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.
(visit the link for the full news article)
The legislation, knowns as the "United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012," allows Israel to purchase American KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft for the first time. Thus far, the Bush and Obama administrations refused to sell planes of this kind to the Jewish state, primarily in order to bar it from launching a massive aerial strike on Iran.
The U.S. air force's new 13.6-tonne bunker-buster - the world's largest non-nuclear bomb - is "ready to go" if the U.S. decides to strike heavily fortified Iranian nuclear facilities Michael Donley, the U.S. air force secretary, said the bomb would be available "if it needs to go today." The endorsement of the so-called Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) comes after concerns the weapon still needed development if it was to be effective against Iran's deepest installations. Read more: www.vancouversun.com...
President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not discuss in their meetings this week a reported Israeli request for advanced U.S. military technology that could be used against Iran, the White House said on Thursday. "In meetings the president had there was no such agreement proposed or reached," White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters. Obama and Netanyahu meet in the Oval office for two hours on Monday and then had lunch together.
Carney's comment came after an Israeli official quoted by the Maariv newspaper earlier on Thursday indicated that Israel has asked the United States for advanced "bunker-buster" bombs and refueling planes that could improve its ability to attack Iran's underground nuclear sites. On Tuesday, Haaretz quoted a U.S. official as indicating that Netanyahu had asked Defense Secretary Leon Panetta for the GBU-28 bunker busting bombs as well as for advanced refueling aircraft.
Originally posted by buster2010
Even more of our tech sold to a terrorist nation. Why are we doing this for a nation that we have no treaty with? Not to mention we give them the money to buy these things. Imo Israel is nothing but a welfare terrorist state.
Originally posted by justwokeup
Originally posted by buster2010
Even more of our tech sold to a terrorist nation. Why are we doing this for a nation that we have no treaty with? Not to mention we give them the money to buy these things. Imo Israel is nothing but a welfare terrorist state.
The british public wonders this also.
The UK armed forces pay to use the weapons they deploy when fighting alongside the USA.
Israel gets the weapons for free.
One would think you'd provide the charity weapons to those who'll actually aid you in a crisis. Its curious.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I held off adding my comment to see if something might occur to anyone else to ask here. It hasn't come up yet so here goes Capt. Obvious with a real zinger of a question....
What nation is playing host for Airspace to Israeli refueling planes in support of a military strike on Iran? Sure..They might want one over the Persian Gulf, but we could have refueled them there ourselves and not GIVEN them the aircraft which add a huge capability to the IDF. Is Iraq playing host? I think we can assume Turkey isn't a consideration. Georgia maybe? All this has to happen so far north of the Gulf. Hundreds and Hundreds of miles north...both directions. It has to require support over land too.
I just wonder...who is hosting the Israeli Air Force? This should be real interesting to watch develop. My impression was Iraq wanted nothing to do with being a direct party to an attack on Iran. They had their war..and lost the last one.edit on 29-7-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)
Saudi Arabia denied Wednesday a report in Britain's Sunday Express that said the Kingdom offered the Israel Air Force flight paths to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.
The Sunday Express reported this week that the Saudis had agreed to turn a blind eye and not interfere should Israel and the United States attack Iranian nuclear facilities via Saudi air space. A senior Saudi official said Wednesday morning that the report was baseless, adding that his country would demand that the newspaper print a retraction and apology.
Source
Tehran to the Gulf Waters = 418 Miles x 2 - 836 Miles for the round trip.
Tehran to the Afghani Border = 531 Miles x 2 = 1062 Miles for the round trip
F-15 Range = 3,400+ miles if configured as a flying gas can / 1,000 Nautical miles for combat operations
F-16 Range = 2,620 miles in gas can config / 340 Miles for combat operations
F-18 Range = 500 Nautical Miles
F-117 Range = 1,250 Miles in gas can config / 765 Miles for combat operations (this one at least gets there!)
AH-64 Apache Range = 1,180 Miles in gas can config / 300 Miles for combat operations
f this attack happens, I wish them luck and I want to see it succeed. Why? Simple. It has nothing to do with Iran deserving this or my thinking that this needs to happen unless Iran starts the dance themselves. It's because if this starts and we don't win in the opening 24-48 hours, we'll be fighting this a decade from now....or no one will be left to fight anything again inside a week. One of the two..and neither is something I want to even consider.
That, unfortunately, is a fair point. However even if it does succeed in this time, Iran will surely retaliate in some form, as is their right, and this will be used to justify regime change and a massive aerial assault on the whole state and MEK/other insurgent groups.
"The only winning move is not to play."
"Supplying Israel with defensive equipment including air refueling tankers, missile defense capabilities and specialized munitions" – This is an extremely interesting detail and has been seized upon by the Israeli media. In actuality, it does not herald any real improvement for Israel's armed forces in the near future. The IDF would like to enlarge its aerial tanker fleet, allowing more flexibility for long-range missions. But the U.S. Air Force's huge KC-135 tanker fleet has been in service for over fifty years and will probably carry on flying for another couple of decades at least - it soldiers on thanks to the wealth of experience of USAF maintainers, and the huge number of planes in service (over 400). Since the new KC-46 will not be coming into service for at least another five years, the only way Israel can obtain American tankers in the near future will be through a transfer of a few old USAF KC-135s. This would be a logistical nightmare for the Israeli Air-Force, forced to deal with maintaining fifty-year old jets, and more than one officer has told me that in such a case, they would rather stick with the converted Boeing 707 airliners which the IAF is already using.
"Missile defense capabilities" has already been covered and "specialized munitions" has been interpreted to mean "bunker-busting" missiles. These are indeed valuable components in the armory of an army planning to attack well fortified nuclear installations and missile silos. More of these would certainly be welcome, but once again, Israel has already received 55 GBU-28 bunker-busters from the Obama administration.