Eye on the Enemy: US Sending Signals Via Drill in Jordan
Local Editor
US Sending Signals Via Drill in Jordan
"Israel" Defense - Arie Egozi
More than ten thousand soldiers from the United States and Jordan participate in a large military drill that began on Wednesday in Jordan. The Americans and Jordanians are trying to separate between the recent events in various Arab countries in the region and between the drills, but it is difficult not to see a connection of this kind.
Delegates from other countries participate in the drill called the (EAGER LION 12), but it is mainly implemented to boost the cooperation between U.S. military and the Jordanian army. In a statement issued by the U.S. military, it indicated that "the drill is to deal with terrorism, which clearly shows the one of our main goals in this drill."
The drill will last around three weeks and will include a variety of scenarios in land, sea and air. In the framework of these drills, some troops will be deployed near the "Israeli"-Jordanian border in the Aqaba region. Live ammunition will be used to simulate different scenarios. The crew will, for example, execute a special training on what is called "a large chemical spill".
Under this title, "Israeli" sources say that there is a possible scenario for the use of chemical weapons by countries like Iran in any future confrontation in the region.
The Kingdom of Jordan receives U.S. military aid, and has received such assistance in the last five years of $ 2.4 billion.
In "Israel" they estimate that the timing of the drill is no coincidence, and it is intended to show the extremists in the region that the United States has an interest in maintaining the stability of the regime in Jordan. "
ـــــــــــــــــ
No Elections, Increased Chance for an Attack
Amir Rapaport - "Israel" Defense
Do not believe those who tell toy that there is no link between the political drama that "Israel" is undergoing and the possibility of "Israel" attacking Iran.
Do not believe those who tell you that Netanyahu postponed the elections (or arranged them to be held sooner), because he intends to attack.
Do not believe those who tell you "Bibi won't attack" because he is subject to the dictates of the Americans.
The Iranian issue in the last days has been mixed into extensive political drama , and the elections' possibilities have lavished the place with lots of "media spins." And the words of former Shin Bet head, "Yuval Diskin," against the attack option and against the union of Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, have confused the public. It is time for reformation.
Does "Israel" seriously consider attacking Iran?
Yes, definitely. The argument between "Israel" and the United States comes down to the question of when it is right to stop the bomb.
"Israel" believes that Iran's strategy is enriching Uranium to a level of 20% which is at least sufficient enough for one bomb (approximately a 250 kg bomb). As of May 2012, Iran has nearly 120 kg of 20% enriched uranium. The transition from 20% to a level 90% , which is required to produce a bomb, is only need take less than a few weeks - a maximum of two to three months.
By this strategy, the Iranians could produce the required amount to make a bomb and thus stop enriching uranium. The transition from possessing 20% enriched uranium to manufacture a bomb will be done by the time they deem convenient, and at a speed that will not leave enough time to thwart the bomb.
Americans say: ‘we have military capabilities that you lack. We'll stop the bomb in any way. But can the Americans be trusted? Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Minister of "defense" Ehud Barak, Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe Ya'alon, and other cabinet members will face in the coming months.. Now, Mofaz joined the crew of the decision-makers.
Does the unity government increase the likelihood that "Israel" will attack?
In principle, yes. On the one hand, the chances of the attack increased, because the public legitimacy of the government increased. The decision of whether or not to attack is one of the crucial decisions in the history of the state. The attack will result in a counter-attack against "Israel" and will have far-reaching repercussions. And the Government of national unity is more appropriate to take such a decision than a limited government.
Moreover, it is important to know that as foreign affairs and "defense" committee in the past few years, and as opposition chairman in the past few weeks, Shaul Mofaz, was a full partner to some top secrets of "Israel" on the issue of Iran's nuclear project. The fact that Mofaz is the head of ARMY Planning Branch, chief of staff, and minister of "defense" adds a noteworthy weight to the Cabinet , where former ARMY Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon serves as well.
On the other hand, expanding the government is perceived in Iran as the intensification of the threat of an attack by "Israel". It may help persuade the Iranians to freeze their nuclear program in response to the demands of the West, and in such a case the possibility of attack will be actually decrease..
Has the cabinet already decided to attack, and is simply waiting now for the right time?
No. One can assume that even the prime minister and the cabinet ministers don't yet know how the coming months will develop.
Is there a link between the timing of the attack and the date of the US elections ?
The date of an attack, if it occurred, will be primarily influenced by the pace of the uranium enrichment by Iran, but the elections in the United States will play a role as well. Any president sitting in the White House, new or old, is expected to be more assertive against "Israel" than this current administration - which is on the eve of the elections. This is another reason for "Israel" not to linger.
It has been published that former Chief of Staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, does not support an attack in Iran. Does the army oppose an attack in general?
No. The ""Israeli" army has been preparing for the possibility of an attack for several years and has already set up operational plans. In the end, it will be up to the political echelon to decide whether to send aircrafts.
Can the government instruct an attack in contrast to the army's position, if it objects decisively?
It's a poor chance, but yes. In any case, there is no accord regarding the issue within the army and the "defense" establishment, nor is this a new situation. A reminder: in June 1981, Menachem Begin ordered IAF aircraft to attack the nuclear reactor in Iraq. At the time, the then Chief of Staff, Refael Eitan and Air Force Commander David Ivry hid the operation from the Head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence, who opposed the operation, out of concern that he would act to foil it.
Source: Hebrew Newspapers, translated and edited by moqawama.org
US Sending Signals Via Drill in Jordan
"Israel" Defense - Arie Egozi
More than ten thousand soldiers from the United States and Jordan participate in a large military drill that began on Wednesday in Jordan. The Americans and Jordanians are trying to separate between the recent events in various Arab countries in the region and between the drills, but it is difficult not to see a connection of this kind.
Delegates from other countries participate in the drill called the (EAGER LION 12), but it is mainly implemented to boost the cooperation between U.S. military and the Jordanian army. In a statement issued by the U.S. military, it indicated that "the drill is to deal with terrorism, which clearly shows the one of our main goals in this drill."
The drill will last around three weeks and will include a variety of scenarios in land, sea and air. In the framework of these drills, some troops will be deployed near the "Israeli"-Jordanian border in the Aqaba region. Live ammunition will be used to simulate different scenarios. The crew will, for example, execute a special training on what is called "a large chemical spill".
Under this title, "Israeli" sources say that there is a possible scenario for the use of chemical weapons by countries like Iran in any future confrontation in the region.
The Kingdom of Jordan receives U.S. military aid, and has received such assistance in the last five years of $ 2.4 billion.
In "Israel" they estimate that the timing of the drill is no coincidence, and it is intended to show the extremists in the region that the United States has an interest in maintaining the stability of the regime in Jordan. "
ـــــــــــــــــ
No Elections, Increased Chance for an Attack
Amir Rapaport - "Israel" Defense
Do not believe those who tell toy that there is no link between the political drama that "Israel" is undergoing and the possibility of "Israel" attacking Iran.
Do not believe those who tell you that Netanyahu postponed the elections (or arranged them to be held sooner), because he intends to attack.
Do not believe those who tell you "Bibi won't attack" because he is subject to the dictates of the Americans.
The Iranian issue in the last days has been mixed into extensive political drama , and the elections' possibilities have lavished the place with lots of "media spins." And the words of former Shin Bet head, "Yuval Diskin," against the attack option and against the union of Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, have confused the public. It is time for reformation.
Does "Israel" seriously consider attacking Iran?
Yes, definitely. The argument between "Israel" and the United States comes down to the question of when it is right to stop the bomb.
"Israel" believes that Iran's strategy is enriching Uranium to a level of 20% which is at least sufficient enough for one bomb (approximately a 250 kg bomb). As of May 2012, Iran has nearly 120 kg of 20% enriched uranium. The transition from 20% to a level 90% , which is required to produce a bomb, is only need take less than a few weeks - a maximum of two to three months.
By this strategy, the Iranians could produce the required amount to make a bomb and thus stop enriching uranium. The transition from possessing 20% enriched uranium to manufacture a bomb will be done by the time they deem convenient, and at a speed that will not leave enough time to thwart the bomb.
Americans say: ‘we have military capabilities that you lack. We'll stop the bomb in any way. But can the Americans be trusted? Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Minister of "defense" Ehud Barak, Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe Ya'alon, and other cabinet members will face in the coming months.. Now, Mofaz joined the crew of the decision-makers.
Does the unity government increase the likelihood that "Israel" will attack?
In principle, yes. On the one hand, the chances of the attack increased, because the public legitimacy of the government increased. The decision of whether or not to attack is one of the crucial decisions in the history of the state. The attack will result in a counter-attack against "Israel" and will have far-reaching repercussions. And the Government of national unity is more appropriate to take such a decision than a limited government.
Moreover, it is important to know that as foreign affairs and "defense" committee in the past few years, and as opposition chairman in the past few weeks, Shaul Mofaz, was a full partner to some top secrets of "Israel" on the issue of Iran's nuclear project. The fact that Mofaz is the head of ARMY Planning Branch, chief of staff, and minister of "defense" adds a noteworthy weight to the Cabinet , where former ARMY Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon serves as well.
On the other hand, expanding the government is perceived in Iran as the intensification of the threat of an attack by "Israel". It may help persuade the Iranians to freeze their nuclear program in response to the demands of the West, and in such a case the possibility of attack will be actually decrease..
Has the cabinet already decided to attack, and is simply waiting now for the right time?
No. One can assume that even the prime minister and the cabinet ministers don't yet know how the coming months will develop.
Is there a link between the timing of the attack and the date of the US elections ?
The date of an attack, if it occurred, will be primarily influenced by the pace of the uranium enrichment by Iran, but the elections in the United States will play a role as well. Any president sitting in the White House, new or old, is expected to be more assertive against "Israel" than this current administration - which is on the eve of the elections. This is another reason for "Israel" not to linger.
It has been published that former Chief of Staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, does not support an attack in Iran. Does the army oppose an attack in general?
No. The ""Israeli" army has been preparing for the possibility of an attack for several years and has already set up operational plans. In the end, it will be up to the political echelon to decide whether to send aircrafts.
Can the government instruct an attack in contrast to the army's position, if it objects decisively?
It's a poor chance, but yes. In any case, there is no accord regarding the issue within the army and the "defense" establishment, nor is this a new situation. A reminder: in June 1981, Menachem Begin ordered IAF aircraft to attack the nuclear reactor in Iraq. At the time, the then Chief of Staff, Refael Eitan and Air Force Commander David Ivry hid the operation from the Head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence, who opposed the operation, out of concern that he would act to foil it.
Source: Hebrew Newspapers, translated and edited by moqawama.org
