Time for Israel to test nuclear arsenal?

ibrodsky · 06-19-2002, 03:31 AM

With its survival at stake, perhaps it is time for Israel to openly test its nuclear arsenal.

Israel should either demonstrate that it has a sufficient stockpile to simultaneously destroy countries such as Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia -- or expand its weapons to ensure the price the Arab/Islamic world would pay for nuking Israel would be too high even for such barbarians.

It appears that the threat of massive mutual destruction may have averted a Pakistani-Indian war. It is inevitable that a country like Iran will get nukes. Thus, perhaps Israel must develop sub-based nukes to counter the Iranian threat, and put its cards on the table.

danholo · 06-19-2002, 03:40 AM

Nuclear strike? No way.

Barak · 06-19-2002, 03:52 AM

Israeli subs are, or are being armed with nuclear missiles. everybody knows that Israel has them and also that Israel has enough of them to do whatever they want to. The only answer is, WHEN will Israel use them, what will be the red line, and HOW MUCH will Israel use. If for instance, Iraq would launch a Chemical Weapon Attack (CWA) against Israel, how would Israel respond?

If it would be 1 missile, would Israel react with a nuclear strike, if so, with how much missiles/bombs would they strike, where, and with what kind of missiles/bombs?

Israel will once have to make an official statement about being a nuclear state or not, and not the poliy of we will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the middle east. It isn't really nessesary to reveil everything, but at least the minimum to show that the capabilities are there for MAD.

A thing that Israel will have to do in such a case is to vagley descride their nuclear doctrine and their use of nuclear arms policy, but of course this has to be done with selectivly chosen words.

It is very likely that Israel indeed has nukes, but wouldn't it be funny to hear when there is no threat anymore to Israel that everything was pure BS?

Vic · 06-19-2002, 03:55 AM

Any ideas on where to carry out the tests in a country of Israel's size?

Barak · 06-19-2002, 04:23 AM

Of course not inIsrael. Who says a nuclear test should be in the country itself? Let's do it in Iran, this way we have tested and attacked.

danholo · 06-19-2002, 04:25 AM

There is tonnes of land suitable for a nuclear test around Israel.

Joke, joke...
Anyhoo, I wouldn't use nuclear arms if I were Israel.. Not now at least. I wouldn't even bring the topic up.

L@mplighterM · 06-19-2002, 07:27 AM

I read yesterday that the US prevented a war last month between Syria and Israel. I don?t know what could be easier than making a little love, milking a camel and minding your own business. The whole region is full of hatred towards the Jews and it seems all the dictatorial regimes are the main sponsors.

At some point it seems like it?ll go nuclear and the whole region will explode. Israel has subs with nuclear capabilities I provided a link a couple of days ago with that information. Apparently the testing was done in conjunction with the US in 2000 and the information was recently released.

Israel has super computers and that eliminates the need for testing nuclear bombs because they can simulate explosions accurately. Apparently Israel has developed nuclear warheads where you can get better bangs for the buck (I think they call it low yield). From what I?ve read Israel could easily wipe out the whole region.

Iori Yagami · 06-19-2002, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by Barak

If it would be 1 missile, would Israel react with a nuclear strike, if so, with how much missiles/bombs would they strike, where, and with what kind of missiles/bombs?

Call me an extremist, but I think that for any attempt, even a failed one, to wipe out thousands of Israelis with a weapon of mass destruction, Israel should bring a doomsday on those that tried, i.e turning Assad`s presidential palace into dust if even a single scud missile armed with anthrax lands here.
Arab countries have prooved over and over again, that the only language that they understand is force, and a lot of force. Until their jihad dreams woudln`t be stuffed so deep into their throats, that they would choke on it, there would be no quiet here.

ibrodsky · 06-20-2002, 03:14 AM

danholo, I didn't say Israel should launch a nuclear strike, I suggested that maybe it is time to showcase their nuclear weapons. The reason is that in the last several months we have heard talk among Israel's enemies that perhaps they can absorb the price of destroying Israel, or that if they all join together and throw everything they have it Israel, they just might win.

Israel needs to disabuse them of such notions. If Israel could demonstrate that it has the power to truly obliterate its enemies, then even if they develop nukes it will do them no good to dream of absorbing the loss of 10% of their people -- who they would gladly sacrifice -- in order to destroy Israel (their main purpose in life, it seems). They must be shown that they would likely lose something closer to 90% of their people.

Barak · 06-20-2002, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Iori Yagami

Call me an extremist, but I think that for any attempt, even a failed one, to wipe out thousands of Israelis with a weapon of mass destruction, Israel should bring a doomsday on those that tried, i.e turning Assad`s presidential palace into dust if even a single scud missile armed with anthrax lands here.
.

IMHO you're POV isn't extremist at all. Israel can not afford to be attacked an if they are, even on a "limited" scale, Israel will have to set an example for other stated, who might be thinking about doing/trying the same.

I was just talking about things that should be brough more in the open. As some kind of threat, but also not a real threat

**Mediocrates** · 06-20-2002, 12:23 PM

I don't believe you should expose one scintilla of the existence, location, shape, configuration or support infrastructure for one's nuclear arsenal. Let alone any names and faces of anyone associated with it. Let them wonder. In the fluid casual command structure of the IDF normal nuclear control protocol must be very hard and strange and stressful for those people. Let them go on with their jobs quietly. National security services specialized in drawing conclusions from fractured information and assumptions - that's what they do. Any expert can guess what their arsenal is like and the IDF doesn't have to trot it out like those old bogus Soviet May Day Parades in order to prove a point. What they should trot out and get working ASAP is their Arrow systems and anything else they can improvise as an anti missile system. This would help reinforce the idea that an Arab state could not be successfule with their one bomb - they would need many. Not only would that be very expensive for them it would invite annihilation in return.

The days of MAD as a deterrent are dead and gone. What is a deterrent is who has first/second stike capability. Because land locked countries do not generally have second strike capability in the age of spy satellites. There may be launch platforms in the Negev that are inaccessible to Arab intelligence as a second strike but that is probably what Israel's subs are for - second strike capability. The normal doctrine is after the land based missiles fly the subs pop up and launch a second strike. Some call it a Doomsday option.

**Mediocrates** · 06-20-2002, 12:29 PM

What's more interesting is who tested their designs for them. The French, The Indians, The Pakistanis, The PRC, The US? Based on the crappy seismic data derived it looks like the famous Pakistani test cluster was a bunch of fizzles and failures. So their actual capability may be somewhat imaginary. The Indians, French, PRC have all had successul live fire tests in the last decade - in fact the PRC may or may not have used advanced nuclear designs as part of the massive 3 Rivers Dam project to clear out whole mountains. It's also possible that their designs were tested on US simulation systems. Certainly the ASCI systems are up to the job - who's to say what Livermore and Sandia are up to?

L@mplighterM · 06-20-2002, 02:36 PM

A few itsy bitsy teeny weenie nuclear launched and sent to major military installations somewhere in the ME would make everyone snap to attention.

My vote is for pushing the button.

Whatâ€™s to be gained by waiting? Put all the facts on the table and study them.

Israel is systematically being destroyed itâ€™s citizens are slowly being murdered, economy is suffering, etcâ€¦

RedLine · 10-21-2002, 04:10 AM

Oh come on guys! Saying that you want to Nuke surrounding Arab nations un-provoked makes you as bad as them. I agree with Danholo there should be no talk of using Nuclear arms.

medkorp · 10-21-2002, 05:19 AM

Hi,

please stop saying : Israel survival is at stake !!!

Israel has the nuclar weapon, the backing of the USA and a state...

Since 1948, it's the palestinian state who is at stake !!!

thanks

Medkorp