Posted on 03/26/2010 7:53:36 AM PDT by jhpigott
Israel could use tactical nukes on Iran-thinktank 26 Mar 2010 11:03:37 GMT Source: Reuters
By Dan Williams
JERUSALEM, March 26 (Reuters) - Deeply concerned as it is by the risk of a nuclear-armed Iran, Israel has never even hinted at using atomic weapons to forestall the perceived threat.
But now a respected Washington think tank has said that low-radioactive yield "tactical" nuclear warheads would be one way for the Israelis to destroy Iranian uranium enrichment plants in remote, dug-in fortifications.
Despite the 65-year-old taboo against carrying out -- or, for that matter, mooting -- nuclear strikes, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) says in a new report that "some believe that nuclear weapons are the only weapons that can destroy targets deep underground or in tunnels".
But other independent experts are on record warning that such a scenario is based on the "myth" of a clean atomic attack and would be too politically hazardous to justify.
In their study titled "Options in Dealing with Iran's Nuclear Program", CSIS analysts Abdullah Toukan and Anthony Cordesman envisage the possibility of Israel "using these warheads as a substitute for conventional weapons" given the difficulty its jets would face in reaching Iran for anything more than a one-off sortie.
(Excerpt) Read more at alertnet.org ...
Not surprised...
Israel is in a tough spot. A nuclear Iran is a huge threat. But nuking Iran could draw a military response from many fronts. And given the current muslim-in-chief in the White House, the US could join the Middle East countries against Israel.
If nothing else, this is a reminder to all parties concerned (especially the US) that Israel is a SOPHISTICATED nuclear weapons nation.
It isn’t some backwater nuke wannebe with 1st generation, dirty, gravity dropped nukes.
And, if anyone in the world would have a need for real suitcase nukes, Israel would be that anyone.
It is certainly a less risky military approach.
Deep penetrating nukes would work fine, and are well-deserved.
Obama won’t let Israel fly over Iraq, so this is the best option.
Not good news for the folks working in these underground facilities. I say go for it.
When it comes to self preservation, I would guess nothing is off the table.
History has shown that going to war against Israel is a losing proposition.
It will be like the finger of God streaking from the heavens touching the desert, a dull "whoomp", and a little dust out off the exits if deep enough.
In the words of "the one", I say..."GO FOR IT!". When the world condemns Israel, Bibi can simply say, "I travelled to the US to get its help in a conventional strike. When Obama put Iran ahead of Israel's existance, we decided that we are on our own and had to use nuclear weapons. Had Obama helped us, we would have not had to resort to low-yield, deep penetrating, special weapons". "You wanted change....you got it America".
I am dead serious in saying this: I wish Israel would nuke Tehran & DARE the rest of the Muzzies to do anything about it...& if they try, then nuke THEIR capital cities as well.
Exactly. Israel will do what it feels it has to in order to survive, and that is exactly why our administration’s treatment of Israel lately is so destabilizing.
Iran’s Arabic neighbors wouldn’t be unhappy to see Israel take out the nuclear facilities. I don’t know where the reaction would come from. I do expect that Iran would attack any nearby US assets including naval forces.
Unless Obama gave our military the go-ahead to at least defend themselves, he would be absolute toast. The firestorm that would consume his administration would be unimaginable. Nothing he could say after wards would make a difference.
IDF tested a Jericho II last year with a CEP of 25 yards, 2000 miles away into the middle of the Med. Thats close enough for a 1-10kt sub-surface nuke. Hell, the energy flying out of the atmosphere itself will bury the warhead tens of yards underneath the desert.....right where you want it to explode.
If the IDF is worried about a "second strike" from Arabs, they have their (possibly) nuclear armed subs with Penguin cruise missle hybrids ready for an airburst over some key targets...wink wink. Dont forget. Israel also has neutron bombs, similar to France's old Plutons, and probably sophisticated to have some SADM's available as well.
May God guide their aim true.
“You mean open intervention or quiet blackmail?”
Quiet blackmail is certain. Open intervention, quite possible.
Oh my..... Please elloborate on the neutron. SADM?
By contemporary standards, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were “tactical” nukes. These hints and rumors are all part of the meta-diplomacy. The fact is, Israel is a moral nation and no moral nation will use nukes preemptively. As sad as may be, Israel is prepared to endure a first strike, at which point the Middle East will be changed forever. Their strategy is to make sure everyone knows just how high the price would be for such an attempted first strike.
Maybe the US military commanders in Iraq could ignore the order, let the IAF fly over & back home, & say @ a later date that they never got the message?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.