HeXp£Øi±
Well-Known Member
Scott Ritter, the former UN weapons inspector has recently told Israelis that they should not support US action against Iraq. However, IDF chief Moshe Ya'alon has stated that the current Intifada is more dangerous for Israel than any strike by Iraq.
A) RITTER THINKS HE KNOWS BEST FOR ISRAEL
Scott Ritter, the former weapons inspector in Iraq and now ardent critic of proposed military strikes against that country, has said that an American led war against Iraq would be a disaster for Israel.
In an interview with Israeli paper Ha'aretz, Ritter said that no one in Israel should support an American led strike against Iraq, as the move would create a number of dire consequences for Israel. These are; an Iraqi attack on Israel, regional instability, a lowering of Arab opinions of Israel and an increase of terrorism inside Israel.
Some might accuse Ritter of stating the obvious. Despite Israel's excellent anti-missile system and its threat of massive retaliation, most in Israel would not be at all surprised if the Iraqi dictator sent rockets westward should international forces attempt to forcefully change his regime.
Arab opinion regarding Israel has never been very high, but it is the support of the West, especially the United States, that Israel generally seeks.
As for an increase in terrorism caused by an attack on Iraq, one might argue that the militant Islamic groups that have killed over 600 Israelis in the last two years might attempt to justify their murders by citing the upcoming regime change in Baghdad, but it doesn't change facts on the ground here in Israel.
The potential for regional instability is a worry for Israelis. However, the leaders of the Arab regimes in the area are more worried than those of the Jewish State.
Ritter's comments, placed alongside his oft repeated ideas on other aspects of the upcoming "regime change," will not convince many in Israel.
B) YA'ALON: INTIFADA WORSE THAN IRAQI STRIKE
The ongoing campaign of terrorism waged against Israelis is far more worrisome than a potential Iraqi missile attack, IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said.
His comments to Israeli television yesterday backed up claims a day earlier that Israel is ready and able to deal with an Iraqi strike. Despite his reassurances, people are still worried, evidenced by the fact that many are exchanging their outdated gas masks for new replacements.
According to the latest figures, 15,000 people per day queue up at the Israel Defense Force's Home Front Command to exchange their gas masks. The figure is up from 3-4,000 people per day a couple of months ago.
Israeli intelligence predicts that an American offensive against Iraq would be a focused operation, with its objective of assassinating Saddam Hussein and members of his family.
The document, prepared by intelligence sources and presented to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, indicates that the narrow focus would be intended to spur a change in Iraq's regime without causing the country's dismemberment, thus allowing Saddam's successor to begin reconstruction.
http://www.icej.org/cgi-local/icej_goto.pl?type=NEWS&artid=20020918PYhfxti7kwUAACeBB7s
A) RITTER THINKS HE KNOWS BEST FOR ISRAEL
Scott Ritter, the former weapons inspector in Iraq and now ardent critic of proposed military strikes against that country, has said that an American led war against Iraq would be a disaster for Israel.
In an interview with Israeli paper Ha'aretz, Ritter said that no one in Israel should support an American led strike against Iraq, as the move would create a number of dire consequences for Israel. These are; an Iraqi attack on Israel, regional instability, a lowering of Arab opinions of Israel and an increase of terrorism inside Israel.
Some might accuse Ritter of stating the obvious. Despite Israel's excellent anti-missile system and its threat of massive retaliation, most in Israel would not be at all surprised if the Iraqi dictator sent rockets westward should international forces attempt to forcefully change his regime.
Arab opinion regarding Israel has never been very high, but it is the support of the West, especially the United States, that Israel generally seeks.
As for an increase in terrorism caused by an attack on Iraq, one might argue that the militant Islamic groups that have killed over 600 Israelis in the last two years might attempt to justify their murders by citing the upcoming regime change in Baghdad, but it doesn't change facts on the ground here in Israel.
The potential for regional instability is a worry for Israelis. However, the leaders of the Arab regimes in the area are more worried than those of the Jewish State.
Ritter's comments, placed alongside his oft repeated ideas on other aspects of the upcoming "regime change," will not convince many in Israel.
B) YA'ALON: INTIFADA WORSE THAN IRAQI STRIKE
The ongoing campaign of terrorism waged against Israelis is far more worrisome than a potential Iraqi missile attack, IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said.
His comments to Israeli television yesterday backed up claims a day earlier that Israel is ready and able to deal with an Iraqi strike. Despite his reassurances, people are still worried, evidenced by the fact that many are exchanging their outdated gas masks for new replacements.
According to the latest figures, 15,000 people per day queue up at the Israel Defense Force's Home Front Command to exchange their gas masks. The figure is up from 3-4,000 people per day a couple of months ago.
Israeli intelligence predicts that an American offensive against Iraq would be a focused operation, with its objective of assassinating Saddam Hussein and members of his family.
The document, prepared by intelligence sources and presented to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, indicates that the narrow focus would be intended to spur a change in Iraq's regime without causing the country's dismemberment, thus allowing Saddam's successor to begin reconstruction.
http://www.icej.org/cgi-local/icej_goto.pl?type=NEWS&artid=20020918PYhfxti7kwUAACeBB7s