TToI:‘"Sparks fly"’ over US policy on Iran at meeting between Netanyahu and US envoy

[twa]

I think you err in believing a invasion is required, and other things....but I'm done with this.

[JMS]

I think you err in believing a invasion is required, and other things....but I'm done with this.

Invasion is the least objectionable way to ensure Iran's nuclear program is not continued...

[visionary]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/world/middleeast/us-is-weighing-new-curbs-on-iran-in-nod-to-israel.html?_r=1&smid=tw-nytimesworld&seid=auto

To Calm Israel, U.S. Offers Ways to Restrain Iran

With Israel openly debating whether to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months, the Obama administration is moving ahead with a range of steps short of war that it hopes will forestall an Israeli attack, while forcing the Iranians to take more seriously negotiations that are all but stalemated.

Already planned are naval exercises and new antimissile systems in the Persian Gulf, and a more forceful clamping down on Iranian oil revenue. The administration is also considering new declarations by President Obama about what might bring about American military action, as well as covert activities that have been previously considered and rejected.

Later this month the United States and more than 25 other nations will hold the largest-ever minesweeping exercise in the Persian Gulf, in what military officials say is a demonstration of unity and a defensive step to prevent Iran from attempting to block oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, the United States and Iran have each announced what amounted to dueling defensive exercises to be conducted this fall, each intended to dissuade the other from attack.

The administration is also racing to complete, in the next several months, a new radar system in Qatar that would combine with radars already in place in Israel and Turkey to form a broad arc of antimissile coverage, according to military officials. The message to Iran would be that even if it developed a nuclear weapon and mounted it atop its growing fleet of missiles, it could be countered by antimissile systems.

The question of how explicit Mr. Obama’s warnings to Iran should be is still a subject of internal debate, closely tied to election-year politics. Some of Mr. Obama’s advisers have argued that Israel needs a stronger public assurance that he is willing to take military action, well before Iran actually acquired a weapon. But other senior officials have argued that Israel is trying to corner Mr. Obama into a military commitment that he does not yet need to make.

[Jumbo]

Every analysis I have seen has indicated that Iran's nuclear sites cannot possibly be wiped out with airstrikes alone. Period. They learned the lesson after what happened to Syria's reactor a decade ago, and have been preparing for years. Plus, several of the sites are underground in the middle of heavily populated cities.

I wonder if Netanyahu is hoping to involve the US in another full scale Iraq style invasion. That is the only military solution that would actually stop the Iranian nuclear program.

(Give me a minute ti get my hat...ok) Did you really think we did Iraq (Afghanistan was just part of a cover/justification for what we really wanted) only to stop there? We have the biggest of plans for that whole region.

[JMS]

(Give me a minute ti get my hat...ok) Did you really think we did Iraq (Afghanistan was just part of a cover/justification for what we really wanted) only to stop there? We have the biggest of plans for that whole region.

Seymour Hersh had a cover story on the New Yorker a few years back saying GW had plans to take Iran after Iraq, but couldn't because we got so bogged down in Iraq.

The Bush Administrations Plan for Iran from 2007

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/10/08/071008fa_fact_hersh

[DaGoonie55]

I don't know what to think. In the last few years, Syria has taken itself out of power, Egypt is rebuilding, Afghanistan has never even entered the picture, Iraq is rebuilding. The only threat left to the west is Iran. We're in bed with everyone else that matters. My dad told me about the Lebanon bombings. He was on the radar station when it lit up. He called it in and the Admiral from the flagship told all to stand down and basically turn their attention to the south. Israel will do what it wants. We would be best served staying out of their way/ looking south @ Mexico and grabbing a dos equis.

[JMS]

I don't know what to think. In the last few years, Syria has taken itself out of power, Egypt is rebuilding, Afghanistan has never even entered the picture, Iraq is rebuilding. The only threat left to the west is Iran. We're in bed with everyone else that matters. My dad told me about the Lebanon bombings. He was on the radar station when it lit up. He called it in and the Admiral from the flagship told all to stand down and basically turn their attention to the south. Israel will do what it wants. We would be best served staying out of their way/ looking south @ Mexico and grabbing a dos equis.

The problem with that is Israel cannot do it without US help. Everybody knows this including the Iranians. So if Israel attacks it means the US attacked, and we have a lot more vulnerable assets globally for Iran to hit back on. That's not an argument not to act... But it is an argument that "sitting back and watching" isn't an option. We will be neck deep in this one if it happens regardless of what our politicians tell the public.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Israel is the most dangerous country in the world. The biggest threat to world peace by a wide margin.

[twa]

Israel is the most dangerous country in the world. The biggest threat to world peace by a wide margin.

must be why so many keep trying to exterminate them

a cornered animal IS rather dangerous....a intelligent one even more so.

[Thiebear]

If Iran attack Israel, the United Nations will have failed it's own Charter and reason for coming into existence.

And Iran has said enough now to take them seriously?

[JMS]

must be why so many keep trying to exterminate them

a cornered animal IS rather dangerous....a intelligent one even more so.

Israel is a regional super power who introduced nukes into the region first. There policy of always negotiating from strength is part of the problem. It's not really negotiating if the other guy has no choice but to accept your terms. Likewise In Israel's many wars, she's struck first more times than was attacked first.

• Israel Struck First,
  
• Israel was Attacked,
  
• Toss up
  

Israeli Wars

• War of Independence - (November 1947 - July 1949)
• Suez War - (October 1956)
  
• Six Day War - (June 1967)
• Yom Kippur War (October 1973)
• 1982 Lebanon War (1982)
  
• 2006 Lebanon War (summer 2006)
  
• Gaza War (December 2008 - January 2009)

---------- Post added September-3rd-2012 at 02:11 PM ----------

If Iran attack Israel, the United Nations will have failed it's own Charter and reason for coming into existence.

And Iran has said enough now to take them seriously?

uhhh, not really. The United Nations wasn't designed to keep Israel safe or the ME at peace. The UN was designed to provide a forum to discuss international issues. We designed it weak because we didn't want it dictating to us. So If the UN is ineffective with Iran, that means it's working as designed and that somebody on the security council has Iran's back. As the United States has used it's veto more times than all other security council members combined since 1980 to safeguard Israel's back.

The UN isn't the solution to everything, it's merely the solution to some things.

[visionary]

https://twitter.com/Reuters

IRAN COULD STRIKE U.S. BASES IN MIDDLE EAST IF ISRAEL ATTACKS ITS NUCLEAR FACILITIES - HEZBOLLAH LEADER NASRALLAH

3:50 PM

[visionary]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/former-cia-chief-tells-haaretz-decision-on-iran-strike-can-wait.premium-1.462519

Former CIA chief tells Haaretz: Decision on Iran strike can wait

A decision on attacking Iran need not be taken at present, as current assessments point to its achieving nuclear-weapons capabilities no earlier than 2013 or 2014, former director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Michael Hayden told Haaretz on Monday.

Gen. (res.) Hayden, who led the CIA when the Syrian nuclear reactor in al-Kibar was destroyed by the Israel Air Force five years ago, also believes that if an operation against Iran were eventually deemed necessary, the United States would be much more capable of undertaking it than Israel.

Hayden arrived in Tel Aviv on Monday for a seminar to be held today by the Institute for National Security Studies and its cyber warfare program, run by retired Israel Defense Forces Col. Gabi Siboni.

[twa]

In Israel's many wars, she's struck first more times than was attacked first.

.

a cornered animal IS rather dangerous....a intelligent one even more so.

[Corcaigh]

Likewise In Israel's many wars, she's struck first more times than was attacked first.

Meh, when Hezbollah and Palestinian militant groups have are engaged in long term campaigns of launching rockets at you, it's a bit silly to claim that the Israeli's are the ones the started the conflict.

[visionary]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israel-tries-to-ease-differences-with-us-over-iran-seeks-forceful-statement-from-americans/2012/09/04/a784dfe8-f6cc-11e1-a93b-7185e3f88849_story.html

Israel tries to ease differences with US over Iran, seeks forceful statement from Americans

Israeli officials said Tuesday they are in close discussions with the United States over how to deal with the Iranian nuclear program, seeking to ease tensions that have emerged between the two allies over a possible Israeli military strike against Iran.

The dialogue, in which Israel is looking for President Barack Obama to take a tough public position against Iran, suggests the odds of an Israeli attack in the near term have been reduced.

Israel, convinced that Iran isn’t taking seriously U.S. vows to block it from acquiring nuclear weapons, believes that time to stop the Iranians is quickly running out. A series of warnings by Israeli officials in recent weeks has raised concerns that Israel could soon stage a unilateral military strike. In response, senior American officials have made clear they oppose any Israeli military action at the current time.

After tense exchanges with the Americans, Israeli political and defense officials said Tuesday that the sides are now working closely together in hopes of getting their positions in sync. Clearer American assurances on what pressure it is prepared to use against Iran, including possible military action, would reduce the need for Israel to act alone, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a security matter.

[twa]

http://debka.com/article/22334/Massed-US-UK-French-navies-for-drill-simulating-breach-of-blocked-Hormuz

The third US aircraft carrier, USS Stennis, is moving into place off the Iranian Gulf coast to lead a 12-day naval exercise of 25 nations on Sept 16-27, that will include a large-scale minesweeping drill simulating the breaching of the Strait of Hormuz against Iranian efforts to block oil passage through the strategic waterway. President Barack Obama may see Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on the last day of the exercise. He hopes to present him with proof of US readiness for military action against Iran and demonstrate that an Israeli strike is superfluous.

The Stennis will join two other aircraft carriers, the USS Enterprise and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, and their strike groups, which are already on operational duty off the coast of Iran, ready for the drill which kicks off in the strategic Strait of Hormuz on Sept. 16

[Gibbsisgod2006]

The US and Israel can do more damage through cyber attacks then Air Strikes. The way the Iranians have their nuclear facilities set up bunker buster would only do a certain amount of damage. However, Israel is not the only country in the middle east that is threaten by a nuclear Iran the Saudis are as well because the majority of the Saudis are Sunnies and they tend to not get only ****es. The other problem is that the Iranian would become the regional hegemon if they were able to produce nuclear weapons and they would flex its new found power in the region.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

The idea of attacking Iran is insanity. Iran is a heavily armed and fortified country, with a very good military, with a landmass that is about Britain and France put together...this isn't Afghanistan or even Iraq. To invade and occupy Iran, you would actually need to reinstate the ****ing draft, which is political suicide, or use nuclear weapons which is political suicide ^ 2 (Nuking Iran pretty much turns America into a pariah state for a while).

Sheer insanity, which is par for the course for neoconservatism and Israeli foreign policy.

[Koolblue13]

Sheer insanity, which is par for the course for neoconservatism and Israeli foreign policy.

How are you blaming neoconservatives if the CiC is a Dem?

It's not insanity IMO, it's murder.

[FanboyOf91]

The US and Israel can do more damage through cyber attacks then Air Strikes. The way the Iranians have their nuclear facilities set up bunker buster would only do a certain amount of damage. However, Israel is not the only country in the middle east that is threaten by a nuclear Iran the Saudis are as well because the majority of the Saudis are Sunnies and they tend to not get only ****es. The other problem is that the Iranian would become the regional hegemon if they were able to produce nuclear weapons and they would flex its new found power in the region.

Yeah, Saudi Arabia would have to start their own program to avoid getting strategically outflanked.

[Koolblue13]

Yeah, Saudi Arabia would have to start their own program to avoid getting strategically outflanked.

Or SA could just control all the oil and have a body guard like us to do the dirty work.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

How are you blaming neoconservatives if the CiC is a Dem?

It's not insanity IMO, it's murder.

Obama is the one trying NOT to get into a suicidal war with Iran, Romney would drive the bus into that wall at 60 miles per hour.

[visionary]

It's not insanity IMO, it's murder.

Well yes, but so are drone strikes on random civilians across multiple countries, but there isn't much debate or complaint in the US about those.

Thinking of invading and occupying a place like Iran is a few hundred levels past murder.

Then again, I haven't actually heard anyone suggest doing that.

[Gibbsisgod2006]

Or SA could just control all the oil and have a body guard like us to do the dirty work.

At that point they probably would want to produce there own nuclear weapons.

---------- Post added September-5th-2012 at 09:33 AM ----------

Obama is the one trying NOT to get into a suicidal war with Iran, Romney would drive the bus into that wall at 60 miles per hour.

It wouldn't be a war just a joint air strike plus this is all talk right now. If we were to strike Iran with Isreal we would face the threat of being attacked through a proxy. The cyber attacks are doing just as much damage as a bunker buster is doing.