Hamas Missiles Could Put Israel’s Nuclear Plant in Target Zone

[tekisui]

Source: Chattah Box

(ChattahBox) — Israeli warplanes conducted fresh attacks against Hamas on the seventh day of bombing seeking to smash Hamas’s rocket-firing capability and topple the hardline Islamist regime. According to a TimesOnLine story there is growing fears in Israel that missiles one day could threaten its nuclear facility at Dimona.

Speculation is that Hamas has already acquired dozens of Iranian-made Fajr-3 missiles with an even longer range then the current rockets being launched today. Many fear that it may be only a matter of time before Hamas will get a bigger present from Iran and the nuclear installation at Dimona, 20 miles east of Beersheba, falls within sight. Dimona houses Israel’s only nuclear reactor and is believed to be where nuclear warheads are stored.

Israel’s worst nightmare is that soon all its cities will be within range either of the Hezbollah Katyushas arrayed on the Lebanese border to the north or the increasingly sophisticated missiles stockpiled by Hamas to the south. Both groups have links to Israel’s archenemy Iran.

Thousands of Israeli soldiers are amassed on Gaza’s border, waiting for the signal to invade. Hamas’ survival could depend on how far Israel is willing to go to obtain its declared objective. Israel, which withdrew its troops from Gaza in 2005 after a 38-year occupation, says it does not want to reoccupy the area. That suggests Hamas will be able to cling to power in Gaza, which it seized by force from moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in June 2007.

more: http://chattahbox.com/world/2009/01/02/hamas-missiles-could-put-israel%E2%80%99s-nuclear-plant-in-target-zone/

[w4rma]

1. Now, is it a little more obvious why progressives generally oppose nuclear power and nukes? (nt)

[sellitman]

2. Yet without a Nuclear deterrent Israel would probably not exist.

Which probably would be cheered by most on this site from what I have seen.

[w4rma]

4. Oh come on, none of the nuclear powers want to nuke that place. It's Holy Land. (nt)

[Statistical]

11. That wasn't the point

Israel fought 3 major wars against Arab aligned states prior to aquiring nuclear weapons.

They never need to worry about an invasion again.
Without the risk of nuclear response it is entirely likely the Arab states would have tried another "Yon Kapur" war except maybe this time they would be successful.

Israeli (implicit) threat of nuclear annihilation against any state that invades has pretty much insured that no state will ever invade.

[Vegasaurus]

5. Soon enough, Iran will have a nuke

and that will be the end of Israel.

They've been itching to wipe Israel off the map, and won't let up until either they, or their proxies in Hamas does the job.

[tekisui]

6. Ridiculous.

Mutually assured destruction would prevent that from happening.

[Vegasaurus]

7. Mutually assured destruction only works

when both sides have equal value for human life.

Terrorists who are eager to martyr themselves by suicide bombing and killing themselves and others have no such value for life.

Terrorists with a nuke wouldn't care if they die, as long as they killed as many Israelis/Jews as possible.

[LeftishBrit]

8. The Iranian government are not 'martyr types'.

They appear to be very fond of their own skins, and would like to keep them safe.

They will not want to risk the massive retaliation that would probably come from America, if not directly from Israel. Plus the fact that if they nuke Israel, they will also be nuking Palestine; and the fallout would seriously affect the neighbouring Arab countries, and might spread to Iran itself.

There IS a real danger that true 'martyr-type' terrorists would get access to the nukes; and then all bets are off. For that reason alone, Iran should not have nukes. It's bad enough that there are nukes in Pakistan. In fact, it's bad enough that there are nukes anywhere.

[Vegasaurus]

10. Their proxies in Hamas will be happy to martyr themselves

as terrorists always are.


Iran with a nuke could be the end of the world, or at least world war 3.

Also, Pakistan with nukes is a very dangerous situation too.

[Tarc]

3. Wait, Israel doesn't have nukes!

They've said so themselves. :rofl:

[sellitman]

9. Link?

Glad you think this shit is funny.