al Qaeda threatens chemical attack on Tel Aviv

[Mediocrates]

http://www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=6743

Al Qaeda threatens chemical attack on Tel Aviv

A high ranking al Qaeda official says on video: "We'll hurt Eilat when we can". Takes credit for attempted attack on Jordon.
Maariv News Service

"Alla knows, if we could get chemical weapons, we would use them against Israeli cities like Eilat and Tel Aviv", said a high ranking al Qaeda member in a video cassette broadcast on an Arab television station and uploaded on Moslem websites on the Internet.

He made these statements in response to reports that Jordanian security forces had averted a chemical attack that al Qaeda planned to carry out in that country. He admitted that the organization planned to carry out an attack, but that it was not chemical.

"Yes, we planned to destroy the building which houses Jordanian intelligence", he said. "But the statement that the attack was meant to be chemical is a pure lie… a creation of the evil Jordanian establishment".

Al Qaeda took responsibility for a number of other major attacks on Iraq.



(2004-04-30 13:17:47.0)

[sokol2002]

Israel will be a terrorist target both from Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. In Norway the Al Aqsa terrorist group have had several fundraising events for terror attacks against Israel. The Norwegian government has neglected to stop this fundraising and the fundraising probably continues in the Norwegian Muslim community.

Norway is continuing to fund the Palestine Authorities, even if the IMF report the funds has “disappeared” or been embezzled. It’s likely that substantial amounts of the 500 million US dollars given to the Palestine Authorities have ended in the pockets of terrorist organisations.

Several organisations are now protesting against the Norwegian support for terrorism against Israel. www.svik.org/palestine.htm

I hope Israel use their diplomatic channels to protest to the Norwegian authorities and request to stop the funding terrorism and respect UN regulations of funding of terrorism.

[varian]

A chemical attack against Israel is "predicted" for some time in 2005. A nuclear incident is "predicted" for 2006. Should these eventscome to pass, most of the world still won't admit that Islam is worlds' greatest enemy of free speech and thought. Even China understands, (where there is limited free speech and thought), Islam to be an aberrant philosophy that will have to be reckoned with in the future. The main difference between China's method of handling Islam, and the "Western Democracies' " methods of handling of Islam is the use of restraint.
The West kills themselves to use restraint, (this includes Israel at times), whereas China will probably forgo the use of restraint as a nuisance. Once the West's influence wanes, China and the emerging "radical Hindu" movement in India, will be unfettered. Their methods of nullifying Jihad and radical Islam will be horrific compared to what the West termed "shock and awe." Time will catch up to the worshipers of the little djinn of the Middle East. All Islamic schemes against the Nation of Israel, will likewise meet with eventual failure. Islam is on a world wide watchlist, and the Western coalition is the least of Islam's worries. Israel's retaliation will most likely be swift and utterly destructive as well. Be vigilant Blue and White!!!

[Mediocrates]

(Islamonihilism is at its core, cowardly. Which is why it probes the west and not the no nonsense cultures of Asia and India. Of course facing off against another culture that more or less devalues human life almost as much as Islamists, it's hard to tell what victory would look like.)

I would imagine that Israel's policy of nuclear opacity will end soon, as soon as it becomes obvious that Israel is no longer the sole deployable regional nuclear force. And as a matter of doctrine they will probably allude to a strike on-immediate-danger backed up by massively lethal second strike policy. I would also have to assume that a chemical attack would be considered an existential threat little different from a nuclear strike since the long run effect to Israel wouldn't be that different. A chemical attack could kill as many as 10-20,000 immediately with the long run aftereffect being the installation martial law, severe security measures and the eventual collapse of Israeli society and politics.

[cerulean]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
(Islamonihilism is at its core, cowardly. Which is why it probes the west and not the no nonsense cultures of Asia and India. Of course facing off against another culture that more or less devalues human life almost as much as Islamists, it's hard to tell what victory would look like.)

Islamonihilism is targetting India also, as well as Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and no doubt other countries as soon as possible. I think the primary targets are Israel and the US, but the other countries are also part of the scheme to get world domination.



I would imagine that Israel's policy of nuclear opacity will end soon, as soon as it becomes obvious that Israel is no longer the sole deployable regional nuclear force. And as a matter of doctrine they will probably allude to a strike on-immediate-danger backed up by massively lethal second strike policy. I would also have to assume that a chemical attack would be considered an existential threat little different from a nuclear strike since the long run effect to Israel wouldn't be that different. A chemical attack could kill as many as 10-20,000 immediately with the long run aftereffect being the installation martial law, severe security measures and the eventual collapse of Israeli society and politics.

The question no one wants to think of: what if an Al Qaeda chemical or bio or whatever attack hits Israel before there can be an effective major response? What if the first blow is too incapacitating?

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by cerulean



The question no one wants to think of: what if an Al Qaeda chemical or bio or whatever attack hits Israel before there can be an effective major response? What if the first blow is too incapacitating?

The last Jew can launch the nuclear arsenal from a deep underground bunker. More and more Islamic countries will acquire WMD with the passing of time and they will use them.

[Justcurious]

Isn't Eilat far too close to Aqaba? I think Eilat is not at risk, any attack would be too dangerous to the Jordanian resort.

[RichardP]

Originally posted by Justcurious
Isn't Eilat far too close to Aqaba? I think Eilat is not at risk, any attack would be too dangerous to the Jordanian resort.
Most of us in the forum realise that this malevolent malevolent and abominable act, will take place, G-d forbid… Honestly, we must hit them before they hit us, unless, we’re gripped by a death-wish. Sokol2002 from Norway, (welcome, Sokol)… stated that in Norway that his government has neglected to stop the fundraising for Islamo-Fascism; moreover, Norway is not alone; we in Canada and other democracies ought not’ be smug, as it’s occurring far and wide. Are our leaders, so naïve, stupid, insane, that they believe by ignoring these wankers, they will stay in their rats nests?

[rhodescholar]

Originally posted by varian
A chemical attack against Israel is "predicted" for some time in 2005. A nuclear incident is "predicted" for 2006. Should these eventscome to pass, most of the world still won't admit that Islam is worlds' greatest enemy of free speech and thought. Even China understands, (where there is limited free speech and thought), Islam to be an aberrant philosophy that will have to be reckoned with in the future. The main difference between China's method of handling Islam, and the "Western Democracies' " methods of handling of Islam is the use of restraint.
The West kills themselves to use restraint, (this includes Israel at times), whereas China will probably forgo the use of restraint as a nuisance. Once the West's influence wanes, China and the emerging "radical Hindu" movement in India, will be unfettered. Their methods of nullifying Jihad and radical Islam will be horrific compared to what the West termed "shock and awe." Time will catch up to the worshipers of the little djinn of the Middle East. All Islamic schemes against the Nation of Israel, will likewise meet with eventual failure. Islam is on a world wide watchlist, and the Western coalition is the least of Islam's worries. Israel's retaliation will most likely be swift and utterly destructive as well. Be vigilant Blue and White!!!

2 things -

1-look at russia now in chechnya. or serbia in kosovo a few years ago. did these countries use restraint against the muslim agressors? no, they didnt. so china wont be the first.

2-india is already under attack constantly, either in shooting attacks on its parliament or suicide bombings in kashmir.

[rhodescholar]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
(Islamonihilism is at its core, cowardly. Which is why it probes the west and not the no nonsense cultures of Asia and India. Of course facing off against another culture that more or less devalues human life almost as much as Islamists, it's hard to tell what victory would look like.)

I would imagine that Israel's policy of nuclear opacity will end soon, as soon as it becomes obvious that Israel is no longer the sole deployable regional nuclear force. And as a matter of doctrine they will probably allude to a strike on-immediate-danger backed up by massively lethal second strike policy. I would also have to assume that a chemical attack would be considered an existential threat little different from a nuclear strike since the long run effect to Israel wouldn't be that different. A chemical attack could kill as many as 10-20,000 immediately with the long run aftereffect being the installation martial law, severe security measures and the eventual collapse of Israeli society and politics.

Were al qaeda to attack israel, where would israel respond against? there is no more stronghold in afghanistan to launch strikes against. The only place i can think of would be the tribal areas in pakistan which house and support al qaeda, the iranians who also are working in conjunction with al qaeda, or the sudan - a notorious hideaway for al qaeda operatives. An attack against any of these would probably lead to a wider, regional war.

[Mediocrates]

I'm not sure that a 'place target' is relevant when faced with an existential threat. Israel would have to consider its options - I can imagine there are several most of which involve trilateralization or multilateralization of threats. What that means is that Israel would necessarilly have to gambit dragging in other regional states and/or their oil resources. That's what nuclear doctrine is all about, understanding that your enemies know what you know they understand. This is why I suggest that Israel will eventually abandon opacity as a non-doctrine. It's more than halfway obvious that Israel not only has a first strike but also a second strike capacity or something quite like it. Given that it makes better strategic sense to posit a working doctrine that more or less dictates that an existential threat to Israel will require a like response to ______ (fill in the blank: Mecca, Cairo, Teheran, Damascus) or, a like response to the Iraqi, Iranian, Saudi... oil fields. That's a crude example but the basic theory is that if you can't strike back at a known enemy then you have to raise the threat of extinction to a third party who can moderate the attacks from that enemy.

In fact the early theoretical approachs to having a second strike capacity its designers were faced with what they thought was a 'missile gap' or a 'bomber gap' [which turned out not to be real] and this lead them to many of the same scenarios Israel is facing today. The US seriously believed that the CCCP believed it could survive a nuclear war which is why they might start one. The US developed a second strike force to neutralize that doctrine. Similarly Israel believes its enemies believe they can survive a nuclear war or something akin to it. And likewise Israel had to develop a second strike capacity, not as a matter of 'winning' but as a matter of doctrine. If we have learned anything from Islamic culture is that they would rather win than survive and if Israel can take that 'victory' off the table by ensuring they get the last word as it were then that alters the balance of terror.