Report: Israel training for tactical nuke strike on Iran’s reactors
posted at 8:06 pm on January 6, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
As usual, Drudge oversold it. They’re training for the mission as a contingency and the only nukes involved are bunker-busters with a one-kiloton yield, roughly the power of the Trade Center collapse, to be used at a single site.
Still, the missiles-down-the-chute bombing scenario should please Star Wars fans.
Two fast assault squadrons based in the Negev desert and in Tel Nof, south of Tel Aviv, are already training for the attack…
The prime target will be Natanz, the deep and ferociously protected bunker south of Tehran where the Iranians are churning out enriched uranium in defiance of the United Nations security council.
If things go according to plan, a pilot will first launch a conventional laser-guided bomb to blow a shaft down through the layers of hardened concrete. Other pilots will then be ready to drop low-yield one kiloton nuclear weapons into the hole…
In recent weeks Israeli pilots have been flying long-haul as far as Gibraltar to simulate the 2,000-mile round trip to Natanz…
“There are 24 strong batteries around Natanz, making it one of the most protected sites on earth,” said an Israeli military source. Its centrifuge halls, where the uranium is enriched, are heavily protected at least 70ft underground…
Should Israel launch a tactical nuclear strike, the consequences could be catastrophic. Gardiner believes that there would not only be “low DNA operations” — difficult to trace directly back to the Iranians — such as terrorist attacks, but the Muslim world would also be so inflamed that the stability of pro-western regimes would be threatened.
“It doesn’t take much imagination to see Pakistan (a nuclear power) falling to Islamic fundamentalists,” Gardiner said. “It could mean that in order to prevent Iran getting nuclear weapons, we could be handing them to a terrorist nation.”
Partly because of the taboo on nukes, partly because the Times has been alarmist in this vein before, but mostly because Israel risks total isolation and regional war if it follows through, I’m skeptical. But … what’s the alternative? To wait and hope that the UN’s weak-tea sanctions cripple the regime before it gets the bomb? The lesson here is, if your leader talks like Hitler, don’t be surprised if he’s treated like Hitler. Especially by the neighborhood Jews.
Root causes, in other words.
Will the U.S. beat Israel to the punch? Maliki said today, for what it’s worth, that the long-awaited attack on the militias is at hand. Given that Bush is set to announce a surge on Wednesday, he might finally be telling the truth. The U.S. will be worried about Iranian pushback, especially given the newly-discovered extent of their influence inside Iraq. If things escalate, we may seize the opportunity to take out their reactors. In fact, Ralph Peters and Debkafile both see significance in the appointment of Admiral Fallon to replace Abizaid at Centcom. Peters:
Why put a swabbie in charge of grunt operations?
There’s a one-word answer: Iran.
Assigning a Navy aviator and combat veteran to oversee our military operations in the Persian Gulf makes perfect sense when seen as a preparatory step for striking Iran’s nuclear-weapons facilities – if that becomes necessary.
While the Air Force would deliver the heaviest tonnage of ordnance in a campaign to frustrate Tehran’s quest for nukes, the toughest strategic missions would fall to our Navy. Iran would seek to retaliate asymmetrically by attacking oil platforms and tankers, closing the Strait of Hormuz – and trying to hit oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates.
Only the U.S. Navy – hopefully, with Royal Navy and Aussie vessels underway beside us – could keep the oil flowing to a thirsty world.
Debka, after declaring that Bush is ready to stake “every US resource to hand” on victory in Iraq:
DEBKAfile’s military and Washington sources report that the new Bush policy will brook no look-in for Iran, Syria or Hizballah in Iraq’s affairs. Exceptionally offensive US military resources have been marshaled to bar any interference with the White House’s plans for Iraq…
[Admiral Fallon] specializes in deploying large-scale navy, air and Marines forces simultaneously in different arenas.
And the White House is making sure that Adm. Fallon has plenty of resources to deploy, a veritable buildup, the second in four months, in the Persian Gulf and other waters opposite Iran. The USS John C. Stennis strike group is heading for the Persian Gulf with a mighty air arm of 9-10 fighter-bomber squadrons. Saturday, some sources reported that another task force, the USS Ronald Reagan Strike Group, had been ordered out of Sand Diego on Jan. 4 and was heading in the same direction.
I hope Bush is prepared to have his bluff called.
Update: Steny Hoyer takes the hardline. Until Israel actually acts, in which case he’ll repudiate his support, declare that he was misled, and do a photo op with Cindy Sheehan.
Update: Mubarak’s not counting on Israel to deal with the Shiite bomb.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Its time to git-er-done!!!
davy on January 6, 2007 at 8:11 PM
Oh, great.
You know how Media Matters is going to spin this, right?
CONSERVATIVE BLOGGER ADMITS WORLD TRADE CENTER BROUGHT DOWN BY EXPLOSIVES!!!
They can’t help themselves.
Slublog on January 6, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Any chance Luke Skywalker is an Israeli?
.
GT on January 6, 2007 at 8:13 PM
The time is right. I echo “git er done”.
Zorro on January 6, 2007 at 8:20 PM
w00t!!
Ugly on January 6, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Holy crap, I screwed that link up. Here.
Ugly on January 6, 2007 at 8:23 PM
Thank you, Times of London douchebags, for disclosing and undermining Israeli defense plans.
Squid Vicious on January 6, 2007 at 8:28 PM
I would hope (but I doubt) it would speed the process. One can dream.
Ugly on January 6, 2007 at 8:31 PM
I was in the A.F. during Gulf War One, and I remember rumors (probably just that, rumors) that Israeli F-15s and F-16s had their tails painted over with American markings and they joined in on the fun. Any chance we might return the favor? American planes with a great big ‘ol Star Of David on the tail?
“the Muslim world wouls also be inflamed”
What? Ya mean it’s not already? Ya mean the muslims might hate the Israelis? Oh hell no! Anything but that!
And yes that was sarcasm, Capt. Obvious.
Tony737 on January 6, 2007 at 8:46 PM
Hoyer has for years been the threat to Pelosi from the center-right of the Democratic Party. He is more Lieberman-esque than Lamont-esque. The left wing of the Democratic Party is anti-Israel, and the left wing is also anti-Hoyer. The enemy of my enemy …
Ever since Ahmadinejad started his anti-Semitic nuclear saber-rattling, I have favored an Osirak-style solution. The Islamic madman wants a war with Israel? Fine. Israel has never been ashamed to fight for its survival, and has never been defeated on its home field. Another demonstration of Israeli military superiority would have wonderful influence on Middle Eastern affairs, and Israel’s independent action would help quiet those U.S. critics who view the alliance with Israel as a one-way street with no benefit to the U.S.
Frankly, the Saudis and the Gulf emirs will (privately) celebrate the humiliation of the radical Shi’ites, who’ve been a thorn in the side of the Sunni conservatives for decades. So if Israel strikes Iran, expect a lot of noise from the “Arab street,” and perhaps Palestinian violence, but no military reprisals, because (a) Syria is Iran’s only ally in the region, and (b) the IDF is itching for an excuse to kick Syria’s butt.
Ali-Bubba on January 6, 2007 at 8:48 PM
And it isn’t like the good Admiral is going to be issuing OPORDs to infantry platoons, sheesh. It is the largest MACOM we have right now.
Guess I had best pay attention next month since my unit is on the “ready” list…
major john on January 6, 2007 at 9:05 PM
I’ll go out on a limb and say that this threat of a tactical nuclear strike will do more to make the Iranians think twice about their nuclear program than UN sanctions ever could.
Chad on January 6, 2007 at 9:05 PM
THEN:
Welcome to Iran!Enjoy your stay!HOPEFULLY SOON:
Welcome to Whats left of Iran! PARKING: $10.00 A DAY.
seejanemom on January 6, 2007 at 9:06 PM
I hope they do it since it’s obvious the democrats have no backbone whatsoever. Frankly, it seems the Republicans are missing several veterbrae…
SouthernGent on January 6, 2007 at 9:23 PM
Bomb, bomb, bomb,
Bomb, bomb I-ran,
Bomb, bomb, bomb,
Bomb, bomb I-ran,
Bomb I-ra-a-an!
Faster, please.
bdfaith on January 6, 2007 at 9:38 PM
Given the utter uselessness of the U.N., that sounds like an extremely wide and sturdy limb to go out on. Although the U.N. can only get better under SecGen Moon, but only because it couldn’t get any worse than under Kofi. ‘Useless but better’ is still useless, though.
All too true on both counts. And the fact that the Dems are spineless will no doubt factor into the Israelis’ plans, because they know that now they can’t even count on us to back them up, let alone take any effective action on our own. Which is yet another instance where the Democrats’ worthlessness on foreign policy weakens our allies and emboldens our enemies. Sorry, but I’ll take “peace through strength” to “appeasement through weakness” any day.
ReubenJCogburn on January 6, 2007 at 9:43 PM
Olmert does not seem like the button-pushing type. Or maybe he’ll do it to prove his bonafides. I think Sharon would not have let dinnerjacket flaunt and threaten. Osama demonstrated you have to take these people seriously. The existance of Israel disproves the koran. You know how muslims hate that.
Buck Turgidson on January 6, 2007 at 9:46 PM
He’s got the whooooole world…. in his hands….
Is anyone else reminded of Steve ushemi’s character in Con-Air??
Hehehe.
Ringmaster on January 6, 2007 at 9:46 PM
I hope this is true, for I fear it is the world’s only option at this time. We will not do it, no one in the West will so Israel, just like with Iraq, will have to save the world’s collective ass. I fully support Israel in this operation and hope that it will accomplish what needs to be accomplished. Go Israel, go Israel……..
ritethinker on January 6, 2007 at 9:58 PM
Meanwhile….
http://www.espomagazine.com/bev/rabbitvssnake.wmv
.
GT on January 6, 2007 at 10:29 PM
About half a dozen members of my church are assigned aboard the USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76). Several of them were at midweek services Thursday evening, so I strongly doubt she got underway on the 4th. Also, it’s pretty hard to sneak a nuclear carrier out of port in San Diego without the news being on hand. I’ll find out more tomorrow morning. I would think that the Reagan is not due for another full deployment quite yet, as they returned from a 7-month stint at sea last July.
As for the chances of Osirak v2.0, there’s one thing the Israeli military has never lacked. Malkins.
Freelancer on January 6, 2007 at 10:29 PM
Before
Iran
Iraq
Syria
Saudi Arabia
After
Exxon
Mobile
Shell
Texaco
:-)
AZPatriot on January 6, 2007 at 10:40 PM
Hmm? I wonder what the fallout will be?
I don’t think Israel will be the first to tap off a nuke. They would lose the moral high ground in the world’s eye.
The Muslims will be the first to nuke a city somewhere, they won’t be able to help themselves, and then holy hell will break loose. I can easily envision the U.S. or Israel completely annihilating the guilty country with nukes. If the first strike country isn’t completely annihilated then the West will continue to lose city after city.
There are perilous days ahead and it will be no laughing matter when it happens.
Mojave Mark on January 6, 2007 at 11:10 PM
The bulk of the world, so far as I can determine, and for whatever reasons, already perceives Israel as holding the low ground. In the end, the nations that deal with it now would continue to do so; the ones that oppose it would continue to do nothing but verbally express their disdain.
Blacklake on January 7, 2007 at 12:01 AM
I don’t know how many times I need to say it, but we need to print up billions and billions of counterfeit Iranian dollars and dump them in Iraq, all over Iran and in numerous places in Europe (beware of Europe’s litering laws) and tell Iran, you hit a tanker, we hit a harbor.
At the same time block all refined gas returning to the Iranians.
Oh, and tonight I got to give the one finger salute to the UN building. Sic Semper Tyrannis
Tim Burton on January 7, 2007 at 12:13 AM
As was the case with N. Korea recently, you have to test a nuke before you can “have nukes.” The same should apply to Iran. I would expect things to stay conventional until at least that point. Air campaign could set them back. Do you stop with the centrifuges or take out the moolas?
Buck Turgidson on January 7, 2007 at 12:46 AM
I’m hoping that a massive earthquake destroys the Iranian nuclear installations and prempts this possible Israeli premption.
But, barring such a miracle, it’s time for the Western militaries to unite and crush the Iranian ayatollahs’ ambitions to gain atomic weapons in order to implement their theocratric genocidal ambitions.
But, because the disunity of the West seems to make that possibility about as unlikely as an 8.8 quake, Israel will have to strike. Or risk losing their nation and population to the lunacy of Mahmoud and the mad mullahs’ murderous machinations.
If now now, when? If not them, who?
profitsbeard on January 7, 2007 at 1:01 AM
The Jooooos are gonna kick ass!
God Bless the Israelis.
infidel4life on January 7, 2007 at 1:09 AM
I always said “if Iran wants nukes, Israel should give them to them…air delivery!”
Black Adam on January 7, 2007 at 4:59 AM
Yeah, ummmm… I understand Bush hasn’t exactly been the strongest of leaders. I understand the he’s completely screwed up the border issue, but I think you’re wrong here. I think if you looked at it objectively you’d see that.
I’m pretty hacked at Bush about many of the spineless decisions he’s made, but this … this is no bluff.
One Angry Christian on January 7, 2007 at 10:39 AM
I personally doubt this has to do with Iran directly. I think it is more likely practice for how to deal with Hezbollah in Lebanon in the future.
crosspatch on January 7, 2007 at 3:53 PM
I don’t think we should depend on the Israelis if our side has to take the military option against Iran’s nukes.
The IAF barely made it off the ground with their bombs to take out Osirak in 1981 and their planes didn’t have to fly as far (Iran is much farther than Iraq was and the Iraqis aren’t going to let the IAF use Iraqi air space either).
Also, the IAF can’t use a Sinai airbase to launch as they did in 1981.
Israel will help us, but this has to be an Allied operation…if American isn’t alone, as Mark Steyn says.
(BTW, this story ‘isn’t” news and has been thrown out as the American solution to the Iranian nuke problem for at least the last 3 years.)
Time for the USA to cowboy up again and assume our responsibilities as the World’s only superpower, force for Good and global policeman.
Jen the Neocon on January 7, 2007 at 6:57 PM
Here’s a description of the source of this story, from http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/01/israeli_military_leaks_iran_pl.php
That’s followed by annual reports of the impending Israeli strikes.
pedestrian on January 7, 2007 at 9:40 PM
Since when does Israel publish advance notice of possible secret missions? It was decades after they did the nuke reactor in Iraq before they allowed any pilots involved to talk about it. The last thing the Israelis do is talk about future operations. They’re demons about operational security.
This smells like a bluff. This is meant to distract from something else hidden.
Tantor on January 8, 2007 at 1:22 AM
Lose the moral high ground in the world’s eyes? Israel wouldn’t have the moral high ground if all its neighbors teamed up to wage a war of genocide on them. I know that because it’s happened twice. And what does everyone whine about? The fact that Israel kept some of the land it took from its defeated foes, something every victorious nation has done in every war ever fought. But still, you’re proabably right, I don’t see them being the first to use anything that could be likened to a nuke.
Unless it’s far more compelling than any threat that I’ve ever heard a legitimate government make, I wouldn’t be so sure.
Wolfman on January 8, 2007 at 3:11 AM
Two points:
The Jerusalem Post is carrying an article where, once again, Iran threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz if the talk about striking Iran’s nuclear program doesn’t stop.
If Iran is stupid enough to try, the Israeli’s striking Iran will be the least of their problems.
Point Two: Appointing Admiral Fallon, PACOM’s commander before the recent announcement, is a pointed message to Iran.
georgej on January 8, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Followup on this:
The Reagan is at berth at NAS North Island at this moment. The battle group is scheduled to provide stop-gap presence in the Persian Gulf region ahead of its normal deployment schedule, so the story is true but inaccurate. Exact dates NFPD.
Freelancer on January 9, 2007 at 4:34 PM
Comment pages: