and Europe that
pressure to stop
If so, retired Air Force
Colonel Sam Gardiner didn't get the message. "The signal I received is
Gardiner says a 2006 MIT paper by Whitney Raas and Austin Long, "Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities," is a good representation of how Israeli military planners think about targeting.
According to Raas and Long, in a strike on
"Getting 36 bombing aircraft into the targets connects well with the New York Times description of the early June exercise of 100 aircraft," Gardiner says. "Three strike packages of F-15I and F-16I aircraft, escorted by F-15A/C's with other supporting aircraft would be around 100 aircraft."
"An Israeli strike would not be much of a strike," Gardiner says.
"President Bush likes beehive analogies," Gardiner points out. " An Israel-only strike would stir up the bees and leave the hives with only limited damage."
If Gardiner's analysis is
correct, then Michael Gordon's New York Times article is deceptive, perhaps
deliberately so. It's part of a campaign of pressure
on Congress and European governments - likely orchestrated with the Cheney
faction of the Bush Administration - to forego real negotiations with
military escalation. If we don't
act, the Israelis will, the argument will be - neglecting the fact that no
Israeli action is possible without a green light from
Next week, Congress may
consider on its suspension calendar a resolution promoted by AIPAC that
effectively endorses a naval blockade against