FAS - NUKE GUIDE - ISRAEL
Federation of American Scientists
03-Oct-2009 (5 comments)

The United States first became aware of Dimona's existence after U-2overflights in 1958 captured the facility's construction, but it was not identified as a nuclear site until two years later. The complex was variously explained as a textile plant, an agricultural station, and a  metallurgical research facility, until David Ben-Gurion stated in December 1960 that Dimona complex was a nuclear research center built for "peaceful purposes."

There followed two decades in which the United States, through a combination of benign neglect, erroneous analysis, and successful Israeli deception, failed to discern first the details of Israel's nuclear program. As early as 8 December 1960, the CIA issued a report outlining Dimona's implications for nuclear proliferation, and the CIA station in Tel Aviv had determined by the mid-1960s that the Israeli nuclear weapons program was an established and irreversible fact. 

>>>
Dan Huck

Israel Lied to the US About Nukes

by Dan Huck on Sat Oct 03, 2009 11:58 PM PDT

 

Once burnt, twice stung, the old saying goes, so when David Kay, former chief weapons inspector for the IAEA says in reference to the upcoming inspection at Qum he would make sure he was not given a "tourist's tour of the plant" (See Former Inspector: Iran on 'Cusp' of Losing Credibility), he no doubt was feeling the 'sting' of the US having been played for a sucker by our friends the Israelis, and is not happy thinking about a re-run with the Iranians.

(from the article referenced above) "United States inspectors visited Dimona seven times during the 1960s, but they were unable to obtain an accurate picture of the activities carried out there, largely due to tight Israeli control over the timing and agenda of the visits. The Israelis went so far as to install false control room panels and to brick over elevators and hallways that accessed certain areas of the facility. The inspectors were able to report that there was no clear scientific research or civilian nuclear power program justifying such a large reactor - circumstantial evidence of the Israeli bomb program - but found no evidence of "weapons related activities" such as the existence of a plutonium reprocessing plant."

As for the Israelis, Liars expect everyone lies. Perhaps that's Heaven's way. Being untrustworthy, who can they trust? As for us, Having liars for an ally is problematic.

 



Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
Dan Huck

Why Feed Into the Dissonance?

by Dan Huck on Mon Oct 05, 2009 07:51 AM PDT

The United States wants Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. When they do, their input and concerns will have greater credibility, and the international community will be troubled by less cognitive dissonance.

Mr. Raimondo gives affirmation to a supposed agreement that we are pledged to keep faith with, while the Israelis have long since broken the pledge (not an agreement on our side from what the written record shows) which they made to President Johnson in 1968 they would not 'introduce' a nuclear weaponization program into the Mideast.

This attempt at manipulation is like the so-called agreement we were supposed to have made regarding settlement 'lebensraum' expansion, which President Obama clarified for the Israelis - there was no agreement.

Is there anyone in the Mideast, in the world, who hasn't been ''introduced' to the nuclear weapons of Israel?


  •  
Ahmed from Bahrain

Israel lied to US

by Ahmed from Bahrain on Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:24 AM PDT

What kind of a headline is that?

Check this for a better understanding of this dilemma

//original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/10/04/isra...

Ahmed from Bahrain


  •  
Dan Huck

Paranoia or Strategy?

by Dan Huck on Sun Oct 04, 2009 03:34 PM PDT

If it's paranoia, I certainly don't think it's paranoia at the leadership level.  I think those people, as you suggest, don't want the focus on their behavior so they may attempt to foment fear and paranoia by information management, fear mongering and incitement.

But for normal folks, hoping it will all just go away, and who take their breaks listening to a radio in the car, or in front of the TV, heightened fearfulness and paranoia are endemic.

To me, the situation in Israel 40 years ago might have warranted some paranoia, but not now.

For example, for the last year I saw figures, Israel spent 200 times more per capita than Iran on defense spending. It was something like Iran - $81. p/c, Israel - $1585. p/c. The US spends even more per capita than Israel!  Together, in 2006, our combined expenditures were $505 billion compared to Iran's $5 billion.

Doesn't it make sense to think the people who have been most aggressive, and who spend accordingly, are the dangerous ones?  By that yardstick, I don't think any nation in the Mideast and Gulf area is less likely to attempt aggressive behavior than Iran.


  •  
Shah Ghollam

Israel

by Shah Ghollam on Sun Oct 04, 2009 09:02 AM PDT

obtained its nuclear power status clandestinely and everyone knows it. What everyone is ridiculing Israel for is how arrogant they are in slandering other countries peacefull nuclear progress to be a military program.

I can only assume their paranoia is much more about how they cheated the world in obtaining nuclear technology and thus thinking others to behave like them. But one thing is for sure, their own successful history in this matter leaves a lot of lessons for those who wish to maufacfure their own clandestine nukes.

As they say, your shameful past will always come to hunt you in the future in many ways more than one!


  •