Paper says Israel has plans for tactical nuclear strike on Iran

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=newsOne&storyID=2007-01-07T094811Z_01_L06759405_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-NUCLEAR-ISRAEL.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C2-TopNews-newsOne-2

LONDON (Reuters) - Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, Britain’s Sunday Times newspaper said.

Citing what it said were several Israeli military sources, the paper said two Israeli air force squadrons had been training to blow up an enrichment plant in Natanz using low-yield nuclear “bunker busters.”

Two other sites, a heavy water plant at Arak and a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, would be targeted with conventional bombs, the Sunday Times said. The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously last month to slap sanctions on Iran to try to stop uranium enrichment that Western powers fear could lead to making bombs. Tehran insists its plans are peaceful and says it will continue enrichment.

Israel has refused to rule out pre-emptive military action against Iran along the lines of its 1981 air strike against an atomic reactor in Iraq, although many analysts believe Iran’s nuclear facilities are too much for Israel to take on alone.

An Israeli government spokeswoman, Miri Eisin, declined comment on the Sunday Times report. Israel does not discuss its assumed atomic arsenal, under an “ambiguity strategy” billed as warding off regional foes while avoiding arms races.

“We don’t comment on stories like this in the Sunday Times,” Eisin said. In Tehran, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told a news conference that the newspaper report “will make clear to the world public opinion that the Zionist regime (Israel) is the main menace to global peace and the region.”

He said “any measure against Iran will not be left without a response and the invader will regret its act immediately.”

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and Israel has said it will not allow Iran to acquire a bomb.

The Sunday Times quoted sources as saying a nuclear strike would only be used if a conventional attack was ruled out and if the United States declined to intervene. Disclosure of the plans could be intended to put pressure on Tehran to halt enrichment, the paper added. It said the Israeli plan envisaged conventional laser-guided bombs opening “tunnels” into the targets. Nuclear warheads would then be used fired into the plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce radioactive fallout.

Israeli pilots have flown to Gibraltar in recent weeks to train for the 2,000 mile round-trip to the Iranian targets, the Sunday Times said, and three possible routes to Iran have been mapped out including one over Turkey.

An Israeli defense source, who did not want to be identified, wrote off the Sunday Times report as “psychological warfare.”

“If we have such capabilities, I find it extremely unlikely that we would use them in a ‘tactical strike’,” the source said.

“Israel’s nuclear option, if it exists, is exclusively part of a second-strike doctrine,” the source said, referring to a deterrent strategy whereby a country ensures it can retaliate massively for a catastrophic attack on its territory. Washington has said military force remains an option while insisting that its priority is to reach a diplomatic solution.

Its the end of the world as we know it…

I’d be surprised if Israel carried out a nuclear first strike against Iran, but as much as I hate to say it, I will also be surprised if a nuke isn’t used in an act of war or terrorism in the next 5-10 years.

“Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons,”

Does anyone else see the irony in this?:biglaugh:

Ironic, yes, but probably the only weapons that would be effective against the facility, as it is far underground.

…and i feel fine.

No seriously. when is this shit going to stop.

oh yeah… when the bastards turn them sandy beaches into a glass sculpture.

Dayum! Probably all talk at this point but scary to think about.

not really, a conventional weapon would have no problem you just need something to burrow deep down into the ground. how ever far under ground they are

This would be super for the US…We could never get away with doing something like this with out drawing terrorist attacks on a daily basis.

ugh

The article states that they would use conventional bunker busting bombs to ‘open up’ the sites, and then fire the small yield nuclear warheads in to detonate deep inside the facility. Conventional weapons are good for smaller sites, but from what I gather the facility at Natanz is enormous.

I’m sure the political message sent by using nuclear weapons is another large goal of the plan, whether misguided or not. As I said I’d be very surprised if they went through with it in a first strike capacity, as the repercussions in the region and in the world would be massive. Terrorist attacks on Israel and also the US would increase many fold, as we share blame with Israel for Israel’s unilateral actions in the minds of the majority of Muslims in the region.

Isrealis dont fuck around. I think at this point they are the first strike arm of the US in that region to avoid sullying our hands with that work. How else do you think Isreal got nuclear technology

If you follow history, you might not be so surprised. It wouldn’t be the first time Israel did something like this.

Ever heard of Operation Babylon?

With the state of affairs of the Middle East now, with Palestine having terrorist run government (HAMAS), Israel is feeling like the proverbial “caged” animal. It will be only a matter of time. If Israel has or can find/buy the technology, they will use it. It’s not a matter of if, but when.

Lets not forget that the PRESIDENT of Iran has repeatedly called for Israel to be wiped off the map. I think that justifies a first strike.

They find/buy said equipment from the US lol

Yep. Let the radical Muslims keep flapping their gums. The only reason it hasn’t happened yet is because of the US. Typically they try everything to stall/talk Israel out of these kinds of actions. Israel will reach the tipping point and say “fuck it, let Allah sort it out” again. Just as history has already proven.

You would be surprised how much military innovation comes out of Israel. The US bought hardware is only in certain areas. They also buy a lot of “parts” and create their own stuff. Some of which the US ends up buying back from them and implementing in our own arsenal.

Isreael is a big power in armor production among other things.

I am familiar with those strikes. However, the world was a different place in the early 80s. The danger of (or idea of) terrorism with wmd, whether it be nuclear or biological, was nearly non-existant back then. I understand Israel’s desire to act on Iran, but I think that the potential of such action to spin the middle east and the rest of the world out of control is much, much greater than it was in the early 80s, and that leaders are (or at least should be) aware of that.

That is what I was thinking but, these types of weapons are not speciality.

You couldn’t be more wrong. It was VERY prevelant back then. It just never got the news coverage it gets now. In the late 70s/ early 80s, the general populace was more concerned about the U.S.S.R., and the Middle East was some far away land with nothing in it.

And I’m sure the survivors of the Iran-Iraq war might disagree with the notion that WMD didn’t exist in the 80s.

Of course there has always been terrorism, there have been examples of terrorism since before the 20th century, however until 1993 the United States was not a primary target, and the ‘globalization’ of terrorism had not yet formed. Terrorist acts weren’t even primarily about the immediate deaths of only innocent civilians until Pan Am 103, which in many ways ushered in a new age of terrorism, or at least enlightenment about it. Prior to that, most middle eastern terrorist actions were intended (or perceived as) to operate as hostage situations, and involve negotiations.

In addition, many of the terrorists from the early 80s operated in Lebanon, where there was no functioning government. While terrorists in Afghanistan operate under little government scrutiny, having a nation like Iran which arguably is supporting terrorists and is actively pursuing nuclear technology, potentially for a bomb, is a very heightened situation from where things used to be. Not to mention the fact that the breakup of the Soviet Union has left countless security lapses and other ways for warheads to enter the black market.