PDA

View Full Version : Israel has '8 days' to hit Iran nuclear site: Bolton



Gingersnap
08-17-2010, 11:32 AM
Israel has '8 days' to hit Iran nuclear site: Bolton

http://i35.tinypic.com/swbpro.jpg
AFP/File Israel has "eight days" to launch a military strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear facility

WASHINGTON (AFP) Israel has "eight days" to launch a military strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear facility and stop Tehran from acquiring a functioning atomic plant, a former US envoy to the UN has said.

Iran is to bring online its first nuclear power reactor, built with Russia's help, on August 21, when a shipment of nuclear fuel will be loaded into the plant's core. At that point, John Bolton warned Monday, it will be too late for Israel to launch a military strike against the facility because any attack would spread radiation and affect Iranian civilians.

"Once that uranium, once those fuel rods are very close to the reactor, certainly once they're in the reactor, attacking it means a release of radiation, no question about it," Bolton told Fox Business Network.

"So if Israel is going to do anything against Bushehr it has to move in the next eight days."

Absent an Israeli strike, Bolton said, "Iran will achieve something that no other opponent of Israel, no other enemy of the United States in the Middle East really has and that is a functioning nuclear reactor." But when asked whether he expected Israel to actually launch strikes against Iran within the next eight days, Bolton was skeptical.

"I don't think so, I'm afraid that they've lost this opportunity," he said.

Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100817/wl_afp/irannuclearpoliticsisraelusmilitary_20100817120240 )

malloc
08-17-2010, 11:39 AM
I don't have a lot of information on this, so this is a total armchair quarterbacking.

This might be a calculated move by Israel. If this facility is perceived by the population of Iran as a power utility facility and not a military facility, then attacking it could galvanize a torn Iranian population into a unified front. A front led by the same crazies who are trying to brow beat the population into that unified front. A strike by Israel could accomplish what the Iranian oligarchy cannot.

Just my $0.02.

djones520
08-17-2010, 11:55 AM
I don't have a lot of information on this, so this is a total armchair quarterbacking.

This might be a calculated move by Israel. If this facility is perceived by the population of Iran as a power utility facility and not a military facility, then attacking it could galvanize a torn Iranian population into a unified front. A front led by the same crazies who are trying to brow beat the population into that unified front. A strike by Israel could accomplish what the Iranian oligarchy cannot.

Just my $0.02.

Iran won't take it quietly like Iraq did, that is for sure. But I don't think that the populace of Iran is quite so ignorant of the issue. They've gotta have access to some outside news source other then the Iranian state media.

I'd say worse case scenario here would be Israel trying to bomb the place, and finding that Iran's anti-air capabilities is fully capable of stopping them. I've gotta imagine that site is surrounded by AA Missile batteries, with fighter jets on alert at all times for just such an event.

FlaGator
08-17-2010, 11:57 AM
Iran won't take it quietly like Iraq did, that is for sure. But I don't think that the populace of Iran is quite so ignorant of the issue. They've gotta have access to some outside news source other then the Iranian state media.

But Iran won't be in much of a position to do anything other than bitch and moan.

djones520
08-17-2010, 12:02 PM
But Iran won't be in much of a position to do anything other than bitch and moan.

Except they've got a lot of missiles that are plenty capable of hitting Israel. The Israeli's attacking a "civilian" target would more then warrant for the Iranians to do the same.

Rockntractor
08-17-2010, 12:21 PM
North Korea's reaction to an attack on Iran will also be interesting.

obx
08-17-2010, 12:29 PM
North Korea's reaction to an attack on Iran will also be interesting.

I think if Isreal turned Iran into a glass topped parking lot, North Korea would not do much.
________
Chrysler Cordoba Specifications (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Chrysler_Cordoba)

Ranger Rick
08-17-2010, 12:48 PM
My arm chair Quarterbacking:

Hitting it after it is loaded might be a good thing. There are not going to be a lot of civilians around. And dosing ever thing in radiation would make it harder to rebuild.

Of course, all hell will break loose in the oil market. But hey.

Rockntractor
08-17-2010, 03:11 PM
I think if Isreal turned Iran into a glass topped parking lot, North Korea would not do much.

It could go either way, the little dictator is not a rational human being. His life is at the end and he doesn't give a crap about the lives of his people so he may decide to go out with a bang.

noonwitch
08-17-2010, 03:12 PM
Except they've got a lot of missiles that are plenty capable of hitting Israel. The Israeli's attacking a "civilian" target would more then warrant for the Iranians to do the same.


Does Israel have an anti-missle system? After Saddam sent his SCUDs that way in the first Gulf War, I would think they would have one by now.


The russians sure better hope that the Iranians never turn on them, or all those weapons they are selling Iran will be used on them.

Rockntractor
08-17-2010, 03:13 PM
Does Israel have an anti-missle system? After Saddam sent his SCUDs that way in the first Gulf War, I would think they would have one by now.


The russians sure better hope that the Iranians never turn on them, or all those weapons they are selling Iran will be used on them.

They do but it isn't infallible.

PoliCon
08-17-2010, 03:23 PM
Does Israel have an anti-missle system? After Saddam sent his SCUDs that way in the first Gulf War, I would think they would have one by now.


The russians sure better hope that the Iranians never turn on them, or all those weapons they are selling Iran will be used on them.

A nuke does not have to hit the ground or to be delivered on a missile to be effective.

Odysseus
08-17-2010, 05:01 PM
The real issue here is why is Russia aiding Iran in the proliferation of nuclear technology? Iran sits on an ocean of oil and needs nuclear power about as much as they need sand. Russia is being incredibly short-sighted, since the Iranians are supplying the Chechens with arms and training, and the Islamic world considers Russia just as great an evil as they do us. The nukes that they provide the Iranians will end up used against them in the long term, but in the short term, they don't care because Putin is still looking at a bipolar world, in which his greatest adversary is the US.

Guess that reset button didn't accomplish much.

m00
08-17-2010, 10:12 PM
Does Israel have an anti-missle system? After Saddam sent his SCUDs that way in the first Gulf War, I would think they would have one by now.

They're so close, it's quite hard. Most anti-missile systems can't handle rockets fired from short distances. Response time is too small.

djones520
08-18-2010, 04:05 AM
They're so close, it's quite hard. Most anti-missile systems can't handle rockets fired from short distances. Response time is too small.

Well depends. The C-RAM is a varient of the CIWS that we use to defend our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan against rocket and mortar attacks. Your not getting much shorter range then those.

Against ballistic missile technology, I'd Imagine they'd be pretty useless though. One just has to do an airburst at a thousand feet and Israel goes black. Their is a plus to this though. Weaponizing a nuclear weapon into a ballistic missle is a lot harder then just as a bomb. That'll give Israel a few more years to act for that scenario.

One thing that Iran has to be concerned about is that if they hit Israel with a nuke, Israel will not be the only victims. Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq will all most likely receive dangerous levels of fall out. And I doubt they'd be very happy about that.

Satanicus
08-18-2010, 06:10 PM
Bolton ?

Ya , ok.

He dreams about war with Iran. Of course he offers no evidence for an "8 day claim'

Satanicus
08-18-2010, 06:18 PM
But Iran won't be in much of a position to do anything other than bitch and moan.

Wrong , they will take half the planes Israel would send.

They would then gather support from the rest of the ME and put the pressure on Israel and the USA.

Obama will be very clear to Israel that if they do this , it's THEIR deal.

Not to mention the Strait of Hormuz , which would be shut down because of sunburn missiles hiding in the nearby mountains. Guess what that does to oil prices ?

Israel will never attack Iran with Obama in office in the same way the USA would never crush Iran's democracy with Truman in office, as soon as he left and a repub came in they went right for it.

If the GOP wins in 2012 we can look for a strike by Israel, but not sooner.

And when the USA backs up Israel we will have started a war with a very well armed nation that is bigger than both Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

Vote GOP for more war , but this war is for real , Iran can hurt us badly , it won't homemade bombs placed by a barefoot man.

djones520
08-18-2010, 06:26 PM
Wrong , they will take half the planes Israel would send.

They would then gather support from the rest of the ME and put the pressure on Israel and the USA.

Obama will be very clear to Israel that if they do this , it's THEIR deal.

Not to mention the Strait of Hormuz , which would be shut down because of sunburn missiles hiding in the nearby mountains. Guess what that does to oil prices ?

Israel will never attack Iran with Obama in office in the same way the USA would never crush Iran's democracy with Truman in office, as soon as he left and a repub came in they went right for it.

If the GOP wins in 2012 we can look for a strike by Israel, but not sooner.

And when the USA backs up Israel we will have started a war with a very well armed nation that is bigger than both Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

Vote GOP for more war , but this war is for real , Iran can hurt us badly , it won't homemade bombs placed by a barefoot man.

Well you've definitely surpassed yourself here. This is by far your dumbest post to date. Take a bow.

ME countries have given Israel clearance to fly over there territory to attack Iran. They do not want an Iranian nuclear state, because Persians and Arabs do not get along.

The only thing you are right about is that Obama is to chickenshit to do what is right, and it will have to wait a couple years for us to get on the right page for this one.

BadCat
08-18-2010, 06:27 PM
Wrong , they will take half the planes Israel would send.

They would then gather support from the rest of the ME and put the pressure on Israel and the USA.

Obama will be very clear to Israel that if they do this , it's THEIR deal.

Not to mention the Strait of Hormuz , which would be shut down because of sunburn missiles hiding in the nearby mountains. Guess what that does to oil prices ?

Israel will never attack Iran with Obama in office in the same way the USA would never crush Iran's democracy with Truman in office, as soon as he left and a repub came in they went right for it.

If the GOP wins in 2012 we can look for a strike by Israel, but not sooner.

And when the USA backs up Israel we will have started a war with a very well armed nation that is bigger than both Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

Vote GOP for more war , but this war is for real , Iran can hurt us badly , it won't homemade bombs placed by a barefoot man.


Yeah, you asswipes said that about Iraq too.
4th largest army and a "well armed" country at the time.
Took us all of, what, 100 hours to reduce them to a bunch of surrender monkeys.

djones520
08-18-2010, 06:30 PM
Yeah, you asswipes said that about Iraq too.
4th largest army and a "well armed" country at the time.
Took us all of, what, 100 hours to reduce them to a bunch of surrender monkeys.

Iran is nothing to shrug our shoulders at, but asswipe is kidding himself if he thinks the Iranian military has half the training that the IDF has, and none of the combat experience. Their technology is at least a generation behind Israel's as well.

BadCat
08-18-2010, 06:34 PM
Israel would put iran between the sheets in a week.
Their problem will be that the rest of the raghead countries surrounding them will come howling out of the desert at them, while our "president" sits around with his muslim thumb up his butt.

djones520
08-18-2010, 06:35 PM
Yeah, you asswipes said that about Iraq too.
4th largest army and a "well armed" country at the time.
Took us all of, what, 100 hours to reduce them to a bunch of surrender monkeys.

And don't forget that the Air Force and Navy spent a good 40 days prior to that pounding them into quivering jelly.

djones520
08-18-2010, 06:36 PM
Israel would put iran between the sheets in a week.
Their problem will be that the rest of the raghead countries surrounding them will come howling out of the desert at them, while our "president" sits around with his muslim thumb up his butt.

No, the other countries would "protest" to keep appearances up, but they wouldn't do anything more. Iranians aren't Arabs, their Persians. The two don't like each other. None of the big ME countries want a nuclear Iran anymore then Israel does.

Satanicus
08-18-2010, 06:43 PM
Israel would put iran between the sheets in a week.
Their problem will be that the rest of the raghead countries surrounding them will come howling out of the desert at them, while our "president" sits around with his muslim thumb up his butt.

And yet the USA can't take care of Afghanistan in how many years ?

Iran is an armed nation. you have no idea of what you ask.

BadCat
08-18-2010, 06:47 PM
And yet the USA can't take care of Afghanistan in how many years ?

Iran is an armed nation. you have no idea of what you ask.

Uhm...the Afghanistan "military" at the time of our invasion was dusted in about 3 days.

For some reason, we are not allowed to carpet bomb the camel fellators up in the mountains into oblivion.

Iran's military is just like Iraqs was...lots of Soviet era weaponry, and a small, dedicated force (Revolutionary Guard) that is well armed and somewhat well trained. The rest of their military is conscripts, and would fade into the desert like a sirocco.

m00
08-18-2010, 06:50 PM
Well depends. The C-RAM is a varient of the CIWS that we use to defend our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan against rocket and mortar attacks. Your not getting much shorter range then those.

Yeah this is true. But I guess with nukes you problem want to take it down a bit earlier in the trajectory. :D

m00
08-18-2010, 06:52 PM
And yet the USA can't take care of Afghanistan in how many years ?

Yeah sure. That's because we have so many rules of engagement we wouldn't allow ourselves to win. We leveled cities in WWII. War is hell. It needs to be, if you want to win it.


Iran is an armed nation. you have no idea of what you ask.

Dude, they were in an 8 year war against an army we obliterated in a week. Twice.

Satanicus
08-18-2010, 06:55 PM
Uhm...the Afghanistan "military" at the time of our invasion was dusted in about 3 days.

.

Or ,....

They didn't fight the invasion and melted into the towns to fight the longest US war ever.

And here we are.

"dusted" .... not even close

djones520
08-18-2010, 06:57 PM
And yet the USA can't take care of Afghanistan in how many years ?

Iran is an armed nation. you have no idea of what you ask.

Listen boy. I've been in Operations for the past 9 years. I work hand in hand with Intel here at my deployed site, and work at a strategic level command center at my home duty station. I know more about this shit then you could even begin to imagine.

My job is involved with every facet of military planning and execution. I've worked with our allied forces and have studied the capabilities of others that I have not worked with.

Any day you wanna dance this dance, you just say the word. I'd love to wipe your face is the piss your spraying all over here.

malloc
08-18-2010, 06:59 PM
And yet the USA can't take care of Afghanistan in how many years ?

Iran is an armed nation. you have no idea of what you ask.

Apparently somebody didn't witness 1st MARDIV rolling up central Iraq with impunity, nor did they witness (then) Maj. Gen. Mattis dictating terms of combat to the enemy like the whole war was on his schedule.

The so-called militaries of these shit-holes were brushed aside like a mere nuisance. The civilian population, who we can't indiscriminately initiate hostility with, is what mires our military because mujahideen choose to mix in with that population, thus endangering the civilians and our military which is limited under these conditions. This is one of the biggest reasons I'm against the nation building which continues under Obama.

asdf2231
08-18-2010, 07:02 PM
Wrong , they will take half the planes Israel would send.

They would then gather support from the rest of the ME and put the pressure on Israel and the USA.

Obama will be very clear to Israel that if they do this , it's THEIR deal.

Not to mention the Strait of Hormuz , which would be shut down because of sunburn missiles hiding in the nearby mountains. Guess what that does to oil prices ?

Israel will never attack Iran with Obama in office in the same way the USA would never crush Iran's democracy with Truman in office, as soon as he left and a repub came in they went right for it.

If the GOP wins in 2012 we can look for a strike by Israel, but not sooner.

And when the USA backs up Israel we will have started a war with a very well armed nation that is bigger than both Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

Vote GOP for more war , but this war is for real , Iran can hurt us badly , it won't homemade bombs placed by a barefoot man.

Fuck Iran and Fuck You.

Because it would take us longer to destroy Irans military and infrastructure than it would take me to drive to Florida.

YTou have no fucking clue when you talk about military matters so shut your whore mouth and go back to spreading talking points there hey?

djones520
08-18-2010, 07:08 PM
You want to know what Israel would do Satanicus.

They'd probably do just like they did with Osiraq. Launch a squadron of F-15's and F-16's. The F-15's will be there to provide support against responding Iranian aircraft, while the F-16's are kitted to do the damage on the ground.

They'd take off with a full weapons load out. They'd probably conduct an airial refueling within minutes of take off and again over Saudi Territory. They'd penetrate Iranian air space firing HARM missiles at all known radar sights, saturating the area with anti-radar radiation making it impossible to develop locks on the aircraft with radar guided missiles.

Now the reacter site is probably well guarded by IR seeking SAM batteries. This is where a flight of the F-16's will push ahead and take on a Wild Weasel roll. One would allow the battery to develop a lock and his wingman would follow in and drop a bomb on the site. It's very likely they would lose an aircraft or two in this mission role but that is to be expected.

Following the nuetralization of the ground defences, either a prestaged ground team would lase the target for some LGB's, or GPS GBU's would be released from a range of 5-10 miles and then the aircraft would bug out.

They'd leave Iranian air space with the F-15's providing cover and once their safely back in Saudi air space, they'd refuel again and return home.

djones520
08-18-2010, 07:20 PM
Now, I've told you the most likely scenario of how Israel would conduct an attack.

In your breadth of knowledge and experience on military manners, you tell me just what Iran is going to do to stop them.

Rockntractor
08-18-2010, 07:44 PM
Now, I've told you the most likely scenario of how Israel would conduct an attack.

In your breadth of knowledge and experience on military manners, you tell me just what Iran is going to do to stop them.

Um pray to Allah?:confused:

Zathras
08-18-2010, 07:59 PM
Wrong , they will take half the planes Israel would send.

With what moron? Iran's military is in worse shape than Iraq's when we went in. Israel's air force is one of the best in the world. They'll sweep the IAF from the sky.


They would then gather support from the rest of the ME and put the pressure on Israel and the USA.

Again you show your stupidity. When the Israelis bombed Osirak in 89, the rest of the ME said and did nothing. When they recently took out the NorK reactor in Syria, the rest of the ME said and did nothing. When, not if, Israel takes out Iran's reactor, the same thing will happen again. The rest of the ME will say and do nothing.


Obama will be very clear to Israel that if they do this , it's THEIR deal.

No surprise since The Obumbler is the weakest President we've ever had.


Not to mention the Strait of Hormuz , which would be shut down because of sunburn missiles hiding in the nearby mountains. Guess what that does to oil prices ?

One thing about shore based missiles Stupidicus is they don't move and make great targets for ship, sub or air launched crise missiles, which we would have every right to use if Iran threatens internatonal shipping with them. You can bet we have those launch facilities marked and targeted. If Iran starts warming up those missles, they will go away.

As for the rest of your rambling stupidity, it's worth less than what my dog leaves when she goes out to relieve herself.