(Gulp) Israel deploys nuclear cruise missiles near Iran

Israel/Palestine
on 45 Comments

The other day on Russian TV, Norman Finkelstein said Israel is a lunatic state and it has a bunch of nukes. Well the Times of London says: 

Three German-built Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles are to be deployed in the Gulf near the Iranian coastline.

The first has been sent in response to Israeli fears that ballistic missiles developed by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, a political and military organisation in Lebanon, could hit sites in Israel, including air bases and missile launchers.

Oh and I theorized a long time ago that Obama caved on settlements because Israel has nukes and is out of control, and the game is containment.

45 Responses

  1. eGuard
    June 5, 2010, 8:30 pm

    Let’s not forget: Thank you, Germany.

    • eGuard
      June 5, 2010, 8:39 pm

      for promoting peace.

    • Colin Murray
      June 5, 2010, 9:02 pm

      Those nitwits will rue the day they gave submarines to a fascist apartheid Israel that they knew were capable of being and would be modified to carry torpedo-tube launched nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

    • potsherd
      June 5, 2010, 9:55 pm

      Israel is like a vampire that feeds on guilt.

      • Avi
        June 5, 2010, 11:12 pm

        I don’t know what motivated Germany to give an irresponsible child such a dangerous weapon, whether it was Holocaust guilt or whether it has something to do with the bible thumping fanatic Angela Merkel.

        Ultimately Germany bears the responsibility for providing the criminal with the weapon, the US bears responsibility for defending and enabling the criminal. It’s a mafia of rogue nations. I hope that wasn’t too maximalist.

      • Koshiro
        June 6, 2010, 2:49 am

        In this particular case, Israel prodded Germany into delivering them during Gulf War I by accusing Germany of supplying Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons which he’d use against Israel.
        Of course, that didn’t happen, all Saddam used against Israel were Russian-designed conventional Scud missiles. But of course, we can all imagine the response Russia would have given Israel had they demanded some nice submarines, so guilt-tripping Germany over its hypothetical weapon deliveries seemed more reasonable.

      • Justice Please
        June 6, 2010, 8:27 am

        Avi, as far as I know the German government gave (not sold, mind you) those submarines several years ago, meaning it has nothing to do with the now-governing CDU, Angela Merkels Christian Democratic Party. Rather it was during the reign of the Gerhard Schröder-led coalition between the SPD (social democrats) and the Green party. All of this means that there is no need for Christian Zionists when it comes to delivering weapons to a murder regime; instead, even so-called “left” governments in Germany are easily guilt-tripped into handing over nuclear subs.

        The German government has gone from killing Jews to providing racist extremist Jewish murderers with weapons of mass destruction. It’s a big con being played by Zionists, comparable to what Norman Finkelstein reveals in “The Holocaust Industry”.

        Zionists carefully cultivate the culture of guilt in Germany, making most Germans afraid even to talk about Israel publicly. Behing closed doors they all see how criminal Israel acts, but they are afraid to voice that opinion out loud.

  2. Psychopathic god
    June 5, 2010, 8:30 pm

    no, Obama caved, on settlements and on IDF killing Americans in the Mediterranean, because he’s being blackmailed by nuclear Netanyahu.

  3. Psychopathic god
    June 5, 2010, 8:34 pm

    link to campaigniran.org

    Though that story was reported by the Times of London and several Israeli newspapers, it got little if any notice in the U.S. mass media. And now that all eyes are on the terrible attack at sea, it’s not likely to get any notice. Perhaps that’s why Netanyahu could risk giving Iran such a central role in his concocted version of the Mavi Marmara tragedy.

    No one is paying attention to the central fact: Even if Iranian missiles were being smuggled into Gaza, they would be mere firecrackers compared to the nuclear missiles that Israel plans to keep permanently in range of Teheran and every other city in Iran.

    What does the Israeli justification of the attack on the Mavi Marmara tell the Iranians? It was self-defense, Netanyahu insisted; Israel has the right to use any violence necessary to stop ships from coming into Gaza harbor. His defense minister, Ehud Barak, agreed, telling the commandos who carried out the attack that “we live in the Middle East, in a place where there is no mercy for the weak.” And a top Israeli Navy commander warned that Israel will use even more aggressive force to prevent future ships, like the MV Rachel Corrie, from breaking the blockade

    If I were an Iranian military planner, I would be listening to all this very closely. It’s all about self-defense, right? Well Iran is in infinitely more danger than Israel. Barak himself recently said publicly: “Right now, Iran does not pose an existential threat to Israel.” But three submarine loaded with nuclear-armed missiles certainly pose an existential threat to Iran. And according to Barak, Middle Eastern nations should show no mercy to the weak.

  4. Taxi
    June 5, 2010, 8:43 pm

    Three nuclear Israelis subs are snaking around the Indian Ocean – precise location undisclosed. Been deployed there for five weeks.

    Yap, ‘defending’ Israel all the way from the Indian Ocean.

    Thanks Germany. Thanks India.

    NOT!!!!!!!

    Evil Bastards!

    • potsherd
      June 5, 2010, 8:57 pm

      But if Iranian commandos should happen to board and capture those subs and tow them into an Iranian harbor, Israel wouldn’t think that Iran was just defending themselves.

  5. annie
    June 5, 2010, 8:50 pm

    and the hits just keep on comin’.

  6. hayate
    June 5, 2010, 9:03 pm

    In my opinion, saying obama “caved” to israel is like saying booth caved to the confederacy when he shot Lincoln. People don’t ‘cave” on things they fully support. Obama has been an israeli/zionist protege since at least his college days and probably even earlier. Everyone knows the story of the “Manchurian candidate”, think of obama as the telavivian candidate.

    Is israel crazy enough to sneak attack Iran with nuclear cruise missiles? World reaction to their terrorist piracy attack on the Gaza convoy shows what the most gentle world reaction to their nuking Iran would be. And also what the american reaction would be and how the israeli occupied western corporate media would frame the war crime.

    But the question still remains. The israelis have full american support no matter what they do and they know it. Would anybody go to war with israel over israel nuking Iran when america’s nuclear arsenal is backing up the israeli aggression? It could be world wide nuclear war. The israeli/zionist control of america is probably the worst thing to befall this planet since the rise of the nazis, but israeli control of america’s nuclear arsenal is the most sobering aspect of this zionist/israeli control of all.

    I doubt the israelis have any hesitancy to use their control of america’s nukes for their own purposes,which most definitely include threatening nuclear war.

    • hayate
      June 5, 2010, 9:16 pm

      My fingers failed to keep pace with my thoughts on that last line. This is more like what I intended to say:

      I doubt the israelis have any hesitancy to use their control of america’s nukes for their own purposes, which most definitely include threatening nuclear war if the world reaction to their criminality gets to the point where the world puts a serious monkeywrench into israeli plans.

      • demize
        June 5, 2010, 9:42 pm

        I agree with your acessment of Obama. It irks me when lib/progs advocate that Obama is being constrained by political expediencies, no, he is a vain hollow man who is a thorough corporatist and authoratarian. He is quite happy to exercise what power he is allowed to have, change his inflection depending on who he’s addressing and play act gravitas. He is quite satisfied enjoying the perks of the office.

  7. Colin Murray
    June 5, 2010, 9:09 pm

    But the threat is clear: keep quiet on the flotilla attack, or Israel starts a war with Iran — thereby destabilizing the region and jeopardizing the U.S. military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The obvious word for this is “blackmail”.

    from Daniel Luban @ Mondoweiss blogroll site LobeLog:
    Neocons to Obama: Keep Quiet on Flotilla, Or Iran Gets It

    • hayate
      June 5, 2010, 9:17 pm

      Good point.

      • hayate
        June 5, 2010, 9:23 pm

        Though it is the world being blackmailed more than america is, in my opinion.

    • DICKERSON3870
      June 5, 2010, 10:00 pm

      “TWO DAYS IN MAY” (EXTORTION)

      FIRST DAY – SUNDAY, MAY 30, 2010
      Israel stations nuclear missile subs off Iran – [RUPERT MURDOCH’S] Times Online, 05/30/10
      (excerpts) Three German-built Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles are to be deployed in the Gulf near the Iranian coastline…Some of the cruise missiles are equipped with the most advanced nuclear warheads in the Israeli arsenal…
      ….The submarines could be used if Iran continues its programme to produce a nuclear bomb. “The 1,500km range of the submarines’ cruise missiles can reach any target in Iran,” said a navy officer…
      ———————————————————————————–
      SECOND DAY – MONDAY, MAY 31, 2010
      The Gaza Crisis: Decision Time for Obama, By Michael Rubin, The Corner, National Review Online, 05/31/10
      (excerpt)…If Obama decides it is in America’s interest to make an example of Israel after the Gaza flotilla incident in order to win goodwill in Cairo, Beirut, Tehran, and Ankara, then he must also recognize that the leadership in Jerusalem is going to conclude that it cannot trust the United States to safeguard its security, and that therefore it must take matters into its own hands on any number of issues, not the least of which is Iran’s nuclear program. In effect, if the White House decides to come down hard on Israel now, it is the same as giving a green light for Israel to strike Iran…”

      • munro
        June 5, 2010, 11:46 pm

        Rubin wrote “Mary Robinson, War Criminal?” about the president of Ireland and the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights:
        link to old.nationalreview.com
        Rubin was hired because he was the cream of the crop of US journalism graduates, like Rich Lowry, Bill Kristol, Robert, Frederick and Kimberly Kagan etc. Why shouldn’t he be comfortable smearing an Irish president as an anti-Semite or blackmailing the first African-American president with a nuclear war to protect the sadistic turn on of Gaza?
        ethnic networking that old canard:
        link to pakalert.wordpress.com

  8. Richard Parker
    June 5, 2010, 9:09 pm

    Mondoweiss hasn’t been keeping his eye on the ball.

    Germany gave 2 Dolphin class submarines (for free) to Israel some time ago (reparations for the Holocaust, don’t you know) . Now Israel is buying on its own (or the USA’s) account, another third one.

    All will be dispatched to the Persian Gulf. (Only one is there now, having passed through the Suez Canal some months ago). They will be deployed some 1100 miles away from Israel, on its new front line against Iran. (As if Israel didn’t have enough frontlines right next to itself).

  9. eljay
    June 5, 2010, 9:11 pm

    >> What does the Israeli justification of the attack on the Mavi Marmara tell the Iranians? It was self-defense, Netanyahu insisted; Israel has the right to use any violence necessary to stop ships from coming into Gaza harbor. … If I were an Iranian military planner, I would be listening to all this very closely. It’s all about self-defense, right? Well Iran is in infinitely more danger than Israel.

    Irrelevant. Israel is “we”; Iran is “they”. And “they” are not allowed the same rights as “we” are.

    I’m sure if RW were here, he’d be up in arms against Israel’s provocative – dare I say it, “maximalist” and “destabilizing” – actions.

    • eljay
      June 5, 2010, 9:12 pm

      >> Irrelevant. Israel is “we”; Iran is “they”. And “they” are not allowed the same rights as “we” are.

      That’s what’s known in the West as “justice” and that’s just one of the reasons that “they” hate “us”.

      • RoHa
        June 5, 2010, 9:30 pm

        No, eljay. They hate us for our freedoms. Didn’t you get the memo?

      • eljay
        June 5, 2010, 9:56 pm

        >> No, eljay. They hate us for our freedoms. Didn’t you get the memo?

        Sorry, it’s so hard to keep track of the things they *actually* hate us for and the stuff (invasion, occupation, mass murder, torture, etc.) I keep mistakenly thinking they hate us for. ;-)

  10. RoHa
    June 5, 2010, 9:13 pm

    You’ve only just noticed? This is old, terrifying, news.

  11. Colin Murray
    June 5, 2010, 9:15 pm

    The US Navy better be dogging those boats every meter of the way to the Persian Gulf, and once they are there keep them under flawless surveillance 24-7 with torpedoes ready to drop as soon as they hear a tube clear. This Israeli provocation isn’t just a threat to Iran, it’s a threat to us.

  12. Colin Murray
    June 5, 2010, 9:19 pm

    I wonder if the Germans were considerate enough to share the Israeli subs’ sound profiles with us?

  13. Richard Parker
    June 5, 2010, 9:23 pm

    The world’s response (ie the USA’s) would be extremely weak in the event of Israel nuking Iran. Israel’s got 200-400 nuclear bombs, and can treat them like hand grenades.

    The nuking could do nothing at all, simply because neither Israel or the US has any idea where Iran is really doing its nuclear work (if it is).

  14. syvanen
    June 5, 2010, 9:34 pm

    These submarines are unbelievably provocative. From the Indian Ocean they have only a single military purpose and that is to launch nuclear warheads. Though these same cruise missiles can deliver conventional explosives, they must be within one or two hundred miles of their targets to have any military effectiveness. The logistical problem here is that the further out they are, the more fuel that is required thus limiting the size of the explosive. To get closer to their target the submarines would have to enter the Persian Gulf thereby making them vulnerable to antisubmarine weapons. This leaves a massive question: what is Israel trying to accomplish? I simply cannot believe that they are seriously considering nuclear warfare. If not, then what is it? If someone has some ideas or inside information on this question, I would be interested in hearing them.

    • Colin Murray
      June 5, 2010, 9:52 pm

      I simply cannot believe that they are seriously considering nuclear warfare.

      Netanyahu may not, but with respect, take another look at his governing coalition. If he gets ousted and any of his more excitable, racist, lunatic buds become PM, all bets are off.

      Even if no one in the Israeli political establishment is serious about nuking Iran, events have a way of unfolding in unpredictable ways. Their subs simply being there opens up the possibility of accidental war.

      • DICKERSON3870
        June 5, 2010, 11:03 pm

        RE: “I simply cannot believe that they are seriously considering nuclear warfare.” – sylvanen

        FROM JOHN M. GRANT, 06/04/10: “…A friend of mine who was a tank driver in the Six Day War lives outside Jerusalem. He thinks my views are wrong-headed and hostile to Israel, yet we remain friends. When I saw him here in early May, his mood was especially dark and fatalistic. Enemies were everywhere; at one point, he said Israel might have to resign itself to an exchange of nuclear weapons. I suspect this cornered point-of-view is the way many Israelis feel in the current intractable climate with a blockheaded Likud on one side and Iran on the other…”
        SOURCE – link to counterpunch.org

    • Danaa
      June 5, 2010, 9:53 pm

      I have no inside information (I better not – that would be dangerous to have) but I do have an idea. The israelis are no doubt worried about a possible Iranian counter-strike, should Israel launch their bombers. having nuclear armed submarines within range would then be a way of dulling whatever responses Iran chooses to deploy. To the Israeli militarized, commando-style mind (the one we saw triggered in the attack of the flotilla), it would be a perfectly reasonable response to retaliate against, say, an Iranian missile hitting Tel Aviv, with a nuclear strike on a selected target in Iran. That Iran would respond to an attack by Israel, is besides the point. For israelis, it’s never a question of who’s right, and what the costs might be. By definition, it is they who are always in the right and the rest is just something that needs to be contained. With better hasbara, perhaps?

      I think that when we weigh israel’s potential actions and reactions, we need to suspend any prior conceptions of poliicy, political, moral or even strategic considerations. For israel’s miltary hive mind, it’s only about tactics and fall-out containment. They believe the Lobby is powerful enough to even contain radioactive fall out. They’ll just have to work harder, that’s all.

      • sherbrsi
        June 6, 2010, 11:17 am

        I think that when we weigh israel’s potential actions and reactions, we need to suspend any prior conceptions of poliicy, political, moral or even strategic considerations. For israel’s miltary hive mind, it’s only about tactics and fall-out containment. They believe the Lobby is powerful enough to even contain radioactive fall out. They’ll just have to work harder, that’s all.

        The lobby’s already been working hard and producing results, instilling the righteousness of an Israeli/American attack on the demon Iran and dulling the American mind to another Israeli-pushed proxy war.

  15. RoHa
    June 5, 2010, 9:36 pm

    Floating around the internet are accustions that Israel torpedoed the South Korean ship. The alleged torpedo is claimed to be German, and Israel gets torpedoes from Germany.

    (I, you will be surprised to note, doubt this one. The ship was blown in half. To my inexpert eye, this looks like the result of a mine under the ship. Torpedoes usually pierce the side of the ship.)

    • Colin Murray
      June 5, 2010, 9:55 pm
    • hayate
      June 6, 2010, 2:04 am

      Likely an american mine, rather than a torpedo, in my opinion. An american mine warfare ship was there and it is speculated they were testing or installing some bottom mines, possibly a new type to the usn. This was being done while the the usn and South Korean navy were running exercises off the island. These mines are actually a small installation the sits upon the sea bottom. When a activated and they detect a ship, they launch their mine, which is essentially a homing torpedo. I’ve been following this incident ever since the story broke in the media and have kept notes and links relating to it. I’ll post links and excerpts from articles and what my thinking was/is. Those not really interested in this just scroll past, I’ll keep it to this post and use replies so as not to disrupt the rest of the comment section here.

      Lets start here:

      Who Sank the South Korean Warship Cheonan? A New Stage in the US-Korean War and US-China Relations The original Japanese text is available here

      Tanaka Sakai

      Translated by Kyoko Selden

      [Updated May 24, 2010]

      link to japanfocus.org

      • hayate
        June 6, 2010, 2:11 am

        My initial reaction after reading the article was:

        This article raises an interesting issue that a usn sub also sank. That seems unlikely now, given the time passed and covering up such a loss would be impossible now since family members of the sub’s crew would be wondering where their Johnny was. But the 3rd buoy dives are something to wonder about. What were they doing there, when the ship’s halves were known to be elsewhere. And why were these dives such a priority over that of the Korean ship? I’ve seen a lot of commentary that an israeli sub may have torpedoed the Korean ship. That also seems a stretch, given the distance Korea is from israel, though not impossible. The israelis certainly have motivation to stage a falseflag against North Korea. The connection here is the German made subs the israelis own, and their presumably German made torpedoes. It’s been reported the “torpedo” used to sink the Cheonan was of German make. It’s much more plausible, I think, that a u.s.n. sub torpedoed the ship, if the ship was in fact torpedoed. Either by mistake or as a falseflag op.

        From the initial claims by the u.s and South Korea that they didn’t think the North had a part in the sinking, I suspect the Korean ship was not deliberately sunk, but was the victim of an accident. Perhaps it triggered an old mine (there are many in that area still) or an internal mishap. And the israeloamericans are now using the sinking to bash North Korea, after the fact. Another interesting thing is the green netting covering the fore part of the after section of the ship as it sits on a barge. It appears somebody doesn’t want analysis of the damage to that part of the ship where it broke in two. Why? Was it in fact an external explosion? Or was it internal?

        I’ve been watching this story develop, wondering when the israeloamericans would kick in their propaganda. It’s obvious North Korea is an unresolved failure in israeloamerican eyes. Both because they have positive relations with Iran and because they kicked yank arse during the Korean war (not many americans know, but the objective of the american forces during that war was the conquest of North Korea, in which they failed completely to achieve) and the americans (not to mention, zionist oligarchs) don’t like it that small nations can remain independent of their fascist control.

        That was on 28 May.

      • hayate
        June 6, 2010, 2:20 am

        At the same time I saw this essay:

        The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To

        by Scott Creighton

        link to willyloman.wordpress.com

        That article goes into detail on the “torpedo” parts “found” and how they actually compare with the North Korean torpedo they are claimed by the israeloamericans to be a part of.

        Then the next day Wayne Madsen posted this:

        Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette By Wayne Madsen May 28, 2010, 00:18

        link to onlinejournal.com

        At that point it “clicked”. The USS Salvor being there was the missing link that explained the accident. This is what I wrote regarding the info Madsen provided and his speculations:

        While I doubt #3 happened (see the article) – the ship was underway, not anchored, the mine exercise may provide a clue to what happened. The Cheonan could have been accidentally sunk during this mine exercise. This could explain all the attention at the 3rd buoy. Since the mines are not tethered objects like old fashioned mines and actually are a mini, seabed mounted installation that fires a mine, which then acts like a homing torpedo, it’s possible one of these fired off its mine at the Cheonan. The mine installation could have been located and fired from that 3rd buoy location and the usn was busy recovering it first so the evidence would be removed – and also so they could inspect the device to see why it fired off the mine. This would explain the importance attached to that 3rd buoy location over that of the sunken ship. It could also explain why the u.s. and South Korean guvs initially didn’t blame North Korea. They were taken by surprise by an accident and were not sure what do yet with the spin. IE: still in a state of panic. Later, it occurred to use North Korea as the culprit once the panic subsided.

      • hayate
        June 6, 2010, 2:53 am

        Then a couple of days later, I read this article and realised others were speculating it was a usn mine that sank the Cheonan in a “friendly fire” incident:

        Did an American Mine Sink South Korean Ship?

        New America Media, News Analysis, Yoichi Shimatsu, Posted: May 27, 2010

        link to newamericamedia.org

        So to recap, the usn was installing or running tests on a minefield when the Cheonan triggered one of these mines which sunk her. Apparently the specific mine installation was at that 3rd buoy described. The mine would have the same effect on a ship as a modern torpedo exploding under the ships hull and a small vessel like Cheonan would certainly see it’s back broken. This accident would explain why North Korea wasn’t blamed initially, like a “bad guy” usually gets when there is a falseflag, which is why I consider the sinking accidental, rather than deliberate as a falseflag. Later, the decision was made to blame the North Koreans and start falsifying evidence and hop up the media.

        My best guess is neither China or Russia accepts the falsified report produced to to blame the North, and they probably also suspect an accident occurred. “Unofficially” the Russians have said the report is bunk. The results from their own independent investigations are not announced yet. Likely, as with the Iranian nuclear issues, the Russians and Chinese will chose a route to defuse the worst of western aggressive planning. It should be easier with North Korea, since the israeloamericans seem to have used the issue to get what they wanted to happen in Japan and South Korea politically already.

  16. lareineblanche
    June 5, 2010, 9:57 pm

    They’ll have five of those subs soon, from what I’ve read, 2 more in 2012.
    There are reports of an American nuclear sub also in the Persian Gulf, going through the Strait of Hormuz.

  17. thankgodimatheist
    June 5, 2010, 9:57 pm

    French Cinema chain Utopia cancels the projection of an Israeli film in favor of the documentary film “Rachel” by Simone Bitton:
    From Le Monde:
    Les salles Utopia refusent un film israélien après le drame de la flotille:
    Utopia, which has cinemas in Avignon, Bordeaux, Montpellier and Toulouse decided to show instead the film Rachel (2008), a documentary by Simone Bitton dedicated to Rachel Corrie, the 22-year-old American peace activist crushed by an Israeli bulldozer in the Gaza Strip in 2003 as she attempted to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes.

    The canceled film Five Hours from Paris is a romantic comedy about an Israeli who dreams of visiting Paris, but must overcome his fear of flying. Ironically, 1.5 million Palestinians have been imprisoned in the Gaza Strip for four years (and they are also afraid of flying Israelis, albeit in F-16s), and are virtually banned from traveling for almost any purpose, including study or family reunification. Hundreds have died due to long delays or refusals of permits to leave Gaza for urgently needed medical care. Few Palestinians in Gaza — where 80 percent of the population are refugees — can ever dream of a holiday in Paris.
    link to lemonde.fr

  18. hughsansom
    June 5, 2010, 10:06 pm

    Yep, I think you’re right, Philip. The world’s leading rogue state? Israel.

Leave a Reply