Iran Super Thread- Merged

[CougarKing]

And the unrest has returned.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election

Police beat mourners in new wave of unrest in Iran
Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writer – 51 mins ago
TEHRAN, Iran – Iranian police fired tear gas and beat protesters to disperse thousands chanting "Neda lives!" Thursday at a memorial for victims of post-election violence held at the gravesite of the woman whose death made her an icon of the pro-reform movement, witnesses said.

The new wave of unrest showed the opposition's continuing ability to harness anger over the crackdown, and more protests could erupt around the inauguration next week of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose government has been virtually paralyzed by the crisis.

Thursday's memorial gathering marked the end of the traditional 40-day mourning period for Neda Agha Soltan, a 27-year-old music student who was shot to death June 20. Her dying moments were filmed and circulated widely on the Internet, making her name a rallying cry for the opposition.

"Neda is alive! Ahmadinejad is dead!" chanted protesters, many holding up single red roses tied with green ribbons, the signature color of the opposition.

Plainclothes forces dispersed the crowd with tear gas and batons — and with chants of "Death to those who are against the supreme leader," according to witnesses and state television.

(...)

 

[CougarKing]

Debka file... Not exactly a balanced news source, but an interesting article nonetheless:

The weeklong US-Israel marathon in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv ending Thursday, July 30 was the platform for the Obama administration's first unveiling of a new US diplomatic-military program for Iran and its nuclear threat, DEBKAfile's military and intelligence sources disclose.

...

The new approach consists of three steps for thwarting Iran's drive for a nuclear bomb:

1. Diplomatic engagement as far as it will go. The American officials assured Israel they were aware of the diminishing chances of this track succeeding in view of the Islamic regime's domestic troubles, but the US administration is still determined to give it a chance up until early September.

2. If diplomacy fails, Washington will embark on the phased introduction of increasingly harsh sanctions against Iran, such as an embargo on exporting refined oil products including gasoline to Iran and a blockade on its sea ports.

3. If Iran continues to forge ahead with its nuclear and missile development, the US will resort to its military options.

DEBKAfile's military sources report that the American visitors shared with Israeli leaders their specific plans of actions with details of the resources they planned to wield.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6203

 

[CougarKing]

Seems there's always a "confession" in Kangaroo courts like these.  :

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090808/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election

TEHRAN, Iran – A young French academic and local staff of the British and French embassies stood trial Saturday with dozens of Iranian opposition figures and confessed to being involved in the country's postelection unrest.

Iran's opposition and rights groups have condemned the trial as a sham and say such confessions are coerced and scripted. Britain, which seemed caught off guard by the appearance of its embassy employee, called it an outrage, while France demanded the immediate release of its citizen.

Saturday's second hearing at Tehran's Revolutionary Court involved a new group of detainees and focused on testimony from the French academic and the two other foreign-linked defendants, demonstrating the government's resolve to taint Iran's pro-reform movement as a tool of foreign countries — particularly Britain and the United States.

The prosecutor accused the two countries of fomenting the unrest in an attempt to engineer a "soft overthrow" of the government.

The French academic and the two embassy employees took turns standing at a podium in the large, wood-paneled courtroom to make confessions before a judge seated between two large portraits for Iran's supreme leader and the Islamic Republic's founder.

(...)

 

[a_majoor]

The UN does it's usual sterling job:

http://gayandright.blogspot.com/2009/08/is-iaea-hiding-evidence-of-irans.html

Is the IAEA hiding evidence of Iran's nuclear plans???

You can always count on the UN to do the wrong thing...
The world's nuclear weapons watchdog is hiding data on Iran's drive to obtain nuclear arms, senior Western diplomats and Israeli officials told Haaretz.

The officials and diplomats said that the International Atomic Energy Agency under Director General Mohamed ElBaradei was refraining from publishing evidence obtained by its inspectors over the past few months that indicate Iran was pursuing information about weaponization efforts and a military nuclear program.

ElBaradei, who will soon vacate his post, has said that the agency does not have any evidence that suggests Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

But the sources told Haaretz that the new evidence was submitted to the IAEA in a classified annex written by its inspectors in the Islamic Republic. The report was said to have been signed by the head of the IAEA team in Iran.

The classified report, according to the sources, was not incorporated into the agency's published reports. The details, they said, were censored by senior officials of the IAEA in the organization's Vienna headquarters.

American, French, British and German senior officials have recently pressured ElBaradei to publish the information next month in a report due to be released at the organization's general conference.

"We expect the details to appear in the new report and to be made public," a senior Western diplomat told Haaretz.

The efforts to release the allegedly censored report is being handled in Israel by Dr. Shaul Horev, director general of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, and the Foreign Ministry. Asked about this sensitive subject, several Israeli diplomats declined to comment. The Prime Minister's Bureau also declined to comment, but the report was not denied.

Israel has been striving to pressure the IAEA through friendly nations and have it release the censored annex. It hopes to prove that the Iranian effort to develop nuclear weapons is continuing, contrary to claims that Tehran stopped its nuclear program in 2003. A confirmation of these suspicion would oblige the international community to enact "paralyzing sanctions" on Iran.

Throughout his term, Israel has accused ElBaradei of not tackling the Iranian nuclear issue with sufficient determination. As the end of his term in December nears, Israeli diplomats are concerned that he will become less responsive and continue to hide the classified report.

 

[CougarKing]

Russia reciprocating to Israel for those UAVs it bought recently from them?

Russia May Review Air Defense Sale to Iran: Israel
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 19 Aug 2009 05:19 


MOSCOW - President Dmitry Medvedev has promised to review Russia's planned sale of its sophisticated S-300 air defense system to Iran, Israeli President Shimon Peres said Aug. 19, news agencies reported.

"President Medvedev promised to review this issue once again after I explained that it would have an impact on the balance of force in our region," Peres said a day after he held talks with the Russian leader.

The contract for the S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems is reported to have been signed back in 2005 but has proved hugely controversial as the weapons would significantly upgrade Iranian air defense capabilities.

Amid repeated U.S. objections over the contract, Russian officials have emphasized over the last months that none of the S-300 systems have been delivered to Tehran.

 

[a_majoor]

Perhaps conflict with Iran will actually be a global conflict involving the Axis of Evil (or the Axis of Evil 2.0: Syria, Iran and North Korea). Of course if the current Administration keeps insisting on talk rather than action, they may find themselves pulled into a conflict by Israel, the ROK or perhaps China when they attempt to deal with these rogue regimes:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ap9U2VfbfCBs

UAE Seizes North Korean Weapons Shipment to Iran (Update2)

By Bill Varner

Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) -- The United Arab Emirates has seized a ship carrying North Korean-manufactured munitions, detonators, explosives and rocket-propelled grenades bound for Iran in violation of United Nations sanctions, diplomats said.

The UAE two weeks ago notified the UN Security Council of the seizure, according to the diplomats, who spoke on condition they aren’t named because the communication hasn’t been made public. They said the ship, owned by an Australian subsidiary of a French company and sailing under a Bahamian flag, was carrying 10 containers of arms disguised as oil equipment.

The council committee that monitors enforcement of UN sanctions against North Korea wrote letters to Iran and the government in Pyongyang asking for explanations of the violation, and one to the UAE expressing appreciation for the cooperation, the envoys said. No response has been received and the UAE has unloaded the cargo, they said.

The UAE and Iranian missions to the UN didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. The Financial Times reported the weapons seizure earlier today.

The Security Council voted on June 12 to adopt a resolution that punishes North Korea for its recent nuclear-bomb test and missile launches through cargo inspections and enforcement of restrictions on financial transactions. The measure calls for the interdiction at seaports, airports or in international waters of any cargo suspected of containing arms or nuclear or missile-related materials going to or from North Korea.

UN Sanctions

Iran is under three sets of UN sanctions for its refusal to halt uranium enrichment, a process to isolate a uranium isotope needed to generate fuel for a nuclear power reactor or, in higher concentrations, to make a weapon.

Iran denies allegations by the U.S. and some of its major allies that it seeks an atomic weapon or the means to build one, insisting the nuclear work is intended to generate electricity.

U.S. President Barack Obama has said the Iranian government must respond by late September to his request for new talks on curbing its nuclear program. Iran last month said work is under way on proposals that may provide the basis for renewed talks.

To contact the reporter on this story: Bill Varner at the United Nations at wvarner@bloomberg.net

 

[CougarKing]

Another update:

In the rare moments when it's not preoccupied with the decline of U.S. President Barack Obama in the polls and with the debate over its government's proposed health-care reforms, the American press continues to deal almost obsessively with another pressing issue: the deadlock in efforts to stop Iran's nuclear program and the growing likelihood that the endgame will be an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
In the past few weeks alone, an editorial in The Wall Street Journal warned the president that the United States must put a quick halt to the Iranian nuclear program, because otherwise Israel will bomb the facilities.

"An Israeli strike on Iran would be the most dangerous foreign policy issue President Obama could face," the paper wrote.Former vice president Dick Cheney revealed that while in office he supported an American strike against Iran, but was compelled to accept the approach of president George W. Bush, who preferred the diplomatic route.

Another Republican ultra-hawk, former ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, maintains that additional sanctions alone will not be enough to make the Iranians abandon their nuclear ambitions. William Cohen, who served as secretary of defense during Bill Clinton's second presidential term (1997-2001), says that "there is a countdown taking place" and that Israel "is not going to sit indifferently on the sidelines and watch Iran continue on its way toward a nuclear-weapons capability."

The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, explains that "a very narrow window" exists between the possibility of resolving the issue and an attack on Iran.

An op-ed in The Los Angeles Times states (with some justification) that if Iran does not respond in September to the demands made of it, the world should brace itself for an Israeli attack. However, the author adds (mistakenly) that in the event of an Israeli strike, Obama "will probably learn of the operation from CNN rather than the CIA."

This month will mark a critical juncture in Iran's race for nuclear capability. The timetable is getting ever shorter: Most Western intelligence services share the assessment that over the course of 2010, Iran will accumulate sufficient fissionable material to produce two or three nuclear bombs. If the Iranians succeed in dispersing this material among a large number of secret sites, it will reduce the likelihood that the project can be stopped.

Even though Obama has now been in office for seven and a half months, Tehran has not responded to his offer to engage in direct dialogue about the nuclear issue.

At first the talks were deferred in anticipation of the Iranian presidential elections in June, then because of the internal crisis that erupted there in their wake, and now the regime is engaging in additional - and typical - delay tactics. Last week, for the first time, Tehran announced readiness in principle to conduct negotiations with the international community.

Peaceful enrichment

The European Union appears to want to reach a decision on the subject ahead of the authorization of a fourth round of international sanctions against Iran, in the context of the G-20 conference to be held in Pittsburgh in about two weeks. Israel is apprehensive that the Americans may delay a final decision until December.

The impression gained by Israelis who have visited Washington lately is that Obama is gradually backing away from the Bush administration's fundamental demand that Iran cease to enrich uranium as a precondition for beginning a dialogue.

Subsequently, they believe, the United States will offer Iran the following compromise: The Iranians will be allowed to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes (under tight international supervision), the previous sanctions imposed on Iran will be lifted and the two sides will reach understandings concerning Iran's interests in a number of arenas, notably Iraq, ahead of the planned withdrawal of U.S. troops from there.

Obama would be able to present such an arrangement as an accomplishment. After all, before the election in November he promised to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, not to force it to stop enriching uranium. From Israel's point of view, however, this will probably not be enough.

According to Maj. Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland, former head of Israel's National Security Council, "The United States was ready to sign an agreement to that effect Thursday. The prospect that Iran will agree, despite the temptation of gaining international recognition for its right to enrich uranium, remains small."

In his view, "For its strategy to succeed, America needs a broad and binding international coalition. I still don't see them getting Russia and China to back such a move, and their support is essential."

Despite its fear that Iran will use the peaceful enrichment go-ahead to continue advancing secretly toward a bomb, Israel might, as a fallback position, accept such a compromise as long as it is clear that the international supervision is strong enough and that, in anticipation of the likely eventuality Iran will be found cheating, a broad coalition to toughen the sanctions is put together in advance.

If the dialogue fails, or never begins, more severe sanctions might be put into place: a ban on the purchase of oil from Iran and on the export of petroleum distillates to it, or even a maritime embargo. But the potential effectiveness of these moves, with Tehran already well past the halfway mark toward achieving its goal, is in doubt.

Looking the other way

So, the moment of truth will arrive at some point between the end of 2009 and the middle of 2010: Should Iran be attacked? American experts agree that this would involve an Israeli strike. It is very unlikely that Obama will be the one dispatching American planes to Natanz.

During the past year, military experts and commentators are increasingly coming around to the view that the Israel Air Force is capable of executing the mission. The Israel Defense Forces was significantly upgraded during the tenure of Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi. The goal, it is argued, is not to liquidate the Iranian project but to set it back. According to this line of thought, if an attack, American or Israeli, causes a couple of years' delay in the project it will have achieved its aim. Similarly, before launching the attack on the Iraqi reactor in 1981, Israel did not foresee the chain of events that finally forced Saddam Hussein to forgo his nuclear ambitions.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak take a similar view of the Iranian threat. At least, that is what both their public statements and their comments in closed meetings suggest.

For an Israeli attack to be considered, Israel would need the tacit approval of the Obama administration, if only in the sense that it looks the other way. This is due above all to the necessity of passing through the Iraqi air corridor, as American soldiers will still be in Iraq in 2011. No less important is strategic coordination for the day after: How will the United States react to a prolonged aerial attack by Israel on the nuclear sites and to the regional flare-up that might follow?

These are matters that would have to be agreed on directly between Obama and Netanyahu. The disparity in their policy stances, together with the total lack of personal chemistry between them, is liable to prove a hindrance.

Iran is likely to respond to an Israeli attack by opening fronts nearby, via Hezbollah from Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. Three years after the Second Lebanon War and at the end of a broad process of learning lessons from that conflict, the IDF is quite confident of its ability to deal with Hezbollah. At the same time, it's clear that Israel will be subjected to extensive rocket attacks that can be expected to cover most of the country.

A key question would be Syria's behavior. Israel has a salient interest in having Damascus be no more than a spectator in a confrontation. If the attack on Iran is perceived to have been successful, that is probably how the Syrians will respond.

But an attack on Iran will reopen a decades-old blood feud - and the Iranians have both a long memory and a great deal of patience. With decisions like this looming within a year, it's no wonder that Netanyahu wants to get the Gilad Shalit affair wrapped up.

A decision to attack Iran would mean that the IDF bears central responsibility for resolving the nuclear threat. In the years when Mossad director Meir Dagan held prime minister Ariel Sharon in his thrall (and even more so his successor, Ehud Olmert), the general belief was that the espionage agency could, together with political efforts, contain the Iranian nuclear project. And, indeed, if Western intelligence services had to push back their forecasts repeatedly over the past decade regarding when the project would be completed, it's a safe bet that not all of Iran's delays were due to divine providence. At present, however, no action looms - other than an attack - that is capable of preventing Iran from achieving its goal.

Deep and impressive cooperation exists between the IDF and the Mossad in many arenas. But this is clouded by professional differences and personal friction between the heads of the two organizations. In a few cases, it even looked as though the two were merrily pouring salt on each others' wounds.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1113816.html

 

[tomahawk6]

Time is fast running out for Israel. The US and Europe are prepared to live with a nuclear Iran,but I doubt Israel feels that is a viable option. If they are going to strike that time is fast approaching.

 

[CougarKing]

Here we go again:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090918/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran

Thousands march in Iran opposition protests
By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writer
28 mins ago

TEHRAN, Iran – Hard-liners attacked senior pro-reform leaders in the streets as tens of thousands marched in competing mass demonstrations by the opposition and government supporters. Opposition protesters, chanting "death to the dictator," hurled stones and bricks in clashes with security forces.

The opposition held its first major street protests since mid-July, bringing out thousands in demonstrations in several parts of the capital. In some cases only several blocks away, tens of thousands marched in government-sponsored rallies marking an annual anti-Israel commemoration.

The commemoration, known as Quds Day, is a major political occasion for the government — a day for it to show its anti-Israeli credentials and its support for the Palestinians. During a speech for the rallies, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad railed against Israel and the West, questioning whether the Holocaust occurred and calling it a pretext for occupying Arab land. Quds is the Arabic word for Jerusalem.

But the opposition was determined to turn the day into a show of its survival and continued strength despite a fierce three-month-old crackdown against it since the disputed June 12 presidential election.

The four top opposition leaders joined the protests, in direct defiance of commands by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who barred anti-government demonstrations on Quds Day. That could provoke an escalation in the crackdown: hard-line clerics have been demanding the past week that any leader backing the protests should be arrested.

Tens of thousands joined the government-organized marches, starting in various parts of the capital and proceeding to Tehran University. Police and security forces, along with pro-government Basij militiamen, fanned out along main squares and avenues and in many cases tried to keep nearby opposition protesters away from the Quds Day rallies to prevent clashes, witnesses said.

But at one of the several opposition rallies around the city, a group of hard-liners pushed through the crowd and attacked former President Mohamad Khatami, a cleric who is one of the most prominent pro-reform figures, according to a reformist Web site. The report cited witnesses as saying the opposition activists rescued Khatami and quickly repelled the assailants.

Another reformist Webs site said Khatami's turban was disheveled and he was forced to leave the march.

Hard-liners tried to attack the main opposition leader, Mir Hossein Mousavi, when he joined another protest elsewhere in the city, a witness said. Supporters rushed Mousavi into his car when the hard-liners approached, and the vehicle sped away as his supporters pushed the hard-liners back, the witness said. He and other witnesses spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of government retaliation.

In one of the main Tehran squares, Haft-e Tir, baton-toting security forces tried to break up one of the opposition marched, and were met with protesters throwing stones and bricks, witnesses said. Several policemen were seen being taken away with light injuries. At least 10 protesters were seized by plainclothes security agents in marches around the city, witnesses said.

The opposition claims that Ahmadinejad won the June election by fraud and that Mousavi is the rightful victor. Hundreds of thousands marched in support of Mousavi in the weeks after the vote, until police, Basij and the elite Revolutionary Guard crushed the protests, arresting hundreds. The opposition says 72 people were killed in the crackdown, thought the government puts the number at 36. The last significant protest was on July 17.

On Friday, opposition supporters poured out on the streets in green T-shirts and wearing green wristbands — the color of the reform movement — and marched with fingers raised in the V-sign for victory, chanting "Death to the Dictator."

Others shouted for the government to resign, carried small photos of Mousavi, while some women marched with their children in tow.

There were also chants of: "Not Gaza, not Lebanon — our life is for Iran" — a slogan defying the regime's support for Palestinian militants in Gaza and Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrilla.

Two other opposition leaders appeared at the protests — Mahdi Karroubi, who also ran in the June election, and former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, according to the semiofficial Fars news agency. Rafsanjani is a senior cleric in Iran's leadership but has been a behind-the-scenes supporter of Mousavi.

His appearance at the rally is a rare overt show of backing for street protesters. It comes after Rafsanjani was banned this year from his customary role delivering the Friday prayers on Quds Day, which he has done the past 25 years. On Friday, the prayer sermon was delivered by a hard-liine supporter of Ahmadinejad, Ahmad Khatami.

In sheer numbers, the opposition turnout was far smaller than the mass pro-government Qods Day marches — not surprising given the state's freedom to organize the gathering. Customarily on Quds Day, Tehran residents gather for pro-Palestinian rallies in various parts of the city, marching through the streets and later converging for the prayers ceremony. The ceremony was established in 1979 by the leader of the Islamic Revolution and founder of present-day Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Just hundreds of yards (meters) away from opposition protesters on the main Keshavarz Boulevard, thousands of Ahmadinejad supporters marched carrying huge photographs of the president and Supreme Leader Khamenei. Some in the government-sponsored rally chanted: "Death to those who oppose the supreme leader!"

At the climax of the occasion, Ahmadinejad addressed worshippers before Friday prayers at the Tehran University campus, reiterating his anti-Holocaust rhetoric that has drawn international condemnation since 2005. He questioned whether the "Holocaust was a real event" and saying Israel was created on "false and mythical claims."

 

[Shec]

Contemporary political slogans:

We Can Do Better

Getting Things Done For All Of Us

Yes We Can

Someday Is Now

Death to those who oppose the supreme leader!

Has a certain je ne sais quoi about it doesn't it ?

Seriously, his Holocaust denial on the eve of the Jewish New Year speaks volumes.  He wants peace like my dog doesn't want a treat.

 

[a_majoor]

More on the "negotiations"

http://www.slate.com/id/2228252/pagenum/2

Engaging With Iran Is Like Having Sex With Someone Who Hates YouTehran's latest bid to run down the clock.
By Christopher HitchensPosted Monday, Sept. 14, 2009, at 12:29 PM ET

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Click image to expand.Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"Living in the Islamic Republic," wrote Azar Nafisi in her book Reading Lolita in Tehran in 2003, "is like having sex with a man you loathe." This verdict has gathered extra force and pungency as the succeeding years have elapsed and as more women have been stoned, hanged, beaten, raped, and silenced. Lately has come the news that Iranian men in prison are being raped, too, for trying to exercise their right to vote. And now the U.S. government has come to a point where it must ask itself: What is it like to enter negotiations with a man who loathes you and who every Friday holds public prayers that call for your death?

Last Friday brought the news that the Obama administration had accepted an offer from Tehran, delivered the preceding Wednesday, for the holding of what the New York Times called "unconditional talks." It was further reported that the administration had spent "less than 48 hours" deliberating whether to respond to the invitation, which yields the interesting if minor detail that this must have been the most significant decision taken by Obama's people on or about the eighth anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11.

A couple of weeks after the June 12 election, Benjamin Weinthal suggested six ways President Barack Obama could influence Iran. In August, an undercover journalist reported on the mood in Tehran. Christopher Hitchens reminded us of why we're in a war against Islamic terrorism.

Well, I am all for talks without preconditions, and I have said several times in this space that I think we should offer the Iranians cooperation on a wide spectrum of topics, especially the very pressing one of helping to "proof" Iran against the coming earthquake that could devastate its capital city. There may even be areas of potential interest in our having common enemies in the Taliban and al-Qaida. But things have changed a little since the president and his secretary of state were sparring over the word unconditional during the primaries. First, it has become ever clearer that Iran's uranium-enrichment and centrifuge program has put it within measurable distance of the ability to weaponize its nuclear capacity. Second, it has become obscenely obvious that the theocracy is prepared to govern by force alone and to employ the most appalling measures to remain in power without a mandate.

So it would be nice to know, even if no "conditions" or "preconditions" (this seems like a distinction without much difference) are to be exacted, whether the administration has assured itself on two points. The first of these is: Do we seriously expect the Islamic Republic to be negotiating in good faith about its nuclear program? And the second is: What do we know about the effect of these proposed talks on the morale and the leadership of the Iranian opposition?

One presumes that the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regime had its own reasons for firing off a five-page document proposing negotiations and including Britain, France, Russia, Germany, and China—the much-stalled group of countries that have conducted business with Iran so far—in the offer. The letter was sent out in the same period that the Russian government opposed any further sanctions on Iran for noncooperation, in the same period that Ahmadinejad announced that Iran would never halt its nuclear fuel production, and in the run-up to Ahmadinejad's next appearance at the podium of the United Nations toward the end of this month.

Might it be possible—you will, I hope, forgive my cynicism—that this latest initiative from Tehran is yet another attempt to buy time or run out the clock?

Meanwhile, it is certainly the case that at least three of the six countries approached are being asked to negotiate under some kind of duress. In an unpardonable violation of diplomatic immunity (a phrase that may remind you of something), employees of the French and British Embassies in Tehran have been placed under arrest and subjected to show trials since the convulsions that attended the coup mounted by the Revolutionary Guards in June. And the Iranian correspondent of Newsweek magazine—who is also a Canadian citizen—has been held incommunicado for almost the same length of time. Without overstressing any "preconditions," it doesn't seem too much to require of the Iranian regime that it not send out invitations to countries whose citizens or locally engaged diplomatic staff it is holding as hostages.

On the larger question of the breach by Iran of all its undertakings about nuclear weapons, and the amazing absence from its diplomatic note of any mention of its own program, one wasn't too reassured by the lazy phrasing of Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. The Obama administration, she said, would not impose "artificial deadlines" on Ahmadinejad. Why is this not reassuring? Because it's impossible to tell what is meant by an "artificial deadline." Would one prefer a "genuine" deadline, whereby, for example, the United Nations required Iran to demonstrate compliance with the relevant Security Council resolutions on nuclear proliferation—we have a bushel of these—or face further U.N.-mandated sanctions? Certainly one would, but this isn't what Ambassador Rice appears to have meant.

From all appearances, then, this seems like another snow job from the mullahs. And did the State Department or the CIA take any soundings, in those 48 hours between receipt of the mullahs' letter and our response to it, among the leaders of Iranian civil society? Given the short interval, it seems that the thought did not even occur to them. Here is what I heard from professor Abbas Milani, the director of Iranian studies at Stanford University:

    When you read [the Iranian letter] and realize how empty of earnest negotiating positions it in fact is, you are left with no choice but to conclude that they are relying on their ally in Putin's Russia to veto any resolutions against them. For the Russians to be able to even pretend to be serious in their talk of no need for more pressure on the regime, Tehran has also to pretend to be serious in negotiation.

This analysis appears to conform to all the available facts as we know them. A bit too much like having sex with someone who loathes you.

 

[CougarKing]

Somehow, I really doubt Tehran intends to follow this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090924/ap_on_re_us/un_un_g8_iran

G-8: Iran has 3 months to stop uranium enrichment
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer John Heilprin, Associated Press Writer
52 mins ago

UNITED NATIONS – Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini says the Group of Eight nations is giving Iran until the end of the year to commit to ending uranium enrichment and avoid new sanctions.

Frattini, who's nation holds the rotating chair of the club of wealthy nations, known as the G-8, said Thursday that member foreign ministers agreed Wednesday night "to give Iran a chance."

But Frattini said that the informal agreement will be re-examined each month until the end of the year.

The U.S. has won Russian agreement to consider new sanctions against Iran to add pressure on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who insists Tehran's nuclear program is designed only to generate electricity.

 

[a_majoor]

Well, we already knew this to be true.....

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/world/ap/ap-newsbreak-iran-reveals-existence-of-a-second-uranium-enrichment-plant-officials-say.html

[qiote]
Iran reveals existence of a second uranium enrichment plant
By: GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press
09/25/09 6:59 AM EDT 

VIENNA — Iran has revealed the existence of a secret uranium-enrichment plant, officials told The Associated Press Friday, a development that could heighten fears about Iran's ability to produce a nuclear weapon and escalate its diplomatic confrontation with the West.

The New York Times reported that President Barack Obama and the leaders of France and Britain had been planning to charge Iran with constructing the facility in an announcement in Pittsburgh before the opening of the G-20 economic summit. It said they were to demand Tehran open the plant to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Two officials told the AP that Iran revealed the existence of a second plant in a letter sent Monday to International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei.

Iran is under three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to freeze enrichment at what had been its single known enrichment plant, which is being monitored by the IAEA.

The officials told the AP that Iran's letter contained no details about the location of the second facility, when — or if — it had started operations or the type and number of centrifuges it was running.

But one of the officials, who had access to a review of Western intelligence on the issue, said it was about 100 miles (160 kilometers) southwest of Tehran and was the site of 3,000 centrifuges that could be operational by next year.

Iranian officials had previously acknowledged having only one plant — the one under IAEA monitoring — and had denied allegations of undeclared nuclear activities.

The last IAEA report on Iran in August said Iran had set up more than 8,000 centrifuges to churn out enriched uranium at the cavernous underground Natanz facility, although the report said that only about 4,600 of those were fully active.

The Islamic Republic insists that it has the right to the activity to generate fuel for what it says will be a nationwide chain of nuclear reactors. But because enrichment can make both nuclear fuel and weapons-grade uranium, the international community fears Tehran will use the technology to generate the fissile material used on the tip of nuclear warheads.

The revelation of a secret plan further hinders the chances of progress in scheduled Oct. 1 talks between Iran and six world powers.

At that meeting — the first in more than a year — the five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany plan to press Iran to scale back on its enrichment activities. But Tehran has declared that it will not bargain on enrichment.

The officials who spoke to the AP — one from a European government with access to IAEA information and the other a diplomat in Vienna from a country accredited to the IAEA — demanded anonymity Friday because their information was confidential. One said he had seen the Iranian letter. The other told the AP that he had been informed about it by a U.N. official.

While Iran's mainstay P-1 centrifuge is a decades-old model based on Chinese technology, it has begun experimenting with state-of-the art prototypes that enrich more quickly and efficiently than its old model.

U.N. officials familiar with the IAEA's attempts to monitor and probe Iran's nuclear activities have previously told the AP that they suspected Iran might be running undeclared enrichment plants.

The existence of a secret Iranian enrichment program built on black-market technology was revealed seven years ago. Since then, the country has continued to expand the program with only a few interruptions as it works toward its aspirations of a 50,000-centrifuge enrichment facility at the southern city of Natanz.
[/quote]

 

[CougarKing]

We'll see if anything comes out of this demand.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090925/ap_on_go_pr_wh/g20_summit_obama_iran

US, UK, French heads demand Iran nuke site opened
By BEN FELLER and GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writers Ben Feller And George Jahn, Associated Press Writers
42 mins ago

PITTSBURGH – President Barack Obama and the leaders of France and Britain declared Friday that the revelation of a previously secret Iranian nuclear facility puts heavy new pressure on Tehran to quickly disclose all its nuclear efforts — including any moves toward weapons development — "or be held accountable."

A defiant Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad retorted that his nation was keeping nothing from international inspectors and needn't "inform Mr. Obama's administration of every facility that we have."

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Iran has until December to comply or face new sanctions. Before that, on Oct. 1, the Iranians are to meet with the U.S. and five other major powers to discuss a range of issues including Iran's nuclear program.

"We will not let this matter rest," said British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who accused Iran of "serial deception."

Said Obama: "The Iranian government must now demonstrate through deeds its peaceful intentions or be held accountable to international standards and international law."
Just hours later, the head of Iran's nuclear program suggested U.N. inspectors will be allowed to visit it. Ali Akbar Salehi called the facility "a semi-industrial plant for enriching nuclear fuel" that is not yet complete, but he gave no other details, according to the state news agency IRNA.

Ahmadinejad, in New York for this week's General Assembly meeting, said that pressing his country on the newly disclosed plant "is definitely a mistake." In an interview with Time magazine, he said Iran was not keeping anything from the International Atomic Energy Agency. "We have no secrecy," he said.

Iran kept the facility, 100 miles southwest of Tehran, hidden from weapons inspectors until a letter it sent to the IAEA on Monday.

But the U.S. has known of the facility's existence "for several years" through intelligence developed by U.S., French and British agencies, a senior White House official said. Obama decided to gather allies to talk publicly on Friday about their view of the project so as not to let Iran have the only word, officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity to let the statements from Obama and the leaders remain the focus.

The plant would be about the right size to enrich enough uranium to produce one or two bombs a year, but inspectors must get inside to know what is actually going on, the official said.
The three leaders, in their dramatic joint statement that overshadowed the G-20 economic summit here, hoped the disclosure would increase pressure on the global community to impose new sanctions on Iran if it refuses to stop its nuclear program.

Beyond sanctions, the leaders' options are limited and perilous; military action by the United States or an ally such as Israel could set off a dangerous chain of events in the Islamic world. In addition, Iran's facilities are spread around and well-hidden, making an effective military response logistically difficult.

The leaders did not mention military force. But Sarkozy said ominously, "Everything, everything must be put on the table now. We cannot let the Iranian leaders gain time while the motors are running."

Germany is one of the six powers meeting with Iran next week, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the revelation "a grave development."

She told reporters that Germany, Great Britain, France and the United States had consulted on the issue and agreed to a joint response. Merkel spoke separately from her counterparts because she had been in an already-scheduled meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

She said "we will see" about the reactions of Russia and China, which also are part of the group of six but always more reluctant to take a firm line on Iran.

Earlier this week, Medvedev opened the door to backing potential new sanctions against Iran, speaking just days after Obama's decision to scale back a U.S. missile shield in Eastern Europe that Russia strongly opposed. But it's unclear if that will translate into action.

Medvedev's spokeswoman said Friday that the developments "cannot but disturb us." Natalya Timakova said Medvedev would talk later in Pittsburgh on it, according to the Russian news agency ITAR-Tass.

The senior administration official said Obama told Medvedev about the Iranian facility during their meeting this week in New York. The Chinese are "just absorbing these revelations," the official said.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said Beijing wants the matter settled through negotiations.
"Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow," Obama said.

Sarkozy and Brown struck an even more defiant tone. "The international community has no choice today but to draw a line in the sand," Brown said.

Ahmadinejad made no mention of the facility while attending the U.N. General Assembly in New York this week. But Iran denies that it is enriching uranium to build a nuclear bomb — as the West suspects — and says it is only doing so for energy purposes.

However, Iran is under three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to freeze enrichment at what had been its single publicly known enrichment plant, which is being monitored by the IAEA.

Officials said Iran's letter to the IAEA contained no details about the location of the second facility, such as when — or if — it had started operations or the type and number of centrifuges it was running.

But one of the officials, who had access to a review of Western intelligence on the issue, said it was underground about 100 miles southwest of Tehran and is the site of 3,000 centrifuges that. It is not yet operational but the U.S. believes it will be by next year, said a U.S. counterproliferation official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

U.S. intelligence believes the facility is on a military base controlled by Iran's Revolutionary Guards, according to a document that the Obama administration sent to U.S. lawmakers. It was provided to The Association Press by an official on condition of anonymity because, though unclassified, it was deemed confidential. The military connection could undermine Iran's contention that the plant was designed for civilian purposes.

"The size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program," Obama told reporters.

The U.S., British and French officials provided detailed information to the IAEA on Thursday, Obama said.

An August IAEA report said Iran had set up more than 8,000 centrifuges to produce enriched uranium at the first facility, also underground and located outside the southern city of Natanz. The report said that only about 4,600 centrifuges were fully active.

___

Jahn contributed to this report from Vienna. Associated Press writers Charles Babington and Michael Fischer in Pittsburgh, Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran, John Heilprin in New York, and Pamela Hess and Desmond Butler in Washington also contributed.

 

[CougarKing]

And it seems Iran will allow UN inspectors in to look at the 2nd site:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090926/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_nuclear

Iran to allow UN inspectors at its new nuke site
        Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 20 mins ago
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's nuclear chief says his country will allow the U.N. nuclear agency to inspect its newly revealed, still unfinished uranium enrichment facility.

Ali Akbar Salehi didn't specify when inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency could visit the site. He says the timing will be worked out with the U.N. watchdog.

Iran's newly revealed site is said to be in the arid mountains near the holy city of Qom, inside a heavily guarded, underground facility.

The pilot plant will house 3,000 centrifuges that could soon produce nuclear fuel — or the payload for atomic warheads. Salehi spoke on state TV Saturday.

He says Iran has "pre-empted a conspiracy" against Tehran by the U.S. and its allies by reporting the site voluntarily to the IAEA.

 

[Marmite]

Now they start lobbing missiles all over the country.....

Also, for those Google Earth types, I was looking at the Natanz facility which is very clear and has great images. It is heavily defended. There appears to be a ring of fences, walls, watch towers and anti-aircraft defenses surrounding the facility. Just adds to the evidence that they have no intentions of keeping their program...."Peaceful"....in their words.

Iran test-fires short-range missiles

By NASSER KARIMI (AP) – 42 minutes ago

TEHRAN — Iran said it successfully test-fired short-range missiles during military drills Sunday by the elite Revolutionary Guard, a show of force days after the U.S. warned Tehran over a newly revealed underground nuclear facility it was secretly constructing.

Gen. Hossein Salami, head of the Revolutionary Guard Air Force, said Iran also tested a multiple missile launcher for the first time. The official English-language Press TV showed pictures of at least two missiles being fired simultaneously and said they were from Sunday's drill in a central Iran desert. In the clip, men could be heard shouting "Allahu Akbar" as the missiles were launched.

"We are going to respond to any military action in a crushing manner and it doesn't make any difference which country or regime has launched the aggression," state media quoted Salami as saying. He said the missiles successfully hit their targets.

The powerful Revolutionary Guard defends Iran's clerical rulers. It has its own ground, naval and air units and its air force controls the country's missile program.

The tests came two days after the U.S. and its allies disclosed that Iran had been secretly developing a previously unknown underground uranium enrichment facility and warned the country it must open the nuclear site to international inspection or face harsher international sanctions. The drill was planned in advance of that disclosure.

The newly revealed nuclear site in the arid mountains near the holy city of Qom is believed to be inside a heavily guarded, underground facility belonging to the Revolutionary Guard, according to a document sent by President Barack Obama's administration to lawmakers.

After the strong condemnations from the U.S. and its allies, Iran said Saturday it will allow U.N. nuclear inspectors to examine the site.

Nuclear experts said the details that have emerged about the site and the fact it was being developed secretly are strong indications that Iran's nuclear program is not only for peaceful purposes, as the country has long maintained.

By U.S. estimates, Iran is one to five years away from having a nuclear weapons capability, although U.S. intelligence also believes that Iranian leaders have not yet made the decision to build a weapon.

Iran also is developing a long-range ballistic missile that could carry a nuclear warhead, but the administration said last week that it believes that effort has been slowed. That assessment paved the way for Obama's decision to shelve the Bush administration's plan for a missile shield in Europe, which was aimed at defending against Iranian ballistic missiles.

Salami said Iran would test medium-range Shahab-1 and Shahab-2 missiles on Sunday night and long-range Shahab-3 missiles on Monday, during drills set to last several days.

Salami said Fateh, Tondar and Zelzal missiles were test fired on Sunday, but did not give specifics on range or other details. All are short-range, surface-to-surface missiles.

He told reporters Iran had reduced the missiles and their ranges and enhanced their speed and precision so they could be used in quick, short-range engagements. He also said they are now able to be launched from positions that are not as easy to hit.

He said the Revolutionary Guards' current missile tests and military drills are indications of Iran's resolve to defend its national values and part of a strategy of deterrence and containment of missile threats.

Salami claimed Iran has started "running into difficulties storing so many missiles" with its recent progress on its missile program.

Iran has had the solid-fuel Fateh missile, with a range of 120 miles (193 kilometers), for several years. Fateh means conqueror in Farsi and Arabic. It also has the solid-fueled, Chinese-made CSS 8, also called the Tondar 69, according to the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, a private group that seeks to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The Tondar, which means thunder, has a range of about 93 miles (150 kilometers.)

State media said the Revolutionary Guard tested a multiple launcher for the first time, designed for the Zelzal missile. Tehran has previously tested the Zelzal — versions of which have ranges of 130-185 miles (210-300 kilometers) — but only single launch.

In July 2006, Israeli military officials said their jets had destroyed a missile in Lebanon named Zelzal, which they said Hezbollah had received from Iran and could reach Tel Aviv. Zelzal means earthquake.

Iran's last known missile tests were in May when it fired its longest-range solid-fuel missile, Sajjil-2. Tehran said the two-stage surface-to-surface missile has a range of about 1,200 miles (1,900 kilometers) — capable of striking Israel, U.S. Mideast bases and Europe.

The revelation of Iran's secret site has given greater urgency to a key meeting on Thursday in Geneva between Iran and six major powers trying to stop its suspected nuclear weapons program.

The U.S. and its partners plan to tell Tehran at the meeting that it must provide "unfettered access" for the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, within weeks.

The facility is Iran's second uranium-enrichment site working to produce the fuel that could eventually be used in a nuclear weapon.

A close aide to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Saturday the site will be operational soon and would pose a threat to those who oppose Iran.

"This new facility, God willing, will become operational soon and will blind the eyes of the enemies," Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani told the semi-official Fars news agency.

Evidence of the clandestine facility was presented Friday by Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the G-20 economic summit in Pittsburgh. On Saturday, Obama offered Iran "a serious, meaningful dialogue" over its disputed nuclear program, while warning Tehran of grave consequences from a united global front.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Saturday the revelation was firm proof Iran was seeking nuclear weapons.

Israel considers Iran a strategic threat with its nuclear program, missile development and repeated calls by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Israel's destruction. It has not ruled out a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear sites.

In 1981, Israeli warplanes bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reaction and in 2007, Israel bombed a site in Syria that the U.S. said was a nearly finished nuclear reactor built with North Korean help that was configured to produce plutonium — one of the substances used in nuclear warheads.

Israel's Foreign Ministry had no immediate comment on the missile tests.

Iranian Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi, who heads the country's nuclear program, said Saturday that U.N. nuclear inspectors could visit the nuclear site. On Sunday, he told Press TV Iran and the IAEA would work out the timing of the inspection.

The small-scale site is meant to house no more than 3,000 centrifuges — much less than the 8,000 machines at Natanz, Iran's known industrial-scale enrichment facility, but they could still potentially help create bomb-making material.

Experts have estimated that Iran's current number of centrifuges could enrich enough uranium for a bomb in as little as a year. Washington has been pushing for heavier sanctions if Iran does not agree to end enrichment.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Related articles

    * IRGC to launch more missiles in military drill
      PRESS TV - 9 hours ago
    * Iran warned over 'nuclear ambitions'
      ITN - 20 hours ago
    * Iran says it test-fired short-range missiles
      CTV.ca - 2 hours ago
    * More coverage (77) »

Add News to your iGoogle Homepage Add News to your Google Homepage
The Associated Press

 

[CougarKing]

The clock continues to tick.

Zero hour: Countdown to Israeli attack on Iran
July 14, 2009 - 7:54am

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=778&sid=1716852

WASHINGTON -- There is a commonly held belief by some influential Israeli and U.S. government officials that valuable time has been lost trying to talk to Iran about ending its nuclear weapons program.

Mohamed El Baradei, the outgoing chairman of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said last month that he had a "gut feeling" Iran was working to produce nuclear arms to be used as an "insurance policy" against perceived threats.

Those threats include a vow from Israel to stop Iran from developing the weapons.

While an attack may seem unlikely due to diplomatic dialogue with Iran, a source in Israel with knowledge of the situation says an attack could happen any day.

"Time is running out," the source says. "A decision could be made by September or October of this year as to when an attack will occur."

The source also says Israel has been updating its plans to reflect real-time changes in Iran.

Israeli Embassy spokesman Jonathan Peled says his country is trying to avoid two basic scenarios.

"One is a situation where Iran can have nuclear capabilities and the other is having to resort to military options," Peled says.

At the same time Peled says, "The clock is ticking and therefore we need to step up our concern, our measures and our attention toward dealing with this."

The spokesman says Israel wants the world to deal with Iran's nuclear weapons program because it is a "global threat" and "we have to find the best, quickest and most peaceful means to put an end to Iran's nuclear program."

But behind the scenes it's a different story.

A senior Israeli military official told WTOP in early November 2008, "Allowing Iran to produce nuclear weapons is not an option and all options are on the table to stop Iran from producing nuclear weapons."

Since then, other Israeli officials have echoed those comments repeatedly with a growing sense of urgency, and there are signs the U.S. may be the hold up.

There is evidence that some in Israel are growing impatient. A top Israeli intelligence operative confessed to an American counterpart recently that there is a growing concern that "the U.S. does not have the stomach" to attack Iran.

Avi Issacharoff, a correspondent for Ha'aretz newspaper in Jersualem, said during a recent interview that the Israeli military is looking carefully at what option would be most successful in neutralizing Iran's nuclear program. And the best option - air strikes - runs right through the White House.

"In order to do something like that - a big aerial operation to hit all nuclear facilities in Iran - Israel will need U.S. approval for something like that," says Issacharoff.

"I'm not aware of any other type of solution, like ground to ground or sea to ground missiles. Those solutions will not be able to answer the threat that has been made by the Iranians. Only an Air Force attack would be partially able of answering the threat."

The U.S. military is not anxious to participate in an attack on Iran.

"President Obama and his administration are reaching out to Iran in a dialogue which has not taken place for almost 30 years in a way that at least offers some potential to resolve some of these challenges," says Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"I certainly, like many other people - not just in the United States, but I think globally - eagerly await that engagement to hopefully defuse what could be a very, very bad situation if Iran doesn't change how it's evolving, particularly with this capability."

An Israeli attack on Iran would require more from the U.S. than solely permission. A former Israeli military intelligence source says Israel needs the U.S. for refueling support.

"They either need U.S. air-to-air refueling tankers to support the mission, or buy re-fueling tankers from the U.S. or need to re-fuel in Iraq."

Israel has not been able to persuade the U.S. to agree to any of those options.

"Unfortunately, the centrifuges are spinning as we speak," says Peled. "Despite the internal turmoil in Iran, the nuclear program has not been affected and the Iranians are continuing to develop their nuclear aspirations."

A senior Iranian member of Iran's Parliament has said any an attack will trigger "a decisive and full-scale response." Ala'eddin Borujerdi, the head of parliament's national security and foreign policy commission, said any attack on Iran would destabilize the Middle East and the whole world.

 

[tomahawk6]

The first of 10 30,000-pound (13.6 metric tons) precision-guided bunker buster are due to roll off the assembly lin in December two years ahead of schedule. The bomb can be fitted to a B-2.

 

[Jammer]

I have watched the video of the "short range missles", and to me some of the captures show that some look and awful lot like souped up SA-2s, others look like Honest Johns.
IMHO they Honest John look alikes are not much of a threat to Israel. They are a battlefield system (Canada even had a Bty of them in the 60's).
The media will take this and run with it though, based on thier "expert military analysts"...(one Col Michel Drapeau ret springs to mind).

 

[Edward Campbell]

While it is complicated, even a bit difficult, to build a "fleet" of long range ballistic (much less guided) missiles and while it is even more complex and difficult to build nuclear warhead and then "mate" them to said missiles, the question remains:

How much time should Israel allow?

An Israeli attack is also complex, difficult and fraught with military and strategic dangers, but I, personally, am not sure I see an alternative that serves Israel's vital interests.

My guesstimate is that, despite a HUGE whoop and holler from throughout the Muslim "world," and from it's European friends, the Sunni Muslims, worldwide, which is to say most Muslims, will breathe a sigh of relief when (IF) Shia Iran is dealt a harsh, even crippling, nuclear blow.

The fate of the Gulf of Hormuz, however, and all the oil that flows through it become problematical.

I don't know how many combat brigades are available in the US Army and USMC but I do know that they constitute just about all of the US led West's strategic reserve and if an Israeli attack provokes a wider regional conflict - just as Iraq is, slowly, starting to quiet down - then that reserve will have to be committed there, and not in Afghanistan or South Korea or anywhere else.