IAF Generals ‘Loudly’ Demanding Strike on Iran

Der Spiegel says the IDF and IAF are making increasingly loud demands to bomb Iran, while Mossad prefers assassinations.

by Gil Ronen, INN

The commanders of the IDF, especially those in the Air Force, are making “increasingly loud” demands to strike Iran’s nuclear program, a German news source reported Wednesday.

According to Der Spiegel, the question of how Israel will eventuallydeal with the threat of a nuclear Iran depends in part on a battle of prestige between the military and the Mossad – the latter being in charge of assassinations, and favoring them as a result. Mossad is behind the killings of three Iranian scientists in the last 18 months, the paper claimed.

A fourth scientist was wounded and subsequently appointed to head Iran’s nuclear commission.

According to “sources in Israeli intelligence,” the targeted assassinations are part of a campaign to sabotage or slow down Iran’s nuclear program. The alleged campaign also involves the Stuxnet computer virus.

“But for hardliners in the Israeli military, the covert action does not go far enough,” wrote Spiegel’s Ulrike Putz. “The calls for bombing Iran are getting louder and louder, especially among Israeli Air Force officers.” She added:

“Until now, Mossad experts have been able to convince decision-makers thatthe construction of an Iranian bomb can best be delayed through attacks on key figures and nuclear facilities. But it is unclear how long Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will continue to follow this advice. Politicians in Jerusalem know well that Mossad is also pursuing its own interests when it argues that its agents should play the leading role in the struggle against Iran.”

“As long as Mossad is leading the fight against the bomb, it will get the big budgets,” the source told the newspaper. And the question of whether Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities will partly depend on the internal power struggle between the IDF and Mossad.

“Just like with everything, this is also about prestige,” the source said, adding that the recent assassination of Darioush Rezaei was “the first serious action taken by the new Mossad chief Tamir Pardo.”

August 4, 2011 | 10 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

10 Comments / 10 Comments

  1. Whatever is going to happen, or not happen, I sure wish relevant parties would keep their mouths shut!!!

    We can speculate all we like, but when people in positions of responsibility start making noises that are picked up in places like Der Spiegel, that is a big problem.

    The element of surprise has got to be included in any such attack.

    In any event, we don’t have access to the critical intelligence info needed to make such choices. Surely, these are among Israel’s most closely guarded secrets.

    IF Iran really is on the verge of producing a working nuclear weapon, and IF Israel really does have the independent capability to both stop them in a decisive way AND to manage – however they need to be managed – the ah, “collateral consequences” of any such action, then I’m sure it will be done.

    If it isn’t done, it will be because either there wasn’t enough hard intelligence to support military action, and/or because there was not a high enough confidence level that a strike would be effective.

    These are things most of us on this site cannot really know. Perhaps Yamit has enough connections in the IDF to have a little more informed opinion than most of the rest of us. As for me, I only know what is in open sources on this topic. And while this is an issue that I follow as closely as I can, the best I can come up with as to how this turns out, whether Israel can indeed do this independently, if the U.S. has to be involved or not for this to work, and if any of this is going to happen, what the chances of success are, is a big fat MAYBE.

    All that said, in the main, I agree with what Yamit posted above. One way or the other, I see no other solution to Iran’s drive to acquire nuclear arms than an overt strike. How much time is left before this option is exercised, we don’t know, but my sense is that it isn’t all that much. And if it is time, then whatever must be done, must be done, regardless of whatever collateral damage may accompany effective action. That’s nothing compared to what happens if Iran is not stopped, even to them. Not even close. I don’t know that it would be wise to be publicly revealing nuclear targeting information, but broadly, I agree that if there is to be a strike, EVERYONE needs to be put on notice that inteference will NOT be tolerated. Anyway, Israel ain’t Libya, everybody knows that, and I don’t think anyone really would interfere, never mind the bullshit blustering of twits like Zbigniew Brzezinski.

  2. I have been praying to g-d for this for years. It’s about time. I hope that this is correct and will happen this month! Oy! I can’t believe I am saying THIS MONTH. Please g-d, let it be and let it be successful min every way possible. THen, we have to get Obama out of office.

  3. Sorry for my accidental comment above — it slipped out.

    The Russians are wary not of an Israeli strike on Iran, but of an American one:

    In an interview published by Izvestia Friday, Aug. 5, the knowledgeable and high-placed Rogozin added: “This statement means that the planning [of the military campaign] is well underway. It could be a logical conclusion of those military and propaganda operations, which have been carried out by certain Western countries against North Africa.”

    Thursday, as the Syrian military crackdown in Hama reached a new level of ferocity with public executions in the town square, the Russian president warned Assad: “We are watching how the situation is developing. It’s changing and our approach is changing as well.”

    debkafile’s Moscow sources note that the Rogozin added Yemen to his remarks on NATO: He said he agreed with the opinion that Syria and later Yemen could be NATO’s last steps on the way to launching an attack on Iran.

    http://www.debka.com/article/21183/

    Russia justifiably sees an American attack on Iran, through whatever proxies, as ultimately an attack against her. Iran has historically been viewed by the Russians as its outlet to the Indian Ocean. They even occupied the northern reaches of it, but were kept from the sea — and the oilfields — by the British and Americans. How, then, are they to view an American pincer movement that involves first Iraq, then Afghanistan and Pakistan, then Georgia and Azerbaijan, then a sanctions regime, to choke off and destroy this outlet? Obama may not be very American, but he understands the power of the America at his disposal; and if I were the leader of Russia, I would not trust him either.

    But Israel? I think the Russians see Israel as no more potentially effective in Iran than France and Britain are in Libya: They need American backing, in order to pull off a campaign that can actually stop the Iranians in their nuclear tracks.

    But an accident? Who can stop an accident? Oops — there I go again!

  4. Every nation has the right of insurrection to remove by force despotic regimes and rulers. Therefore they are responsible for their leaders, their policies and their actions. This is why I say there are no innocents. Since the government and leaders of Iran have openly and publicly threatened to wipe the State of Israel off the map they place every man woman and child in the position of being legitimately targeted when Israel will be forced to use what means it has to eliminate their threat. America has the conventional forces that could have stopped the Mullahs
    many times over. Oil for Jews may be cost effective for the Americans and the world but it’s not for us.

    I refuse to accept the notion that we should commit national suicide to please anyone for any reason.

    I would remove the whole country of Iran and all in it if there is no other choice or way for Israel and not shed a tear for the consequences.

    I would announce our nuclear targeting in advance to deter any third party whether Russia or America to not interfere. They would have had by then ample opportunity to stop Iran both by benign and by conventional military means over the years. If in their calculations they are willing to accept the premise that Israel is expendable then our concerns should ignore what concerns them… screw em. That’s when Bradury’s Butterfly Effect</strong kicks in. It's a crap-shoot!!

  5. Face facts. Unless Israel has more a power powerful military capable of a successful attack on Iran without a distructive retaliation than I believe and, I love the Israeli military, it can not be done without the force of the US. All anti-aircraft missles have to be neutralized, heavy duty penatrating bombs must be carried on aircraft larger than F-16s, it would have to destroy Iran’s aircraft and refueling planes would probably be required to enter Iran airspace.

    Then again, it might be the right war for the US to get in.

  6. How in hell can any of us know whether these assertions of Der Spiegel are true, false, a mixture of both, or just wishful thinking of the type western news media always engage in when they have nothing factual to go on?

    Arnold Harris
    Mount Horeb WI