Skip to comments.U.S. Warns Israel on Strike
Posted on 01/14/2012 9:20:01 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
WASHINGTONU.S. defense leaders are increasingly concerned that Israel is preparing to take military action against Iran, over U.S. objections, and have stepped up contingency planning to safeguard U.S. facilities in the region in case of a conflict.
President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other top officials have delivered a string of private messages to Israeli leaders warning about the dire consequences of a strike. The U.S. wants Israel to give more time for the effects of sanctions and other measures intended to force Iran to abandon its perceived efforts to build nuclear weapons.
Stepping up the pressure, Mr. Obama spoke by telephone on Thursday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will meet with Israeli military officials in Tel Aviv next week.
The high-stakes planning and diplomacy comes as U.S. officials warn Tehran, including through what administration officials described Friday as direct messages to Iran's leaders, against provocative actions.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
They will try to hold the world hostage, that is an absolute fact.
“They will use that nuke to threaten and intimidate every country in the world by doing whatever they want.”
The Iranian proponents of the nuke may think that, but if so they are in for a rude awakening (for details, see van Creveld’s analysis of nuclear proliferation). Despite the apocalyptic views of some factions in the Iranian mullah-ocracy, I suspect that the dominant factions have a much more realistic view of what they might accomplish by developing their nuke, starting with careful consideration of what happened to Libya’s Quaddafi after he renounced his WMD development efforts. http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/32007.pdf They, like the North Koreans, will draw the obvious conclusion: http://38north.org/2011/03/libyan-lessons-for-north-korea/
The World Can Live With a Nuclear Iran
By Martin van Creveld
Though the possibility of nuclear confrontation between superpowers has greatly diminished since the end of the Cold War, the possession of nuclear weapons by states whose conflicts are unresolved could turn out to be equally threatening, notes Van Creveld ( The Transformation of War ). He here considers the likelihood of conflict between North and South Korea, China and Taiwan, China and India, India and Pakistan, Israel and the Arab states, as well as the nuclear status of other countries currently developing the scientific, technological and industrial infrastructure that would enable them to build weapons of mass destruction. Van Creveld begins this academic study by describing the basic characteristics of large-scale warfare as it evolved before the introduction of nuclear weapons and the effect of the latter on both the countries that possess them and on those countries threatened by them. Finally, he assesses the impact of nuclear proliferation on the future of war itself, including the configuration of the armies that would be prepared to wage it. For specialists.
But dont’ you realize that a strike on Iran would be almost as bad as our marines pissing on some dead terrorists?
Thanks Ernest. The US has done this multiple times, perhaps it’s more like “don’t throw me in that briar patch”.
US Warns Israel Not To Attack Iran
Australian Broadcasting Company | Posted Fri May 15, 2009 8:34am AEST | Anne Barker
Posted on 05/15/2009 8:06:56 AM PDT by lewisglad
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
Europe decided against cooperating with sanctions for at least another six months.