the Holocaust. We advise them not to create something sacred, not to fabricate another sacred lie, and to allow a group of truth-seekers to get to the bottom of things, to identify and expose those behind it, and get it over with."
Monday, September 24, 2007
Israeli Commandos Seized Nuclear Material in Syria, claims London Times
Israeli Commandos Seized Nuclear Material in Syria, claims London Times
Saturday, September 22nd, 2007
Snatched: Israeli commandos ‘nuclear’ raid
Uzi Mahnaimi, Tel Aviv, Sarah Baxter, Washington, and Michael Sheridan
September 23, 2007
Times of London
ISRAELI commandos from the elite Sayeret Matkal unit – almost certainly dressed in Syrian uniforms – made their way stealthily towards a secret military compound near Dayr az-Zawr in northern Syria. They were looking for proof that Syria and North Korea were collaborating on a nuclear programme.
Israel had been surveying the site for months, according to Washington and Israeli sources. President George W Bush was told during the summer that Israeli intelligence suggested North Korean personnel and nuclear-related material were at the Syrian site.
Israel was determined not to take any chances with its neighbour. Following the example set by its raid on an Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak 1981, it drew up plans to bomb the Syrian compound.
But Washington was not satisfied. It demanded clear evidence of nuclear-related activities before giving the operation its blessing. The task of the commandos was to provide it.
Today the site near Dayr az-Zawr lies in ruins after it was pounded by Israeli F15Is on September 6. Before the Israelis issued the order to strike, the commandos had secretly seized samples of nuclear material and taken them back into Israel for examination by scientists, the sources say. A laboratory confirmed that the unspecified material was North Korean in origin. America approved an attack.
News of the secret ground raid is the latest piece of the jigsaw to emerge about the mysterious Israeli airstrike. Israel has imposed a news blackout, but has not disguised its satisfaction with the mission. The incident also reveals the extent of the cooperation between America and Israel over nuclear-related security issues in the Middle East. The attack on what Israeli defence sources now call the “North Korean project” appears to be part of a wider, secret war against the nonconventional weapons ambitions of Syria and North Korea which, along with Iran, appears to have been forging a new “axis of evil”.
The operation was personally directed by Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister, who is said to have been largely preoccupied with it since taking up his post on June 18.
It was the ideal mission for Barak, Israel’s most decorated soldier and legendary former commander of the Sayeret Matkal, which shares the motto “Who Dares Wins” with Britain’s SAS and specialises in intelligence-gathering deep behind enemy lines.
President Bush refused to comment on the air attack last week, but warned North Korea that “the exportation of information and/or materials” could jeopard-ise plans to give North Korea food aid, fuel and diplomatic recognition in exchange for ending its nuclear programmes.
Diplomats in North Korea and China said they believed a number of North Koreans were killed in the raid, noting that ballistic missile technicians and military scientists had been working for some time with the Syrians.
A senior Syrian official, Sayeed Elias Daoud, director of the Syrian Arab Ba’ath party, flew to North Korea via Beijing last Thursday, reinforcing the belief among foreign diplomats that the two nations are coordinating their response to the Israeli strike.
The growing assumption that North Korea suffered direct casualties in the raid appears to be based largely on the regime’s unusually strident propaganda on an issue far from home. But there were also indications of conversations between Chinese and North Korean officials and intelligence reports reaching Asian governments that supported the same conclusion, diplomats said.
Jane’s Defence Weekly reported last week that dozens of Iranian engineers and Syrians were killed in July attempting to load a chemical warhead containing mustard gas onto a Scud missile. The Scuds and warheads are of North Korean design and possibly manufacture, and there are recent reports that North Koreans were helping the Syrians to attach airburst chemical weapons to warheads.
Yesterday, while Israelis were observing Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, the military was on high alert after Syria promised to retaliate for the September 6 raid. An Israeli intelligence expert said: “Syria has retaliated in the past for much smaller humiliations, but they will choose the place, the time and the target.”
Critics of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, believe he has shown poor judgment since succeeding his father Hafez, Syria’s long-time dictator, in 2000. According to David Schenker, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, he has provoked the enmity of almost all Syria’s neighbours and turned his country into a “client” of Iran.
Barak’s return to government after making a fortune in private business was critical to the Israeli operation. Military experts believe it could not have taken place under Amir Peretz, the defence minister who was forced from the post after last year’s ill-fated war in Lebanon. “Barak gave Olmert the confidence needed for such a dangerous operation,” said one insider.
The unusual silence about the airstrikes amazed Israelis, who are used to talkative politicians. But it did not surprise the defence community. “Most Israeli special operations remain unknown,” said a defence source.
When Menachem Begin, then Israeli prime minister, broke the news of the 1981 Osirak raid, he was accused of trying to help his Likud party’s prospects in forthcoming elections.
Benjamin Netanyahu, who leads Likud today, faced similar criticism last week when he ignored the news blackout, revealed that he had backed the decision to strike and said he had congratulated Olmert. “I was a partner from the start,” he claimed.
But details of the raid are still tantalisingly incomplete. Some analysts in America are perplexed by photographs of a fuel tank said to have been dropped from an Israeli jet on its return journey over Turkey. It appears to be relatively undamaged. Could it have been planted to sow confusion about the route taken by the Israeli F-15I pilots?
More importantly, questions remain about the precise nature of the material seized and about Syria’s intentions. Was Syria hiding North Korean nuclear equipment while Pyongyang prepared for six-party talks aimed at securing an end to its nuclear weapons programme in return for security guarantees and aid? Did Syria want to arm its own Scuds with a nuclear device?
Or could the material have been destined for Iran as John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, has suggested? And just how deep is Syrian and North Korean nuclear cooperation anyway?
China abruptly postponed a session of the nuclear disarmament talks last week because it feared America might confront the North Koreans over their weapons deals with Syria, according to sources close to the Chinese foreign ministry. Negotiations have been rescheduled for this Thursday in Beijing after assurances were given that all sides wished them to be “constructive”.
Christopher Hill, the US State Department negotiator, is said to have persuaded the White House that the talks offered a realistic chance to accomplish a peace treaty formally ending the 1950-1953 Korean war, in which more than 50,000 Americans died. A peace deal of that magnitude would be a coup for Bush – but only if the North Koreans genuinely abandon their nuclear programmes.
The outlines of a long-term arms relationship between the North Koreans and the Syrians are now being reexamined by intelligence experts in several capitals. Diplomats in Pyongyang have said they believe reports that about a dozen Syrian technicians were killed in a massive explosion and railway crash in North Korea on April 22, 2004.
Teams of military personnel wearing protective suits were seen removing debris from the section of the train in which the Syrians were travelling, according to a report quoting military sources that appeared in a Japanese newspaper. Their bodies were flown home by a Syrian military cargo plane that was spotted shortly after the explosion at Pyongyang airport.
In December last year, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Seyassah quoted European intelligence sources in Brussels as saying that Syria was engaged in an advanced nuclear programme in its northeastern province.
Most diplomats and experts dismiss the idea that Syria could master the technical and industrial knowhow to make its own nuclear devices. The vital question is whether North Korea could have transferred some of its estimated 55 kilos of weapons-grade plutonium to Syria. Six to eight kilos are enough for one rudimentary bomb.
“If it is proved that Kim Jong-il sold fissile material to Syria in breach of every red line the Americans have drawn for him, what does that mean?” asked one official. The results of tests on whatever the Israelis may have seized from the Syrian site could therefore be of enormous significance.
The Israeli army has so far declined to comment on the attack. However, several days afterwards, at a gathering marking the Jewish new year, the commander-in-chief of the Israeli military shook hands with and congratulated his generals. The scene was broadcast on Israeli television. After the fiasco in Lebanon last year, it was regarded as a sign that “we’re back in business, guys”.
Saturday, September 22nd, 2007
Snatched: Israeli commandos ‘nuclear’ raid
Uzi Mahnaimi, Tel Aviv, Sarah Baxter, Washington, and Michael Sheridan
September 23, 2007
Times of London
ISRAELI commandos from the elite Sayeret Matkal unit – almost certainly dressed in Syrian uniforms – made their way stealthily towards a secret military compound near Dayr az-Zawr in northern Syria. They were looking for proof that Syria and North Korea were collaborating on a nuclear programme.
Israel had been surveying the site for months, according to Washington and Israeli sources. President George W Bush was told during the summer that Israeli intelligence suggested North Korean personnel and nuclear-related material were at the Syrian site.
Israel was determined not to take any chances with its neighbour. Following the example set by its raid on an Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak 1981, it drew up plans to bomb the Syrian compound.
But Washington was not satisfied. It demanded clear evidence of nuclear-related activities before giving the operation its blessing. The task of the commandos was to provide it.
Today the site near Dayr az-Zawr lies in ruins after it was pounded by Israeli F15Is on September 6. Before the Israelis issued the order to strike, the commandos had secretly seized samples of nuclear material and taken them back into Israel for examination by scientists, the sources say. A laboratory confirmed that the unspecified material was North Korean in origin. America approved an attack.
News of the secret ground raid is the latest piece of the jigsaw to emerge about the mysterious Israeli airstrike. Israel has imposed a news blackout, but has not disguised its satisfaction with the mission. The incident also reveals the extent of the cooperation between America and Israel over nuclear-related security issues in the Middle East. The attack on what Israeli defence sources now call the “North Korean project” appears to be part of a wider, secret war against the nonconventional weapons ambitions of Syria and North Korea which, along with Iran, appears to have been forging a new “axis of evil”.
The operation was personally directed by Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister, who is said to have been largely preoccupied with it since taking up his post on June 18.
It was the ideal mission for Barak, Israel’s most decorated soldier and legendary former commander of the Sayeret Matkal, which shares the motto “Who Dares Wins” with Britain’s SAS and specialises in intelligence-gathering deep behind enemy lines.
President Bush refused to comment on the air attack last week, but warned North Korea that “the exportation of information and/or materials” could jeopard-ise plans to give North Korea food aid, fuel and diplomatic recognition in exchange for ending its nuclear programmes.
Diplomats in North Korea and China said they believed a number of North Koreans were killed in the raid, noting that ballistic missile technicians and military scientists had been working for some time with the Syrians.
A senior Syrian official, Sayeed Elias Daoud, director of the Syrian Arab Ba’ath party, flew to North Korea via Beijing last Thursday, reinforcing the belief among foreign diplomats that the two nations are coordinating their response to the Israeli strike.
The growing assumption that North Korea suffered direct casualties in the raid appears to be based largely on the regime’s unusually strident propaganda on an issue far from home. But there were also indications of conversations between Chinese and North Korean officials and intelligence reports reaching Asian governments that supported the same conclusion, diplomats said.
Jane’s Defence Weekly reported last week that dozens of Iranian engineers and Syrians were killed in July attempting to load a chemical warhead containing mustard gas onto a Scud missile. The Scuds and warheads are of North Korean design and possibly manufacture, and there are recent reports that North Koreans were helping the Syrians to attach airburst chemical weapons to warheads.
Yesterday, while Israelis were observing Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, the military was on high alert after Syria promised to retaliate for the September 6 raid. An Israeli intelligence expert said: “Syria has retaliated in the past for much smaller humiliations, but they will choose the place, the time and the target.”
Critics of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, believe he has shown poor judgment since succeeding his father Hafez, Syria’s long-time dictator, in 2000. According to David Schenker, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, he has provoked the enmity of almost all Syria’s neighbours and turned his country into a “client” of Iran.
Barak’s return to government after making a fortune in private business was critical to the Israeli operation. Military experts believe it could not have taken place under Amir Peretz, the defence minister who was forced from the post after last year’s ill-fated war in Lebanon. “Barak gave Olmert the confidence needed for such a dangerous operation,” said one insider.
The unusual silence about the airstrikes amazed Israelis, who are used to talkative politicians. But it did not surprise the defence community. “Most Israeli special operations remain unknown,” said a defence source.
When Menachem Begin, then Israeli prime minister, broke the news of the 1981 Osirak raid, he was accused of trying to help his Likud party’s prospects in forthcoming elections.
Benjamin Netanyahu, who leads Likud today, faced similar criticism last week when he ignored the news blackout, revealed that he had backed the decision to strike and said he had congratulated Olmert. “I was a partner from the start,” he claimed.
But details of the raid are still tantalisingly incomplete. Some analysts in America are perplexed by photographs of a fuel tank said to have been dropped from an Israeli jet on its return journey over Turkey. It appears to be relatively undamaged. Could it have been planted to sow confusion about the route taken by the Israeli F-15I pilots?
More importantly, questions remain about the precise nature of the material seized and about Syria’s intentions. Was Syria hiding North Korean nuclear equipment while Pyongyang prepared for six-party talks aimed at securing an end to its nuclear weapons programme in return for security guarantees and aid? Did Syria want to arm its own Scuds with a nuclear device?
Or could the material have been destined for Iran as John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, has suggested? And just how deep is Syrian and North Korean nuclear cooperation anyway?
China abruptly postponed a session of the nuclear disarmament talks last week because it feared America might confront the North Koreans over their weapons deals with Syria, according to sources close to the Chinese foreign ministry. Negotiations have been rescheduled for this Thursday in Beijing after assurances were given that all sides wished them to be “constructive”.
Christopher Hill, the US State Department negotiator, is said to have persuaded the White House that the talks offered a realistic chance to accomplish a peace treaty formally ending the 1950-1953 Korean war, in which more than 50,000 Americans died. A peace deal of that magnitude would be a coup for Bush – but only if the North Koreans genuinely abandon their nuclear programmes.
The outlines of a long-term arms relationship between the North Koreans and the Syrians are now being reexamined by intelligence experts in several capitals. Diplomats in Pyongyang have said they believe reports that about a dozen Syrian technicians were killed in a massive explosion and railway crash in North Korea on April 22, 2004.
Teams of military personnel wearing protective suits were seen removing debris from the section of the train in which the Syrians were travelling, according to a report quoting military sources that appeared in a Japanese newspaper. Their bodies were flown home by a Syrian military cargo plane that was spotted shortly after the explosion at Pyongyang airport.
In December last year, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Seyassah quoted European intelligence sources in Brussels as saying that Syria was engaged in an advanced nuclear programme in its northeastern province.
Most diplomats and experts dismiss the idea that Syria could master the technical and industrial knowhow to make its own nuclear devices. The vital question is whether North Korea could have transferred some of its estimated 55 kilos of weapons-grade plutonium to Syria. Six to eight kilos are enough for one rudimentary bomb.
“If it is proved that Kim Jong-il sold fissile material to Syria in breach of every red line the Americans have drawn for him, what does that mean?” asked one official. The results of tests on whatever the Israelis may have seized from the Syrian site could therefore be of enormous significance.
The Israeli army has so far declined to comment on the attack. However, several days afterwards, at a gathering marking the Jewish new year, the commander-in-chief of the Israeli military shook hands with and congratulated his generals. The scene was broadcast on Israeli television. After the fiasco in Lebanon last year, it was regarded as a sign that “we’re back in business, guys”.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Israeli Jets vs. Iranian Nukes - article by Daniel Pipes
Israeli Jets vs. Iranian Nukes - article by Daniel Pipes
From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at: www.danielpipes.org/article/4634
Israeli Jets vs. Iranian Nukes
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
June 12, 2007
[With slight differences from the NY Sun version]
Barring a "catastrophic development," Middle East Newsline reports, George Bush has decided not to attack Iran. An administration source explains that Washington deems Iran's cooperation "needed for a withdrawal [of U.S. forces] from Iraq."
If correct, this implies the Jewish state stands alone against a regime that threatens to "wipe Israel off the map" and is building the nuclear weapons to do so. Israeli leaders are hinting that their patience is running out; Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz just warned that "diplomatic efforts should bear results by the end of 2007."
Can the Israel Defense Forces in fact disrupt Iran's nuclear program?
Top secret analyses from intelligence agencies normally reply to such a question. But talented outsiders, using open sources, can also try their hand. Whitney Raas and Austin Long studied this problem at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and published their impressive analysis, "Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities," in the journal International Security.
Raas and Long focus exclusively on feasibility, not political desirability or strategic ramifications: Were the Israeli national command to decide to damage the Iranian infrastructure, could its forces accomplish this mission? The authors consider five components of a successful strike:
The Natanz uranium enrichment facility.
Intelligence: To impede the production of fissile material requires incapacitating only three facilities of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. In ascending order of importance, these are: the heavy water plant and plutonium production reactors under construction at Arak, a uranium conversion facility in Isfahan, and a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. Destroying the Natanz facility in particular, they note, "is critical to impeding Iran's progress toward nuclearization."
Ordnance: To damage all three facilities with reasonable confidence requires – given their size, their being underground, the weapons available to the Israeli forces, and other factors – twenty-four 5,000-lb. weapons and twenty-four 2,000-lb. weapons.
An F-15I
Platforms: Noting the "odd amalgamation of technologies" available to the Iranians and the limitations of their fighter planes and ground defenses to stand up to the high-tech Israeli air force, Raas-Long calculate that the IDF needs a relatively small strike package of twenty-five F-15Is and twenty-five F-16Is.
Routes: Israeli jets can reach their targets via three paths: Turkey to the north, Jordan and Iraq in the middle, or Saudi Arabia to the south. In terms of fuel and cargo, the distances in all three cases are manageable.
Defense forces: Rather than predict the outcome of an Israeli-Iranian confrontation, the authors calculate how many out of the 50 Israeli planes would have to reach their three targets for the operation to succeed. They figure 24 planes must reach Natanz, 6 to Isfahan, and 5 to Arak, or 35 all together. Turned around, that means the Iranian defenders minimally must stop 16 of 50 planes, or one-third of the strike force. The authors consider this attrition rate "considerable" for Natanz and "almost unimaginable" for the other two targets.
In all, Raas-Long find that the relentless modernization of Israel's air force gives it "the capability to destroy even well-hardened targets in Iran with some degree of confidence." Comparing an Iranian operation to Israel's 1981 attack on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor, which was a complete success, they find this one "would appear to be no more risky" than the earlier one.
The great question mark hanging over the operation, one which the authors do not speculate about, is whether any of the Turkish, Jordanian, American, or Saudi governments would acquiesce to Israeli penetration of their air spaces. (Iraq, recall, is under American control). Unless the Israelis win advance permission to cross these territories, their jets might have to fight their way to Iran. More than any other factor, this one imperils the entire project. (The IDF could reduce this problem by flying along borders, for example, the Turkey-Syria one, permitting both countries en route to claim Israeli planes were in the other fellow's air space.)
Raas-Long imply but do not state that the IDF could reach Kharg Island, through which over 90 percent of Iranian oil is exported, heavily damaging the Iranian economy.
That Israeli forces have "a reasonable chance of success" unilaterally to destroy key Iranian nuclear facilities could help deter Tehran from proceeding with its weapon program. The Raas-Long study, therefore, makes a diplomatic deal more likely. Its results deserve the widest possible dissemination.
Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org), director of the Middle East Forum, taught for two years at the U.S. Naval War College.
From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at: www.danielpipes.org/article/4634
From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at: www.danielpipes.org/article/4634
Israeli Jets vs. Iranian Nukes
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
June 12, 2007
[With slight differences from the NY Sun version]
Barring a "catastrophic development," Middle East Newsline reports, George Bush has decided not to attack Iran. An administration source explains that Washington deems Iran's cooperation "needed for a withdrawal [of U.S. forces] from Iraq."
If correct, this implies the Jewish state stands alone against a regime that threatens to "wipe Israel off the map" and is building the nuclear weapons to do so. Israeli leaders are hinting that their patience is running out; Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz just warned that "diplomatic efforts should bear results by the end of 2007."
Can the Israel Defense Forces in fact disrupt Iran's nuclear program?
Top secret analyses from intelligence agencies normally reply to such a question. But talented outsiders, using open sources, can also try their hand. Whitney Raas and Austin Long studied this problem at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and published their impressive analysis, "Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities," in the journal International Security.
Raas and Long focus exclusively on feasibility, not political desirability or strategic ramifications: Were the Israeli national command to decide to damage the Iranian infrastructure, could its forces accomplish this mission? The authors consider five components of a successful strike:
The Natanz uranium enrichment facility.
Intelligence: To impede the production of fissile material requires incapacitating only three facilities of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. In ascending order of importance, these are: the heavy water plant and plutonium production reactors under construction at Arak, a uranium conversion facility in Isfahan, and a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. Destroying the Natanz facility in particular, they note, "is critical to impeding Iran's progress toward nuclearization."
Ordnance: To damage all three facilities with reasonable confidence requires – given their size, their being underground, the weapons available to the Israeli forces, and other factors – twenty-four 5,000-lb. weapons and twenty-four 2,000-lb. weapons.
An F-15I
Platforms: Noting the "odd amalgamation of technologies" available to the Iranians and the limitations of their fighter planes and ground defenses to stand up to the high-tech Israeli air force, Raas-Long calculate that the IDF needs a relatively small strike package of twenty-five F-15Is and twenty-five F-16Is.
Routes: Israeli jets can reach their targets via three paths: Turkey to the north, Jordan and Iraq in the middle, or Saudi Arabia to the south. In terms of fuel and cargo, the distances in all three cases are manageable.
Defense forces: Rather than predict the outcome of an Israeli-Iranian confrontation, the authors calculate how many out of the 50 Israeli planes would have to reach their three targets for the operation to succeed. They figure 24 planes must reach Natanz, 6 to Isfahan, and 5 to Arak, or 35 all together. Turned around, that means the Iranian defenders minimally must stop 16 of 50 planes, or one-third of the strike force. The authors consider this attrition rate "considerable" for Natanz and "almost unimaginable" for the other two targets.
In all, Raas-Long find that the relentless modernization of Israel's air force gives it "the capability to destroy even well-hardened targets in Iran with some degree of confidence." Comparing an Iranian operation to Israel's 1981 attack on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor, which was a complete success, they find this one "would appear to be no more risky" than the earlier one.
The great question mark hanging over the operation, one which the authors do not speculate about, is whether any of the Turkish, Jordanian, American, or Saudi governments would acquiesce to Israeli penetration of their air spaces. (Iraq, recall, is under American control). Unless the Israelis win advance permission to cross these territories, their jets might have to fight their way to Iran. More than any other factor, this one imperils the entire project. (The IDF could reduce this problem by flying along borders, for example, the Turkey-Syria one, permitting both countries en route to claim Israeli planes were in the other fellow's air space.)
Raas-Long imply but do not state that the IDF could reach Kharg Island, through which over 90 percent of Iranian oil is exported, heavily damaging the Iranian economy.
That Israeli forces have "a reasonable chance of success" unilaterally to destroy key Iranian nuclear facilities could help deter Tehran from proceeding with its weapon program. The Raas-Long study, therefore, makes a diplomatic deal more likely. Its results deserve the widest possible dissemination.
Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org), director of the Middle East Forum, taught for two years at the U.S. Naval War College.
From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at: www.danielpipes.org/article/4634
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Iran invites Israeli tourists...Interesting!
Iran invites Israeli tourists: "
Wednesday, June 06, 2007 by Staff Writer
Iran invites Israeli tourists
Just days after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that the “countdown to the destruction of Israel has begun,” Iranian government officials cordially invited Israelis to visit their country.
During a recent international tourism conference in Berlin, a representative of the Israeli culture and tourism television program “The Good Life” said he was shocked when high-level officials from the Iranian Ministry of Tourism singled him out and treated him to a very warm reception.
Sharon Lamberger told Israel's Ma'ariv daily newspaper that as the encounter drew to a close, the Iranians said they would very much like for Israeli tourists to come to Iran.
Israel and Iran had friendly relations prior to the Islamic Revolution and the overthrow of the shah by the ayatollahs. Many in Iran still remember those days, and are ready to reconnect with the Jewish state.
Lamberger said he hopes to use the information and material provided by his new Iranian friends to prepare Israelis for the day they are able to visit and explore the Persian homeland."
Wednesday, June 06, 2007 by Staff Writer
Iran invites Israeli tourists
Just days after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that the “countdown to the destruction of Israel has begun,” Iranian government officials cordially invited Israelis to visit their country.
During a recent international tourism conference in Berlin, a representative of the Israeli culture and tourism television program “The Good Life” said he was shocked when high-level officials from the Iranian Ministry of Tourism singled him out and treated him to a very warm reception.
Sharon Lamberger told Israel's Ma'ariv daily newspaper that as the encounter drew to a close, the Iranians said they would very much like for Israeli tourists to come to Iran.
Israel and Iran had friendly relations prior to the Islamic Revolution and the overthrow of the shah by the ayatollahs. Many in Iran still remember those days, and are ready to reconnect with the Jewish state.
Lamberger said he hopes to use the information and material provided by his new Iranian friends to prepare Israelis for the day they are able to visit and explore the Persian homeland."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
