Israel threatens more strikes in Syria over arms to Hezbollah
Israel Hayom | Israel threatens more strikes in Syria over arms to Hezbollah.
( Doubling down… – JW )
Israeli official makes unprecedented threat in New York Times interview, says Israel determined to prevent transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah • Satellite photos show extent of damage to Damascus airport after alleged Israeli strike on May 3.
|
Before: The cargo bay at Damascus International Airport on Feb. 22, 2012, circled in red
|
Photo credit: Ronen Solomon/digital globe
|
|||||
|
The fog of uncertainty surrounding the airstrike on the international airport in Damascus on May 3, attributed in foreign reports to Israel, is becoming somewhat clearer with the publication of up-to-date satellite photographs showing the precise targets and the damage they sustained.
A senior Israeli official, meanwhile, told The New York Times in a story published on Wednesday that if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad retaliates against Israeli attempts to stem the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah, “he would risk forfeiting his regime.”
The satellite photos of Damascus International Airport reveal that the air strike was aimed at the airport’s main cargo bay, where Iran Air planes often dock to unload their cargo. The target, according to intelligence sources speaking to the foreign media, was a shipment that was unloaded from an Iran Air plane, which had landed a while earlier.
According to the reports, the shipment included Iranian-made Fateh 110 surface-to-surface missiles, which were offloaded and stored in one of the two hangars in the vicinity.
In another satellite photo, part of a sanctions report on Iran Air from September 2012, an Iran Air plane can be seen in the vicinity of the cargo bay, near the hangar that was attacked nearly two weeks ago on Friday, May 3. Iran Air has an office in Damascus, and its planes make three shipment flights per week. The airline’s last cargo flight took place one day prior to the attack.
The senior Israeli official, who declined to be identified and who was reportedly briefed by high-level officials on Israel’s assessment of the situation in Syria, told The New York Times that “Israel is determined to continue to prevent the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah. The transfer of such weapons to Hezbollah will destabilize and endanger the entire region.
“If Syrian President Assad reacts by attacking Israel, or tries to strike Israel through his terrorist proxies,” the official said, “he will risk forfeiting his regime, for Israel will retaliate.”
The official added that Israel has until now refrained from involving itself in the Syrian civil war and would maintain this policy as long as Assad doesn’t attack Israel, directly or indirectly.
In Jerusalem, the Israeli government confirmed the veracity of the New York Times report. Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin, who accompanied Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his recent visit to Russia, where he discussed to impending sale of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria, said that the government “had a pretty good idea” who the senior official who spoke to The New York Times was.
Elkin stressed that the report did not constitute a threat, saying, “We are not threatening him but we do have our clear red lines. We will not intervene in the Syrian civil war but we have very clear positions and the transfer of any game-changing weapons is a red line … and we will do everything necessary to stop them.”
WarSclerotic 
May 16, 2013 at 4:29 PM
Joe , I must ask you these questions. You’ve been monitoring things very closely there for years.
Do you believe Iran can reasonably be talked/incented down from the bomb?
Do you believe Israel can keep the ever more powerful wolves at bay forever.
In your opinion, what must Israel do to survive the evil arrayed against it.
May 16, 2013 at 5:05 PM
John…
A heavy set of questions.
1. Can Iran be talked down.
I honestly can’t say. All indications from their ideology and from past behavior indicate that they won’t stop.
2. Can Israel hold out against the increasing forces arrayed against it.
This I feel comfortable answering. Yes. Israel has the machines and the manpower to do the job. Not to mention the motivation.
3. What must Israel do to survive against it’s opponents?
Two things. Keep fighting and keep developing economically.
In another 5 years, Israel may well become indispensable to the modern world as a source of technological advances.
We’re almost already there. Witness China’s reception of Netanyahu.
Ultimately, that’s the only way we’ll find peace. When EVERYBODY loses if we lose.
Until then, we have to stay ahead of the curve militarily. We also must use our military judiciously… Only when we HAVE to.
But when we use it, we must win SO CONVINCINGLY that no one will challenge us until, over time, our indispensability to the world becomes apparent to all.
That’s as good as I can do, John.
JW
May 16, 2013 at 5:32 PM
I hate to be the pessimist but no Iran cant be talked down it is under the delusion that the russians can save it,which is comical at best and sad at the worst
May 16, 2013 at 5:11 PM
Thank you Joe. From your lips to God’s ears. You are good people, I wish you well!
May 16, 2013 at 5:27 PM
Interesting question…’can Iran be talked down?’. In my humble opinion, I say how can we possibly know? No one has directly challenged Iran yet. By challenged, I mean militarily on their soil. How they react is anyone’s guess. I think if the assault is intense enough, they will fold like a bad poker hand. But then again, I wouldn’t want to bet anyone’s life on it.
Sorry John P for jumping in on something for JW, but it is a question that goes to the core of what all these discussions are about.
May 16, 2013 at 5:35 PM
Might I also add that while Israel is quickly becoming technologically indispensable to the modern world, Israel became indispensable to humanity when it was born years ago out of the horror of a tyrannical government. Today’s remaining tyrannical governments are the only ones having trouble recognizing this fact, China included. But some, including China, may be coming around. They just need to dispense with their own tyranny first…not a small task.
May 16, 2013 at 5:57 PM
Steve…
You speak Idealistically, which I admire.
I answered John in a way that any cynic could relate to.
May 16, 2013 at 6:04 PM
steve is right especially about china china is seriously thinking of joining the west,and historically china has never been the problem Russia has been
May 17, 2013 at 11:04 AM
iran iraq war
https://www.google.com.mx/search?q=iran+iraq+war&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:nl:official&client=firefox-a
May 16, 2013 at 6:28 PM
Cynicism (contemporary)
It is a form of jaded negativity, and other times, realistic criticism or skepticism.
May 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM
China has been engaging in govt sponsored cyber warfare against West et al and China getting more aggressive in claiming territories normally belongs to other countries esp in South China Sea. Hard to see that China is really serious about joining the west.
About Iran, does anyone have good pulse of the general Iran population? I feel that Iran population is so tired of their govt running by religious crazies and they would love to have new govt that is much more moderate/democratic and focus on market freedom to help with their economy. Not possible due to their society’s DNA?
May 16, 2013 at 11:19 PM
Its worse than that and deeper than the press have reported there is a power struggle going on in china,however there is not really anything the Chinese can do other than talk,with china they will just try increase there international presence in a way that suits there interests,its not in china’s interest in destroying Europe or the usa,they are back to square one if they lose their market ,that is the context or my statement !considering joining the west” the Chinese are blinking at this moment
May 16, 2013 at 8:26 PM
Interesting questions and many good answers.
The question whether Israel could win a sustained war of attrition against Iran has often occupied my thougths.
Based on what happened during the Iran-Iraq-war, on the geography and population of Iran and the developments from the nineties to this day I came to the following conclusion.
The Iranian leadership had no problems whatsoever to send millions of Iranians to the battlefield as cannon fodder.
Many where going volontarily to war but the regime sent even children to clear the minefields.
If Israel and Iran were direct neighbours and if the Iranian regime could mobilize the population the sheer size of the land, the size of its population the resources and a domestic industry that could produce many goods needed for war would result in an.Israeli defeat or at best in a stalemate.
But they are not direct neighbours and neither can the Iranian regime mobilize the population to the extend that it could at the time of the Iran-Iraq war. This was a time when the Iranian revolution was just a few years old and there were still many idealistic men, willing to die for the regime.
Today it looks very different. Iran has a very young population.
Many of this generation are disillusioned or fed-up with the regime.
When faced with an invasion or a ground attack of great scale the Iranians, no matter how they hate the regime will definitevely not fold but they will be willing to take great losses to defend their country but I cannot see a situation where the regime is able to motivate the Iranian people to march through Iraq and attack Israel because of an Israeli attack on their nuke sites.
There are also parts of the population (the Kurds for example) who would welcome an Israeli attack.
I can envision a scenario where Iran conducts a sustained missile war against Israel. But this kind of war could not defeat Israel because as history has shown (the Blitz etc.) it has never been possible to do enough damage or defeat an adversary by attacking him with missiles. The only way missiles can decide a war is if they have unconventional warheads.
Because Israel is not interested in any invasions or ground wars but only in a very limited operation the regime will not be able to mobilze the people for a full scale war.
So without taking into account Israel’s nukes or its missile defence systems, I come to the conclusion that Israel will be able to deal with the aftermath of an attack against Iran.
May 16, 2013 at 11:27 PM
ill agree with that,and i will predict that Obama is impeached as a result of it
May 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM
What about air superiority and the proxy army,s of iran , or a 3 front war whit Israel
Why do you think Israel is so concerned about Jordan
What about a 4 th front over sea ?
I think it is a bit more complicated, more complicated as you take the religious component in to the quotation.
In the end is Israel the little satan for nearly all moslims .
Egypt, turkey, Saudi , Oman etc are NO friends !!
Time will learn
May 17, 2013 at 2:49 PM
Could you explain each of your points in brief but sufficient detail?
Because otherwise I can not address them without misrepresenting them and that is something I don’t want to do.
For example, what do you mean by that: “What about air superiority and the proxy army,s of iran , or a 3 front war whit Israel”
Same goes for your other points.
You know, possible is anything. It is also possible, that we live on a pizza pie and hallucinate the things, that we think are reality.
(This was not meant to ridicule you, but it’s a simple statement of fact).
Because ANYTHING is possible me must distinguish between POSSIBLE and REASONABLE POSSIBLE.
You will quickly learn, that when you try to develop a reasonable, realistic scenario with as much detail as possible you will separate POSSIBLE and REASONABLE POSSIBLE pretty quick.