2007 – A Year of Decision in the Middle East that will affect the World – PART 6
January 10, 2007
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
THE FALLOUT FROM ATTACKING IRAN’S NUKE SITES
This is the sixth in a series of BLOGS on the year 2007 as a Year of Decision for Israel on the Iranian Nuclear Threat. The major question of the series is simply “What is Israel going to do about it?” How Israel handles this problem, has, is, and will continue to, cause the world to hold its breath. As you know by now, my guesstimate for the time of an attack against Israel will occur on some day during the time period 2008 to 2012. I suspect the events of 2007 may well determ ine how early or late it will occur
in this time frame.
If Israel decides to blast the Iranian Nuclear Complex, what will be the fallout from the act– Number 6 in this series deals with some of the ramifications of that question.
Since the articles appeared in UK newspapers a few days ago, saying it looked like Israel was about to launch an attack against the Iranian nuclear facilities, queries and phone calls caused me to issue this six set series to provide as much information as possible on the subject, so that you could look at the information, and make your own guess.
Since this is the last article in the series, I am going to give you some answers to questions on the subject as they relate to the Middle East situation.
May I remind you that opinions are like noses, in that most people have one!
Do I think that nuclear missiles would be launched against Israel by any of the nations possessing them, if she were to attempt to knock out the Iranian missile complex? NO!
Do I think chemical and biological missiles would be launched against Israel by the Islamic nations if she were to use nuclear tactical weapons to knock out Iranian nuclear facilities? YES!
Do I think conventional weapons would be launched against Israel by the Islamic nations if she used conventional weapons against the Iranian nuclear complex
? YES!
Does Israel have all sorts of contingency plans for an attack to knock out the Iranian nuclear facilities
? YES
Has the IAF been practicing for an attack against the Iranian nuclear facilities? YES
Will Israel actually attack the Iranian nuclear facilities before a Jihad is launched against her? There are so many variables involved in trying to answer this question, and so many circumstances that could cause it to go either way, that I confess my answer is no better than a wild guess, or what we referred to as a “WAG” in the agency. I WOULD SAY, PROBABLY NOT.
If Israel does carry out a pre-emptive strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities, will it unite 10 Arab nations in a Jihad against Israel
? YES
Do I believe it quite likely that a Jihad will be launched against Israel at some point in time between 2008 and 2012 regardless of whether or not a pre-emptive strike is made against the Iranian nuclear facilities? YES
Will the United States, Europe, Russia, and China immediately join in the war between Israel and the 10 Arab nations? NO
Will all the nations of the “old” world (Pre-Columbus) unite with the 10 Arab nations some three and one-half years after Islam initially attacks Israel, at what is known as the final battle, the battle of Armageddon? YES
Yaakov Katz, an excellent journalist, has an outstanding analysis of the pros and cons Israel faces in “to launch or not to launch,” from which I will draw in this and future BLOGS. It appears in the Jerusalem Post, and is titled “Decision Time.”
Decision Time
BY YAAKOV KATZ, THE JERUSALEM POST
Begin Excerpt 6 from Jerusalem Post
THE FALLOUT
During this summer’s war in Lebanon Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, head of Military Intelligence, warned one night during a press conference at military headquarters in Tel Aviv that Hizbullah sleeper cells abroad, directed and supported by Iran, had been “awakened” and were preparing plans to attack Jewish and Israeli sites
.
The assumption within Military Intelligence took into account Iran’s long-reaching terror arm. Iran is held responsible for the bomb ing of the Argent
ine Israelite Mutual Association building in Buenos Aires in 1994 in which 85 people were killed.
Hizbullah is also believed to be behind the bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992 in which 29 people were killed and 242 wounded.
“If Israel decides to attack Iran’s nuclear installations, it will have to take in
to account a response in kind,” Brom wrote.
The Iranians would most probably utilize Hizbullah to ignite the Lebanese border like they did this past summer when 4,000 rockets pounded the North. While Hizbullah refrained from firing long-range Iranian-made Fajr and Zelzal missiles, it would most probably launch the missiles – which can reach south of Tel Aviv – following an attack on Iran.
Iran has also developed its own ballistic missile, the Shihab 3, which is said to have a range of 1,330 km. and gives Iran the capability to strike directly at targets in Israel. In mid-December 2005, it was also reported that Iran had acquired 18 BM-25 missiles from North Korea which have a range of 2,500 km. Iran is also said to be in the midst of developing missiles that would be capable of carrying heavier payloads for increased distances: 2,000 km., 2,500 km. and even 4,000 km.
No solid evidence of these advanced Shihabs is available, and it is unclear whether the Iranians have moved beyond the initial planning phase. But if they are being developed – and MI believes they are – then they indicate that Iran also has its sights on European countries – possibly even US military bases in Germany, one diplomatic official speculated.
While the Shihab is deadly when carrying a conventional warhead – its payload is up to 800 kg. – Brom warned that Israel would also have to take into account Iranian use of chemical weapons. For that purpose, the Arrow 2 anti-ballistic missile defense system, which according to senior IAF officers is capable of intercepting all of Iran’s missiles, was developed.
“The fallout of a preemptive attack would be painful,” admits a high-ranking security official. “But we need to think of the trade-off: A nuclear bomb could destroy the State of Israel.”
An Uncontrollable Region
In April, following close to two years of work, Dan Meridor presented his report on Israel’s defense doctrine to then-defense minister Shaul Mofaz. The report, the first of its kind, made practical recommendations concerning defense strategy: Develop anti-missile systems, upgrade the National Security Council and prepare
the IDF for low-intensity conflicts.
An additional and no less important recommendation was: under no circumstances to allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. According to Meridor’s report, success for Iran would set off a race to join the nuclear club throughout the Middle East.
“The region,” the report states, “would become uncontrollable.”
That day might not be too far away, With Iran plunging ahead with its program in defiance of the UN and the international community, Egypt, Algeria, S audi Ar
abia, Morocco, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates announced in early November that they intended to begin upgrading their nuclear energy programs. Of the six, the most advanced by far are Egypt and Algeria. Turkey is also reported to be toying with the idea of starting a nuclear program.
“To remain a player in the region, these Arab countries will have no choice but to quickly develop nuclear weapons,” says a senior government official responsible for formulating strategic policy.
The countries that would be most affected by Iranian success, Meridor’s report claims, are Saudi Arabia and Egypt, both heavily dependent on American military support and afraid to lose their place of dominance in the region. Saudi Arabia is a leading Sunni power while Iran is a Shiite-dominated country.
“The Saudis will not be able to stand by and let their archenemies overtake them militarily,” said the official. “Egypt is the same and will want to retain its military superiority in the region.”
This was actually pointed out three years ago in a report – “Saudi Arabia – a New Player on the Nuclear Scene?” – published in the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies’ Notes by Ephraim Asculi, a veteran of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission.
Asculi claimed that a Sunni fear of a Shi’ite nuclear bomb prompted Saudi Arabia to strike a deal with Pakistan under which it would contribute to the Pakistani nuclear project and in return receive a commitment from Islamabad to provide it with a “nuclear umbrella.” Saudi Arabia can also launch the weapons; it purchased 36 CSS-2 missiles, with a range of 3,000 kilometers, from China in the late 1980s.
End Excerpt 6 from Jerusalem Post
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.