Is Israel Really Preparing to Attack Iran? Col. Gardiner Says No

Is Israel really preparing to attack Iran? The New York Times today describes a June Israeli military exercise U.S. officials say "appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran's nuclear facilities." A "senior Pentagon official" said a goal of the exercise "was to send a clear message to the United States" and Europe that Israel was prepared to act militarily if U.S. pressure to stop Iran from enriching uranium continued to fail.

If so, retired Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner didn't get the message. "The signal I received is that Israel does NOT have the capability to effectively attack Iran's nuclear facilities," Col. Gardiner says.

Gardiner says a 2006 MIT paper by Whitney Raas and Austin Long, "Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities," is a good representation of how Israeli military planners think about targeting.

According to Raas and Long, in a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities Israel would be interested in three targets - the enrichment facility at Natanz, the conversion facility at Esfahan and the heavy water plant at Arak. They say Israel would want to attack these three facilities with a combined total of 36 aircraft.

"Getting 36 bombing aircraft into the targets connects well with the New York Times description of the early June exercise of 100 aircraft," Gardiner says. "Three strike packages of F-15I and F-16I aircraft, escorted by F-15A/C's with other supporting aircraft would be around 100 aircraft."

"An Israeli strike would not be much of a strike," Gardiner says. Israel would hit approximately 100 aim points, single weapons on a single part of the target. "I would call the Israeli strike 'disruptive' rather than 'destructive,'" he says. It has taken three to five years to build the three facilities. "You would have to destroy most of the facilities to come close to setting back the program three to five years."

The US probably thinks in terms of about 10 times more aim points for a similar strike, Gardiner notes.

"President Bush likes beehive analogies," Gardiner points out. " An Israel-only strike would stir up the bees and leave the hives with only limited damage."

If Gardiner's analysis is correct, then Michael Gordon's New York Times article is deceptive, perhaps deliberately so. It's part of a campaign of pressure on Congress and European governments - likely orchestrated with the Cheney faction of the Bush Administration - to forego real negotiations with Iran, and to push towards U.S. military escalation. If we don't act, the Israelis will, the argument will be - neglecting the fact that no Israeli action is possible without a green light from Washington.

Next week, Congress may consider on its suspension calendar a resolution promoted by AIPAC that effectively endorses a naval blockade against Iran - an act of war. If you don't think such a resolution should be rushed through Congress, you can say so here.

Comments

[Hass]

Remember folks, the Israeli attack on Osirak reactor in Iraq was a FAILURE.
http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1242

[KillTheMessenger]

If Israel plans to make the best possible case for Iran to be a nuclear force, all they have to do is to attack it. Reality will take it from there.

[batguano]

Sorry, this is the better/newer Times Online link to the plans for an Israeli strike. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1290331.ece

[batguano]

Let's not forget Israeli Minister Saul Mofaz, who recently said; "Attacking Iran, in order to stop its nuclear plans, will be unavoidable". Lets not forget what Cheney/Bush & many surrogates have said about the "evil" Iran & their leaders. It seems to me that "our ally" in the ME, Israel, is continuing the Bush/Cheney/Neocon propaganda to an attack on Iran. Think oil prices are high now, just wait? Total disruption of oil movement in & around the Gulf would result, at the very least, and cost Americans & the rest of the world untold billions. This will benefit Bush/Cheney cronies as usual. Of course the Israelis have been armed with specially modified F-16's & bunker-busters to accomplish this attack. We will be a target as a result of any Israeli attack using weapons supplied by the Bush regime. This article
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310,00.html gives the straight skinny what an Israeli attack would look like, & the others on Iranian weapons & what may be the result.
Instead of down-playing the possibility of yet another Israeli pre-emptive sneak attack, we all should be working to stop it & force dialogue & the Israelis to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty & open all their nuclear sites to IAEA inspectors as they demand of Iran.

http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JF05Ak02.html

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IF14Ak01.html

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IF13Ak02.html

[mrqapla]

http://wexlerwantshearings.com/

[doofmann02]

Israel hit sites in Iraq in the eighties and Syria just recently. If they believe Iran is close to the capability they would do it again. How they do it tactically and how effective....hard to say.

[KillTheMessenger]

Israel would commit the same mistake as the US: attack and prove to the attacked that despite its superior military technology it is a paper tiger. There is no better way to demonstrate weakness than by losing ones cool.

[deminmo]

Bush and Israel have been planning the war with Iran
since 2003. Like with Iraq, Bush has no plan for what
happens after the strikes. Like what if Russia and China,
who have interests in Iran, decide to take out large American
cities with nukes, after we destroy Iran. Do you think there is
any plan for protecting the citizens of the US, like there was
during the height of the "Cold War"?
By the way, the NY Times article made it seem that America
just watched. Maybe it was a joint operation.

[KillTheMessenger]

What happens after an Iran strike is pretty obvious: Obama wins the presidency by 65:35 ratio in votes. Bush leaves office. Obama stops the US military cold in whatever nonsense they were doing for Bush/Cheney and apologizes to Iran. Then we pay reparations. No big deal.

[texastornado]

I've been in a few fights in my lifetime and have learned that if you're going to " get it on" with someone, you don't talk about it you just do it. You also don't telegraph you punches. It's like someone talking trash and hoping sombody will step in and stop it befor it happens or have someone elso do your fighting. That's my opinion of Isreal. All bark and no bite.

[jhNY]

Good luck to all advocates of peace in Washington and Jerusalem. They're going to need it.

[GZLives]

Hopefully Israel will not wait until Iran has its proxies Syria, Hezbollah , Hamas playing out everything iran has promised to do. Of course it would appear that for any sort of rational defense Israel would need a new government as this one is spineless and inept.

You don't wipe "Israel off the map" without killing all its citizens so those who like to play with words and try to convince everyone that Iran is really benign and misunderstood ought to go back and see how many times and in how many different ways the Iranians have threatened to carry out this same genocidal goal of theirs.

The Israelis will and should attack Iran if the rest of the civilized world continues to do nothing.

[KillTheMessenger]

This is exactly the kind of advice Israel can not listen to if it wants to survive.