Can Iran's Pursuit of Nuclear Technology Be Thwarted By Air Strikes?

[Herschel]

As Iran continues its development of nuclear technology, powerful rival states such as the United States and Israel have publicly considered the viability of launching an air strike against Iran's nuclear facilities should Tehran come closer to developing the ability to create nuclear weapons. Israel, for example, has a nuclear monopoly in the Middle East and has shown its willingness to prevent other Middle Eastern states from acquiring nuclear arms. In 1981, when France was assisting Iraq in its quest for nuclear technology, Tel Aviv launched an air strike on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor. The attack accomplished its primary objective of putting a dent in Baghdad's nuclear research program. Would a similar attack on Iran's nuclear facilities yield similar results?

cut

Aware of Baghdad's failure to spread their nuclear program to multiple facilities, Tehran has adopted a safer approach. Realizing that other countries which have military power in the region -- such as the United States and Israel -- may attempt to take military action against their nuclear research program, Tehran has likely spread their nuclear program into multiple facilities throughout the country. This dispersal strategy will make it very difficult for an outside country to launch a successful air strike against Iran's nuclear research program.

cut

http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=103&language_id=1

It would appear the glorious air strike against Iraq cannot be repeated against Iran. It would be unfortunate if an overthrow of Iran's government was necessary, similar to Iraq.

[Darranar]

1. How was the overthrow of Iraq's government necessary?

[Jack Rabbit]

11. I think you know the answer

It was necessary to liberate the Iraqi people from their mineral rights.

[Forkboy]

2. Scary stuff again

[Herschel]

5. Well said

The prospect of Iran with nuclear weapons is frightening indeed.

[Forkboy]

7. Yeah,that's scary too

[xchrom]

3. first israel's then iran's

since you are volunteering such a grotesque idea.

[DuctapeFatwa]

4. I thought the Israeli resources were slated to be deployed to Iran

Or was that Syria? Yeah, must be. Iran has a population of about 60 million. The Israeli resources are used to shooting into smaller crowds.

[Herschel]

6. I suspect

Israel will be asked to restrain itself, as it has in both wars against Sadaam.

[bemildred]

8. A somewhat old story?

And an interesting source, associated with the dreaded Yellow Times.

But correct on the facts, Iran is not Iraq, 2004 is not 1981, and
the use of force is unlikely to forward the cause of non-proliferation.

[Djinn]

9. please tell me this was a sick joke

It would appear the glorious air strike against Iraq cannot be repeated against Iran. It would be unfortunate if an overthrow of Iran's government was necessary, similar to Iraq.


Glorious?????????? if Hamas could get hold of a bunch of bombs and fighter jets - would you call the resulting slaughter "glorious"

that is repulsive

[Muddleoftheroad]

12. Glorious

Iraq wanted to build nuclear weapons. Since, as history has indeed proved, Iraq has launched its weapons at Israel and attacked two other neighbors as well, Israel was justified in fearing Saddam having nukes.

Similarly, Israel is justified in fearing Iranian nukes.

[Djinn]

13. what's your point

what has your post above got to do with Herschel calling the deaths of thousands of Iraqi's (including children) "glorious" can yuo even IMAGINE how fast the mods would jump if someone suggested the same about an airstrike on Israel????

[Muddleoftheroad]

14. The airstrike WAS glorious

Just as the raid on Entebbe was glorious. It was a courageous act of self defense against a nation that was arming itself with nukes to attack Israel.

[beanball]

10. WMD

why is it that no one seem to care about Israel's nuclear weapons ,they get a pass and the Arabs get shafted.?

[Muddleoftheroad]

15. Ah, the poor Arabs

They only outnumber Israel many times over and have enormous oil resources and control over 20 nations.

Perhaps if they didn't make a habit of attacking Israel and ethnically cleansing Jews from their nations, then Israel wouldn't see the need for WMD.

[Djinn]

16. this will no doubt be pulled

but if muddle can use narky sarcasm so can I, I assume

Perhaps if they didn't make a habit of attacking Israel and ethnically cleansing Jews from their nations, then Israel wouldn't see the need for WMD.

compare the number of Arab "attacks" against Israel to the number of Israeli attacks in the OT

compare the "ethnic cleansing" from arab countries to the Palestinian cleansing from ww2 onwards...how many arab families used to live on teh Israeli coast? Also compare with statements from several Israeli MP re their wish to continue said "cleansing"

[GabysPoppy]

17. The truth is not "narky sarcasm"

History has recorded all that Muddle has said.

[Djinn]

18. I've got to get out of here

so what???????? history records a lot of things...not all of which is actually correct or unbiased.

Question: is it not even slightly distasteful to call an airstrike "glorious" especially when you consider that the Iraqi's didn't get to choose their leader.

also nice dodge of the second part of that post

[GabysPoppy]

19. History does record "lots of things"

It is too easy to label "correct" only with what you want to agree with and call the rest biased.

I also choose to answer what I want to answer. I am sorry if that makes you unhappy.

[Muddleoftheroad]

21. The airstrike remains glorious

It was a glorious act of self defense by a small nation threatened by yet another enemy.

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. Narky?

I've never been narky before.

A couple points:

* Israel is attacking terrorists in the disputed territories, because the Palestinians won't deal with the problem themselves.
* Yes, many Arabs left Israel. Perhaps being in the one non-Arab nation in the Mideast didn't appeal to them. Now let's talk ethnic cleansing of Jews in Gaza and the West Bank.

[Noon_Blue_Apples]

22. Ya, them palestinians and their messed up culture

celebrating death and destruction.

it was glorious!

them bad, us good

sad

"Tehran has likely spread their nuclear program into multiple facilities throughout the country. This dispersal strategy will make it very difficult for an outside country to launch a successful air strike against Iran's nuclear research program."

So what is stated here is that the war has made the situation less stable, does it not?

Or do the prospects of war bring glee?

Bill

[Muddleoftheroad]

23. You can only address one problem at a time

It indeed made THAT situation better. Iran is a new case and requires a new strategy.

[Noon_Blue_Apples]

24. Way, way to simplistic

Yes, nations can walk and chew gum.

the lack of causation is obvious in your analysis.

The world does not work in a vacuum.

Its the same reason why Saddam was able to amass such power and control. Short term vision. We need him because of Iran. Oops, he's a bad guy. We need Iran. Oops, we need OBL, OOPS ...and the story goes.

Well, what has changed?

You can't say those actions worked and still back the invasion. It's one or the other. Or was the invasion only necessary for verification of the weakness of Iraq?

The invasion of Iraq has made the situation worse.

There is no escaping that conclusion.