Is Israel assassinating Iran nuclear scientists?

[azurnoir]

Israel is assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists as part of a covert war against the Islamic Republic's illicit weapons program, the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday quoted Western intelligence analysts as saying.

Other recent deaths of important figures in the procurement and enrichment process in Iran and Europe have been the result of Israeli "hits", intended to deprive Tehran of key technical skills at the head of the program, according to the analysts.

The Telegraph also quoted United States intelligence sources as saying Israel is using sabotage, front companies and double agents to disrupt the regime's illicit weapons project as an alternative to direct military strikes.

The Telegraph also quoted Israeli officials as privately acknowledging the new U.S. administration is unlikely to sanction an air attack on Iran's nuclear installations and that President Barack Obama's offer to extend a hand of peace to Tehran puts any direct military action beyond reach for now.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1064852.html

[aquart]

1. Sounds likely.

I'm not sure if the article is complaint or admiration of the tidiness of the operation. It has none of the "collateral damage" that so upset people about Gaza.

I swear, people on DU think "international relations" means tea parties.

[Tartiflette]

2. So you think it's justified?

..and hence by extension Iran, whose existence is far more threatened by Israel and the US than the other way round, would be justified in assassinating key figures in those two countries that might be seen as instrumental in maintaining that threat?

I think it's all BS frankly. Israel is not threatened by Iran having the bomb; There is no country in the world stupid enough to risk annihilation (with the possible exception of North Korea) not even your favourite boogeymen. It would simply weaken Israel's overwhelming position of strength in the Middle East, and even then, not by much. The key is in maintaining leverage and dominance, and has nothing to do with any real threat to the people of the country.

[notesdev]

13. No country?

>>There is no country in the world stupid enough to risk annihilation (with the possible exception of North Korea) not even your favourite boogeymen

You willing to bet your life on it? Or the lives of your loved ones?

History is full of those who risked annihilation and were annihilated.

[Tartiflette]

22. Not convinced

If I might read more in to what you commented, it seems like you're trying to demonise the Iranians as a group that somehow values their lives less than we do. I don't see it that way. I think history teaches us many things, but we now live in a world with weapons that have no comparison to those that have gone before, and I sincerely believe this alters the parameters somewhat.

I am more convinced by an argument that there might be the use of a dirty bomb, than a fully fledged nuclear weapon, and this t me is a far more serious source of concern.

[aquart]

18. Gosh, why would a tiny nation want to maintain leverage?

Must you be so disingenuous?

[Tartiflette]

21. It's not me who is being disingenuous here

Israel is not, and has not been for a long time, a tiny country in isolation. It carries the full weight of the most powerful military on earth behind it, as you well know. And "tiny" or not, it is the most powerful nation in the region (and also probably the highest functioning). My opinion is that it is beynd ridiculous to think that Iran would use a nuclear weapon against Israel, yet I think it possible (but unlikely) that the reverse might occur. The difference? The support of the US.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. Sure, and the moon is green cheese, say US astrological sources...

...as quoted by the World News Daily.

[Tartiflette]

4. The Daily Telegraph and World Net Daily equivalent?

I don't like the Telegraph - it has horrible politics, and is insufferably Thatcherite, but it's a respectable source, and in no way should be compared to the World Nuts. It's also not unthinkable that Israel might do such a thing (the US has done similarly, in the past, and Israel was very effective in tracking down the Olympics terrorists). I disagree with what would be the reasoning behind such a strategy, but it would seem to be a valid option from Israel's perspective. It may or may not be true, but it does not seem to me to be something that should be summarily dismissed.

[Behind the Aegis]

6. Oh sorry, I forgot.

When it paints Israel as the "villain" it is "reputable." But, when it does anything else it is the "Tory-graph." I am sure it will be in PressTV Iran soon.

Could Israel be killing Iranian scientists? Of course. This, however, is nothing more than more hyped up propaganda. Just wait, when it is Iran, I am sure you will be on the other side.

[Tartiflette]

9. Neither implied nor stated

It is the torygraph. But, it's not The Sun. They have their own, rather horrible slant on most matters, but they do have real reporters. However, Oberliner made a good point dealing with the facts of the matter below, and I think there is every chance this may be a non-story.

For what it's worth, and to illustrate precisely where stand, I sympathise with the plight of the palestinians, and think Israel currently has no interest in anything other than the status quo, as all potential solutions involve some unpalatable sacrifice on their part, and it would be (short-term, and potentially long-term) political suicide to take such measures, steps that no Israeli politician is willing to contemplate. I also think that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and trying to justify the behaviour of the West (includng Israel in ths, but this point goes beyond that) in general on some sort of exceptionalism, whether it be superior values, or democracy or anything else, is crap, and we should judge all countries by their actions. Hence your point about Iran is wrong. I would equally condemn it, as I condemn their human rights record. I think only that if a behaviour is justified for whatever reason by "us", it is equally justifed for whatever reason by "them".

on edit: I should make that no major Israeli politican.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

15. Sources going against their own biases are more reliable that sources supporting them.

The Telegraph is generally strongly pro-Israel, so I place far more weight on stories it carries that reflect badly on Israel than on those that reflect well on it; conversely, I would be more inclined to trust e.g. Al-Jazeera when its reporting reflects well on Israel than when it reflects badly.

[oberliner]

8. Attention-grabbing headline with little to nothing to back it up

The only quote in the Telegraph article dealing with the idea of Israel assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists is this:

"Israel has shown no hesitation in assassinating weapons scientists for hostile regimes in the past," said a European intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity. They did it with Iraq and they will do it with Iran when they can."

An anonymous "European intelligence official" speculating that since Israel assassinated Iraqi scientists close to thirty years ago that they will do the same with Iran.

Edit to add link to Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4640052/Israel-launches-covert-war-against-Iran.html

[oberliner]

5. The RW Telegraph has been full of crap before

Didn't they run an article about an imminent attack on Iran citing intelligence sources about a year ago?

[Behind the Aegis]

7. Among other things.

Generally, the only time it is of use is when it quotes sources which can be verified.

[azurnoir]

11. Well the link is to Ha'aretz

but I will agree after all the "glory days" of Mossad seem to be over, and well there has been quite a bit of fist shaking at Iran lately but is nothing more, IDF seems to prefer softer targets these days

[oberliner]

17. The Ha'aretz story seems to be a story about the Telegraph story

I do not believe there is any original reporting from Ha'aretz to be found within.

[azurnoir]

24. One could then ask why

did Ha'aretz run the story, it is still on the front page I just checked. However in all honesty as I told another poster this morning my first and second reaction was to laugh or you've got to be effing kidding

[LeftishBrit]

16. You bet. They're known as the Torygraph here.

Better for news than the tabloids; but you can never trust them totally.

[Tartiflette]

23. I like the crossword though

..and the sports section is good. It's easily the worst of the 4 majors, but it can surprise you every now and again.

[azurnoir]

25. Rueters is also running the story

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE51G1VR20090217

[bemildred]

27. Boy, that's an amazing pile.

---

Quoting intelligence experts and an unnamed former CIA agent, the newspaper said Israel's "decapitation" strategy had targeted members of Iran's atomic program, hoping to set back the country's nuclear ambitions without resorting to war.

I have to wonder what they think this sort of thing is if not war. Those are all acts of war.

[bemildred]

10. I doubt it. nt

[azurnoir]

12. As do I

my actual first reaction was to laugh

[bemildred]

14. Knocking off secret nukular scientists is not as easy as one might think.

Knocking of bunches of them is even more so. After a while, somebody might notice the pattern or something. Start to put two and two together. This thinking stuff is hard work, isn't it?

[LeftishBrit]

19. True enough. Sounds like something out of a second-rate thriller, to be honest!

If the question was "Is Israel plotting to assassinate/ has it assassinated A (single) nuclear scientist in Iran?" - well, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility. But serial murder of nuclear scientists - a bit unlikely IMO!

[bemildred]

20. Well, consider, when the US was doing the Manhattan project,

would killing one or two of the top physicists have stopped it? Even slowed it down much? No. And that was 60 years ago, working in the dark, so to speak. It's an engineering job, straightforward once you have the resources to apply. Killing a few employees will just make them hurry it up, if they can.

[Malikshah]

29. Second rate is the Lavon Affair of 1954. There is a precedent. The US is know for this...1953

anyone?

This fixation on Iran would be fascinating if it wasn't so deadly for all involved.

[bemildred]

30. I guess this makes it not "secret" anymore, too.

Sort of lets the cat out of the bag when you have all these news stories about the "secret" program. You'd think that the people running this program would want to keep it quiet, but I guess dedication to a free press and the publics right to know all about what the government is doing overrides that.

[TomClash]

26. Why would that be surprising?

The Mossad never kills anyone?

I suspect the US is running at least 4 separate ops in Iran right now.

Oh, wait - only the dirty muslims kill. :eyes:

[GoesTo11]

28. Sounds fantastic

[Alamuti Lotus]

31. the dumbing down of psyops goes on unabated.....

It is not surprising that the usual keyboard crusaders would cheer the thought, but ... really?--I suppose some people can believe anything.. The only thing that bugs me about this is that somebody got a paycheck for coming up with this garbage.

[azurnoir]

32. well what bugs me is that not only is someone

getting a paycheck for coming up with this they don't even have the imagination to be a level 1 dungeon master

BTW jpost is carrying the article too guess crap is contagious, sort of like the Syrian nuclear plant

[L. Coyote]

33. Israel assassinating Iranian scientists

This is the sort of activity that would make Iranians want a nuclear bomb program!!
How stupid are the Israelis anyway??

---------
Israel is reportedly assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists
By Jerry Mazza - Online Journal Contributing Writer
Feb 20, 2009 - http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4392.shtml


In a Haaretz article, Is Israel assassinating Iran nuclear scientists?, Yossi Melman reports, “Israel is assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists as part of a covert war against the Islamic Republic’s illicit weapons program, the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday quoted Western intelligence analysts as saying.”

He continues, “The British daily said Israel’s Mossad espionage agency was rumored to be behind the death of Ardeshire Hassanpour, a top nuclear scientist at Iran’s Isfahan uranium plant, who died in mysterious circumstances from reported “gas poisoning” in 2007.

“Other recent deaths of important figures in the procurement and enrichment process in Iran and Europe have been the result of Israeli ‘hits,’ intended to deprive Tehran of key technical skills at the head of the program, according to the analysts.”

And isn’t President Obama at the same extending a diplomatic hand to the Iranians? And isn’t Israel, as of this date, one of our closest allies ; and isn’t Israel the recipient of US billions in military aid, unsecured loans, and military hardware, spying software, plus contributions of hundreds of millions of dollars from Jewish American organizations?

More importantly, isn’t Israel in possession of some 200 to 300 nuclear warheads, products of the leaky Dimona nuclear reactor and facility, which was built way back in the late 1950s with the help of the French?

[Behind the Aegis]

34. This shit...again?!

"How stupid are the Israelis anyway??" :rofl:

The real question is "How stupid is the anti-Israel brigade?"

[iamthebandfanman]

35. not as stupid

as the people who equate it with anti-semitism

[Behind the Aegis]

40. Or charge anti-Semitism has been used when clearly the only ones..

...using the false charge are the anti-Israel brigade.

[Idealism]

43. Why do you continue to try to justify Israel's policy of extrajudicial assassinations?

[Behind the Aegis]

44. Why do you insist on strawmen instead of actual positions?

[Idealism]

45. So now you are claiming you don't support assassinations?

The real question is "How stupid is the anti-Israel brigade?"

Or do you not believe the Israeli government to have conducted this type of troubling operation?

[Behind the Aegis]

46. Why do you continue with strawmen?

Why do you continue with made up positions?

[Idealism]

47. So now you are denying your previous position?

Saying that Israel has a right to assassinate those they deem to be a threat?

[Behind the Aegis]

48. And for the THIRD time, you are using strawmen?

Is the only way you know how to "debate" is by using logical fallacies?

[Idealism]

49. Just to be clear, you are denying your previous statements. Got it.

Glad to see you can hold strong to your convictions when it suits you

[Behind the Aegis]

51. And clearly, you know nothing and therefore create positions...

....and run them into the ground using circular logic and logical fallacies. How pathetic.

[Idealism]

52. As principled as ever, BTA.

By the way, it is just you that posts on your screen name, right?

[Behind the Aegis]

53. Are your strawmen boring you? They must be because it...

...explains your change to ad hominems. I do love your continual nonsensical questions? So, my turn: Do you feel superior when you make up things about people?

[Idealism]

54. Please point out the ad hominems once you answer the question

Do you support prior and current Israeli governments assassination policy?

Considering you refuse to answer this again, I take it to mean your stance has not changed- another reason that you have yet to reply to it. Keep repeating your "strawman" line though, that never gets old.

[Behind the Aegis]

55. FINALLY...but because of your snotty and idiotic post...you get nothing.

"Considering you refuse to answer this again,..." Strawman and untrue.

"I take it to mean your stance has not changed" Logical fallacy.

"Keep repeating your "strawman" line though, that never gets old." Because you fancy yourself as intellectual, when your posts indicate nothing of the sort.

[Idealism]

56. Get nothing? I get you proving your hypocrisy over and over. Priceless!

[Behind the Aegis]

60. LOL! Strawmen aren't proof.

Those with reading comprehension skills will not see "hypocrisy," but a cascade of strawmen by someone who use this tactic over and over; laying out a "supposed" position, then critiquing said created position (strawman).

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

50. 'they hate their "half-brothers" as only family can'

Hmmm...sounds familiar.

[L. Coyote]

39. Are you at all familiar with the term "counter-prouctive"? Geeez!! Think first, please.

[Behind the Aegis]

42. Perhaps you should look before posting something already posted three times...

...and reeks of propaganda. But, of course, you don't care because it suits your agenda.

[L. Coyote]

62. IGNORE

[Chulanowa]

57. Please do counter it, Aegis

I, for one, would like to learn whatever makes the claim bogus. I'm not just going to assume it's true, and I suppose you have some sort of contradictory evidence, beyond the trusty ol' "rofl" smiley?

[Behind the Aegis]

61. More bullshit from predictable, chula.

Do take the time to learn about the concept of "burden of proof."

[Chulanowa]

65. Do you have a counter-argument?

Seriously, I'm reading an article from Haaretz stating that Israel is doing this. it names names, cites sources, and, while I'm only going to give the reporting a C-, I don't immediately see any reason to doubt the claim, based on this article.

This is where you come in. You say the claim is bogus. Okay. Show us how it's bogus. I'm sure you have contradictory information, right? Contradictory reports and sources? C'mon, Aegis, give us some counter-point here.

[Behind the Aegis]

66. You first chula, since you seem to think it true.

I have never said one way or the other. I simply responded to the same shit we see over and over...unsubstansiated accusations against Israel = truth. If the "I" country had been "Iran," then comments like mine would be produced 20-fold.

"I don't immediately see any reason to doubt the claim, based on this article." Given your posting history, it (the reason) isn't based on this article.

[Chulanowa]

67. So your argument amounts to "Because it's Israel, it must not be true?"

Okay then. I was kinda hoping you had something to give us.

[Behind the Aegis]

68. Sure. If that helps you sleep at night.

:eyes:

[Chulanowa]

69. So give me something else, Aegis

:eyes: yourself

[Behind the Aegis]

70. Try reading. It's very useful.

While you roll your eyes, let them roll to the top of the thread.

[Chulanowa]

71. I see you trashing the Telegraph

But you trash everything anyway. if you have a point, make it.

[Behind the Aegis]

72. My point was made. As usual, you missed it.

[aquart]

37. How many? Got names?

And why should I care if nuclear scientists are biting it?

[L. Coyote]

38. You should care because murder is a crime! Do onto others ... Doh!

[kestrel91316]

41. You know, I can't say I disgree with this Israeli tactic. And I am not much

of one to jump to their defense on every issue......

[Elidor]

58. If you find this acceptable, then what are you doing on a progressive board?

Because assassination is not exactly a plank in liberal politics.

[azurnoir]

59. welllll as an alternative to diplomacy

assassination sucks and is wrong, however as an alternative to all out war it doesn't suck quite as much and is still wrong which is not to say in any event its right and in fact is quite illegal according to international law.

[kestrel91316]

63. I'm just saying I sort of understand why Israel feels it needs to take this tack.

Why don't you request that the mods TS me if you think I don't belong here? Go ahead. I'll be waiting.

Denying someone their opinion is most unprogressive, in case you hadn't noticed. We don't do the marching in lockstep thing here.

Go ahead. Alert on me.

[iconicgnom]

64. Would you sort of understand if Iran and all other countries took that tack?

There're so many good uses for assassination squads, not only to take out nuclear physicists.