Iran Approaching Nuke-Israel to attack Iran

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

For months I have been posting the increasing deteriorating Iran situation in the Discussion session because this is an Avian Flu site. I have tried to keep, mostly, topics which are not relevant to disease in the discussion area. The Iran issue is highly complex and since last August when I began tracking this in the Bush Administration, Hilary Clinton stated that if she were elected president she would attack Iran and end the nuclear problem. 

If we have evolved to where this is now news for the Latest news area, then I will bring over my thread into this area, into which I have poured hundreds of hours of work here. 

M.C. 

http://www.france24.com/en/20090408-israel-ill-advised-attack-iran-says-joseph-biden-cnn

Israel 'ill-advised' to attack Iran, says Biden

AFP - US Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday the new Israeli 
government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be "ill-advised" to attack 
Iran, but stressed that it was unlikely to do so.

"I don't believe 
that Prime Minister Netanyahu would do that. I think he would be ill-advised to 
do that," Biden said in an interview with CNN, when asked about possible Israeli 
strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

"My level of concern is no different 
than it was a year ago," he added.

Presenting his new government to 
Israel's parliament a week ago, Netanyahu alluded to an eventual nuclear-armed 
Iran as the biggest threat to his Jewish state.

"The biggest danger to 
humanity and to Israel comes from the possibility of a radical regime armed with 
nuclear weapons," Netanyahu said, making clear his remarks were aimed at 
Iran.

President Barack Obama's administration has repeatedly said that 
all options are on the table for dealing with Iran, but is trying to launch a 
new dialogue with the Islamic republic after a three-decade freeze in 
relations.

Medclinician

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Post Options Post Reply Quote Guests Thanks(0) Quote Reply Topic: Iran Approaching Nuke-Israel to attack Iran Posted: April 14 2009 at 4:23am
	For months I have been posting the increasing deteriorating Iran situation in the Discussion session because this is an Avian Flu site. I have tried to keep, mostly, topics which are not relevant to disease in the discussion area. The Iran issue is highly complex and since last August when I began tracking this in the Bush Administration, Hilary Clinton stated that if she were elected president she would attack Iran and end the nuclear problem. If we have evolved to where this is now news for the Latest news area, then I will bring over my thread into this area, into which I have poured hundreds of hours of work here. M.C. http://www.france24.com/en/20090408-israel-ill-advised-attack-iran-says-joseph-biden-cnn Israel 'ill-advised' to attack Iran, says Biden AFP - US Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday the new Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be "ill-advised" to attack Iran, but stressed that it was unlikely to do so. "I don't believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu would do that. I think he would be ill-advised to do that," Biden said in an interview with CNN, when asked about possible Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. "My level of concern is no different than it was a year ago," he added. Presenting his new government to Israel's parliament a week ago, Netanyahu alluded to an eventual nuclear-armed Iran as the biggest threat to his Jewish state. "The biggest danger to humanity and to Israel comes from the possibility of a radical regime armed with nuclear weapons," Netanyahu said, making clear his remarks were aimed at Iran. President Barack Obama's administration has repeatedly said that all options are on the table for dealing with Iran, but is trying to launch a new dialogue with the Islamic republic after a three-decade freeze in relations. Medclinician

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Post Options Post Reply Quote Guests Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: April 14 2009 at 4:26am
	Biden warns Israel off any attack on Iran Gerry Broome / Associated Press Vice President Joe Biden last week as he arrived at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. Vice President Joe Biden tells CNN that the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be 'ill advised' to try to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. By Paul Richter April 8, 2009 Reporting from Washington -- Vice President Joe Biden issued a high-level admonishment to Israel's new government Tuesday that it would be "ill advised" to launch a military strike against Iran. Biden said in a CNN interview that he does not believe newly installed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would take such a step. Even so, his comment underscored a gap between the conservative new Israeli government and the Obama White House on a series of questions, including the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and Iran. While the Obama administration has made a series of recent overtures to Tehran, the Israelis have grown more confrontational out of concern that the Islamic Republic's increasing nuclear know-how could one day become an existential threat. Netanyahu signaled several times during his election campaign that he would not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. "I promise that if I am elected, Iran will not acquire nuclear arms," he said in one appearance, "and this implies everything necessary to carry this out." With his brief comment Tuesday, Biden became the highest-ranking administration official to caution the Jewish state against a military strike. In the interview, Biden was asked whether he was concerned that Netanyahu might strike Iranian nuclear facilities. "I don't believe Prime Minister Netanyahu would do that. I think he would be ill advised to do that," Biden said. "And so my level of concern is no different than it was a year ago." But many U.S. officials believe Israel is serious. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. forces in the Middle East, told senators this month that the Israeli government may be "so threatened by the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon that it would take preemptive military action to derail or delay it." Other U.S. officials have made it clear in the past that they would prefer that Israel not carry out a strike against Iran. Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cautioned last summer against military action. "This is a very unstable part of the world," he said then. "And I don't need it to be more unstable." Among other concerns, U.S. Defense Department officials worry that Iran might retaliate by striking at U.S. troops in neighboring Iraq. Differences between U.S. and Israeli officials also are emerging on key issues involving the Palestinians. Netanyahu has not embraced Washington's goal of an independent Palestinian state, and some of his key supporters favor expanded Jewish settlements in the West Bank, an idea criticized by President Obama. But U.S. views are important to the Israelis. Steven J. Rosen, a former policy director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, an influential lobbying group, said a decision by Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities "depends to a large extent on the impact such a strike might have on the United States." He made the comment in a blog, the Obama Mideast Monitor. Many top officials in the Obama administration have said they believe the costs of a U.S. attack on Iran would outweigh any benefits, and they are considered less likely to favor military action than the Bush administration. One hint of the Obama administration's intentions may lie in its choice of top experts. Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration's representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, has hired longtime Iran expert Vali Nasr. Dennis Ross, senior administration advisor for Southwest Asia, has hired Ray Takeyh, another veteran Iran expert. Both Nasr and Takeyh have advocated diplomatic engagement with Tehran. paul.richter@latimes.com Medclinician

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Post Options Post Reply Quote Guests Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: April 14 2009 at 4:27am
	http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6009 April 12, 2009, 9:10 PM (GMT+02:00) The New York Police Department has put together a response plan that includes deploying extra officers, including heavily armed Hercules Teams, at synagogues, Jewish community centers and Israel diplomatic offices, out of concern that Muslim extremists might retaliate if Israel should attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Similar precautions were taken last year after Hizballah commander Imad Mughniyeh was killed in a car bombing in Damascus, for which the Lebanese terrorists blamed Israel. "Just in case there was some kind of retaliation in New York, we had an operational plan that was implemented within hours of knowing he was hit," Mitch Silber, a top NYPD intelligence analyst, said Friday at a briefing about security measures for the Jewish holiday of Passover at the largest Jewish population outside Israel. There have been no specific threats reported against the city for the weeklong holiday which starts at sundown Wednesday, but Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said: More than seven years after 9/11 "we know that counterterrorism is now a permanent part of our mission." Several months earlier, two Iranian citizens were questioned while taking video images of the subway tracks. The pair claimed diplomatic immunity and were never charged. Medclinician

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Post Options Post Reply Quote Guests Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: April 14 2009 at 4:34am
	http://news.antiwar.com/2009/03/15/mullen-us-attack-on-iran-would-focus-on-navy-air-force/ April 13, 2009 In an interview today on the Charlie Rose show, Admiral Michael Mullen cautioned that a unilateral Israeli attack on Iran could endanger the stability entire region, leading to an escalation that could imperil American forces in the Gulf region. Then Mullen spoke about a hypothetical US attack on Iran, declaring that it was in “a maritime part of the world, where the emphasis would certainly be on those two forces (the Air Force and Navy).” Mullen also insisted that there was no disconnect between the United States and Israel on the question of Iran. Israel has repeatedly been reported as being on the cusp of launching an attack on Iran. At the same time, there is evidence of a disconnect within the Pentagon itself about Iran. Mullen has repeatedly been on the same page as Israel, accusing Iran of moving quickly toward the creation of nuclear weapons (in spite of all the evidence to the contrary). Yet Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Mullen contradicted one another rather publicly just two weeks ago, when Gates declared that Iran was “not close to a weapon at this point.” Gates: Iran Attack Would Create Backlash Pre-Emptive Strike Would Be "Disastrous" During a meeting today at Marine Corps University, Defense Secretary Robert Gates cautioned against a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, saying they would create a “disastrous backlash” and reiterating his support for most sanctions against the central Asian nation. “If we or the Israelis or somebody else strike Natanz militarily, in my view, it would delay the Iranian program for some period of time, but only delay it, probably only one to three years,” Gates warned, adding it would also “unify the nation, you would cement their determination to have a nuclear program, and also build into the whole country an undying hatred of whoever hits them.” The Iranian government has been working on a nuclear energy program for over a decade, and the Bushehr nuclear power plant will reportedly come on line in mid-Summer. The plant requires uranium enriched to low levels, which is done at the Natanz enrichment facility. Though the IAEA has repeatedly certified that none of the enriched uranium has been diverted to any other purpose than power generation, both the United States and Israel have repeatedly threatened to attack Iran unless it abandons the program. Medclinician

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Post Options Post Reply Quote Guests Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: April 14 2009 at 4:39am
	Salon News source- April 14, 2009 \| JERUSALEM -- Israel has been steadily ratcheting up pressure on the United States concerning the grave threat allegedly posed by Iran, which seems poised to master the nuclear fuel cycle, and thus the capacity to produce nuclear weapons. The new Israeli prime minister, Likud Party hawk Benjamin Netanyahu, has warned President Barack Obama that if Washington does not quickly find a way to shut down Iran's nuclear program, Israel will. Some analysts argue that this is manufactured hysteria, not so much a reflection of genuine Israeli fears as a purposeful diversion from other looming difficulties. The Netanyahu government is filled with hard-liners adamantly opposed to withdrawal from, or even a temporary freeze on, settlements in the occupied territories, not to mention to any acceptance of Palestinian statehood. On his first day as foreign minister, extremist demagogue Avigdor Lieberman, with characteristic bluster, announced that Israel was no longer bound by the 2007 Annapolis agreements brokered by Washington, which called for accelerated negotiations toward a two-state settlement. Such talk threatens to lead the Israelis directly into a clash with the Obama administration. In what can only be taken as a rebuttal of the Netanyahu government's recent pronouncements, in his speech to the Turkish Parliament Obama pointedly reasserted Washington's commitment to a two-state settlement and to the Annapolis understandings. So what better way for Netanyahu to avoid an ugly clash with a popular American president than to conveniently shift the discussion to an existential threat from Iran -- especially if he can successfully present it as a threat not just to Israel but to the West in general? Medclinician

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Post Options Post Reply Quote Guests Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: April 14 2009 at 4:49am
	April 08, 2009 Obama admin warns Israel, not Iran Ed Lasky American Thinker has carried numerous articles over the past two years predicting that Barack Obama would prove to be an appeaser of tyrants. He has fulfilled our predictions. His obsequiesness towards the tyrannical regime of Iran; his bowing to the Saudi king (even the Center for American Progress; closely tied to the Administration, admits Obama bowed), his television address to the Arab world on a partially Saudi-owned cable network, his expansion of aid to the Palestinians; his claim that the Muslim world has enriched America; his commitment to join the UN Human Rights Council; his first call as President was to Palestinian leader Mohammed Abbas; his gutting of defense spending -- particularly the ending of the F-22 and missile defense programs -- crucial to dealing with regimes developing nuclear weapons; his placidity towards Russia's and North Korea's aggressiveness; his apology tour of Europe; well..the list could go on and on. Now to be truly effective, his abasement of America must also reflect itself in the belittling and weakening our allies and friends. This he has started to do with his serial and shameful diplomatic faux pas involving Great Britain. Now he has turned his focus onto Israel -- a small nation surrounded by far more numerous and wealthy enemies -- one of which, Iran, routinely boasts that it will destroy Israel. In the face of these manifold existential threats, what does Barack Obama do? He sends an unprecedented warning to Congress that there will be an upcoming clash with Israel and he demands that Congress support his policies. Will he send his legion of grassroots supporters to petition their Congressional members to support the President? After all, he has told them recently that he is "keeping score" regarding the level of support they show for him. Just in case, no one misses the message, his Vice-President, Joe Biden, to reinforce the message to Israel that traditional American support may not be forthcoming. Last night on CNN, Biden warned Israel not to attack Iran. . Israel is a sovereign nation whose people face the prospect of another Holocaust. Yet the message from the leader of a nation who has in the past been its best friend is... what? Drop dead? Any experienced leader would realize that threats of military force is one tool that can be used with diplomacy to shape other nations' behavior. America has just sent a message to Iran that they need not take risk into account in the future. As America cuts the F-22 Raptor and missile defense programs-just a day after North Korea (allied with Iran) launches a ballistic missile, what message is Obama sending to the rest of the world? The era of Pax Americana has ended and with it much of the security for the Western world. comment: This is truly a test of the Obama Administration. One must take into consideration that before President Obama came into office, Israel blatantly invaded Gaza, killing many civilians, blocked off its borders, and the entire world stood back, as U.N. and neutral centers became the focus for the bombing and death of innocent women and children. The administration and the world did nothing. This was a carry over from eight years of "The War on Terrorism" which was a thinly veiled movement after 9/11 to use fear and false information as a pretext to invade Iran. Later the data and intelligence used was found to be flawed and non-supportive of the war, and after almost a decade, we have poured billions into stopping nuclear weapons development which likely was not even present. Now we have a situation where nuclear development is present. It has clearly evaded and elluded the checks by monitoring agencies, has enough to high grade enriched substance to make a nuclear bomb and now can import North Koreas proven ICBM technology. The North Koreans have been clearly proven to be working with Iran in the development of a nuclear bomb. Meanwhile, aside from posturing, words, and no action to stop them (except a covert op program to sabatoge their work as slipped behind the scenes to Israeli warhawks, we are on the verge of a nuclear crisis. Israel, the world, cannot, cannot allow a nuclear middle east which clearly supports terrorist factions and is a huge threat to the stability of the region. This is not a discussion, this is a reality. We have attacked Syria twice to stop their development of nuclear weapons. Last year, a tactical nuke was launched with joint American and Israeli jets, which dropped a bunker buster and then a tactical nuke, vaporizing a Syrian development site. After going through thousands of articles on this, I finally feel at least moderately informed on the real deal here behind the scenes and it is something the American public should be kept informed on. Our continued foot dragging in terms of words, words, words- in light of the capability of North Korea which now has not only nuclear but biowarfare capability to hurt us if launched by a Muslim extremist group... is a genuine threat. If we do not take action to neutralize Middle Eastern nuclear bomb development, we will soon see an attack on Tel Aviv as well as other parts of Europe- and God help us- the leader of Iran is truly out there enough with talk of the 12th Imam- to bring on the Apocalypse just to fulfill a Muslim mindset nightmare. You do not negotiate with terrorists. And you do not negotiate with those who harbor them. George Bush may have been up on the dunking stool and after 8 years of truly scary policies, dropped below the popularity level where we impeach presidents, but George was right on one thing. We either are the greatest country in the world and take responsibility for leadership and guidance in that world, or in a "new order of things" we stop being the leader and assume an equal position in which the scramble for the top of the heap will move the power center of the globe to Russia and China, the manufacturing center to Southeast Asia and offshore, and our greatest country on earth will become a third world nation. It is truly time to separate the hawks from the doves. Extremists Muslims are not doves. Terrorists who now have infiltrated our cyber systems, threaten our power grid, have not been idyll for the last 8 years. Having worked in the nuclear industry at Lockheed, it is a given that immense power of nuclear weapons in the hands of the super powers is enough to create an On the Beach scenario in the world. Covert ops and proxy wars will not stop the truly impulsive Israelis from invading or striking Iran. They want to include the U.S.- but one nuke of Tel Aviv, or even an impending intelligence report that it is possible by Iran, will set off the event. This would be (as per government statement) a direct attack on American soil by a nuclear bomb. Will Russian and China who are both supporting and making billions from Iran leave them to the American wolves as the warships (which was documented in an unprecedented exercise in the Gulf last year) move in for a blockage of Iran oil tankers and stand nose to nose with Russian protective forces to stop the embargo. Nothing I have posted here is extreme. It is backed by hundreds of links and data over of almost a year. There is one Israel. It was born again in 1948... the year of my birth.. and they have been trying to destroy it ever since. As per those interested in biblical things - it is clear that "the becoming of Israel as a nation" has grave significance in the scheme of things. Our greatest enemy is apathy of the masses, while truly dangerous policies may endanger our way of life as we know it. Ironically, before this pot, as many will boil, the Pandemic will probably hit- and therefore my efforts are best focused on writing the Survival Manual. If the Pandemic hits, we won't be seeing this stuff 12,000 miles away. We will be fighting this at the Canadian and Mexico borders. Already the Mexican border is a war zone. Perhaps our enemies, domestic and abroad will simply be too ill to fight, but it is more likely they would take advantage of our compromised position. Just IMHO- we need alternatives from congress and those we have elected to the policies now in place. Medclinician

Iran Approaching Nuke-Israel to attack Iran

Biden warns Israel off any attack on Iran

Gates: Iran Attack Would Create Backlash

Pre-Emptive Strike Would Be "Disastrous"

Obama admin warns Israel, not Iran