Jimmy Carter reveals Israel's nuclear arsenal

[elder999]

I'm surprised this hasn't made more of a splash.

Jimmy Carter blows lid off Israel nukes
News Wire Services

Tuesday, May 27th 2008, 4:00 AM

LONDON - Loose lips, Jimmy. Loose lips.

Former President Jimmy Carter has revealed Israel holds at least 150 nuclear weapons - the first time a U.S. President has publicly acknowledged the Jewish state's atomic arsenal.
At a news conference in Wales Monday, Carter dropped the bomb while describing how tough it would be for Iran to build a nuclear arsenal. A former Israeli military intelligence chief criticized Carter's comments as "irresponsible."
"The problem is that there are those who can use these statements when it comes to discussing the international effort to prevent Iran getting nuclear weapons," said Aharon Zeevi-Farkash.
Carter, responding to a question, said, "The U.S. has more than 12,000 nuclear weapons, the Soviet Union [Russia] has about the same, Great Britain and France have several hundred, and Israel has 150 or more ..."
While the existence of Israeli nuclear weapons is widely assumed, Israeli officials have never admitted their existence, and U.S. officials have stuck to that line in public for years.

Seen here, but not too much elsewhere. While this has been an "open" secret for some time, and an assumed one in other cases (estimates have put the arsenal variously at anywhere from 50 to 200), it's a clear violation of several treaties-except that Israel would have to declare their weapons to be a signatory to those treaties (wink-wink, nudge nudge)-there is no difference in what Iran has been trying to accomplish since the 1990's, except, of course, that they'r Iran...that, and they won't make as delightfully sophisticated units as the Israeli's have accomplished....

 

[Tez3]

"Carter dropped the bomb..." good grief!

 

[Brian Johns]

Big deal; he was only saying what everyone has known for years...that Israel had an estimated 200 nuclear weapons....150 isn't that far off. If the Iranians are ever stupid enough to send a nuclear weapon to Israel, they can kiss themselves goodbye. So there is still a place in this world for MAD (mutual assured destruction) which served as a deterrance to the US and the Soviets during the Cold War.

 

[elder999]

Big deal; he was only saying what everyone has known for years...that Israel had an estimated 200 nuclear weapons....150 isn't that far off. If the Iranians are ever stupid enough to send a nuclear weapon to Israel, they can kiss themselves goodbye. So there is still a place in this world for MAD (mutual assured destruction) which served as a deterrance to the US and the Soviets during the Cold War.

Well, no, Brian-it’s not quite that simple, and it is a big deal.

Firstly, not “everyone” has known. Some surely knew-others only surmised, guessed or assumed.
Secondly, the estimate has varied from between 50 to 200 for some time. This was based upon the quantity of material it was projected that Israel’s Demona reactor could have produced, in addition to quantities that were assumed to have been “obtained” from South Africa and the U.S. It is also based upon the sophistication of the weapon-more sophistication=less material. While we can’t say with any certainty what level of sophistication these units were built at, it is generally assumed that they wre modeled on French designs, with assistance from France-so it is also generally assumed that some of these weapons could utilize as little as approx. 5-8 lbs. of plutonium. Revelations from an Israeli weapons technician, Mordecai Vanunu, in 1986, lent a great deal of support to these assumptions-Israel’s denials notwithstanding.

Lastly, the Israeli weapons can in no way be compared to the insane and ludicrous, citizenship as hostages for security ,balance of power that was called MAD. These, by virtue of their design, are weapons that are meant to be used-and used against nearby neighbors (or, perhaps at one time, the former Soviet Union).By virtue of their existence-an existence that is a complete violation of every NP standard, and every treaty that Israel, by way of not declaring their weapons, has not had to sign-these weapons placed Israel in a situation not heard of very much since the demise of SDI:OFF. That’s “Opportunity For First strike.” It’s likely that these weapons were meant for a response to some other form of WMD attack, or as a last resort against a concerted Middle Eastern effort against them.

Iran's capability of developing a weapon that they can deliver to Israel is also questionable-while they do possess a missile capable of carrying an approx. 2000 lbs. payload, the Shahab, it is based on the Russian SCUD and North Korean Taepo dong, and not particularly trustworthy-not to mention their questionable capability of building a weapon-even one of that weight-robust enough an instrumented properly to survive the journey and detonate in air or on impact, with, of course, an air burst being the most desirable and somewhat more difficult result. The likelihood of their building a weapon that any of their aircraft are capable of delivering-except perhaps in some sort of suicide mission-is also slim.
In any case, what Iran is doing, if viewed from a non-proliferation standpoint, is no different than what Israel has done with their nuclear program for most of my life. In spite of our monitoring of their progress in this regard for quite some time, their efforts continue in fits and starts, and likely represent a greater hazard to the U.S. and other “western” nations than they do to Israel, given Iran’s ties to Hamas and Hezbollah, their supply of arms and training to militias within Iraq, and their likely subsequent ties to al Qaeda. The prospect of Iran supplying nuclear material in sufficient quantities for any sort of device-nuclear or simply a “dirty bomb”-fills my mind with the kind of dread I haven’t felt since the days of “duck and cover.”

 

[Sukerkin]

Scary indeed.

On the question of whether Israels nuclear weapons were known about of not ... if they weren't, why would there be an official dosier for the Jericho Scenario? This was openly discussed in the news during Gulf War I as a reason for why the Scud Hunt was so important.

 

[elder999]

Scary indeed.

On the question of whether Israels nuclear weapons were known about of not ... if they weren't, why would there be an official dosier for the Jericho Scenario? This was openly discussed in the news during Gulf War I as a reason for why the Scud Hunt was so important.

Where was there an "official dossier" for the "Jericho Scenario?"

What is the Jericho Scenario?(Does it simply refer to speculation about a class of Israeli missiles and possible warheads?)

Most importantly, openly discussed on what news? :lol:

It's worth pointing out that as important as the "Scud Hunt" was, Saddam did manage to lob a couple into Israel, and there was no "Jericho response."

 

[MA-Caver]

Well okay, I admit it, I basically surmised, guessed or assumed that Israel had nukes. I mean if anyone hasn't already done so then they're very naive or haven't been keeping up with world events over the last 20 years or so... particularly in that part of the planet.

All things considered Israel doesn't need a whole lot of 'em when you think about it. They most likely don't need any ICBMs because most (if not all) their enemies are less than 1000 miles away in any given direction, but most are in their back yard or just down the rud a ways. Far enough to launch one and not worry about any lingering effects coming back on them.

Personally I don't blame them for wanting to have some and having some. Practically 1/2 of the world wants to annihilate them and been wanting to annihilate them since man invented fire. The other half has been helping them in a half arsed kinda way, you know... let everybody else hate them and only help out when they're in danger of really getting wiped out.

So yeah, the minnit some arab nation or arab supporting nation does something horrendous (outside the occasional car bombs and feigned air-raids now and again) you can betcha the Israeli's are going to use their nukes. They just might use them without asking/telling anybody too.
I see them as the kid in the neighborhood who keeps getting picked on by the neighboring bullies that just now got a gun because he's sick and tired of being picked on and is going to shoot the next bully that messes with him.
Dangerous stuff. Dangerous situation.

Question is if/when a middle east nuke exchange occurs what will the big boys (US, China, England, Russia) do about it?

 

[FearlessFreep]

Well okay, I admit it, I basically surmised, guessed or assumed that Israel had nukes. I mean if anyone hasn't already done so then they're very naive or haven't been keeping up with world events over the last 20 years or so... particularly in that part of the planet.

Same here. I thought this was pretty much common knowledge and the only thing of interest about this revelation was the fact that Jimmy Carter actually came out and said it.

 

[elder999]

Same here. I thought this was pretty much common knowledge and the only thing of interest about this revelation was the fact that Jimmy Carter actually came out and said it.

...and that's the big thing-it's not just of interest that he said, but the fact that he said it says that the U.S. is complicit in Israel's violation of international nuclear proliferation standards and treaties.

 

[CoryKS]

Nothing that wretched man does could ever surprise me. He is an utter waste of carbon.

 

[Sukerkin]

Where was there an "official dossier" for the "Jericho Scenario?"

. It was over 15 years ago, Elder, I don't remember that specifically :lol:. I'm guessing that it would be the Pentagon or wherever else it is that the military keep all the What If scenarios they have prepared.

What is the Jericho Scenario?(Does it simply refer to speculation about a class of Israeli missiles and possible warheads?)

It is, essentially an escalating House of Cards collapse of the situation in the Middle East where Israel feels so threatened that they respond with a nuclear strike ... and it all goes downhill from there.

Most importantly, openly discussed on what news? :lol:

THE News i.e. the BBC back before it became a simple propoganda machine a la the American model of news as entertainment.

It's worth pointing out that as important as the "Scud Hunt" was, Saddam did manage to lob a couple into Israel, and there was no "Jericho response."

That's because of the intense diplomatic and negotiative pressure to withhold their hand that was put on Israel by the Americans. That too was reported in the news.

 

[Twin Fist]

Wether it was "common knowledge" or not, it was never official knowledge.

Carter doing this is a bad thing. Or rather, yet another bad thing from the guy who was one of the worst presidents of the century, and is hands down the worst Ex President of all time.

 

[FearlessFreep]

Quote:
Originally Posted by elder999
It's worth pointing out that as important as the "Scud Hunt" was, Saddam did manage to lob a couple into Israel, and there was no "Jericho response."

That's because of the intense diplomatic and negotiative pressure to withhold their hand that was put on Israel by the Americans. That too was reported in the news.

I remember that particularly well from he Gulf War, that a big fear was that if the US didn't find the missiles, the Israeli's would lose patience and settle things themselves

 

[Sukerkin]

Wether it was "common knowledge" or not, it was never official knowledge.

A bit of a fine distinction to draw but I do get what you're aiming at there. Something can be 'known' but unproven in political circles and if it's not proven then it's not 'real'.

Carter doing this is a bad thing. Or rather, yet another bad thing from the guy who was one of the worst presidents of the century, and is hands down the worst Ex President of all time.

My apologies for the side-track but can someone 'thumbnail' for me why this is so (I haven't paid any attention to Mr Carter's actions since a certain failed hostage rescue)?

 

[Ahriman]

And just how good was it that it wasn't officially acknowledged?
It reminds me the way Hungarian lawmakers ensured a huge decline in crimes against money... they raised the lower barrier between misdemeanor and crime... before that stealing over 5000 forints or equivalent was a crime, now stealing under 10000 is a misdemeanor. Of course this makes most pickpockets leave the "criminal zone". Did anything change? No. Does it look like our lawmakers are lying bastards doing anything to look better, even at the cost of having more criminals (in the literal instead of legal meaning of the word)? Yes.

Any official person who knew about the Israeli nukes and "forgot" to tell others about this violation (you know, the kind of violation with which Saddam was accused - btw did they found any of those wmds?) is just a liar, nothing else.

(not that I sympathize with Carter, far from that)

 

[elder999]

. It was over 15 years ago, Elder, I don't remember that specifically :lol:. I'm guessing that it would be the Pentagon or wherever else it is that the military keep all the What If scenarios they have prepared.

Yeah, but........

It is, essentially an escalating House of Cards collapse of the situation in the Middle East where Israel feels so threatened that they respond with a nuclear strike ... and it all goes downhill from there.

How would it have gone "downhill" from there, exactly? Israel responds with a nuclear strike, and the "enemies" respond....how, exactly? I mean, given that even the current nuclear balance of power inn the Middle East as we know it has Israel as the only nuclear power, what capability do any of the affected candidate nations, or their potential allies, have to respond? Neither Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc., etc., etc., has the capability to defeat Israel if they use nuclear weapons. Indeed, Israel has beaten the tar out of all of them, singly and together, pretty consistently in conventional warfare.

THE News i.e. the BBC back before it became a simple propoganda machine a la the American model of news as entertainment.

Don't think the media actually called it that over here. It's interesting, but purely speculative without the other players being similarily armed. It's also interesting because that's what Israel calls two classes of missiles...

That's because of the intense diplomatic and negotiative pressure to withhold their hand that was put on Israel by the Americans. That too was reported in the news.

Oh, I knew that...it was thought to be the best way to keep other countries from joining in.....

As for the distinction between "common" knowledge, and "official" knowledge, I couldn't say......

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Well, it's as the old military saying foes, "Anytime more than one person knows a secret, it ceases to be a secret".

 

[CanuckMA]

Well, it's as the old military saying foes, "Anytime more than one person knows a secret, it ceases to be a secret".

And the corrolary: '3 people can keep a conspiracy secret if 2 of them are dead'

 

[elder999]

Well, it's as the old military saying foes, "Anytime more than one person knows a secret, it ceases to be a secret".

Militarily, there is next to no point whatsoever in keeping nuclear capability secret. Israel has been well served by this being an "open secret" since their suspected 1986 test.

It isn't really necessary to have the bomb; it's enough if everyone thinks you have it. Deterrent wise, that is....

 

[Mr G]

Militarily, there is next to no point whatsoever in keeping nuclear capability secret. Israel has been well served by this being an "open secret" since their suspected 1986 test.

It isn't really necessary to have the bomb; it's enough if everyone thinks you have it. Deterrent wise, that is....

I think you got it completely. The whole point of having a nuke is to NOT use it. (unless you're insane!) I have trouble believing this was accidental. Israel may have encouraged Carter to quietly remind it's neighbors about Israeli nukes....