Now That Election Is Over, When Will Israel Bomb Iran?

[g5000]

You forgot all about that, didn't you?

.

 

[g5000]

On the 24 September at Israel’s National Institute of Security Studies, an obdurately dull building off a main road in Tel Aviv, three dozen men and women drawn from the top echelons of Israel’s political and military elite met to play a war-game, the outcome of which could help decide whether Israel goes to war with Iran.

I was in Israel with film director, Kevin Sim, who was making a documentary on the war game for ‘Dispatches’ on Channel 4.

The notional starting point of the game was 9 November 2012, just after the American presidential elections.

Here's How Israel Thinks It Could Attack Iran Without Setting Off WW3 - Business Insider


.

 

[AmyNation]

Within the next year, and I think they will do perhaps something like drone strikes.

 

[waltky]

World powers presented Iran with a proposal which would involve shutting an enrichment plant...

Iran nuclear crisis: Jalili says talks 'positive step'
27 February 2013 - Iran says talks with world powers in Kazakhstan to try to resolve its nuclear crisis were a "positive step".

Chief negotiator Saeed Jalili said the US, UK, France, China, Russia and Germany (the P5+1) had been "more realistic" than in the past. The EU's chief delegate said she hoped Iran was "looking positively" at proposals presented at the talks. International powers suspect Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons - a charge Iran strongly denies. Iran insists its purposes are purely civilian, asserting it needs enriched uranium to make medical isotopes. Russia and Iran said technical experts from both sides would meet in March, and the P5+1 group would meet with Iran again in Almaty on 5 and 6 April. The multilateral discussions were the first since a round in July 2012 ended without a breakthrough.

'Long way to go'

At a news conference after the second day of talks concluded, Mr Jalili expressed cautious optimism. "Some of the points raised were more realistic compared to what they [P5+1] said in the past. And they tried to bring proximity in some points between the viewpoints of Iran and their own, which we believe is a positive step, despite the fact that we have a long way to go to reach the optimum point."

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton - the lead negotiator for the world powers - said she hoped Iran would be constructive. "I hope that the Iranian side are looking positively on the proposals we put forward," she told reporters. "The proposals we put forward are designed to build in confidence and enable us to move forward." During the opening three-hour session, Baroness Ashton presented what has been described as a revised offer to Iran. The proposal was thought to repeat an earlier demand to stop uranium enrichment and to shut down the Fordo underground enrichment facility.

In return, some of the sanctions which have been imposed on Iran could be eased, reports say. Several rounds of sanctions have squeezed Iran's economy, with oil revenue slashed, the currency nose-diving in value and unemployment growing. Reuters news agency quoted Mr Jalili as saying after the talks that there was "no justification" for shutting Fordo, although he said the issue of 20% enrichment "can be discussed in the negotiations... in a view of confidence-building".

New deposits

See also:

Iranian Media Downplay Hopes of Breakthrough in Nuclear Talks
February 27, 2013 – The U.S. and other world powers negotiating with Iran over its nuclear activities were awaiting Tehran’s response Wednesday to an “updated” offer – reportedly involving an easing of sanctions in return for the shutdown of one uranium-enrichment facility – but regime-friendly media were unenthusiastic.

The semi-official Fars news agency, an outlet affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp, quoted an “informed close to the Iranian team of negotiators” as saying it was “not true” that the delegation would consider the proposal presented by the so-called P5+1 at talks in Almaty, Kazakhstan on Tuesday. Fars cited another “source” as saying the proposal by the P5+1 – the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany – would not be acceptable to Iran, while the state-funded Press TV said Iran did not consider the reported offer to be a “balanced proposal.”

Exactly what that offer is remains unconfirmed, but unnamed Western officials cited in news reports said Iran would be allowed to resume trading in gold and other precious metals and have some banking restrictions loosened in return for ending its enrichment of 20-percent uranium and closing the underground Fordow facility near the Shi’ite holy city of Qom where the work is taking place. (Uranium enrichment to 3.5 percent is the grade required to fuel a power plant, but Iran has since 2010 also been enriching to 19.75 percent, the upper limit of what is considered “low-enriched” uranium. Experts say upper levels of enrichment require less work than lower ones, so an advance from 19.75-percent to weapons-grade – 90-plus percent – would not be as steep as it sounds.)

State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell declined to elaborate on the offer beyond describing it as “a serious, updated proposal.” Secretary of State John Kerry, speaking in Berlin on Tuesday, would only say that the offer “includes reciprocal measures that encourage Iran to make concrete steps in order to begin addressing international community’s concerns.” European Union foreign policy chief Cathy Ashton is chairing the talks in Kazakhstan, the seventh round held between the six parties and Iran since June 2008. (Earlier ones took place in Geneva, Istanbul, Baghdad and Moscow).

Iran has rejected a string of P5+1 proposals since mid-2006. It dismisses Western suspicions that its nuclear program has military goals, saying that it is intended for purely peaceful energy-generation and research purposes. When the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported last November that Iran had by that point produced 7,611 kilograms of low-enriched uranium (LEU), the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security observed that that quantity of LEU, “if further enriched to weapon grade, is enough to make, in theory, six or seven nuclear weapons.” Last week, the IAEA in a new report said Iran’s LEU stocks now total 8,271 kilograms. That amount has risen from 839 kilograms in November 2008, two months before President Obama took office.

- See more at: Iranian Media Downplay Hopes of Breakthrough in Nuclear Talks | CNS News

 

[BreezeWood]

Israel says it conducts successful test of anti-missile system - CNN.com


Israel says it conducts successful test of anti-missile system

Jerusalem (CNN) -- Israel completed a successful test flight of its Arrow 3 interceptor system on Monday, the Ministry of Defense said in a statement.

The system is designed to defend against medium-range missiles that could be fired from countries such as Iran.

"The successful test is a major milestone in the development of the Arrow 3 Weapon System and provides further confidence in future Israeli defense capabilities to defeat the developing ballistic missile threat," the statement said.

fairly soon - if it is not to late.

N Korea and Iran working together and the recent detonation in N Korea may make the bombing of an Iranian processing plant a feudal exercise.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

It's not going to happen. Israel only attacks weaker enemies. Such as the defenseless Gazans.

 

[Duped]

It's not going to happen. Israel only attacks weaker enemies. Such as the defenseless Gazans.

Fuck the Gazans! Israel already illustrated with a red line. It will be before the summer - the sooner the better!

 

[BecauseIKnow]

^^^^

Dreamer............

 

[Avatar4321]

It's not going to happen. Israel only attacks weaker enemies. Such as the defenseless Gazans.

Defenseless? you mean the ones killing Israelis by strapping bombs to themselves?

 

[BecauseIKnow]

It's not going to happen. Israel only attacks weaker enemies. Such as the defenseless Gazans.

Defenseless? you mean the ones killing Israelis by strapping bombs to themselves?

I wasn't aware of any suicide bomber for the past decade. Did you not understand what defenseless means? Can they defend themselves? Nope. Can they fire back? Yes. That's different than defending themselves and may or may not be seen as a form of defending themselves.

Besides, you guys are funny when you think you have a punch line. Doesn't make a difference if its an Israeli bomb killing Palestinians or a suicide bomber killing Israelis. It's a military tactic for desperate people.

 

[Duped]

It's not going to happen. Israel only attacks weaker enemies. Such as the defenseless Gazans.

Defenseless? you mean the ones killing Israelis by strapping bombs to themselves?

I wasn't aware of any suicide bomber for the past decade. Did you not understand what defenseless means? Can they defend themselves? Nope. Can they fire back? Yes. That's different than defending themselves and may or may not be seen as a form of defending themselves.

Besides, you guys are funny when you think you have a punch line. Doesn't make a difference if its an Israeli bomb killing Palestinians or a suicide bomber killing Israelis. It's a military tactic for desperate people.

Fuck the Palestinians - 83% Sunni Muslims. They cowardly rain bombs indiscriminantly on the peace loving Israelis. They can go to hell, and join their allah, and their pedophile prophet mohammed ( pig shit be upon him )

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Another Internet tough guy.

 

[Avatar4321]

It's not going to happen. Israel only attacks weaker enemies. Such as the defenseless Gazans.

Defenseless? you mean the ones killing Israelis by strapping bombs to themselves?

I wasn't aware of any suicide bomber for the past decade. Did you not understand what defenseless means? Can they defend themselves? Nope. Can they fire back? Yes. That's different than defending themselves and may or may not be seen as a form of defending themselves.

Besides, you guys are funny when you think you have a punch line. Doesn't make a difference if its an Israeli bomb killing Palestinians or a suicide bomber killing Israelis. It's a military tactic for desperate people.

So you honestly think someone who can fire back and attack an enemy is defenseless?

How exactly do you define defenseless? Because no definition I know would consider that defenseless.

The truth is that if those in Gaza and Judea stopped fighting Israel, there would be peace. If Israel stopped fighting back, there would be no Israel.

 

[Borillar]

Defenseless? you mean the ones killing Israelis by strapping bombs to themselves?

I wasn't aware of any suicide bomber for the past decade. Did you not understand what defenseless means? Can they defend themselves? Nope. Can they fire back? Yes. That's different than defending themselves and may or may not be seen as a form of defending themselves.

Besides, you guys are funny when you think you have a punch line. Doesn't make a difference if its an Israeli bomb killing Palestinians or a suicide bomber killing Israelis. It's a military tactic for desperate people.

So you honestly think someone who can fire back and attack an enemy is defenseless?

How exactly do you define defenseless? Because no definition I know would consider that defenseless.

The truth is that if those in Gaza and Judea stopped fighting Israel, there would be peace. If Israel stopped fighting back, there would be no Israel.

The Palestinians have as much chance against Isreal as one of our wacko wingnut militia groups would against the US military. IE none.