Israel preparing to bomb Iran N-sites
Press TV / CBS 60 Minutes
01-May-2008 (10 comments)

General Eliezer Shkedi, who also heads the Israeli task force on Iran, made the remarks in an
with "60 Minutes" on Sunday. A large portion of Shkedi's service has been dedicated to the preparation for a possible mission that was never discussed in public; an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, should international economic sanctions fail, Israeli daily Ha'aretz reported on Monday.

recommended by Abarmard



Who is a threat to WHOM

by AnotherAnonymous (not verified) on

WHOM, it is WHOM,Baba.


The window of opportunity has been closed to US and Israel......

by Ta Ta (not verified) on

As I said before, I say it once again. The window of opportunity has been closed to US and Israel since the reactors fuel entered Iran from Russia. US know very well that they can’t do anything any longer but to negotiate with the Mullahs.


As this article says it all the consciences of attacking a partial or fully functional reactor is disasters. Remember the Chernobyl?????????
Only an idiot will do such stupid thing and Israel is not one of them.
Hear it from someone who’s been there and has seen it all.

Ta Ta


Owlaviate Ma dar Towse'eh chist?

by R (not verified) on

I think "Anonymous-2" have exaggerated on the side effect when you mentioned on millions death toll even in Pakistan and India...

Most facilities located in the center part of the country regardless of Bushehr so If it could kill that many up to India, it shouldn't leave almost any Iranians alive...

You are definitely right when you talk about the radiobiological mortality and other side effects due to Uranium fuel rods but not within the radius of thousands of miles... I guess they have not installed the fuel rods yet otherwise the power plant must have been all done to generate electricity. Yet like you said as far as they are enriching uranium by the use of centrifuges, it may end of leakage and consequently the mortal radiation dose.

Based on this fact that you have mentioned, if god forbid they decide to strike, I guess, they might have to overthrow the regime rather than just destroying the nuclear plants. This will require more intensive strikes for a longer time with also already predicted plans for short, intermediate and long time of a possible comprehensive war... that's why the U.S is hesitant not to make another mistake but if they get to a point with no other choices left, I think they will do it as they wont tolerate a nuke IR.

This is just a hypothesis but being realistic requires you to consider the worst case scenarios.

I as an Iranian, believe we have the absolute right to pursue any technology but we need to be considerate and based on our todays priority and economical and political potential invest first in the most urgent ones which I personally think it can not be the nuclear plants specially when we can limited Uranium resources whereas have the second largest natural gas ones in the world which last for centuries and is quite neat and cost considerably less to be utilized to generate electricity. I guess it has become some how LAJBAZI which honestly might not be of our best national interests if we have any definition for... .

Todays, countries like Germany and Japan are squeezing the world solely by their economical powers... we can not see even any political equations being solved without considering them...

They, for some decades, in stead of focusing on the political games put all their efforts and resources to optimize their productivity and advancing the high return technologies now after couple of decades of being totally quiet, the traditional super powers are the ones demanding them to take a role in the world's management.

There is no short cut to a real technological and economical advancement but the way "Maslow's hierarchy of needs" has already depicted and simplified...

It starts with developing the agriculture ( and simultaneously political development through democracy in the shape of defining civil rights, freedom of speech and free independent media as the key to prevent a corruptive government, in case a nation decides to reach the tip of that pyramid which is defined as "Self-actualization" )

No political reforms and development means "Towse'eh beh sabke Chini"! this won't yet ever satisfy any nations just like they had not done ours but ended up to the 1979 revolution.

Before revolution all needs such as the physiological, safety, social and esteem needs had been fairly fulfilled but not the ultimate one as the tip of the level of growth needs("Self-actualization").

After over 100 years of struggles, We not only failed to gain what we unconsciously knew we needed but lost a portion of some levels we had already gained such as social freedom as a must and ofcourse the esteem needs... That's why at present we have a depressed and hopeless society with so many psychological issues stemming from the corruptive system showing deadened roads to the youth full of energy who love to reach the sky.

Maslow writes the following of self-actualizing people:

* They embrace the facts and realities of the world (including themselves) rather than denying or avoiding them.
* They are spontaneous in their ideas and actions.
* They are creative.
* They are interested in solving problems; this often includes the problems of others. Solving these problems is often a key focus in their lives.
* They feel a closeness to other people, and generally appreciate life.
* They have a system of morality that is fully internalized and independent of external authority.
* They have discernment and are able to view all things in an objective manner.

To further confound the problem of understanding motivation, Maslow points out that motives are not always conscious. In the average person, he believes, they are more often unconscious than conscious — showing the influence on his thinking of Freudian psychologists who have long been concerned with the hidden causes of human behavior.

In Maslow's theory, then, human needs are arranged in a hierarchy of importance. Needs emerge only when higher-priority needs have been satisfied. By the same token, satisfied needs no longer influence behavior. This point seems worth stressing to managers and administrators, who often mistakenly assume that money and other tangible incentives are the only cures for morale and productivity problems. It may be, however, that the need to participate, to be recognized, to be creative, and to experience a sense of worth are better motivators in an affluent society, where many have already achieved an acceptable measure of freedom from hunger and threats to security and personal safety, and are now driven by higher-order psychological needs.

In short, self-actualization is reaching one's fullest potential. However, to further clarify “There are certain conditions which are immediate prerequisites for the basic need satisfactions.” “Such conditions as freedom to speak, freedom to do what one wishes so long as no harm is done to others, freedom to express one's self, freedom to investigate and seek for information, freedom to defend one's self, justice, fairness, honesty, orderliness in the group are examples of such preconditions for basic need satisfactions.”

According to Maslow, the tendencies of self-actualizing people are as follows:

1. Awareness

* efficient perception of reality
* freshness of appreciation
* peak experiences
* ethical awareness

2. Honesty

* philosophical sense of humour
* social interest
* deep interpersonal relationships
* democratic character structure

3. Freedom

* need for solitude
* autonomous, independent
* creativity, originality
* spontaneous

4. Trust

* problem centered
* acceptance of self, others, nature
* resistance to enculturation - identity with humanity

Maslow discovered that healthy individuals are motivated toward what he termed self-actualization, and noted that Self-actualizing people had strikingly similar characteristics.

A.H. Maslov, A Theory of Human Motivation, Psychological Review


na Anonymous21

by Abarmard on

Na aghl e maa mese shomaast na etelaa'aatemun. che konim digeh, khodaa beh ba'zi dadeh, beh ba'zi nadaadeh. mamun keh aagaaham kardi. digeh haalaa fahmidam. ghorbanat, yeh donyaa mamnun. salam beresun.


The way they are conviced upon their right for preemtive war.

by R (not verified) on

This is their reasoning behind the preemptive war and what so called the nuclear double standard. That is what exactly they concern on... please do not take it to me for bringing it up... I felt it is good to see out side of the box through their point of view:

منبع: ديلي تلگراف – 27 آوريل ‏
الاسدير پالمر

يکي از وحشتناکترين اتفاقات ممکن اين است که کنترل يک بمب هسته اي، در اختيار القاعده و يا ساير گروه ‏هاي اسلامي قرار بگيرد. به طور يقين، تروريست هاي اسلامي در پي آن هستند: اسامه بن لادن بيانيه اي با ‏عنوان "بمب هسته اي اسلام" صادر کرده است و در آن تاکيد کرده که کسب بمب هسته اي، "وظيفه" هر ‏مسلمان است تا "دشمنان خدا را با تمام قوا به خاک و خون بکشد."‏

یک مقام ارشد وزارت خارجه فرانسه در موضوع مبارزه با تروريسم هم "هيچ شکي" ندارد که تروريست ‏هاي اسلامي به شدت در پي قطعات جنگ افزارهسته اي هستند. او مي گويد: "مردمي وجود دارند که براي ‏آنها منفجر کردن بمب هسته اي در داخل يک شهر، با جشن پيروزي همراه خواهد بود."‏

هر چند با استانداردهاي امروز، يک بمب هسته اي 10 کيلوتني کوچک تلقي مي شود، اما انفجار اين بمب در ‏داخل يک شهر، همه ساختمان ها را تا فاصله يک سوم مايل از مرکز انفجار نابود مي کند و تمام انسان ها را ‏در دم مي کشد.‏

يک سوم مايل بعدي شهر هم را به ويرانه اي تبديل مي کند که شکلي شبيه برلين در پايان جنگ جهاني دوم و ‏پس از يک سال بمباران بي وقفه متفقين پيدا خواهد کرد.‏

در يک سوم مايل آخر اين حلقه جهنمي هم، ساختمان ها و انسان را به وسيله شعله هاي آتش و اثرات تشعشع ‏خواهد سوخت.‏

با درنظر گرفتن چنين عواقبي، پيداست که بايد جلوي چنين حادثه اي گرفته شود. اما چگونه؟ تهديد و ‏بازداري- اينکه اگر شما در کشور ما يک بمب هسته اي منفجر کنيد، ما هم در کشور شما همين کار را ‏خواهيم کرد. اين راه حل تا کنون جلوي وقوع جنگ هسته اي در ميان کشورها را گرفته است. تنها وقتي که ‏بمب هاي هسته اي به کار گرفته شده اند، زماني بوده که کشور مقابل فاقد اين قدرت بوده است.‏

معذالک، تاثير تهديد و بازدارندگي به اين بستگي دارد که دشمن شما داراي شهرها و جمعيت متمرکزي باشد ‏که بتوان آن را تهديد کرد.‏

مساله اين است که سازمان هاي تروريستي فاقد هر دوي اينها هستند. آنها فقط شامل گروهي از افرادند که يک ‏کشور با تمام جمعيتش، هيچ کنترل و مسووليتي در قبالشان ندارد. به همين دليل، بازدارندگي با شکست مواجه ‏مي شود. اگر تروريست هاي اسلامي بتوانند به يک بمب هسته اي دست پيدا کنند، همه انگيزه هاي لازم را ‏براي استفاده از آن در اختيار دارند تا در يک کشور "دشمن" مانند بريتانيا و ايالات متحده، تا جايي که مي ‏شود خسارت به بار بياورند. در عين حال، ما نمي توانيم از هيچ تهديدي براي توقف آنها استفاده کنيم. ‏

اين به آن معني است که نهايت خواست جامعه انساني بايد اين باشد که از توانايي آنها در بدست آوردن بمب ‏هسته اي جلوگيري کند، زيرا اين تنها راه حفظ کردن خودمان در برابر تروريسم هسته اي است. ‏

يکي از محکم تريم استدلال هاي مخالفان تکثير هسته اي اين است که هرچه کشورهاي بيشتري به بمب دست ‏پيدا کنند، امکان بيشتري وجود دارد که يکي از اين بمب ها به دستان تروريست ها بيفتد. ‏

دنیا خوشحال است که هنوز قابليت ساخت بمب هسته اي فراتر از توان گروه هاي تروريستي است: پس در ‏واقع يک گروه تروريستي بايد بمب هسته اي را از يک دولت تامين کند.‏

وقتي دولت هايي که در تلاش براي بدست آوردن تکنولوژي ساخت بمب هسته اي هستند، به عنوان تامين ‏کننده مالي و آموزشي گروه هاي تروريست اسلامي شناخته مي شوند – کاري که ايران و سوريه در حال ‏انجام آن هستند- نياز به پيشگيري از دراختيار گرفتن قابليت ساخت بمب توسط اين کشورها بي نهايت اهميت ‏پيدا مي کند.‏

براي همين است که اسراييل با "ابزارهاي غير صلح آميز" به انهدام تاسيسات هسته اي سوريه در سپتامبر ‏گذشته مبادرت نمود و جامعه جهاني با آنکه اين اقدام بر خلاف قوانين بين المللي و بدون صدور قطعنامه اي ‏از سوي سازمان ملل صورت گرفته، از اين اقدام تخريبي راضي بود. ‏

در ضمن، براي همين است که ايالات متحده مرتباً به ايران پيام مي فرستد که مخالفتي با تلاش اسراييل در ‏حمله به تاسيسات آماده به کار هسته اي ايران ندارد، و عملاً ممکن است حتي به آن ملحق شود: احتمالاً ارسال ‏اين پيام جزيي از بيانيه رسمي هفته گذشته اسراييل نيز بود که اعلام نمود مرکز احتمالي ساخت بمب هسته اي ‏سوريه با موفقيت بمباران شده است. ‏

مي توان جلوي کشورها را در انتقال تسليحات هسته اي به گروه هاي تروريستي گرفت. يکي از راه هاي آن ‏اني است که اعلام شود که اگر انفجاري در يک شهر آمريکايي رخ بدهد و ماجرا به يکي از کشورها مانند ‏ايران و سوريه ربط پيدا کند، عواقب سختي از سوي آمريکا در انتظار آن کشرو ها خواهد بود.‏

آمريکايي ها در بيان عواقب چنين اقدامي، سکوت نکرده اند. يکي از مقامات ايالات متحده به من گفت: "ما ‏کشور مسوول را کاملاً ويران خواهيم کرد." احتمالاً اين همان چيزي است که هيلاري کلينتون گفت: "اگر ‏ايران حتي به اسراييل، چه برسد به آمريکا، حمله هسته اي کند، ايالات متحده اين کشور را با خاک يکسان ‏خواهد نمود."‏

البته کشورها هميشه نمي توانند دولتمردانشان را کنترل کنند. به نظر مي رسد بعضي از اعضاي دولت ايران، ‏واهمه اي از عواقب اين جهنم نداشته باشند، و حتي از آن استقبال هم مي کنند. بنابراين تنها راه باقيمانده براي ‏دور نگهداشتن سلاح هسته اي از دست تروريست ها، دور نگهداشتن آن از دست دولتهايي است که ممکن ‏است آن را به تروريست ها تحويل دهند.‏

مطمئن باشيد که اگر ايران يک مرکز توليد بمب هسته اي درست کند، اسراييل براي نابودي آن تلاش خواهد ‏نمود. ضمناً مطمئن باشيد اگر اسراييل اينکار را بکند، بقيه دنيا اعتراضي نخواهد کرد.‏

منبع: ديلي تلگراف – 27 آوريل ‏


To Abarmard

by Anonymous21 (not verified) on

khub shod nagofti agar Isreal hamle kone ba mooshak az rooye safheye jografia mahvesh mikoni. nabinam zooret kam shode bashe ABARMARD jan?

yeki ham in Irandokht ro bidar kone. baba in harfa ke to mizani dastane parsal bood. too CASMII chize jadid be shoma yad nemidan?


Those who like a preemptive strike

by Abarmard on

Preemptive strike is a dangerous concept, especially when it comes from "one" country to another. If the UN is evolved and warns a country, might be justifiable. But for any country, be it Iran, US, or Israel to unilaterally promote or discuss the idea of a preemptive attack, is wrong and crazy.

Imagine based on the same logic, China preemptive strikes against Taiwan, or Iran preemptive Strikes against Israel...Any country, based on the same logic (that there is a danger from a country and before they attack, we’ll attack them) could make that argument. That's absurd. Those who accept this argument are politically stupid. To be nice to them, I call them naive. I believe that if Israel does this preemptive attack, it would be her last one ever. There are going to be a lot of countries that see Israel as a danger to their existance, and they could use the same logic, which then I would be all for it too!  After all, you get what you deserve, at the end.


Mullahs & Bombs!

by M. (not verified) on

It would be disasterious for world & particularly Iranian if Akhonds have BOMBS. It means annihilation of all non Moslems(INFIDEL!).
Think about it!


Theh he is a genocidal maniac!

by Anonymous-2 (not verified) on

He compares Iran's nuclear facilities with Iraq's; there is a major difference. Iraq's did not have nuclear fuel spinning in the centrifuges; Iran's does. This means massive radiation killing millions of people in Iran and as far as Pakistan, India, etc..

They have to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, because they are buried deep under ground.

As for Israel - no country is allowed to have nuclear energy, or any missiles which could possibly be a threat to Israel. This while Israel has 200 to 500 nuclear weapons which can obliterate the entire region.

They are just a bunch of bullies and have been threatening to attack Iran as early as 1993; 2001, 2002, 2003, up to this date.

Maybe one should send the following article to those who are even thinking of attacking Iran's nuclear facilities.

Consider the Consequences of Bombing Iran’s Nuclear Power Plants, and Pray

by Floyd Rudmin




by IRANdokht on

What right do they have to determine who can have nuclear facilities and who can't when they already have nuclear bombs themselves!!!!