This is claimed to be Israel's (no longer) secret war plan

Skybird · 08-16-12, 05:13 AM

Rumours are they will strike even before Novembre.

Say the rumours.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/ti...cret-war-plan/

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/ti...he-hasbarafia/

Note that the blogger himself seems to be quite realistic and critical of Israel'S chances, exporessing doubt that Israel has correctly understood the nature and setup of it's Iranian enemy - at the price of underestimating him.

I am split over all this, i only agree with Israel not to put its trust into Obama. While Israel may assume that he is just about not launching a war before he got reelected, I even doubt his willingness to launch any war against Iran at all. I think he already has arranged himself with a nuclar arms race in the ME and wants to appease Israel endlessly with hollow promises of future assistances. And the rest of the world? The whole diplomatic "effort" over Iran is based on illusions, intentional misinterpretations of realities, and ignoring reality completely.

I think an Israeli war now just will be the prelude to the next war. A delay of this kind may be acceptable for a force as limited as that of Israel. If at any time the US gets involved, I expect much more determination to really crush them. I also expect Europe, if it already does not participate in the fighting (and who seriously holds his breath for that?), then at least it should pay solid and greater part of the American bill for this operation. And Germany should finally arrest and hang those bosses of business that still do hidden business with Iran.

And when I say "hang them", I mean exactly that, in a perfectly cool state of mind. Its about teaching a lesson to others.

Oberon · 08-16-12, 07:16 AM

Good lord, that's supposedly their battle plan?

Israel can't do this alone, not and expect to achieve anything other than a massive counter-barrage from both Iran, what's left of Syria and Lebanon.

Besides, they'll take out Irans nuclear reactor, great, but what's stopping them from just building another one, but this time with Russian help and with Russian SAM launchers around it? Israel would have become an international pariah for acting first without going through the UN and Russia and China would have gained a political reason to supply Iran with all the hi-tech weaponry it needs to 'protect it from the aggressive and warlike Israel'.

Heck, politically, it could play straight into Irans court to be bombed by Israel, particularly if they refrain from retaliating and play the moral high ground in the UN on it. Of course, I doubt they will refrain from retaliating, that would cause internal trouble, but Russia and China could, and will, use a pre-emptive Israeli strike to push for sanctions on Israel in the UN, and for the removal of sanctions on Iran. The US will veto any Israeli sanctions, but its position will be increasingly untenable, and you can expect backlash against US forces in Afghanistan over it.

There is no easy way to deal with Iran, and Israel cannot do it alone, not and hope to achieve any long lasting success, it may win the battle, of that I have little doubt, but it will lose the war and suffer a great deal of damage both in terms of human casualties and political casualties. If Israel had US support, then it gets a bit easier, but you're still left with the problem that unless you put boots on the ground or create constant air superiority then it would be easy for Iran to just dust itself down and restart the program, and then ten-fifteen years down the line you're back at square one, only this time Iran has better weaponry thanks to Russia and China, and you might not even have the resources available to tackle Iran.
It's an election year this year, and neither Romney or Obama would commit to a long term campaign in Iran, it would be political suicide, in fact it's bordering on political suicide to mention any armed campaign against Iran due to the level of war weariness in the US, heck isolationism seems to be on the gentle rise in the background, if trending comments from Americans on different forums I frequent are anything to go by.
The EU...well...lol, that's the only thing I have to say about that mess, honestly I don't think it'd be able to find Tehran on a map, much less contribute to any attack against it, and as for dealing with bankers, well you forget who runs the EU Skybird, it sure as hell ain't the politicians

The UK might throw a couple of TLAMs into the equation but then we'd run out of ammo and have to withdraw so that's pretty pointless. So really, if any big nation who isn't already a friend of Iran is going to have to tackle it, then it's the US and Israel, and even with those two combined, unless Iran magically transforms back to pre-revolutionary days (lol) and becomes a western ally, then all you're going to do is make Iran stronger in the long run.

TLDR? One strike will not be enough, and yet one strike is all that Israel and the US can afford both economically and politically, and even then the price may be too high for them to pay.

Skybird · 08-16-12, 07:50 AM

It is a difficult dilemma. For us.

For Israel, it is the choice between a nuclear holocaust or not. Which makes their choice easy and explains their determination. It is not important whether we take Iran's threats serious or not, our interpretations mean nothing. That Israel takes them as what they are being given is what counts. And I cannot blame them for doing so.

My position is clear, and has been since years. Iranian nukes are totally unacceptable and must be prevented, no matter what. Israel alone probably can only delay and buy some time. But with the US, I demand a greater ambition to not just delay but to turn into microscopic pieces all installations related to a nuclear weapon program. What stands in the way to that objective, must get shattered, too. By as little violence as possible but as much as is needed to guarantee the achieving of all objectives.

Priority is not to not do this and not to use that. Priority is to achieve the objectives.

The alternative, to which Obama probably already has subscribed, is to live with a nuclear arms race of uncalculatable proportions and in a fundamentally unstable region filled with tribal minds having open bills, and religious hysterics, hot-blooded supremacists and apostles of apocalypse. This scenario I fear more than any other. It is instabile, unpredictable, and in no way compares to the stable, rational cold war between East and West.

Damn, I really miss the cold war. And no, Jimbuna, again I am not joking.

Oberon · 08-16-12, 08:10 AM

Don't worry, I miss it too. At least you knew your enemy back then.

I understand Israels motives for a strike, it is a matter of survival, however once they have undertaken the first strike they have committed themselves to a program of continual strikes against an enemy which will be supplied by Russia and China, whilst further isolating themselves from international support and risking cutting their support from America. It's a short term victory but a long term defeat.
And even if America does reduce the Iranian nuclear program to a fine layer of dust, how long will it take until Iran has rebuilt that program? Particularly if it gets covert Chinese and Russian support? And this time that program will have Russian and Chinese made weapons guarding it, which means that when the US comes to reduce the program to dust for a second time it will be more costly, and then Iran will rebuild it for a third time, and so on and so forth.
If the Germans had bombed the Los Alamos laboratory in 1943, would the US have given up on the Manhatten Project? No, it would have had a big setback, yes, but it would still have carried on, and with Iran it's even worse because Iran knows what a nuclear weapon can do, whereas the US only had an idea of the potential of one.

Skybird · 08-16-12, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

Don't worry, I miss it too. At least you knew your enemy back then.

I understand Israels motives for a strike, it is a matter of survival, however once they have undertaken the first strike they have committed themselves to a program of continual strikes against an enemy which will be supplied by Russia and China, whilst further isolating themselves from international support and risking cutting their support from America. It's a short term victory but a long term defeat.
And even if America does reduce the Iranian nuclear program to a fine layer of dust, how long will it take until Iran has rebuilt that program? Particularly if it gets covert Chinese and Russian support? And this time that program will have Russian and Chinese made weapons guarding it, which means that when the US comes to reduce the program to dust for a second time it will be more costly, and then Iran will rebuild it for a third time, and so on and so forth.
If the Germans had bombed the Los Alamos laboratory in 1943, would the US have given up on the Manhatten Project? No, it would have had a big setback, yes, but it would still have carried on, and with Iran it's even worse because Iran knows what a nuclear weapon can do, whereas the US only had an idea of the potential of one.

what would you suggest that they do,then, if you do not want to strike Iran every couple of years?

gimpy117 · 08-16-12, 11:52 AM

Oh yeah, If Israel wants to do that let them, just don't Drag the US into it

Oberon · 08-16-12, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

what would you suggest that they do,then, if you do not want to strike Iran every couple of years?

If I had that answer I'm sure MOSSAD would have contacted me already.

geetrue · 08-16-12, 11:01 AM

Iran is already under attack by Israel

Plus the Lord said that "If Iran were to launch a missile towards Tel Aviv it would land in Jordan"
meaning that El Shaddi is still in charge of his chosen nation no matter what the threat is.

Talk of Military Attack May Be Cover for Cyber War on Iran

Daily chatter of a military attack on Iran may be a ruse to cover a cyber war that could knock out Iran’s nuclear program

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158941

Quote:

Journalists are scratching their heads to figure out why Israeli and American leaders are leading a daily chatter of a military attack on Iran, but the flow of words may be a ruse to give Iran a double jolt as its deep fear that a cyber war can knock out its nuclear program prompts Tehran to try to setup a domestic Internet network.
“The regime no longer fears a physical attack from the West,” Mahmoud Enayat, director of the Iran Media Program at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School of Communications, told The Wall Street Journal recently. “It still thinks the West wants to take over Iran, but through the Internet.”
Computer geniuses can literally take over Iran by taking control of its nuclear sites through technology, Minyanville financial website’s staffer Justin Rohrlich wrote Wednesday.
A spate of cyber attacks, such as the Stuxnet and Flame virus and Malware, may have scared Iran more than the nearly daily threats from Israel that it will strike its underground nuclear installations.

Bilge_Rat · 08-16-12, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geetrue

Iran is already under attack by Israel

Talk of Military Attack May Be Cover for Cyber War on Iran

Daily chatter of a military attack on Iran may be a ruse to cover a cyber war that could knock out Iran’s nuclear program

Agreed.

No need for a messy Air attack which may not knock the whole program anyway.

Israel's strategy so far: assassinations, sabotage, cyber attacks works as well and more importantly, is much less public.

Oberon · 08-16-12, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

Agreed.

No need for a messy Air attack which may not knock the whole program anyway.

Israel's strategy so far: assassinations, sabotage, cyber attacks works as well and more importantly, is much less public.

It's a good strategy, and one that Israel is particularly skilled at.

Whether or not it's enough...remains to be seen.

eddie · 08-16-12, 02:52 PM

Something to think about too is, the Quds forces using a proxy like Hezbollah to plant a dirty bomb in Isreal! It seems like that would be more their style anyway, concidering what they would face in launching a nuke armed missle.

Oberon · 08-16-12, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddie

Something to think about too is, the Quds forces using a proxy like Hezbollah to plant a dirty bomb in Isreal! It seems like that would be more their style anyway, concidering what they would face in launching a nuke armed missle.

I think that is the most likely form that any Iranian attack would take, getting through Israels missile defences isn't particularly easy as Saddam found out years ago. Furthermore, why stop at Israel?

However, it would be pretty easy to trace the attack back to Iran though, and the retaliation would be...impressive.

Skybird · 08-16-12, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddie

Something to think about too is, the Quds forces using a proxy like Hezbollah to plant a dirty bomb in Isreal! It seems like that would be more their style anyway, concidering what they would face in launching a nuke armed missle.

Ha! You are right, I'm preaching this since years. The biggest threat beside the instability of a nuclear arms race in the ME is proliferation, and terror suitcase bombs. This worries me much more than scenarios with Iranian MRBM falling down from the sky.

the_tyrant · 08-16-12, 06:13 PM

Its not going to happen, I mean, when even Skybird knows about it, the IDF would be highly stupid to execute such a plan

Catfish · 08-17-12, 02:32 AM

^ lol

And this is probably "uncovered" intentionally, for desinformation and to strike fear in the hearts of Iran.
I mean the blogger states he has been officially allowed to publish it, by the israelian govenment ? Hello ?

08-16-12, 05:13 AM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,663 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	This is claimed to be Israel's (no longer) secret war plan Rumours are they will strike even before Novembre. Say the rumours. http://www.richardsilverstein.com/ti...cret-war-plan/ http://www.richardsilverstein.com/ti...he-hasbarafia/ Note that the blogger himself seems to be quite realistic and critical of Israel'S chances, exporessing doubt that Israel has correctly understood the nature and setup of it's Iranian enemy - at the price of underestimating him. I am split over all this, i only agree with Israel not to put its trust into Obama. While Israel may assume that he is just about not launching a war before he got reelected, I even doubt his willingness to launch any war against Iran at all. I think he already has arranged himself with a nuclar arms race in the ME and wants to appease Israel endlessly with hollow promises of future assistances. And the rest of the world? The whole diplomatic "effort" over Iran is based on illusions, intentional misinterpretations of realities, and ignoring reality completely. I think an Israeli war now just will be the prelude to the next war. A delay of this kind may be acceptable for a force as limited as that of Israel. If at any time the US gets involved, I expect much more determination to really crush them. I also expect Europe, if it already does not participate in the fighting (and who seriously holds his breath for that?), then at least it should pay solid and greater part of the American bill for this operation. And Germany should finally arrest and hang those bosses of business that still do hidden business with Iran. And when I say "hang them", I mean exactly that, in a perfectly cool state of mind. Its about teaching a lesson to others. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

08-16-12, 07:50 AM	#3
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,663 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	It is a difficult dilemma. For us. For Israel, it is the choice between a nuclear holocaust or not. Which makes their choice easy and explains their determination. It is not important whether we take Iran's threats serious or not, our interpretations mean nothing. That Israel takes them as what they are being given is what counts. And I cannot blame them for doing so. My position is clear, and has been since years. Iranian nukes are totally unacceptable and must be prevented, no matter what. Israel alone probably can only delay and buy some time. But with the US, I demand a greater ambition to not just delay but to turn into microscopic pieces all installations related to a nuclear weapon program. What stands in the way to that objective, must get shattered, too. By as little violence as possible but as much as is needed to guarantee the achieving of all objectives. Priority is not to not do this and not to use that. Priority is to achieve the objectives. The alternative, to which Obama probably already has subscribed, is to live with a nuclear arms race of uncalculatable proportions and in a fundamentally unstable region filled with tribal minds having open bills, and religious hysterics, hot-blooded supremacists and apostles of apocalypse. This scenario I fear more than any other. It is instabile, unpredictable, and in no way compares to the stable, rational cold war between East and West. Damn, I really miss the cold war. And no, Jimbuna, again I am not joking. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 08-16-12 at 08:04 AM.

08-16-12, 11:52 AM	#6
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	Oh yeah, If Israel wants to do that let them, just don't Drag the US into it __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

08-16-12, 02:52 PM	#11
eddie Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,023 Downloads: 99 Uploads: 0	Something to think about too is, the Quds forces using a proxy like Hezbollah to plant a dirty bomb in Isreal! It seems like that would be more their style anyway, concidering what they would face in launching a nuke armed missle. __________________ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness. I'm kind to everyone, but when someone is unkind to me, weak is not what you are going to remember about me. Al Capone

08-16-12, 06:13 PM	#14
the_tyrant Admiral Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 2,272 Downloads: 58 Uploads: 0	Its not going to happen, I mean, when even Skybird knows about it, the IDF would be highly stupid to execute such a plan __________________ My own open source project on Sourceforge OTP.net KGB grade encryption for the rest of us

08-16-12, 07:16 AM	#2
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Good lord, that's supposedly their battle plan? Israel can't do this alone, not and expect to achieve anything other than a massive counter-barrage from both Iran, what's left of Syria and Lebanon. Besides, they'll take out Irans nuclear reactor, great, but what's stopping them from just building another one, but this time with Russian help and with Russian SAM launchers around it? Israel would have become an international pariah for acting first without going through the UN and Russia and China would have gained a political reason to supply Iran with all the hi-tech weaponry it needs to 'protect it from the aggressive and warlike Israel'. Heck, politically, it could play straight into Irans court to be bombed by Israel, particularly if they refrain from retaliating and play the moral high ground in the UN on it. Of course, I doubt they will refrain from retaliating, that would cause internal trouble, but Russia and China could, and will, use a pre-emptive Israeli strike to push for sanctions on Israel in the UN, and for the removal of sanctions on Iran. The US will veto any Israeli sanctions, but its position will be increasingly untenable, and you can expect backlash against US forces in Afghanistan over it. There is no easy way to deal with Iran, and Israel cannot do it alone, not and hope to achieve any long lasting success, it may win the battle, of that I have little doubt, but it will lose the war and suffer a great deal of damage both in terms of human casualties and political casualties. If Israel had US support, then it gets a bit easier, but you're still left with the problem that unless you put boots on the ground or create constant air superiority then it would be easy for Iran to just dust itself down and restart the program, and then ten-fifteen years down the line you're back at square one, only this time Iran has better weaponry thanks to Russia and China, and you might not even have the resources available to tackle Iran. It's an election year this year, and neither Romney or Obama would commit to a long term campaign in Iran, it would be political suicide, in fact it's bordering on political suicide to mention any armed campaign against Iran due to the level of war weariness in the US, heck isolationism seems to be on the gentle rise in the background, if trending comments from Americans on different forums I frequent are anything to go by. The EU...well...lol, that's the only thing I have to say about that mess, honestly I don't think it'd be able to find Tehran on a map, much less contribute to any attack against it, and as for dealing with bankers, well you forget who runs the EU Skybird, it sure as hell ain't the politicians The UK might throw a couple of TLAMs into the equation but then we'd run out of ammo and have to withdraw so that's pretty pointless. So really, if any big nation who isn't already a friend of Iran is going to have to tackle it, then it's the US and Israel, and even with those two combined, unless Iran magically transforms back to pre-revolutionary days (lol) and becomes a western ally, then all you're going to do is make Iran stronger in the long run. TLDR? One strike will not be enough, and yet one strike is all that Israel and the US can afford both economically and politically, and even then the price may be too high for them to pay.

08-16-12, 08:10 AM	#4
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Don't worry, I miss it too. At least you knew your enemy back then. I understand Israels motives for a strike, it is a matter of survival, however once they have undertaken the first strike they have committed themselves to a program of continual strikes against an enemy which will be supplied by Russia and China, whilst further isolating themselves from international support and risking cutting their support from America. It's a short term victory but a long term defeat. And even if America does reduce the Iranian nuclear program to a fine layer of dust, how long will it take until Iran has rebuilt that program? Particularly if it gets covert Chinese and Russian support? And this time that program will have Russian and Chinese made weapons guarding it, which means that when the US comes to reduce the program to dust for a second time it will be more costly, and then Iran will rebuild it for a third time, and so on and so forth. If the Germans had bombed the Los Alamos laboratory in 1943, would the US have given up on the Manhatten Project? No, it would have had a big setback, yes, but it would still have carried on, and with Iran it's even worse because Iran knows what a nuclear weapon can do, whereas the US only had an idea of the potential of one.

08-17-12, 02:32 AM	#15
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,773 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	^ lol And this is probably "uncovered" intentionally, for desinformation and to strike fear in the hearts of Iran. I mean the blogger states he has been officially allowed to publish it, by the israelian govenment ? Hello ?