Skip to comments.Israel Presents Aerial Photos of Iran Nuclear Sites to Bush
Posted on 04/12/2005 5:04:38 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
Ariel Sharons military attache presented aerial photos of Iranian nuclear installations during the Israeli prime ministers summit with US President George W. Bush, Israeli public radio reported on Tuesday.
General Yoav Gallan, who accompanied Sharon to Mondays talks at Bushs Texas ranch, presented the photos as well as information gathered by the Israeli intelligence services on Teherans nuclear programme.
The radio, which did not give details on how the photos were taken, said the images proved that the Iranian nuclear programme was at a very advanced stage.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan confirmed the two leaders had talked about their shared concern about Irans intentions with their nuclear programme but denied they had discussed the possibility of a preemptive military strike by Israel, aimed at ensuring Iran does not acquire atomic weapons.
The United States and Israel have both accused Iran of using its atomic energy programme as cover for a plan to develop nuclear arms, a charge denied by Teheran, which says it needs nuclear power as an alternative energy source.
Israel itself has never publicly acknowledged that it maintains a nuclear arsenal but foreign experts say it has between 100 and 200 nuclear warheads.
Let's hope this time they aren't feeding us crap so we go and do their dirty work for them.
Well, why not, considering that OUR intelligence isn't worth dog drool...
...and your clearance is to what level that helps you qualify that statement?
That's what the unclassified portion of the Intelligence Reform Commission report said or at least strongly implied -- that US intelligence on Iran is grossly lacking. You'd do best to listen to Israel.
Well, we are always telling them not to attack, or not to fight back in ways that are truly effective, so we might as well do the dirty work...JFK
Are you referring to the intel that led us to believe that Iraq possessed WMD? If you are, you're (conveniently) forgetting that our own intel services gave us that same "crap." .....as well as Great Britain's.
I dont know whats going on thats for sure, WE would of course expect them to say they have no intentions of a preemptive strike , After all if the Media found out there was a plan for that they would immediately publish it so Iran could get prepared. Iran doesnt need spies , they have our media. I have heard there are 3 carriers headed that way./ I dont think they are there to go water skiing.
The news media told him so!
Then ... look out.
Who took out the nuclear reactor back in the eighties? Since then we have been asking them not to attack so we do not upset the Arabs in the area.
Believe me, if Isreal really felt threatened she would not ask us squat and there would be a smoking hole in Iran.
Thats the nuclear reactor in Iraq.
They do have a habit of doing that I've noticed.
No. An ivasion would involve subsequent nation building. Facilities in Iran can be destroyed with airpower. I have no desire to have to rebuild Iran.
And if Iran gets nukes, would you have a desire to watch millions of people in Israel instantly be vaporized?
What if they develop nukes and sell them to terrorists? Would it be in you desires to watch NY or LA or Chicago or Washington become a mushroom cloud? This scenario could escalate to an all out nuclear war (worse case scenario).
Believe me, I do agree with you, but I feel that, barring a slight miracle, Iran will get nukes and they will, directly or indirectly, use them on us.
No way. First off, the Iranians learned from the 1980 mistakes of Iraq when Israel took out that reactor. So this time, the new and improved plan is to deceive by burial and disperse by space. Facilities are buried deep and spread way out. You'll never know if you've truly hit the jackpot unless you can verify and that means, unfortunately, boots on the ground. There are so many sites to hit that an SpecOps team would be compromised and eliminated before completing the mission. In fact, I doubt we could field enough teams to do the job in the manner in which it must be done.
Too bad the RATS just forced us to kill our Bunker Buster program that used smallish nukes to strike deep underground. I'm pretty sure that the Israeli nukes are not quite so sophisticated. Do you have any idea how that particular mushroom cloud will damage our country, economically and ecologically? It's not something I'm aching to see, unless we are in control of the events. Israel, in fear for her life, will not waste a second thought on our situation.
When I was on active duty during the 1980's it basically sucked then too. Why do you think that the oldest joke in the military since Christ was a corporal is that Military Intelligence is a total oxymoron? I lost buddies on the Grenada op (and since only about 12 died on that jaunt that's a lot) and I knew guys that were wounded in Panama due to poor intel. In fact just about every modern day fiasco in the realm of military ops can be laid at the foot of the intel received.
That's NOT the fault of our guys! Let me be clear: The true fault lies in the US Congress of the 1970's. Specifically the Carter administration and the CHURCH committee that voted to totally gut the capabilities of both the military industrial complex and the CIA to carry out intel ops because they were ummmmm distasteful to the tender sentiments of American liberals.
Israel photos of Iran nuke sights given to Bush - Ping!
The recent report on Iraq intelligence failures. Don't you read the news?
I think we have the same picures.
Pres. Bush's own commission on intelligence failures in Iraq told me so.
The administration did not have to wait for Israeli intelligence to show him those photographs. Bush and Cheney could simply have read "Atomic Iran," in which surveillance photographs of multiple Iranian nuclear facilities are printed and discussed in detail, making the exact same point.
Thanks for pointing out both points: that our intelligence sucks, and that the cause of it are the very politicians who today are complaining about the fact our intelligence sucks.
We know Iraq possessed WMD because they used them against the Kurds and the Iranians. The UN reported that Saddam had unaccounted for stocks of WMD with no documentation that they had been destroyed. Hence the need for inspections.
The corrrect question should be where are those WMD. I suspect that they were transferred out of Iraq into Syria during the runup to the war or they are still hidden somewhere in Iraq. The idea that Saddam had no WMD is the kind of crap the Dems foist on the American public.
You're preachin' to the choir, kabar. (I'm well aware Saddam was up to his eyeballs in WMD). I was merely debunking oolatec's assertion that Israel gave us phony intel in order to get us to "do their dirtywork for them" (take out Saddam).
Not on this deal, partner. News and itel commentary more and more reveal Russia is supplying, not only Iran, but other elements hostile to U.S. efforts through the whole region. It's looking like the cold war all over again, Bush and Putin as "drinking pals" notwithstanding.
I think you're right...
If that's so, it puts even greater pressure on Putin to destroy the nuke sites.
I wonder if the Cold War ever really ended. To me, it just moved to a different phase where the hostilities were less obvious to the average American. Putin and Bush seem almost a modern version of FDR and Stalin. Cozying up to "uncle Joe" in 1944-45 didn't work, and cozying up to his neo-Stalinist successor 60 years later won't work either. Russia, under whatever name has never been our friend, only a temporary ally of mutual convenience.
<< ...and your Clearance is to what level that helps you qualify that statement? >>
We're right up there with former National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger.
Only a maroon would construe a comment suggesting someone was smart enough to get another someone to do some heavy lifting for them as an insult.
But then in your zeal I guess you are blind.
Sod off swampy.
Boy someone musta pissed in your cornflakes this morning.
"It's looking like the cold war all over again"
A cold war might be the best course of action. Containment isn't as messy as shooting hot lead and dropping high explosives. Changing your enemy's mind about an ideology doesn't necessarily mean using a bullet to disfigure the brain. The Soviets never had a real parity with the US (but, no doubt, they were quite powerful). Because containment worked, it became quite obvious over the decades, and especially in the end, who had a better system for living life and creating wealth. The same might be said of what Iran suffers and what her neighbors don't.