PDA

View Full Version : Report: Israeli attack on Iran would start long war



Zerozx
July 14th, 2010, 06:14 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D5I620100714


(Reuters) - An Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would start a long war and probably not prevent Iran from eventually acquiring nuclear weapons, a think-tank said on Thursday.

Oxford Research Group, which promotes non-violent solutions to conflict, said military action should be ruled out as a response to Iran's possible nuclear weapons ambitions.

"An Israeli attack on Iran would be the start of a protracted conflict that would be unlikely to prevent the eventual acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran and might even encourage it," it said in a report.

It would also lead to instability and unpredictable security consequences for the region and the wider world, it added.

The United Nations Security Council imposed a fourth round of sanctions on Iran last month over a nuclear program the West suspects is aimed at developing atomic weapons in secret. Iran says it wants nuclear energy for peaceful uses only.

The report, by Paul Rogers, professor of peace studies at the University of Bradford, said U.S. military action against Iran appeared unlikely but Israel's capabilities had increased.

"Long-range strike aircraft acquired from the United States, combined with an improved fleet of tanker aircraft, the deployment of long-range drones and the probable availability of support facilities in northeast Iraq and Azerbaijan, all increase Israel's potential for action against Iran," it said.

Israeli leaders usually speak only of leaving all options on the table, although Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon said in May that Israel had the capability to hit Iran.

Israel is widely believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal. The Jewish state neither confirms nor denies this.

THREE TO SEVEN YEARS

The Oxford report estimated it might take three to seven years for Iran to develop a small arsenal of nuclear weapons if it decided to do so. It said there was no firm evidence such a decision had been taken by the Islamic Republic.

Any Israeli strike would be focused not only on destroying nuclear and missile targets but would also hit factories and research centers and even university laboratories to damage Iranian expertise, the report said.

This would cause many civilian casualties, it added.

Military action would include the direct bombing of targets in Tehran and probably include attempts to kill technocrats who managed Iran's nuclear and missile programs, the report said.

Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri alleged on Wednesday that had been abducted in Saudi Arabia and flown to the United States. Washington denies kidnapping him. Iran's Foreign Ministry said Amiri was on his way back home.

Iran's responses to an Israeli attack could include withdrawing from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and immediate action to produce nuclear weapons to deter further attacks, the report said.

They could also include missile attacks on Israel, closing the Strait of Hormuz to push up oil prices and paramilitary or missile attacks on Western oil facilities in the Gulf.

After a first strike, Israel might have to carry out regular air strikes to stop Iran developing atom bombs and medium-range missiles, the report said. "Iranian responses would also be long-term, ushering in a lengthy war with global as well as regional implications," Rogers said.

Other options open to the West were to redouble efforts to get a diplomatic settlement or accept that Iran may eventually acquire a nuclear capability and use that as the start of a process of balanced regional de-nuclearization, the report said.

MrMannn
July 14th, 2010, 06:19 PM
I think that war could end real quick with a nuclear hit on say...Damascus?

RobertB
July 14th, 2010, 07:11 PM
Considering the name, Oxford, (looney liberal Brits), and their agenda, their conclusion isn't surprizing. Just typical leftist drivel.

Grtful1
July 14th, 2010, 07:40 PM
I think that war could end real quick with a nuclear hit on say...Damascus?

Damascus would be the PERFECT spot

sherrimae
July 14th, 2010, 07:52 PM
I'm not sure we should believe anything a "professor of peace studies" has to say.

Buzzardhut
July 14th, 2010, 08:30 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D5I620100714

it will be very quick

Zion
July 15th, 2010, 09:10 AM
The consensus seems to be that there are no solutions. Robert Gates has said that containment is not an option. Obama will never authorize a strike on Iran as he still believes sanctions and diplomacy will work. He is leaving the problem for the next administration (which will probably be Republican in January 2013). Obama will chastise Israel if they strike and probably punish them (may the American Jewish lobby rise up in full force). Meanwhile Iran is steadily pursuing their agenda and 3-7 years will have them in possession of nukes. :hat

jackson64
July 15th, 2010, 09:53 AM
Considering the name, Oxford, (looney liberal Brits), and their agenda, their conclusion isn't surprizing. Just typical leftist drivel.

Exactly Robert :thumb by the time I saw the second sentence I knew exactly where the article was going and exactly which position they would hold.

---in fairness to Reuters, at least they did mention that the "oxford research group" had an agenda or held a position before they quoted all of the Academic Elitists deep thinking on the subject..........

4Godisjust
July 15th, 2010, 09:59 AM
The consensus seems to be that there are no solutions. Robert Gates has said that containment is not an option. Obama will never authorize a strike on Iran as he still believes sanctions and diplomacy will work. He is leaving the problem for the next administration (which will probably be Republican in January 2013). Obama will chastise Israel if they strike and probably punish them (may the American Jewish lobby rise up in full force). Meanwhile Iran is steadily pursuing their agenda and 3-7 years will have them in possession of nukes. :hat

I agree, the thing that Obama doesn't realize is that Isreal doesn't need his permission for anything. I don't know about a next administration, I think at the rate they are moving, there won't be another administration. I :pray that I am wrong. They have agendy, and they have been doing thing's at such a speed, and they have been somewhat successful. America isn't in bible prophecy! WHere is she, she is not here. This is to be expected. As sad and tragic, and hard for all of us to believe and want, it doesn't matter, the Lord's will be done exactly as he planned, whether we are ready or want it at all.:pray

Knightwatch
July 15th, 2010, 10:29 AM
....long war? Doubtful!:preach