Washington concerned Israel gearing up to attack Iran

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/921857.html

Washington officials are concerned that Tehran's announcement that it has 3,000 centrifuges fully working in its controversial uranium enrichment program will lead to an Israeli strike on Iran, the British daily The Times reported on Thursday.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced the landmark development on Wednesday.

Pentagon sources in Washington fear Israel could move to attack the uranium enrichment plant, as U.S. officials and foreign media reports confirmed it did a suspected Syrian nuclear facilily on September 6.
Advertisement

The Times report quoted military officials as saying that while the United States is hesitant to embark on an attack on Iran, Israel is a "different matter."

"We have now reached 3,000 machines," Ahmadinejad told thousands of Iranians gathered in Birjand, in eastern Iran, on Wednesday in a show of defiance of international demands to halt the program believed to be masking the country's nuclear arms efforts.

Ahmadinejad has in the past claimed that Iran succeeded in installing the 3,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. But Wednesday's claim was his first official statement that the plant is now fully operating all those centrifuges.

When Iran first announced launching the 3,000 centrifuges in April, the UN nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Tehran had only 328 centrifuges up and running at Natanz's underground facility.

Mofaz calls on IAEA chief to resign

Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz called on Thursday for Mohamed ElBaradei to be replaced as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, accusing him of complacency over Iran's nuclear ambitions.
more...
and this is a Big one

Bush defends World War Three comments on Iran
U.S. President George W. Bush defended in a television interview on Wednesday his recent comments suggesting Iran's nuclear ambitions might trigger World War Three and insisted he wanted a diplomatic solution.

(Bush always does the opposite of what he says)

But that won't stop the anti-Israeli bigots that post here and on the far-right from taking the ball and running with it! This story is already in GD, so I will say again, it is nothing more than the creation of a scapegoat which the far-right and left will eat up with a spoon.

Many civilians downwind will die of radiation poisoning.

'concerned' my ass. does anyone really believe that Israel is even capable of mounting such an operation by itself? the only 'concern' the white house might possibly have about this is that the israeli planned timetable for this inevitable atrocity doesn't coincide with bush's domestic political agenda.

i bet most of Washington would be lining up to say they support this action by Israel if it takes place.

Cheeeney: I'm shocked, shocked to learn this news!

a)support of Israel's "right of self-defense" within 30 minutes of the commencement of the attack
b)support of Israel's "right of self-defense" within 60 minutes of the commencement of the attack
c)support of Israel's "right of self-defense" within 90 minutes of the commencement of the attack

that is one unknown, i am sure.

sanctions and loss of U.S. dollars to stop this possibility? Naw, this will be the never ending war according to bush - no way out of it - according to bush. Diplomacy is a joke in bush's vocabulary.

Have you heard? Why are they so mute on this issue.

Look at the map, below, and you can see that any route the Israelis might take to strike Iran will involve overflight of third countries or airspace controlled by the U.S.

Either it's up and through Turkey or across Syria and U.S.-occupied Iraq on the northern route to Iran. The southern route down the Gulf of Aqaba and the Red Sea around Saudi Arabia and into the mouth of the Straits of Hormuz takes them over the heads of the U.S. Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf and Oman. The most direct route is across Jordan and Saudi Arabia, but that's also the most improbable for political reasons. Most likely, the Turks or the Americans are going to be held to account by Iran.

An IAF airstrike immediately becomes a regional war involving NATO and the United States. There is no keeping this conflict contained. That's precisely why it's not likely to happen.

They have aerial refueling capability and could fly F-16s all the way around the Arabian Peninsula and spend the whole flight over international waters until they encounter Iranian airspace.

Turnabout is fair play, isn't it? As for Syria getting the bomb, well in the 1973 war, Golda Meir had authorized her generals to drop nuclear bombs on Syria if the Golan Heights front collapsed. So maybe Syria is entitled to bomb Israel, too?

are they p-1 or p-2? :shrug:

A diplomatic source had previously indicated that Tehran can build large numbers of P-1 centrifuges but not enough to meet the commercial centrifuge facility’s planned capacity. Tehran lacks the expertise to pro duce more advanced P-2 centrifuges, the source said. (See ACT, March 2006). http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_04/iranmurky.asp

whose turn is it again? Oh yeah--this is correct. It is indeed Israel's turn! :rofl:

Washington's got this game going, see...they say they're afraid Israel will hit Iran...then they say the US is considering hitting Iran...then they say they're afraid the Israelis are gonna do it...

It's the United States' turn next...this is fun! But dammit...I wish I had been keeping a "link trail", y'know, to actually SHOW the back-and-forth game. I've only been keeping track of whose turn it is! :rofl:

This message is serious, btw. This has been going on for over a year (at the very least).

Mind games, people. Nothing to see here.

If it happens, they're probably good with it - in fact, a cheer would go up in the West Wing if it happened, I'd bet.

But they gotta cover their asses, so they express 'concern.' And I'm sure Bush would be (publicly) 'disappointed' if it happened.

- as