I dagens /Sunday Telegraph/ kan man på:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/
main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/12/wiran12
.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/12/ixportaltop.html>
set at Pentagon skulle planlægge et militært angreb på Irans
atom-faciliteter:
==
US prepares military blitz against Iran's nuclear sites
By Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 12/02/2006)
Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing
raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against
Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to
develop an atomic bomb.
Der foreligger ikke nogen beviser på, at Iran er i færd med at
udvikle atomvåben, det er en formodning. Det er dog nok ikke
usandsynligt, at de er det - USA har i flere år presset dem op
et hjørne, så *enhver* iransk regering ville overveje det. De er
jo for øjeblikket nærmest omringet af amerikansk militær, i
Afghanistan og Irak.
Central Command and Strategic Command planners are identifying targets,
assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics for an operation, the
Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
They are reporting to the office of Donald Rumsfeld, the defence
secretary, as America updates plans for action if the diplomatic
offensive fails to thwart the Islamic republic's nuclear bomb ambitions.
Teheran claims that it is developing only a civilian energy programme.
"This is more than just the standard military contingency assessment,"
said a senior Pentagon adviser. "This has taken on much greater urgency
in recent months."
The prospect of military action could put Washington at odds with
Britain which fears that an attack would spark violence across the
Middle East, reprisals in the West and may not cripple Teheran's nuclear
programme. But the steady flow of disclosures about Iran's secret
nuclear operations and the virulent anti-Israeli threats of President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has prompted the fresh assessment of military
options by Washington. The most likely strategy would involve aerial
bombardment by long-distance B2 bombers, each armed with up to 40,000lb
of precision weapons, including the latest bunker-busting devices. They
would fly from bases in Missouri with mid-air refuelling.
The Bush administration has recently announced plans to add conventional
ballistic missiles to the armoury of its nuclear Trident submarines
within the next two years. If ready in time, they would also form part
of the plan of attack.
Teheran has dispersed its nuclear plants, burying some deep underground,
and has recently increased its air defences, but Pentagon planners
believe that the raids could seriously set back Iran's nuclear
programme.
Iran was last weekend reported to the United Nations Security Council by
the International Atomic Energy Agency for its banned nuclear
activities. Teheran reacted by announcing that it would resume
full-scale uranium enrichment - producing material that could arm
nuclear devices.
The White House says that it wants a diplomatic solution to the
stand-off, but President George W Bush has refused to rule out military
action and reaffirmed last weekend that Iran's nuclear ambitions "will
not be tolerated".
Sen John McCain, the Republican front-runner to succeed Mr Bush in 2008,
has advocated military strikes as a last resort. He said recently:
"There is only only one thing worse than the United States exercising a
military option and that is a nuclear-armed Iran."
Forkert! Der er kun en ting, der er farligere end et Iran med
atomvåben, og det er et amerikansk militært angreb på Iran.
Senator Joe Lieberman, a Democrat, has made the same case and Mr Bush is
expected to be faced by the decision within two years.
By then, Iran will be close to acquiring the knowledge to make an atomic
bomb, although the construction will take longer. The President will not
want to be seen as leaving the White House having allowed Iran's
ayatollahs to go atomic.
In Teheran yesterday, crowds celebrating the anniversary of the 1979
Islamic revolution chanted "Nuclear technology is our inalienable right"
and cheered Mr Ahmadinejad when he said that Iran may reconsider
membership of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
He was defiant over possible economic sanctions.
==
Tjae, det virker meget sandsynligt, og sandsynligvis vil det også være
bedre på den måde at stoppe galningene i Teheran, end at tillade dem at
udvikle bomben.
Forudsat, naturligvis, at man er i stand til at uskadeliggøre
programmet. Sandsynligvis vil det samtidig betyde udslettelsen af det
iranske flyvåben og den iranske flåde.
Glemmer du ikke den iranske *hær* som vist nok er ret stor?
Hvad nu hvis den f.eks. går ind over grænsen til Irak?
Vil irakiske shia-muslimer kæmpe imod den, eller vil de ikke
snarere *alliere* sig med den, for at få smidt besættelsesmagten
USA ud af Irak?
--
Mogens Michaelsen
http://mogmichs.blogspot.com/
Ingen kommentarer:
Send en kommentar