It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TA-THREATS: Iran Threatens to Destroy Israel's Nuclear Reactor if Israel Attacks Iran's

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2004 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Iran has directly threatened to strike Iraels nuclear facilities at Dimona in the event of an attack on its Bushear reactor. Irans recent test of its Shahab-3 missile seems to add weight to its threat.
 



ap.tbo.com
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Accompanied by a warning that its missiles have the range, Iran on Tuesday said it would destroy Israel's Dimona nuclear reactor if the Jewish state were to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

"If Israel fires a missile into the Bushehr nuclear power plant, it has to say goodbye forever to its Dimona nuclear facility, where it produces and stockpiles nuclear weapons," the deputy chief of the elite Revolutionary Guards, Brig. Gen. Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, said in a statement.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The stakes have seemed to have risen to a highly dangerous level with these latest threats by Iran. An attack by Israel on Irans reactor could cause untold amounts of radiation to be released in the middle east if not a nuclear conflagration upon Israeli retaliation.

Related News Links:
www.csmonitor.com
www.reuters.com
www.spacewar.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
NEWS: Iran Develops New Missile To Counter Israel
iran is going to improve shahab-3

[edit on 18-8-2004 by Banshee]




posted on Aug, 17 2004 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Things are going to get very interesting...



Even the very ability of Israel's military to repeat the decisive strike achieved at Osirak appears doubtful. While the Iraqi nuclear effort was concentrated at the Osirak plant, nuclear experts say the Iranians have dispersed their program at multiple sites, some of which are hidden underground.


Seems like it would be pointless to go in until they actually have a finished warhead and missile to carry it. But as far along as their nuclear program is and with the Shahab-3 tests - can that be very far away?



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 12:17 AM
link   
What are they going toattack it with a conventional Shahab 3
. There is no way that they possess the capaility of doing any damage. The Shahab 3 is a glorified scud.
Just more empty words from the useless Iranians, poor bastards.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 12:46 AM
link   
I have a hard time calling this one.
My gut says stand by for an anti-climax. Would Iran REALLY make a move which almost ensures their defeat and humiliation, and probable occupation by American forces in the end?
Yes if they have the bomb.
Yes if they think we're gonna invade them anyway they may start it to rally the neighborhood against us into a massive war which could perhaps prompt UN separation. A historic political victory for Iran to be sure if it happened.
Yes if they think they can take out Israel in their final blaze of glory, and eventually come out on top generations later.

Holy crap... when you think of it that way there's hardly a reason on Earth for Iran not to attack Israel right this very moment while suprise is on their side!



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 02:44 AM
link   
I don't think we give the Iranians enough credit. I believe they simply want to be on par with their rival, just as any nation would seek to be.
This latest declaration is perfectly understandable: try to take out our reactor, and we'll try to take out yours.

NONE of this would be an issue if Israel had not developped a nuclear program. And our position on their program is problematic: we never admonished them for it. Proliferation is bad except when its good...

If Israel can have the bomb, we shouldn't expect her enemies not to want it too. And with our recent cowboy intrusion into their sand pit, we've added extra incentive. This is in VERY great part a crisis of our making and I think the only reasonable course of action is to accept Iran into the atomic family.

U.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys
Seems like it would be pointless to go in until they actually have a finished warhead and missile to carry it. But as far along as their nuclear program is and with the Shahab-3 tests - can that be very far away?


They don't need a nuke warhead to fire the missile and blow up the Israeli reactor ya know.

There are other things then nuclear warheads and for buildings and constructions they are equaly effective.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 04:52 AM
link   
This is huge, the Iranians are in a pretty good position now. i dont think either side will dare to move against the other; the stakes are too high



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Iran had a full-blown drill a couple of days ago to test the new navigation system they have placed on the Shihab-3. The report states that "the entire Iranian leadership" was involved, and it sent the military facility at Dasht-E-Kabir on alert and caused them to pull a Shihab-3 from its silo and install it on a launcher.

I would think they are sitting in a pretty good position now, myself.

www.menewsline.com...

[edit on 8-18-2004 by Valhall]



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 06:39 AM
link   
BTW, The Dimona reactor is surrounded by a number of Patriot missile systems, and probably some Arrows will also be put there.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 09:36 AM
link   
The Iranian nuclear plant must be eliminated either by Israel or some other foreign entity. No Nation in posession of nuclear weapons can be trusted that includes them all. If I were Israel I would strike now and rid the Middle East of just one more pimple on the face of Islam.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by flycatch
The Iranian nuclear plant must be eliminated either by Israel or some other foreign entity. No Nation in posession of nuclear weapons can be trusted that includes them all. If I were Israel I would strike now and rid the Middle East of just one more pimple on the face of Islam.


According to your fine logic here, Israel should also strike its own nuclear facility (as you said no nation in posession of nuclear wepons can be trusted).



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 12:42 PM
link   
The opinion(s) stating that Iran is justified to have nuclear weapons simply because Israel has them does not work for me.

Israel was attacked by its neighbors the minute it became a country in 1948 and then several more times in the next three decades until such time as it developed nuclear weapons. At no time has Israel threatend offensive use of these weapons nor has it made a national policy of annihilating another country militarily or through the use of third party terrorism.

On the other hand countries like Iran with heavy Islamic influence in their governments have either directly attacked Israel or have state sponsored terrorists do it for them. It is these countries stated goal to see the destruction of Israel in an offensive manner.

Israel has used its capability as a deterrent to aggression as history shows us, Iran on the other hand has no reason to fear an attack by any neighbor much less Israel unless of course it presents itself as a threat to Israeli survival. Iran has been attacking Israel for the better part of 25 years through proxy - why then should the Israeli's not consider a nuclear armed Iran a mortal threat to its survival.

Has Israel with its rumored 200 warheads held for the better part of two decades attacked Iran - no it has not, it can be said then that Israel does not present a threat to a peaceful innocent Iran.

Iran has no need whatsoever of nuclear weapons while in the same turn Israel as a country would not exist without them.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   
It is just a miniature cold war. Lots of talk, little action.
Iran will strike IF Israel strikes first.

Does anyone know which countries on this planet are allowed to defend their freedom, people, etc, etc in case of attack and which are not? There must be a list somewhere.... or is it a basic right of every country?
Also regarding civilian victims: which ones can be called that and which ones are called acceptable collateral damage? It is hard to keep up with the terminology these days....



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 01:01 PM
link   
The US should blow up Isreal's nuclear facility, then blame it on Iran and use it as an excuse to invade Iran. BEAT MOSSAD AT THEIR OWN GAME!!



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   
The Iranians have dispersed their program at multiple sites - some are are hidden underground. Eliminate underground centrifuge installations would be very different to the strike achieved at Osirak / Iraq.

The closer Iran gets to getting nuclear capabilities, the more it worries that at the last minute, someone will try to strike out against this possibility. Iran is expected to have full nuclear ability by early 2007 and will purchase the technology it needs to enrich uranium by the first half of next year.

South Africa and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding on Tuesday on bilateral cooperation. The agreement included an arrangement for South Africa to sell uranium to Iran

Iran is in fact threatening not only Israel, but the entire region - the Persian Gulf, and even Arab countries....and the West. In addition, Iran is in blatant violation of its international commitments.

The U.S. is the one who has made recent threats against Iran - Condoleeza Rice last week, and before that it was President Bush. The US has to demonstrate that it can hit Iranian targets and so Israel need not take action on its own.

The IAEA is increasingly faced with the obligation of finding Iran in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and asking the UN Security Council to take action. Economic sanctions authorized by the Security Council and with the full support of the U.S., EU, and Russia, will be difficult, the alternatives are far worse. (Comment: Parleys won't stop Iran's nukes)


Rebekka


[edit on 18-8-2004 by Riwka]



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Remember THEY are the ones who tried to take out Saddams nuclear facility when he was building it. The iranians knew that saddam hated them more than he hated israel and besides the iranians were closer. The israelis also felt threated by saddams nuclear reactor for obvious reasons. While the israeli's were planning their strike on Iraq's facility, the iranians went in with F-4's and bombed the crap out of that facility. BUT after the smoke cleared the it became obvious that the reactor was un touched... The israelis thought they had a get out of jail free card when the iranians attacked first, it wasnt so. Saddam seeing how vernerable his facility was to being attacked from the air put up a multi million dollar SAM system up. With israeli intel they were able to figure out the exact time window that the system shuts down for every day. They attacked in that time window and ended saddams dream of nuclear weapons/energy (but mostly weapons
)

OKOK whats the lesson of all this? Iran shouldnt bitch and moan if israel strikes their reactor, they did the SAME SH*T to iraq not too long ago, (or at least attempted to) WHY? because they felt their national security was at grave risk, and rightly so. Likewise now Israel feels threatened just the same way iran did a la whenever that took place (80's?) I think the israelis have just reason to strike that reactor... the Iranians have NO reason to develop nuclear capabilities, when you are sitting on that much oil, energy becomes a laughable excuse to harness the atom, and real motives become clear.




[edit on 18-8-2004 by RealisticPatriot]



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealisticPatriot
whenever that took place (80's?)


1981



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Originally posted by RealisticPatriot,


the Iranians have NO reason to develop nuclear capabilities, when you are sitting on that much oil, energy becomes a laughable excuse to harness the atom, and real motives become clear.


I've had to shake my head back and forth everytime they've made the claim that their reactors at Bushear are for peaceful power production.

Seems to be a lot of trouble and expense for a cuontry awash in oil.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Israel and Iran are playing a dangerous game and this game ultimately is going to cause the death of many people in the area.

Where is the UN and US when you need them?

Israel and Iran are acting like children with a temper tantrum it is time to put both them on time out.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Riwka
The U.S. is the one who has made recent threats against Iran - Condoleeza Rice last week, and before that it was President Bush. The US has to demonstrate that it can hit Iranian targets and so Israel need not take action on its own.
[edit on 18-8-2004 by Riwka]


Israel need not take action of its own? of course not, your puppets the americans will do it for you!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join