A senior member of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) on Tuesday downplayed the threat of an Israeli attack on Iran, saying any Israeli operation would likely be “limited.”
“I assure the (Iranian) people with certainty that the Zionists will not undertake any significant or substantial action; whatever they do will be nothing more than a desperate attempt,” said Maj. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, who was the top commander of the IRGC from 2007 to 2019, according to Iran’s PressTV.
“The Zionist regime may carry out a desperate, limited, and minor attack,” Jafari said. He insisted that Israel could “definitely cannot” carry out an operation on the scale of Iran’s October 1 missile attack on Israel, which came in response to a series of Israeli escalations in the region.
Jafari also vowed that Iran would hit back harder if Israel did launch a “significant” attack. “Iran’s response depends on the intensity of the enemy’s attack. If a significant action is taken, the response will certainly be several times greater,” he said.
Jafari made the comments at an event commemorating Abbas Nilforoushan, a senior IRGC official who was killed by Israel in the strike that killed Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. The killing of Nilforoushan was listed as one of Iran’s reasons for the October 1 attack, dubbed Operation True Promise II.
Back in April, Iran fired missiles and drones at Israel in response to the Israeli bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, which killed seven Iranians, including a senior IRGC commander. In response, Israel carried out an attack on Iran that reportedly damaged an Iranian air defense system. Iranian officials downplayed the attack, and Tehran did not retaliate.
So it goes…………….
He's wrong about that. Israel is planning something big and unexpected. I wouldn't suggest ignoring the possibility of some level of nuclear attack, even if only as a "demonstration" of Israel's willingness to use nukes at some level.
The only thing they can actually do in terms military that actually hurts, would be to launch nuclear ballistic missiles but Iran is now an unrecognized nuclear power (I totally believe that after the "earthquake", which was meant to "explain" the USA and allies of Iran's nuclear arsenal, which already exists in one capability or another but remains unofficial).
The big question I have is if tiny Israel actually has any nukes at all: I know they had a nuclear program in the 80s and that they may have got some warheads but the rumors about their numbers and capabilities are probably very inflated.
In any case: is the USA willing to see its regional empire destroyed as consequence of such reckless actions? Because Israel does nothing that is not approved by the White House and the USA will be held responsible for whatever the racist genocidal colony does, especially if it's initiating WW3 with the only goal of being allowed to commit genocide in Gaza.
I completely ignore the alleged "nuclear test". That was almost certainly a load of propaganda intended to justify an Iran war. Iran has just explicitly reiterated that its nuclear doctrine has not changed one iota, despite all the latest propaganda.
Israel did not have a nuclear program "in the 80s." They've had one since the 60s. They reportedly conducted a nuclear test in 1969. The CIA knew they had nukes, but probably not how many, since the early 70s. Since then, Dimona was expanded. Estimates of how many maximum warheads they have are all over the place, from 200-400, but the minimum is 80, based on estimates of the plutonium output from Dimona.
And if you haven't figured out by now that the US couldn't care less about being "held responsible" for anything Israel does, I don't know what to tell you.
The problem with the US being worried about the outcome is that everyone in the US government still believes the BS about it being "the most powerful military in the world", with the maybe exception of a few Pentagon colonels who know better and who have no power to alter the politicians' behavior. Read Martyanov about that.
The problem is simple: Politicians are stupid and uneducated about modern war. So they think they can do things they objectively can't.
No one seems to grasp that simple fact. Almost all Americans are still brainwashed into thinking the US can defeat anyone. It can't. Deal.
No, it’s not “propaganda” at all. Firstly because it was spotted by geologists posting at X (Twitter) right away, surprising them because of the specifics that are identical to the Pakistani nuclear test earlier this century and happened in a desertic basin that is most unlikely to have such earthquakes. Secondly because right away, in a matter of hours, Iran cancelled all the airspace alerts (initially scheduled to last for much longer), as if they were very much aware that Washington had acknowledged the threat. It was a nuclear test and anyhow everyone acknowledges that, if it hasn’t yet, Iran can build many dozens of nuclear warheads in a matter of weeks.
Re. Israeli-South African joint nuclear program, the Vela event (which you refer to) is not at all clear that it was a nuclear test. Israel and Apartheid South Africa cooperated in a joint nuclear program in the 80s, although with an initial non-operational phase in the 70s. The Kentron Cycle nuclear center was only inaugurated in 1981 and the first bomb was built in 1987, a few years before Apartheid ended, none were ever tested. While the Israeli program may be older (USA says that since 1967 but it’s not an independent credible source IMO), the revelations of Mordechai Vannunu (which are very credible) are only from 1986. It seems that while Israel might have got crude nuclear weapons before that date, modern thermonuclear weapons became only available to them after the USA allowed export of supercomputers to the racist colony in 1996. Testing has not been observed except for allegedly a miniature device. A plausible (but unconfirmed) figure is that Israel could have some 80 nuclear warheads but only some 16 or so would be modern, the rest is pretty much “old junk” and is unclear if it has any operative capability at all anymore.
I concur with you in that the USA does not realize its weakness. They feel like if it all was as in 90s and early 2000s, when they misruled the world unopposed. One of keyest developments in these last years have been the diversification and massive cheapening of the drone arsenal, largely led by Yemen (Ansarullah) in their fight against Saudi Arabia. That’s a radical game changer: still in the days of Obama the USA was about the only active military user of drones, which it used to murder people in Yemen and other places, now everybody has cheap drones for all purposes, from intel to precision undetected bombing (the one that almost got into Netanyahu’s home a few days ago hovered past all Zionist defenses, undetected and unharmed — just an example). IMO like many other military developments of the past from pike formations to rifles and pistols, it signals a radical change in the nature of warfare, one in favor of more “popular” guerrilla-like successess, weakening the “aristocratic” superiority of warplanes and tanks.
I dismiss the "nuke test" for a very simple reason: Iran has said it has not changed its nuclear posture. And neither I nor you know the people who either allegedly determined it was a test or who reported that that some people determined it was a test.
In short, it's utter bullshit. When Iran announces or uses a nuke, I'll believe it. Not until then.
So far this is merely Scott Ritter running with another news story and making it into a rant.
I'm unaware of any credible sources claiming that Israel either doesn't have nukes or only has "old" nukes. You might want to read the Wikipedia entry on the subject, which cites actual sources and includes the following;
QUOTE:The CIA believed that the number of Israeli nuclear weapons stayed from 10 to 20 from 1974 until the early 1980s.[21] Vanunu's information in October 1986 said that based on a reactor operating at 150 megawatts and a production of 40 kg of plutonium per year, Israel had 100 to 200 nuclear devices. Vanunu revealed that between 1980 and 1986 Israel attained the ability to build thermonuclear weapons.[34] By the mid 2000s estimates of Israel's arsenal ranged from 75 to 400 nuclear warheads.[8][21]
Several reports have surfaced claiming that Israel has some uranium enrichment capability at Dimona. Vanunu asserted that gas centrifuges were operating in Machon 8, and that a laser enrichment plant was being operated in Machon 9 (Israel holds a 1973 patent on laser isotope separation). According to Vanunu, the production-scale plant has been operating since 1979–80.[87][88] If highly enriched uranium is being produced in substantial quantities, then Israel's nuclear arsenal could be much larger than estimated solely from plutonium production.[89]
END QUOTE
As for the Vela test, read this:
U.S. Covered Up an Israeli Nuclear Test in 1979, Foreign Policy Says
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2019-09-22/ty-article/u-s-covered-up-an-israeli-nuclear-test-in-1979-foreign-policy-says/0000017f-dc14-db22-a17f-fcb505b40000
Sorry, but the weight of the evidence is that Israel has at least 80 nukes – and there is zero evidence that some of them don't work – and has had some of them since 1967 and by now has probably more, including miniaturized versions capable of being launched from a submarine cruise missile.
C’mon! Iran has a non-proliferation official policy, backed by a fatwa, however that policy and that edict are designed so that they can be changed if circumstances demand (and most commenters say that it will be changed considering the current circumstances). In any case official stand and actual activities are two different things, they can perfectly say A and do B, a lot of countries do that, all the time. Some local analysts even claim that, not just Iran but even Syria already have nuclear arsenals (I distrust this claim, especially regarding Syria, but hard to say).
If the Vannunu report says that the production scale of nuclear weapons began in 1979-80 then it’s in full agreement with my assessment of the Israeli (and South African) nuclear proliferation is from the 80s.
I’m not saying that the “old junk” doesn’t work but that it’s obsolete and probably already dismantled (recycled, stored away).
I don't think he's wrong. I think he's intentionally underestimating the coming ASI action for the domestic audience. Such that, when the IDF and US attacks at a scale he fully anticipates, the powers-that-be in the IRI can claim an "October 7th moment" and say "Look at this enormous, disproportionate attack by Israel and America in contrast to what we said out loud we 'think' would have been an appropriate action. They went WAY over the top, so WE are justified now in going all-out."
It's not about having faith on what Israel wants to do but about what Israel can actually do, right?
No one knows what Israel "can actually do." Just like no one knows what Iran "can actually do."
That's what the term "classified" means.
I think we know more or less: Israel almost certainly has a dozen or several nuclear warheads that can be used either via warplane (F35 but most were destroyed in the last Iranian bombing per more or less credible sources and are anyhow slow enough to be downed by various means before reaching target, it’s rumored that one of those was actually downed by Russia when it was heading to Iran months ago, plausibly with US acquiescence) or via mid-range missiles Jericho III (not hypersonic and thus potentially interceptable). They also have some nuclear capable submarines but they’re essentially stranded in the Mediterranean Sea, since crossing into the Red Sea can only be done openly and it’s quite possible that Egypt objects to that (also their range is very limited: 75km).
As for Iran, we know it can absolutely block the Strait of Hormuz (and that’s one of their oldest plans vs possible US aggression), that they have a massive missile force (which they have shown twice recently in relatively modest amounts), an untested but real anti-aircraft force, as well as other very serious forces of the other arms. We know that they’re growingly influential thanks to Israel cruel and immoral aggression and the equally immoral passivity/complicity of other regional powers, which are all tyrannies with the debatable exception of Turkey, and that they have three allied forces (Yemen, Hizbollah and the Iraqi Resistance) very actively fighting against Israel and even the USA itself, with great success for their modest size. We know that they have made credible threats to destroy the oilfields and reffineries of all US regional allies except Qatar and Turkey (which they seem to treat as a distinct regional bloc) if their own are attacked and we know that (even if you discount the almost certain recent nuclear test) they are a de-facto nuclear power absolutely able to make nuclear warheads by the dozens in a matter of weeks.
We may not know the exact details but we have a pretty good idea of what both states are capable of in terms military. My assessment is that, barring US nuclear intervention, Iran has the upper hand by far, even against conventional intervention by the USA, mostly thanks to their ethical charisma and long-term secret operations (which can mobilize many dormant organizations in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE etc. and topple hateful pro-US regimes very likely) but very especially to their absolutely massive missile force, which has been demonstrated in minimal capacity twice this year against Israel. Another reason is that the US forces are very far from home or even their European military bases, where they still have some sociological influence hindering outright rebellion, and thus are veritable sitting ducks, both the only fleet it has right now deployed in the Persian Gulf/Arab Sea (all the others are at home ports in North America or in distant locations weeks away from Iran) and the chain of bases Uncle Sam has built in the various Iraq wars.
I'm given to understand the ASI obtained Dolphin-class subs from Germany in the past 5-10 years; and unless you made a typoe on your range estimate, even WW1 era subs had a better range than 75 kilometers.
One might safely assume the ASI had some of its u-boats "take the long way" 'round to the NW Indian Ocean, or passed the Suez years back and take service at US bases when needed.
I quoted Wikipedia, go correct them.
“As for Iran, we fantasize that it can block the Strait of Hormuz”
Fixed, no charge.
It can. Everybody knows that. If little Yemen can block Bab-el-Mandeb, a much wider and complicated strait, big Iran can definitely block Hormuz and has been planning to do so since decades ago: it’s narrow shallow waters, all the Persian Gulf used to be a marsh in the Paleolithic after all, our ancestors lived there almost certainly.
When is it that you think little Yemen blocked Bab-el-Mandeb?
A year ago. Most successful guerrilla operation of the Globalized Era.
Sure … except for the "successful" part. If you think Yemen blocked Bab-el-Mandeb, that thing you're doing that you think is thinking isn't.
It’s a fact: the ships of the affected countries and companies (and many others just in case) are going all around Africa, raising the prices in Europe and making Israeli business like cutting the blood diamonds that Kagame and Museveni loot in Kivu (DRC) impossible to operate anymore.
It’s you who’re dreaming awake and that’s probably because you either support Zionism or belief that somehow the Zionist (US) Empire is invulnerable. It is not as has been repeatedly demonstrated in the last years, from Ukraine to Afghanistan, from Mali to Yemen (in the Saudi phase of WWIII by proxy).
"It's a fact: the ships of the affected countries and companies (and many others just in case) are going all around Africa."
Here's a live map of ship traffic in the area as of a few minutes ago ( http://marinetraffic.com ):
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/64d5ccc247a1ccf6472545faaa8b1facc40f55247762b42e86525d33c1b888c4.png
I’m opposed to Zionism, and I am well aware that the US empire is extremely vulnerable — in fact, it is in permanent/terminal decline.
That doesn’t change the fact that the Yemenis are not now blocking, and have never blocked, the Bab-el-Mandeb.
All those ships are from non-belligerant nations and/or non-belligerant companies. Yemen (as you should know) is not attacking all traffic, only that from hostile nations/companies. The hostile nations are the USA, Britain and Israel, no other. The hostile companies are those who cooperate with Israel and thus with the Palestinian genocide.
I'm not going to clutter the discussion with links and maps, you can perfectly search for them yourself. It's a very well known fact that about half of the former Red Sea trade is going around Africa and that the Suez Canal is experiencing as result a fall of traffic of almost that figure as well.
Yemenis are not just successfully blockading the hostile Red Sea trade but they even managed to hit the USS Eisenhower (aircraft carrier) months ago. The USA officially denies it but we all saw them running away for urgent repairs just after Sana'a announced the successful strike.
Or rather, I will. This (Anglo bias) was already happening on January, publishing date is just five days after the USA & Britain first attacked Yemen:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/620952de2a697973eca1a2ae8d4babbb7d7476986575de2464c7efb04a13d3eb.png
This is an even more pessimistic (non-Anglo, Arab, source) view of the same crisis, reporting a massive collapse of traffic even before the USA-Britain attacked Yemen:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b716f0e670b4efcac1adff51d698c2cf47c2a3839a56df8f9b2ebf784a70da78.png
Things have got much worse since then, of course, as that only made all US and Britain related marine traffic to become targets themselves, regardless of whether they deal with Israel or not. I'm just finding difficult to find the updated figures.
Anyway, the Iranian Hormuz blockade plan is much simpler: they will just sink a few ships in the shallowest and narrowest parts of the strait, literally impeding any traffic, civilian or military until peace ensues and the sunken ships can be somehow dismantled. This is the most likely affected area, with a depth less than 100m:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c939ebf71bcebc3102971c6b0dd21c558ad9d9ee50b5c852fec92fb36c494199.png
Thank you for two posts of admission/explanation of how the Yemenis did not, in fact, block the Bab-el-Mandeb.
WEAK admission, since it pretends that there aren’t any ships from/to countries the Yemenis are mad at, when in fact there are a whole bunch of such ships, but I guess at least a partial/minimal retreat from your fantasy is better than nothing.
They did de facto block the strait, WTF are you talking about were they supposed to throw a chain from Aden to Djibouti. You guys are pathetic in your attempts to “win a discussion” with technicalities. Do you want to understand reality or only to wordplay?
A kid stands next to an eight-lane highway, throwing rocks. But only at blue 1976 Pintos, only a few of which he actually hits.
According to you, the kid has “blocked” the freeway.
There is no hostile traffric in BeM whatsoever, it’s all diverted around Africa, it’s so bad that Yemen has begun attacking Greek ships (of a company allegedly involved with Israel). Get over it.
You’re free to publicly celebrate your fantasies.
I’m free to notice that they’re fantasies.
You’re the one living in a false reality. You should stop trolling people and pretending to be right when you’re absolutely wrong. You’re basically lying.
How is pointing out — and then proving — that a claim you make is absolutely, completely, totally, and irrefutably false “trolling?”
You’re free to abandon the claim, attempt unsuccessfully to defend the claim, or just ignore its disproof and move on to other fantasies.
You don’t get to stop other people from noticing what you post and responding to it.
You’re just repeating yourself. I proved my point perfectly well, your being annoying and trollish is crossing the red lines of my patience. This is a very serious life-and-death issue and there’s no point on buffooning about this. If you keep pushing your nonsense trolling discourse, I’ll block you.
Feel free to block me.
That won’t stop me from seeing, or replying, to your posts though. It may stop you from seeing my replies.
Sorry it bugs you so much to be wrong and to have someone notice you were wrong. The best response to that is to stop being wrong, but apparently that’s not in your nature.
There seems to be more fighting on antiwar.com than there is in the M.E.
;-}
IRGC is ignorantly miscalculating.