As president Obama is in a race running up trillion dollar domestic recovery programs we would like to hear a foreign policy report from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding the following story from a Russian source that should be very troubling to our State Department.
“Iran missile, nuclear threat ‘real, dangerous’ – Russian analyst
MOSCOW, March 12 (RIA Novosti) – Russia and the West would be making a big mistake if they ignored or underestimated the potential missile and nuclear threat coming from Iran, a Russian military expert said on Thursday.
“Iran is actively working on a missile development program. I won’t say the Iranians will be able to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles in the near future, but they will most likely be able to threaten the whole of Europe,” said Maj. Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, head of the Moscow-based Center for Strategic Nuclear Forces.
Some Western and Russian sources claim that Iran may be currently running a program, dubbed Project Koussar, to develop a totally different missile with a range of 4,000-5,000 km (2,500-3,300 miles).
“Iran has long abandoned outdated missile technologies and is capable of producing sophisticated missile systems,” Dvorkin said at a news conference in RIA Novosti.
Iran successfully launched last year an upgraded Shahab-3 ballistic missile as part of a navy exercise, dubbed Great Prophet 3, in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.
With a reported range of 2,000 kilometers and armed with a 1-ton conventional warhead, the Shahab-3 puts Israel, Turkey, the Arabian peninsula, Afghanistan and Pakistan within striking distance.
Western powers led by the United States, along with Israel, accuse Tehran of attempting to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missile technology for their delivery. Iran says it needs its nuclear program for the peaceful generation of electricity and missile program for space exploration.
Iran has consistently defied international demands to halt its nuclear program and insists it plans to use enriched uranium fuel produced at a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz in its first domestically-built nuclear power plant, in the town of Darkhovin, which is scheduled to become operational in 2016.
Tehran announced in late February that it had 6,000 operating centrifuges at Natanz and was planning to install a total of 50,000 over the next five years.
Commenting on the Iranian nuclear program, Dvorkin said the potential danger of its military aspect was not the possibility of a nuclear strike against some countries, but the ability to assume a more bold approach in dealing with the international community after becoming a nuclear power.
“The real threat is that Iran, which is already ignoring all resolutions and sanctions issued by the UN Security Council, will be practically ‘untouchable’ after acquiring nuclear-power status, and will be able to expand its support of terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Hezbollah,” the expert said.
He added that the possession of nuclear weapons by Iran could force non-nuclear countries to seek similar weapons and ballistic missile technologies thus starting a nuclear race and increasing the possibility of a nuclear conflict.
Dvorkin has had a role in writing all major strategy documents for the Strategic Nuclear Forces and the Strategic Missile Forces. As an expert in the field he participated in preparing the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and the START I and START II pacts, and has made a significant contribution to formulating Soviet and Russian positions at negotiations on strategic offensive arms control and reduction.”
This report can be found on the following link:
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090312/120537431.html
OK Juice readers.
Do we put our heads in the sand regarding this report?
What role , if any, can/should the US play regarding this future threat to our strategic energy sources?
Should we give Israel’s IDF the green light to fly directly over Iraq if they take a pro-active position to protect their nation?
Should we tell Israel that we will support/oppose them in any future UN Resolutions that impact their Homeland Security?
Do you believe this story to be “fact or fiction?”
*Larry partner,
You didn’t say “stick our heads in the sand” did you? That was a good one!
Hey, the war in Iraq is winding down, we have lots of aircraft available to drop occasional well placed hits on those areas that Iranians have painted targets – on the ground. We don’t
even have to send in guys these days!
Heck, Google Earth can find squished snails in a Greek Square…does Ack-Me-Got-A-Job figure
we can’t find areas that radiant all the
way to Pluto?
Larry,
Do you believe this story to be “fact or fiction?”
Another name for what you are describing is “Project Koussar” and if you look at wiki, the entire subject article is being considered for deletion because it cannot be substantiated as anything other than speculation. It appears to not be legitimate in any serious sense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Koussar
Pre-emptive strikes are out with this new administration. I believe that diplomacy is a main tool that will be used. The Obama/Clinton focus is about being smart, not just knee-jerk like the last guy who sold us out into a couple of very expensive wars. The Iraq war appears to be illegal, too.
I’d also like to point out that Russia is hardly a good friend of ours. They would love to see us get involved with as many missteps and misadventures as possible. Anything that comes from their camp should be treated with extreme scrutiny, imo.
The Iranian nuclear program is real and represents a horrible future for the region. The problem with giving Israel the green light is:
a) Intel. Where are all the pieces to the nuke program. Sure, google earth can show my what’s above the ground, but how much of the program is below ground. If Israel doesn’t destroy the entire program, but only sets Iran back a few years, they’ve accomplished nada.
b) This would be a suicide mission for anyone who flew into Iran. They simply don’t have the range in their fighters to make it back. If Israel decided that an Iranian nuke program were a threat, my guess is they would launch the fighters regardless, assuming they could dismantle the entire project. They would also have to send in ground troops on a one way mission to get at the underground facilities.
c) Whether Israel attacks or the US attacks, you know that this will play in the Arab world as the US giving Israel permission and thus a US attack on Iran. Iran would be foolish not to retaliate. My guess would be agents in Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, and here in the US would start a pretty strong terror campaign.
For all of these reasons, we’re in a real pickle.
*Think Infrastructure….always think Infrastructure! What does your Nuclear Plant
require? Electricity, Water and People. Whether
their U-238 things are underground or in baby satillites circling the moon. Infrastructure! Israel is almost as good as our Marines at taking out Infrastructure! Iran is best to talk nice and
take Nuclear energy from Putin instead. It will all be in their best interest to do so! You really don’t want Hillary or Biden…upset with you about these things!
A suggestion for another and really more pertinent way to start your post; As President Obama begins to wind down W’s 3 TRILLION dollar IRAQ DISASTER……and oh, by the way, that DISASTER, STRENGTHENED IRAN’S POSITION in the area, but that’s a detail that you war-monger types prefer to forget!
anonster.
Do you have access to a calendar that predated 2001? If not perhaps I can send you one where president Bill Clinton and his administration failed to take out Osama before we invested the monies you speak about. We interviewed a key CIA operative and others that were blocked from completing their mission.
That entire Gulf region is a vital interest to the USA due to our thirst for black gold. If the Carter Administration had supported the Big Three’s development of the turbine engine, instead of throttling it, we might be less needy in terms of OPEC oil. As we recently discovered the Chrysler prototype once ran on Tequila. We could help the Mexican economy today if the program funding had not been cut off.
J
The threat from Iran is real and I didn’t need a Russian verification. While we have a new administration the state of Israel will not be driven into the sea. Therefore the doves and hawks of that country are united to take whatever steps deemed necessary for their survivial even if entails a pro-active strike.
And to the question of distance and targets, have you ever heard of mid-air refueling.
Unlike Iraq, which was closer and was a single nuclear site, we all are aware that Iraq has multiple facilites buried deep under ground.
No matter what steps Israel takes to defend itself the US will be blamed.
If any Juice reader was the PM or President of Israel today, and knowing what we believe to be the current stage of nuclear development in Iran, would you advise waiting for the air raid sirens to go off?
Larry,
I’m quite familiar with mid-air refueling. How many strike assets would they need and does Israel have enough refueling assets to get the packages to and from the target? No. That’s why they tried to get some from Bush before he left office. It’s a one way mission and Israel knows it. And I think if they could pull it off they would sacrifice those fighters to get rid of the Iranian program. More problems. Where would this strike package fly? Over Syria and Iraq? They won’t be able to recreate the low-level route that they used to strike the Osiraq (sp?) reactor and evade Syria and Iraq’s early warning radar. Flying low burns a ton more fuel than flying high does. Iran would see them coming and scramble whatever fighters they have as well as have their russian supplied SAM system ready. Our forces in Iraq would see them coming anyway. Oh, and we don’t own Iraqi airspace anymore. Iraq is back to being a sovereign nation again. We can’t just let ’em through. Do you think that once Iran has nukes their first act is to strike Israel? No way. They’d be inviting a nuclear counterstrike from Israel and the U.S. Bottom line is that this is a s**t sandwich for the U.S. We need Russian and European cooperation to end the Iranian program. Europe used to be on board but I worry that with the economy going down hard they don’t really care as much anymore. Russia, of course, would love to see a counter to US influence in the region via Iran. Seems to me trading missile defense in Eastern Europe for Russian cooperation re: iran’s nuke program is the best bet for us.
All that said, if I were the PM of Iran, I’d consider a preemptive Nuke strike on Natanz. Conventional strike won’t get me what I want and I stand to lose way too much. Banking on the US cutting a deal with Russia gives away too much to someone who doesn’t have as much to lose as I do. Finally, I send a clear message–Don’t F with Israel.
Larry, when will you stop EQUATING IRAQ with Osama Bin Laden, it just DESTROYS ANY CREDIBILITY you have and reduces your arguments to just a jumbled mess of HALF-TRUTHS and OUT RIGHT LIES. Osama could have danced the hula in front of Clinton and it STILL would NOT justify our ATTACK on Iraq.
Once again the U.S. has been tangled up in a web of our own making, BUSH empowered Iran and now along with ALL the other DISASTERS left to him by that IGNORANT LITTLE SCUMBAG, Obama is going to have to find a way to deal with it.
*Anonster: Hmmm. Osama is on “whose team” again?
Are you saying Osama is just an “Independent Contractor” that does not contact anyone but his little group of devote “suicide bombers”? Who are you kidding?
*J: Your knowledge of Israeli military assets and tactics is amazing. Are you a Mossad Agent?
Please….who do you think you are dealing with:
Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter or Madeline Albright?
Benji will handle things just right…not to worry!
Winships, DO some research, Saddam Hussein had NOTHING to do with Osama Bin Laden. The REAL TRUTH is that Saddam viewed Bin Laden as a threat to him and his regime.
*Anonster: Can we please just ask for the basis
for your assertion? Did you have a quote from
Osama or from Saddam? Maybe you found your
so-called evidence on Wikipedia? You might want
to ask Omar Kadahfi..give him a few billion and
he will tell you anything you want to hear!
Hasn’t the argument always been about WMD’s,
Ambassador Wilson, Scooter Libby and who will
be on Dancing with the Stars next season?
The amount of misinformation has been quite
overwhelming, wouldn’t you agree?
anonster. Where did president Bush empower Iran? And please distinguish between 41 and 43.
Shall we engage in a brief USA/Iran history lesson?
Let’s begin with Jimmy Carter’s condemnation of the Shah prior to the 1979 Revolution. What about Iran-Contra where we supplied arms to Iran during the Reagan years. Let’s not overlook Iran’s support of Hezbollah resulting in the death of 241 American servicemen at the Beirut, Lebanon barracks or the Iranian funded Hezbollah attack at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.
We should also include president Clinton’s embargo and president Bush’s Axis of Evil speech.
No, I would opine that presidents of each major party have made some good and bad decisions regarding our partnership relationship with the rulers in Iran and Iraq.
Let’s not overlook 1983 where we armed Saddam to balance power between Iraq and Iran during their war. A very tricky foreign policy decision.
Anonster. Do you get your kicks being a Monday morning quarterback?
Winships-No, the “argument” has NOT just been about the WMD’s, the Bush administration was ALWAYS trying to equate Iraq with 9-11 ( and Osama bin Laden) but there was NO EVIDENCE that Saddam EVER “worked” with bin Laden.
This is from the Wash. Post 9/15/2006; ” The CIA learned in late September 2002 from a high-ranking member of Saddam Hussein’s inner circle that Iraq had no past or present contact with Osama bin Laden and that the Iraqi leader considered bin Laden an enemy of the Baghdad regime, according to a recent Senate Intelligence Committee report.”
This was also confirmed by the FBI agent who interrogated Saddam in prison.
The CIA and the FBI are NOT exactly WIKIPEDIA, are they?
Larry, Saddam’s Iraq served as a counterweight to Iran, now Iran is the most influential foreign power in Iraq and throughout the region.
And NO, I do not get my kicks being a monday morning quarterback, I was AGAINST the Iraq war from the beginning, I attended MANY protests, wrote letters and called the newspapers and their reporters, repeatedly, HOPING TO KEEP THIS COUNTRY FROM MAKING AN OBVIOUS AND POLITICALLY MOTIVATED BLUNDER!!!!!!!