US will ensure Israel's 'military superiority': Panetta

[illusion8]

The United States will ensure Israel retains "military superiority" over its adversaries as the country faces the potential threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Tuesday.

"This is an ironclad pledge which says that the United States will provide whatever support is necessary so that Israel can maintain military superiority over any state or coalition of states, as well as non-state actors," Panetta told the top pro-Israel lobby in Washington, AIPAC.

He touted President Barack Obama's record of security assistance to Israel, saying the administration has "dramatically" increased military aid since Obama entered the White House in 2009.

"This year, the president's budget requests $3.1 billion in security assistance to Israel, compared to $2.5 billion in 2009," Panetta said in a speech delivered to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Panetta cited advanced missile and rocket defenses and plans to deliver the new F-35 fighter jet to Israel, which he said would provide the country with "unquestioned" air superiority.

But amid growing speculation that Israel may conduct a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear sites, Panetta made no mention of more powerful "bunker buster" bombs that Israel would need to reach some deeply buried targets.

It remains unclear if the Pentagon has provided Israel with the most powerful conventional bomb in the US arsenal, the massive ordnance penetrator (MOP), which the Air Force says could strike facilities 200 feet underground.

The Pentagon chief echoed comments by Obama on Sunday, saying the United States would not tolerate Iran obtaining nuclear weapons and was ready to take military action if necessary.

"Let me be clear: We do not have a policy of containment -- we have a policy of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," he said to applause from members of AIPAC.

While seeking to reassure Israel's supporters, Obama on Sunday also criticized "loose talk of war," pleading for patience in ending the nuclear standoff with Iran, arguing that sustained sanctions could work.

On Monday, Obama met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for two hours at the White House, amid clear signs of disagreement on the imminence of the perceived Iranian nuclear threat and the prospects for sanctions and diplomacy.

US will ensure Israel's 'military superiority': Panetta - Yahoo! News

 

[illusion8]

U.S. mulls Iran strike systems for Israel

TEL AVIV, Israel, March 7 (UPI) -- U.S. President Barack Obama's administration is reportedly considering an urgent request by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for GBU-28 bunker buster bombs and tanker aircraft that would be used in any Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

The Israeli air force's lack of the systems is widely seen as a major impediment to Netanyahu ordering airstrikes aimed at slowing the Islamic Republic's nuclear program, which Netanyahu sees as an existential threat to his tiny country.

The Israeli request isn't new but the added urgency of Netanyahu's request during his Monday meeting with Obama underlined the do-or-die emphasis the hawkish Israeli leader places on eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat.

The Obama administration secretly supplied Israel with 55 of the 5,000-pound GBU-28s in 2009 but has rebuffed requests for more, apparently for fear it would encourage Israel to act unilaterally against Iran and trigger a regional war.

The Haaretz daily reported Obama has instructed U.S Defense Secretary Leon Panetta "to work directly with (Israeli) Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the matter, indicating the U.S. administration is inclined to look favorably upon the request as soon as possible."

Many military analysts say any Israeli attack will concentrate on hitting four key Iranian nuclear facilities -- the uranium-enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordow, the heavy-water reactor outside Arak, and the uranium conversion facility near Isfahan.

The Israeli air force has three possible routes to those targets -- north over Turkey, south through Saudi Arabian airspace or the central path over Jordan and Iraq.

Turkey is out following Ankara's May 2010 rupture of its longstanding alliance with Israel.

Saudi Arabia, Iran's archrival in the region, would likely privately applaud any Israeli operation to set back Iran's supposed drive to acquire nuclear weapons but it would probably stop short of opening up its air space to Israel's strike jets. However, some Israelis suspect Riyadh would turn a blind eye and feign ignorance.

U.S. defense analysts say the Jordan-Iraq route would be preferable, since Iraq has no air defenses to speak of after U.S. forces completed their withdrawal in December.

This is where the Israeli air force's lack of refueling aircraft becomes a crucial factor. The distance to target and back via the Iraq route is roughly 2,450 miles.

To effectively clobber the Iranian targets the Israelis would need to employ at least 100 of their strategic strike aircraft. These currently comprise 101 U.S.-built F-16I Sufas and 25 F-15I Ra'ams customized for the Israelis.

The F-15I, for instance, has a combat radius of 2,780 miles but with a full load of bombs and missiles these jets would probably need two in-flight refuelings during the mission.

Israel's capability in this regard isn't enough to cope with 100-plus strike jets to and from targets in Iran.

In recent years the Israelis have quietly acquired seven Boeing KC-707 tanker aircraft from the United States, along with at least five Lockheed C-130 transport jets that have been converted to the tanker role.

"Theoretically," said U.S. military analyst David Isenberg of the Cato Institute, "the Israelis could do this -- but at great risk of failure.

"If they decided to attack Natanz, they would have to inflict sufficient damage the first time -- they probably would not be able to mount follow-on strikes at other facilities."

The Israelis, U.S. officials say, have accepted their limited options and that, unlike the United States, they don't have the firepower to deliver a knockout blow to Iran's nuclear project, only set it back by a year or two.

All key sites are protected by modern Russian air-defense systems, so the Israelis would also probably need electronic warfare aircraft to blind Iran's defenses, as they did in the September 2007 strike that destroyed a North Korean-built nuclear reactor in eastern Syria.

Besides, the Iranians have reportedly been dispersing their nuclear facilities and burying them deep underground to protect them from bomb and missile attacks.

So the Israeli air force will need a lot of GBU-28s to get the job done.

In recent days, an added wrinkle has reportedly emerged.

Israel's Debka Web site, believed to be closely associated with Israeli intelligence, claims Russia has upgraded an electronic surveillance station south of Damascus tailored to extend Tehran's early warning system of an Israeli or U.S. attack from the Mediterranean.

U.S. mulls Iran strike systems for Israel

 

[illusion8]

Netanyahu leaves US with assurances on Iran

Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu left Washington Tuesday with assurances that the United States is prepared to use force to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, just not yet.

Netanyahu, who met with President Barack Obama on Monday and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, put the world on notice that his patience was wearing thin and, if necessary, he would launch unilateral strikes.

"As prime minister of Israel, I will never let my people live in the shadow of annihilation," he told 13,000 delegates in a keynote speech on Monday night at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference.

"Unfortunately, Iran's nuclear program has continued to march forward. Israel has waited... for diplomacy to work, we've waited for sanctions to work. None of us can afford to wait much longer."

Sitting alongside the president at the White House before going into talks on Monday, Netanyahu told Obama that Israel must remain the "master of its fate," in a firm defense of its right to mount a unilateral strike.

Obama, who assured Netanyahu that he has Israel's "back," stressed that he sees a "window" for diplomacy with Iran, despite rampant speculation that Israel could soon mount a risky go-it-alone military operation.

While no one knows exactly what was said behind closed doors in the Oval Office, Obama publicly kept to a far more dovish line and appeared notably at odds with Netanyahu over just how immediate the Iranian threat is.

"This notion that somehow we have a choice to make in the next week or two weeks or month or two months is not borne out by the facts," he told a press conference Tuesday.

But addressing AIPAC on Sunday, Obama recognized Israel's right to take action on its own and said he was prepared to use force if necessary to snuff out an Iranian nuclear threat.

Obama acknowledged "Israel's sovereign right to make its own decisions about what is required to meet its security needs."

"I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon," he said. "As I've made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests."

World powers on Tuesday responded to Iran's new willingness to discuss the nuclear issue with an offer of talks, which Obama said would "quickly" show whether the Islamic republic was serious about avoiding war.

Obama, seeking a second term in November, argued that Iran was now feeling the "bite" of tightening sanctions though cautioned he did not expect a breakthrough in a first set of negotiations.

He also slammed Republican candidates for their hawkish statements demanding military action on Iran, after leading candidate Mitt Romney earlier said "thugs and tyrants" only understood American readiness to use power.

"This is not a game, and there's nothing casual about it," Obama said.

After meeting Clinton, Netanyahu held talks Tuesday with congressional leaders before flying home.

"We've had a very good visit in Washington, first in our discussion with the president in the Oval Office... and now culminating in this remarkable display of solidarity here in the Congress of the United States," he said.

"I go back to Israel feeling that we have great friends in Washington."

House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, said: "The looming threat of a nuclear Iran cannot be ignored. Now is the time to stand together and we are here today to tell the prime minister that Congress intends to do so."

In Brussels, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, speaking on behalf of Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States, reiterated an offer to resume talks with Tehran, which denies it is seeking the bomb.

The Obama administration says it does not believe Iran has taken a decision to develop a nuclear weapon, or that the time is right for military action, preferring to give biting new sanctions time to work.

But Israel, which sees a possible Iranian nuclear weapon as a threat to its very existence, claims Iran may be on the cusp of "breakout" capability -- when it could quickly build a nuclear weapon.

In his speech to AIPAC, Netanyahu sought to minimize the differences between himself and the US president.

Obama "stated clearly that all options are on the table and that American policy is not containment," Netanyahu said. "Israel has exactly the same policy."

Netanyahu leaves US with assurances on Iran - Yahoo! News

Is this actually getting serious? the US wants diplomacy, Israel does not want to wait for it to take effect. End of the day the world pays for it.

 

[longyi]

The all powerful AIPAC has chains on every American politician neck. Where it is going to end? Every one is screaming, including some patriotic American Jews, but nothing is ever done to solve this problem. In fact beginning this year America takes off the limited on political contributions will further empower the AIPAC.

Sometimes I wonder is United State of America a sovereign country or a client state of Israel?

 

[illusion8]

This war could possibly tip the US over the brink with the world economy in tow.

 

[SyrianChristianPatriot]

This war could possibly tip the US over the brink with the world economy in tow.

Why not let it happen it's finally time for it.

 

[longyi]

As much as Obama doesn't a military confrontation with Iran and tries to ruin in the Zionist elements in the Israel government. but he is facing immense pressures from the Republican candidates on this election year.

I hope he is strong enough to hold his guns even if Israel start something. He owes it to the American public and the people in the Middle East.

 

[iajj]

in the long run no amount of israeli technological advance can compensate for the economic and demographic advantages of the arabs. so americans will have to either commit itself to permanent and large-scale wealth transfer to israel (which is music to chinese ears because the americans will bleed themselves to death) or continue to squander its political capital in propping up a few arab dictators. and one day a few arab missles will rain on tel aviv armed harmlessly with only a few saudi princes' severed heads at their tips, and the big house of cards jews and anglo-americans built would just collapse

 

[Solomon2]

The all powerful AIPAC has chains on every American politician neck.

Yesterday my senators and several congressmen repeatedly thanked us in AIPAC for our support: "spectacular work" was how one put it. Doesn't sound like "chains", does it?

Every one is screaming, including some patriotic American Jews

As if I'm not a patriotic American!

In fact beginning this year America takes off the limited on political contributions will further empower the AIPAC.

This is erroneous. AIPAC, despite its name, does not directs funds to election campaigns.

 

[illusion8]

Obama says new Iran talks should calm "drums of war"

President Barack Obama said an announcement on Tuesday of six-power talks with Iran offered a diplomatic chance to defuse a crisis over its nuclear program and quiet the "drums of war."

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who represents the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany in dealings with Iran, announced a fresh bid to allay suspicions that Iran is developing nuclear weapons after weeks of consultations with the other powers.

A date and venue have yet to be agreed for the talks, proposed by Iran after a year's diplomatic standstill that has increased fears of a slide into a new Middle East war.

Amid mounting speculation that Iran's nuclear sites could be attacked in coming months, Obama said that American politicians "beating the drums of war" had a responsibility to explain the costs and benefits of military action.

He said the notion that the United States needed to make a choice in coming weeks or months was "not borne out by facts."

But he said Washington would "not countenance" Iran getting a nuclear weapon, shortly after Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the United States would take military action to prevent this happening if diplomacy failed.

"Military action is the last alternative when all else fails," Panetta told the annual policy conference of the biggest U.S. pro-Israel lobbying group, AIPAC. "But make no mistake, when all else fails, we will act."

With Israel speaking increasingly loudly of resorting to military action, the talks could provide some respite in a crisis that has driven up oil prices and threatened to suck the United States into its third major war in a decade.

Iran's nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, wrote to Ashton in February saying Tehran wanted to reopen negotiations and offering to bring unspecified "new initiatives" to the table.

"Today I have replied to Dr Jalili's letter of February 14," Ashton, speaking on behalf of the six powers after weeks of consultations with them, said in a statement. "I have offered to

resume talks with Iran on the nuclear issue."

A senior EU official said these talks were not expected before the Iranian New Year in two weeks, though there would be a series of preparatory meetings, possibly in the coming days.

"Our overall goal remains a comprehensive, negotiated, long-term solution which restores international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program, while respecting Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy," Ashton said in her reply to Jalili.

Western states are likely to tread cautiously, mindful of past accusations that Iran's willingness to talk has been a stalling tactic to blunt pressure and not a route to agreement.

The Islamic Republic's latest approach to the six powers comes at a time when it is suffering unprecedented economic pain from expanding oil and financial sanctions.

WAR FEARS

The resumption of talks could slow a drift towards military strikes on a uranium enrichment program that Iran is gradually moving underground in what the West fears is an attempt to put a weapons program beyond reach. Iran says its research is aimed purely at electricity generation.

Israel, which says its existence will be threatened if Iran develops nuclear armaments, is losing confidence in Western efforts to rein in the Islamic Republic with sanctions and diplomatic pressure.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assured Obama on Monday that the Jewish state had made no decision on attacking Iranian nuclear sites, sources close to talks in Washington said. But he gave no sign of backing away from the option of military strikes.

The new prospect of diplomacy contributed to a fall in oil prices on Tuesday, with Brent crude falling $1.82 to just under $122.

The senior EU official said there were reasons to believe talks with Iran might be productive.

"The first is that there is clear written commitment by Iran to be willing to address the nuclear issue in talks," the official said. "Second is the unity of the international community ... Third is certainly sanctions."

Russia, which built Iran's first nuclear power plant and has far warmer relations with Tehran than Western nations do, has often stressed the need for talks and said coercive pressure on Tehran is counterproductive.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said last month that global powers must work harder to seek agreement with Iran, warning that Tehran's appetite for concessions was waning as it moves closer to being able to build atomic weapons.

On Tuesday, Ryabkov said he hoped fresh talks with Iran would address a proposal by president-elect Vladimir Putin for global powers to formally recognize Iran's right to enrich uranium, Tehran to submit its program to full IAEA supervision, and international sanctions to be lifted.

U.N. VISIT TO IRANIAN MILITARY SITE?

Iran said on Tuesday it would let U.N. nuclear inspectors visit a military site where they have been repeatedly refused access, to check intelligence suggesting that explosives tests relevant to atom bombs have been conducted there.

However, diplomats noted a proviso in the Iranian statement saying that access to the Parchin site still hinged on a broader agreement on how to settle outstanding issues, which the two sides have been unable to reach for five years.

An International Atomic Energy Agency report in November said that Iran had built a large containment chamber at Parchin, southeast of Tehran, to conduct high-explosives experiments that are "strong indicators" of an effort to design atomic bombs.

Years of tortuous negotiations have often come unstuck over procedural obstacles imposed by Iran since the IAEA first began seeking unfettered access almost a decade ago to check indications of illicit military nuclear activity.

Israel has mooted pre-emptive bombings against Iran, a hawkish approach that Obama - wary of the risk of igniting a new Middle East war and a global surge in oil prices as he seeks re-election in November - has tried to restrain to give time for harsher sanctions and diplomatic pressure to bear fruit.

Israel insists that military action against Iran would be warranted to prevent it from attaining the capability to make nuclear weapons, as opposed to when it actually builds a device. Washington has not embraced that idea.

"The pressure (on Iran) is growing but time is growing short," Netanyahu was quoted by aides as telling Obama.

Later, addressing the influential pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, Netanyahu said: "None of us can afford to wait much longer. As prime minister of Israel, I will never let my people live in the shadow of annihilation."

U.S. officials say that, while Iran may be maneuvering to keep its options open, there is no clear intelligence that it has made a final decision to "break out" with a nuclear warhead.

Obama says new Iran talks should calm drums of war | Reuters

---------- Post added at 09:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 AM ----------

Why not let it happen it's finally time for it.

No dude not good for the world, believe me.

 

[longyi]

To Solomon2:

While AIPAC does not make not make direct campaign contributions but many of its members, especially the ones that own medium size companies donate huge amount on the names of their employees. With the togetherness of the Jewish voting bloc, this is where their power lie. So tell me does it it matter if AIPAC donate or not.

Of course these politicians are happy getting AIPAC's indirect money and votes, but their ability of serving America properly is restrained.

If you try to read some of the reader's comments on all major newspapers you'll know I'm not making this up. I'm in no way blaming the Jewish people, in fact I sympathy with them and believe they should have a safe and peaceful place where they called home. They deserve as much.

I just don't want America to be drawn in for another unnecessary war.

 

[silk route]

why will american taxpayers money be wasted on protection of israeli taxpayer????

million dollar question is will israel taxpayer pay money to safeguard american taxpayer?why dident israel sent its army to afghanistan or iraq?

 

[The SC]

It seems like every nation in the illegitimate state of Israel's vicinity is a threat to its existence, the only logical and plausible solution to this is that Israel Should find an Island in the middle of the pacific or any other ocean on the planet and move there , So that its well funded paranoia might be lowered.
The other option is to have all its neighbouring countries destroyed and live by itself in radio active peace.
I think that this insane entity and its acolytes have chosen the 2nd option.

 

[silk route]

victim is the poor american taxpayer......zionist establishment of america sells fear to american citizens....they are usually dumb couch-potatoes into videos games....having low-IQ their world only revolves around springbreaks and youtube......zionists have run their financial system and bank......they are enslaved by israel.


http://www.defence.pk/forums/members-club/163867-american-mindset.html

an ordinary american is only interested in this sort of activity ^^^^^^^^

 

[Nishan_101]

This is quite worrying for the whole world. I think the Saudi Arabia along with UAE, Oman, Syria, Jordan, Oman, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Algeria and Tunisia should look towards there Educational and research systems to be established but on Co-Education basis. There is an urgent need of colabration between the Muslim world in many issues that are needed to be resolved and we must not forget that Education and Research is our main weapons which we should utilize against our Enemies.