Empresas do Estado cortam mais de 5 mil milhões à dívida

[PMACS]

Irão proíbe venda e exportação de petróleo para países da UE


O Irão proibiu a venda e a exportação de qualquer tipo de crude, gás líquido e condensado para os 27 países da União Europeia (UE), anunciou este domingo o porta-voz do ministério do Petróleo iraniano, Alireza Nikzad Rahbar.


Em declarações difundidas pela agência iraniana Mehr, Nikzad informou que a dita exportação "será proibida aos países europeus que tomaram decisões hostis contra o Irão".

O porta-voz explicou que, "apesar da petição de alguns países europeus para comprar petróleo e gás condensado, tal não será vendido a esses países" e assegurou que atualmente a exportação e produção de crude iraniano está numa situação favorável.

Nikzad disse que esta proibição continuará até que os países europeus e ocidentais "deixem as suas políticas hostis contra o Irão".

O responsável adiantou que nos novos contratos feitos com diferentes países do Mundo, Teerão pergunta qual é o destino, onde se consome e para onde é transferido e pede-lhes para que não enviem para os países europeus.

"Esperamos que todos os compradores estrangeiros de petróleo cumpram os compromissos assumidos com o ministério do Petróleo iraniano e que não vendam a países europeus", adiantou.

O Irão está submetido a sanções da ONU por causa do seu programa nuclear, que alguns países, entre os quais os Estados Unidos, crêem que pode ser usado para armamento, apesar de Teerão negar e afirmar que é exclusivamente para uso civil e pacífico.

http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/notic ... ises-da-ue

[AVMac]

Eu acredito que a existir uma guerra, será uma guerra "limpa" no sentido de ser rápida, pouco onerosa para o atacante e com número reduzido de mortos no ataque inicial.

Nos últimos dias tem-se falado de um ataque EMP, que consiste em detonar uma bomba atómica de potência reduzida a intermédia nas camadas altas da atmosfera. Esta detonação criaria-se um impulso electromagnético que destruiria todos, insisto todos, os circuitos eléctricos. Com um ataque EMP o Irão era enviado para a idade da pedra lascadas.

Com um ataque destes a guerra seria rápida e pouco onerosa pois com um míssil, repito um míssil, Jericho III é o suficiente para fazer o ataque. O ataque inicial não causaria mortos directamente, mas por exemplo, doentes dependentes de suporte ventilatório ou em cuidados intensivos morreriam pois as máquinas seriam completamente fritas.

Contra-ataque seria algo que o Irão não conseguiria fazer, pois com os sistemas fritos, era impossível lançar seja o que fosse. O Irão poderia ter capacidade de segundo ataque, o que exigiria uma base operacional fora do Irão. Neste caso podemos pensar em Hezbollah, Síria e Palestina, contudo este grupo terrorista e estes países não sobreviveriam muito tempo caso Israel lutasse com punhos de aço, em vez dos punhos de renda com que lutou durante a segunda guerra do Líbano.

A minha convição é que estamos perto do inicio do grande confronto no Médio Oriente. Os EUA e Turquia já afirmaram de forma clara que estão a apoiar os rebeldes Sírios, a Turquia vai mais longe e está a dirigir grupos rebeldes. Veremos o que acontece nas próximas semanas.

[Opcard]

IRIB-Whereas the military, Israel continues to warn politicians against a war against Iran, which "would ultimately destroy Israel," the "Sunday Times" just try a new bluff: war électromanétique that Tel Aviv might launch against Iran and will send it to the stone age "!
The "Sunday Times" said that he spoke with U.S. security experts, they think that the fear grows, Israel can send electromagnetic bomb. It's a bomb, which starts in the air, to disable all electrical and electronic appliances, and telecommunications blur the ground, which will restore Iran to the stone age. This is not the first time we showed the Israeli and American programs on a possible attack against Iran. And now, here are the revelations of the electromagnetic bomb. The publication of the "Sunday Times" Israeli deterrence may increase, and can also warn that an attack against Iran approach

[PT_Trader]

O Canadá suspendeu relações diplomáticas com o Irão.

[atomez]

Vão-se preparando.

Analyzing the Impact of Preventive Strikes Against Iran’s Nuclear Facilities

Executive Summary

• Over the past couple of months, speculation about a U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities has made headlines around the globe. This report addresses how the U.S. could take the lead in carrying out a preventive Military Strike against Iran If all peaceful options have been exhausted and Iran has left no other means to convince it to stop or change its course in pursuing nuclear weapons . It also examines how the US could provide a defense umbrella against any Iranian air and missile retaliation that would be aimed at U.S. military targets and allies in the region, in particular the GCC states.

• A key question arises is what should the objectives of a military strike be? To halt the Iranian nuclear
program? To set it back five years or for one year? This criteria is the key to defining the force
required to achieve a successful mission against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

• The study shows that the initial strike should be against key Iranian nuclear enrichment and research
facilities, ballistic missile basis located around the country, numerous mobile ballistic missile launchers dispersed around Iran and main ballistic missile production facilities. At the same time, it shows that the payloads required to hit underground enrichment facilities with a high level of damage, to carry out the scale of initial and follow-up attacks, and providing resources such as near real time intelligence required to detect and destroy other potentially lethal Iranian military weapons, for instance ballistic missiles that could be used in a retaliation, can only be carried out by the United States.

• An initial U.S. strike will require a large force allocation consisting of Defensive Counterair and Offensive Counterair Operations, such as the main Bomber Force, the Suppression of Enemy Air Defense System, Escort aircraft for the protection of the Bombers, Electronic Warfare for detection and jamming purposes, Fighter Sweep and Combat Air Patrol to counter any air retaliation by Iran.

• While such first strike will try to be as effective as possible, the U.S. would be the only country that has the air power, support capability, and mix of sea-air forces in the Gulf to continue a sustained campaign over a period of time and restrike after an initial battle damage assessment it is found that further strike sorties are required.

[atomez]

O embargo de USA e UE às importações de petróleo iraniano e proibição de seguros a navios que o transportem entrou em vigor ontem.

Entretanto,

U.S. Adds Forces in Persian Gulf, a Signal to Iran

WASHINGTON — The United States has quietly moved significant military reinforcements into the Persian Gulf to deter the Iranian military from any possible attempt to shut the Strait of Hormuz and to increase the number of fighter jets capable of striking deep into Iran if the standoff over its nuclear program escalates.

The deployments are part of a long-planned effort to bolster the American military presence in the gulf region, in part to reassure Israel that in dealing with Iran, as one senior administration official put it last week, “When the president says there are other options on the table beyond negotiations, he means it.”
...
“The message to Iran is, ‘Don’t even think about it,’ ”one senior Defense Department official said. “Don’t even think about closing the strait. We’ll clear the mines. Don’t even think about sending your fast boats out to harass our vessels or commercial shipping. We’ll put them on the bottom of the gulf.” Like others interviewed, the official spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the diplomatic and military situation.

[fernandoinveste]

Mas esta gente é para ser levada a sério?

Submarino nuclear civil? Também quero um.

De facto, inventam tudo para poder bombardear um país qualquer do outro lado do mundo.

[atomez]

Mas esta gente é para ser levada a sério?

Submarino nuclear civil? Também quero um.

Iran Says It Plans Nuclear Submarine

WASHINGTON—Iran said it has begun preparations to produce a nuclear-powered submarine, providing an argument for producing weapons-grade fuel, ahead of its next round of international nuclear negotiations.

The U.S., Israel and the United Nations nuclear agency have long worried that Iran would seek such a justification to enrich uranium above the weapons-grade level of 90% purity. Officials have pointed to Iran's deliberations about beginning research and development for nuclear-fueled submarines.

On Tuesday, a senior Iranian naval official told state media that his country had already begun the process.

"Right now, we are in the initial phases of manufacturing atomic submarines," the deputy commander of the Iranian navy for technical affairs, Rear Adm. Abbas Zamini, told Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency.

Adm. Zamini "further reminded that using nuclear power to fuel submarines is among the civilian uses of the nuclear technology and all countries are, thus, entitled to the right to make such a use," the report said.

Iran is enriching uranium to a level of 19.75% purity to run a research reactor in Tehran. Nuclear submarines are powered by fuel ranging from 20% purity to more than 90%. Many U.S. submarines use nuclear fuel enriched to 96%.

Iran has demanded that the international bloc lift economic sanctions and recognize Tehran's right to produce nuclear fuel ahead of any negotiations, a position that has been rejected. Tehran also has been pressing the European Union not to impose an oil embargo on Iran on July 1.

[atomez]

Uma nova forma de guerra já está em curso.

Cyberwar fears after bug targets Tehran

The discovery of a malicious computer program that appears to be collecting sensitive information from Iran and others indicates the global cyberwar has moved to a new level, warn security experts.

Kaspersky Labs, the Russian internet security company that discovered the malware, codenamed Flame, said it was more complex and sophisticated than any of the cyberweapons it has seen to date. “The Flame malware looks to be another phase in this war,” said Eugene Kaspersky, co-founder of Kaspersky Lab.

At the end of April, computers at Iran’s oil ministry were reported to have been attacked by hackers, and experts at Symantec, the US IT security company, said on Monday that parts of the Flame program were identical to the malware used in that attack. The incident was played down by the government at the time and it was unclear if any data was lost.

Earlier this year the head of Iran’s Civil Defence Organisation had also said that the country’s energy sector had been subject to an increasing number of cyberattacks over the past two years. Flame is thought to have been in operation since 2010.

The Stuxnet virus raised widespread panic when it was discovered in 2010, because it was believed to have caused physical damage at Iran’s nuclear facilities, the first known computer worm to target industrial controls. While Flame is not thought to have caused this kind of damage, it appears to be able to spy on organisations in a number of ways, including switching on microphones attached to a computer to record conversations and sounds.

Orla Cox, senior security operations manager at Symantec, said the code was likely to have been written by a nation state. “It is very professionally written and does not even look like a piece of malware. We suspect there is some nation state involvement because of the funding you would need to have behind this.”

Apart from anything else, she said, the amount of information being collected by the program was so vast, it would require large resources to sift through it all. “This is a fully-featured spying program that is grabbing anything it can,” Ms Cox said.

Only a few hundred individuals appear to have been affected by the malware, Ms Cox said, and security experts were still trying to see whether there was any link or pattern to those affected.

Stuxnet and Duqu, another malware program, are widely believed to have been created by the US and Israeli governments, although neither country has confirmed their involvement.

Iran’s armed forces have created a special unit to defend the country against computer attacks, which works closely with the defence, telecommunications and intelligence organisations.

[atomez]

Iran talks end in harsh lesson for west

Over the past few weeks, there has been growing optimism in western capitals that Iran might be forced into a compromise over its nuclear programme and avoid a war with Israel and the US.

However, after two days of anguished talks this week between Iran and world powers in Baghdad , such hopes were doused in a very cold dose of reality.

As Israel and the US make contingency plans for a possible strike, the six powers – the US, EU, UK, France, Germany, Russia and China – put a proposal to Iran that would have seen Tehran freeze its production of more highly enriched uranium in return for a package of inducements from the US and EU, such as providing parts for Iranian civil aircraft.

But after often fraught bargaining in Baghdad, diplomats left declaring they had made no progress at all. “It's been a difficult few days,” said a European diplomat in Baghdad. “After our first meeting in Istanbul with Iran a few weeks ago, we were euphoric. Now we're a lot more realistic about just how difficult this negotiation is.”

The lack of success in the Iraqi capital does not signal the end of the process. The talks between Iran and the international powers still have a few rounds left before the end of this year, when Israel and the US must decide on military action.

There was also the occasional indication in Baghdad that Iran is softening its approach to the US. On one occasion, Saeed Jalili, Iran's chief negotiator, had a brief conversation with Wendy Sherman, the US chief diplomat at the talks. “That's something he hasn't been willing to do before,” said a diplomat. “You can call it a semi-brush-by.”

That said, western diplomats left Baghdad under no illusion about how difficult it will be to strike a deal with Iran this year.

Some experts say it would have been surprising if Iran had accepted the package in Baghdad. Acquiring airline parts is a minor concession compared with what Iran is seeking in this negotiation, such as the scaling back of punitive sanctions and securing international acceptance of its right to uranium enrichment.

Besides, Tehran has room for manoeuvre, particularly because the US is determined that talks must not break down before its presidential election.

Washington is desperate to stop Israel carrying out an attack before November – an event that would drag the US into war and also destabilise President Barack Obama's chances of re-election. “As a result, Jalili could come to the talks retaining his maximalist bargaining position that Iran will give away nothing unless sanctions are reversed,” said a diplomat.

Some diplomats leaving Baghdad said a positive feature of the meetings was that Iran engaged in discussion of its nuclear programme, something it has not done before. “In [the April meeting in] Istanbul, they didn't want to discuss anything,” said a diplomat. “In Baghdad, they did get into details.”

However, what is also clear is that the negotiations will get a great deal harder if there is no clear progress at the next meeting in Moscow on June 18. The meeting comes just before US and EU energy and banking sanctions take full effect on July 1, after which a breakthrough will be much more difficult.

At the same time, failure at Moscow will force Mr Obama to ratchet up the rhetoric against the regime in order to counter Republican accusations that he is being strung along by Iranian prevarication.

And while negotiators await the outcome of the Moscow talks, contingency planning for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities is intensifying in the US and Israel.

[alexandre7ias]

El comandante de la armada iraní dice que la operación muestra "el poder de la República Islámica de Irán".
Varios buques de guerra iraníes han entrado en el Mediterráneo después de cruzar el Canal de Suez, ha dicho el comandante de la Armada almirante Habibollah Sayyari, según informa la agencia oficial de noticias IRNA.
Este portavoz no ha dado más detalles sobre el número y naturaleza de los dispositivos que participan en una operación, la segunda en un año, con la intención de "mostrar el poder de la República Islámica de Irán".
Esta nueva operación tiene el mismo corte que la que se llevó a cabo en febrero de 2011, una incursión que llamó la atención porque era la primera vez que se producía desde 1979.
Estas operaciones de buques de guerra iraníes en el Mediterráneo, han provocado fuertes reacciones en Israel y los Estados Unidos.
Los barcos que han pasado a través del Canal de Suez podrían ser el destructor 'Shahid Qandi' y el de apoyo y suministro 'Kharg'.
El almirante Sayyari no ha dado detalles sobre el propósito o la misión de estos barcos y se ha limitado a decir que transmitían "un mensaje de paz y amistad" para la región, pero "también muestran el poder de la República Islámica de Irán".
Antecedentes
Durante la primera misión en el Mediterráneo de la Armada iraní, los dos buques de la flota, la fragata 'Alvand' y el 'Kharg', viajaron a Siria e hicieron una parada en el puerto de Latakia antes de volver al mar Rojo y el Irán.
Esta primera misión causó un gran malestar en Israel, que calificó el acto como una "provocación" que causó que la marina israelí se pusiera en alerta. Mientras tanto, Washington emitió una advertencia a los barcos iraníes, pidiéndoles que cumplieran con las leyes internacionales y no emprendisen "ninguna acción que pudiera comprometer la seguridad".
Esta nueva misión iraní en el Mediterráneo da muestras del momento de mayor tensión entre Israel e Irán; una tensión impulsada por la crisis del programa nuclear de Irán y por los últimos ataques anti-israelíes en la India y Tailandia, atribuidos a Teherán por el estado judío.
 Leer. Escuchar

[atomez]

Uma coisa destas não se anuncia, faz-se. De preferência no momento menos esperado.

US officials believe Iran sanctions will fail, making military action likely

• Growing view that strike, by Israel or US, will happen
• 'Sweet spot' for Israeli action identified as September-October
• White House remains determined to give sanctions time

Officials in key parts of the Obama administration are increasingly convinced that sanctions will not deter Tehran from pursuing its nuclear programme, and believe that the US will be left with no option but to launch an attack on Iran or watch Israel do so.

The president has made clear in public, and in private to Israel, that he is determined to give sufficient time for recent measures, such as the financial blockade and the looming European oil embargo, to bite deeper into Iran's already battered economy before retreating from its principal strategy to pressure Tehran.

But there is a strong current of opinion within the administration – including in the Pentagon and the state department – that believes sanctions are doomed to fail, and that their principal use now is in delaying Israeli military action, as well as reassuring Europe that an attack will only come after other means have been tested.

"The White House wants to see sanctions work. This is not the Bush White House. It does not need another conflict," said an official knowledgeable on Middle East policy. "Its problem is that the guys in Tehran are behaving like sanctions don't matter, like their economy isn't collapsing, like Israel isn't going to do anything.

"Sanctions are all we've got to throw at the problem. If they fail then it's hard to see how we don't move to the 'in extremis' option."

The White House has said repeatedly that all options are on the table, including the use of force to stop Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, but that for now the emphasis is firmly on diplomacy and sanctions.

But long-held doubts among US officials about whether the Iranians can be enticed or cajoled into serious negotiations have been reinforced by recent events.

"We don't see a way forward," said one official. "The record shows that there is nothing to work with."

Scepticism about Iranian intent is rooted in Iran's repeated spurning of overtures from successive US presidents from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama, who appealed within weeks of coming to office for "constructive ties" and "mutual respect" .

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim this week that Iran loaded its first domestically-made fuel rod into a nuclear reactor, and Iran's threat to cut oil supplies to six European countries, were read as further evidence that Tehran remains defiantly committed to its nuclear programme. That view was strengthened by the latest Iranian offer to negotiate with the UN security council in a letter that appeared to contain no significant new concessions.

If Obama were to conclude that there is no choice but to attack Iran, he is unlikely to order it before the presidential election in November unless there is an urgent reason to do so. The question is whether the Israelis will hold back that long.

Earlier this month, the US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, told the Washington Post that he thought the window for an Israeli attack on Iran is between April and June. But other official analysts working on Iran have identified what one described as a "sweet spot", where the mix of diplomacy, political timetables and practical issues come together to suggest that if Israel launches a unilateral assault it is more likely in September or October, although they describe that as a "best guess".

However, the Americans are uncertain as to whether Israel is serious about using force if sanctions fail or has ratcheted up threats primarily in order to pressure the US and Europeans in to stronger action. For its part, the US is keen to ensure that Tehran does not misinterpret a commitment to giving sanctions a chance to work as a lack of willingness to use force as a last resort.

American officials are resigned to the fact that the US will be seen in much of the world as a partner in any Israeli assault on Iran – whether or not Washington approved of it. The administration will then have to decide whether to, in the parlance of the US military, "pile on", by using its much greater firepower to finish what Israel starts.

"The sanctions are there to pressure Iran and reassure Israel that we are taking this issue seriously," said one official. "The focus is on demonstrating to Israel that this has a chance of working. Israel is sceptical but appreciates the effort. It is willing to give it a go, but how long will it wait?"

Colin Kahl, who was US deputy assistant secretary of defence for the Middle East until December, said: "With the European oil embargo and US sanctions on the central bank, the Israelis probably have to give some time now to let those crippling sanctions play out.

"If you look at the calendar, it doesn't make much sense that the Israelis would jump the gun. They probably need to provide a decent interval for those sanctions to be perceived as failing, because they care about whether an Israeli strike would be seen as philosophically legitimate; that is, as only having happened after other options were exhausted. So I think that will push them a little further into 2012."

The White House is working hard to keep alive the prospect that sanctions will deliver a diplomatic solution. It has pressed the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, to quieten the belligerent chatter from his own cabinet about an attack on Iran. The chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, general Martin Dempsey, was dispatched to Jerusalem last month to talk up the effect of sanctions and to press, unsuccessfully, for a commitment that Israel will not launch a unilateral attack against Iran.

Dennis Ross, Obama's former envoy for the Middle East and Iran, this week said that sanctions may be pushing Tehran toward negotiations.

But in other parts of the administration, the assumption is that sanctions will fail, and so calculations are being made about what follows, including how serious Israel is in its threat to launch a unilateral attack on Iran's nuclear installations, and how the US responds.

But Iran's increasingly belligerent moves – such as the botched attempts, laid at Tehran's door, to attack Israeli diplomats in Thailand, India and Georgia – are compounding the sense that Iran is far from ready to negotiate.

Feeding in to the considerations are the timing of the American election, including its bearing on Israeli thinking, as well as the pace of Iranian advances in their nuclear programme.

Obama has publicly said that there are no differences with Israel on Iran, describing his administration as in "lock step" with the Jewish state.

But the US and Israel are at odds over the significance of Iran's claim to have begun enriching uranium at the underground facility at Fordow, near the holy city of Qom, and therefore the timing of any military action.

Israel's defence minister, Ehud Barak, has warned that Iran cannot be allowed to establish a "zone of immunity" at Fordow where it is able to work on a nuclear weapon deep underground protected from Israel's conventional weapons. Earlier this month, Barak said Israel must consider an attack before that happens.

The Americans say there is no such urgency because the facility is just one among many Tehran needs to build a nuclear weapon, and that other sites are still vulnerable to attack and sabotage in other ways. The US also has a more powerful military arsenal, although it is not clear whether it would be able to destroy the underground Fordow facility.

Kahl said part of Washington's calculation is to judge whether Israel is seriously contemplating attacking Iran, or is using the threat to pressure the US and Europe into confronting Tehran.

"It's not that the Israelis believe the Iranians are on the brink of a bomb. It's that the Israelis may fear that the Iranian programme is on the brink of becoming out of reach of an Israeli military strike, which means it creates a 'now-or-never' moment," he said.

"That's what's actually driving the timeline by the middle of this year. But there's a countervailing factor that [Ehud] Barak has mentioned – that they're not very close to making a decision and that they're also trying to ramp up concerns of an Israeli strike to drive the international community towards putting more pressure on the Iranians."

Israeli pressure for tougher measures against Tehran played a leading role in the US Congresss passing sanctions legislation targeting Iran's financial system and oil sales. Some US and European officials say those same sanctions have also become a means for Washington to pressure Israel not to act precipitously in attacking Iran.

The presidential election is also a part of Israel's calculation, not least the fractious relationship between Obama and Netanyahu, who has little reason to do the US president any political favours and has good reason to prefer a Republican in the White House next year.

There is a school of thought – a suspicion, even – within the administration that Netanyahu might consider the height of the US election campaign the ideal time to attack Iran. With a hawkish Republican candidate ever ready to accuse him of weakness, Obama's room to pressure or oppose Netanyahu would be more limited than after the election.

"One theory is that Netanyahu and Barak may calculate that if Obama doesn't support an Israeli strike, he's unlikely to punish Israel for taking unilateral action in a contested election year," said Kahl. "Doing something before the US gives the Israelis a bit more freedom of manoeuvre."

Obama is also under domestic political pressure from Republican presidential contenders, who accuse him of vacillating on Iran, and from a Congress highly sympathetic to Israel's more confrontational stance.

Thirty-two senators from both parties introduced a resolution on Thursday rejecting "any policy that would rely on efforts to 'contain' a nuclear weapons-capable Iran". The measure was dressed up as intended to protect the president's back, but it smacked of yet more pressure to take a firmer stand with Iran.

One of the sponsors, senator Joe Lieberman, said that he did not want to discount diplomatic options but if the president ordered an attack on Iran he would have strong bipartisan support in Congress. Other senators said there needed to be a greater sense of urgency on the part of the administration in dealing with Iran and that sanctions are not enough.

Others are critical of sanctions for a different reason. Congressman Dennis Kucinich said this week he fears sanctions are less about changing Tehran's policy than laying the ground for military action. He warned that "the latest drum beat of additional sanctions and war against Iran sounds too much like the lead-up to the Iraq war".

"If the crippling sanctions that the US and Europe have imposed are meant to push the Iranian regime to negotiations, it hasn't worked," he said. "As the war of words between the United States and Iran escalates it's more critical than ever that we highlight alternatives to war to avoid the same mistakes made in Iraq."

[alexandre7ias]

Londres teme que ambições iranianas gerem "nova guerra fria" no Médio Oriente

18.02.2012 - 13:29 Ana Fonseca Pereira

Ebrahim Noroozi/Reuters

Manobras militares iranianas no início deste ano no golfo Pérsico

O chefe da diplomacia britânica, William Hague, não tem dúvidas de que o Irão está a tentar desenvolver uma bomba atómica e teme que, se for bem-sucedido, isso desencadeará uma corrida às armas na região que deixará o Médio Oriente à beira de uma “nova guerra fria”.

A República Islâmica “continua claramente o seu programa de armas nucleares”, disse Hague, numa entrevista publicada neste sábado pelo jornal britânico “Daily Telegraph”, acrescentando que se os peritos iranianos atingirem os seus objectivos “então todas as nações do Médio Oriente vão querer desenvolver armas nucleares”.

O ministro diz que este é um cenário que deve preocupar não apenas a região, já que todo o mundo se veria confrontado “com a mais grave fase de proliferação nuclear desde que as armas nucleares foram inventadas” e com “a ameaça de uma nova guerra fria no Médio Oriente sem ter necessariamente todos os mecanismos de salvaguarda” criados no século XX para manter sob controlo os arsenais americanos e soviéticos.

“Isto seria um desastre internacional”, acrescentou.

Os receios de Hague foram revelados numa altura em que Israel continua a discutir – muitas vezes em público – a possibilidade de um ataque preventivo contra o programa nuclear iraniano, que Teerão insiste ter como propósito único a produção de energia atómica. O cenário preocupa tanto europeus como americanos, que receiam que a resposta de Teerão desencadeie um conflito de consequências imprevisíveis na região.

Contudo, fontes da Administração americana citadas neste sábado pelo jornal britânico “Guardian” admitem que as sanções económicas em vigor têm sido insuficientes para travar o programa nuclear iraniano, o que torna mais provável uma acção militar, americana ou israelita, até ao final do ano.

Em paralelo, há indícios de que uma guerra de baixa intensidade está já em curso entre Teerão e Telavive, de um lado com o assassínio de cientistas nucleares e acções de sabotagem do programa iraniano, a que o outro lado terá respondido, nesta semana, com planos de ataque contra diplomatas israelitas na Índia, Tailândia e Geórgia.

Na entrevista, Hague diz, no entanto, que o Reino Unido “tem sido muito claro com todas as partes envolvidas que não defende uma acção militar”. “Continuamos a apoiar a estratégia dupla de sanções e pressão, por um lado, e a de negociações por outro”, afirmou.

E neste capítulo há, pelo menos, uma boa notícia. Na quarta-feira, o principal negociador iraniano, Said Jalili, enviou uma carta à União Europeia propondo o reinício “o mais rapidamente possível” das negociações multilaterais “no respeito pelo direito do Irão ao uso pacífico da energia nuclear”.

A abertura iraniana foi saudada ontem com optimismo prudente pela chefe da diplomacia europeia, Catherine Ashton, e pela sua homóloga americana, Hillary Clinton, mas não há ainda uma data para o reinício dos contactos, parados há quase um ano.

[atomez]

The writing is on the wall...


<object id="flashObj" width="404" height="436" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,47,0"><param name="movie" value="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="flashVars" value="videoId=1441414068001&playerID=1813626064&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAF1BIQQ~,g5cZB_aGkYZXG-DCZXT7a-c4jcGaSdDQ&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" /><param name="base" value="http://admin.brightcove.com" /><param name="seamlesstabbing" value="false" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="swLiveConnect" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1441414068001&playerID=1813626064&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAF1BIQQ~,g5cZB_aGkYZXG-DCZXT7a-c4jcGaSdDQ&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="404" height="436" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" swLiveConnect="true" allowScriptAccess="always" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object>

[atomez]

"Bold Alligator 2012" drills 20,000 troops on US East Coast for Persian Gulf action

Some 20,000 marines, seamen and air crews from half a dozen countries, a US nuclear aircraft carrier strike group and three US Marine gunship carriers are practicing an attack on a fictitious mechanized enemy division which has invaded its neighbor. It is the largest amphibian exercise seen in the West for a decade, staged to simulate a potential Iranian invasion of an allied Persian Gulf country and a marine landing on the Iranian coast. Based largely on US personnel and hardware, French, British, Italian, Dutch, Australian and New Zealand military elements are integrated in the drill.

Bold Alligator went into its operational phase Monday, Feb. 6, the same day as a large-scale exercise began in southern Iran opposite the Strait of Hormuz. This simultaneity attests to the preparations for a US-Iranian showdown involving Israel behind the words on Feb. 5 of US President Barack Obama ("I don't think Israel has decided whether to attack Iran") and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Feb. 3 ("The war itself will be ten times as detrimental to the US.").

Monday, Feb. 6, the US president ordered the tightening of sanctions by freezing Iranian assets in America and blocking the operations of Iranian banks including its central bank.

US Rear Adm. Kevin Scott and Brig. Gen. Christopher Owens are coordinating the exercise over large stretches of coastal terrain in Virginia, North Carolina and Florida and Atlantic Ocean from the USS Wasp amphibian helicopter carrier. It is led by the USS Enterprise nuclear carrier with strike force alongside three amphibian helicopter carriers, the USS Wasp, the USS Boxer and the USS Kearsage. On their decks are 6,000 Marines, 25 fighter bombers and 65 strike and transport helicopters, mainly MV-22B Ospreys with their crews. Altogether 100 combat aircraft are involved.

The exercise is scheduled to end on February 14, a week before the winding up of the Iranian drill, after which the participants are to be shipped out to Persian Gulf positions opposite Iran. Altogether three American aircraft carrier strike groups, the French Charles de Gaulle carrier and four or five US Marines amphibian vessels will be posted there, DEBKAfile's military sources report.

On Feb. this site first disclosed a flow in unprecedented numbers of US military strength to two strategic islands, Yemeni Socotra and Omani Masirah, within range of the Strait of Hormuz and Iran.

US naval officials insist that the exercise has nothing to do with Iran, but the scenario is a giveaway. A mechanized division from the fictitious hostile country of Garnet (Iran) has invaded its neighbor, Amber (Saudi Arabia), which has asked for coalition assistance to halt the enemy's northern advance. Garnet has already mined harbors (Hormuz) and established anti-ship missiles on its coastline.

Coalition forces are required to develop strategy for defeating the enemy and carry the combat onto its (Iranian) soil. Hence, the preponderance of amphibian Marines in the exercise.

[PMACS]

Parece que já não é SE, é Quando acontecerá...

Israel, U.S. Divided Over Timing of Potential Military Strike Against Iran


The U.S. and Israel are publicly disagreeing over timing for a potential attack on Iran’s disputed nuclear facilities, as that nation’s leader said it won’t back down.

The U.S. and Israel have a “significant analytic difference” over estimates of how close Iran is to shielding its nuclear program from attack, Aaron David Miller, a former Mideast peace negotiator in the Clinton administration, said today.

“There’s a growing concern -- more than a concern -- that the Israelis, in order to protect themselves, might launch a strike without approval, warning or even foreknowledge,” he said in an interview.

The differing views were underscored by public comments this week by senior Israeli and U.S. defense officials.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said yesterday that Israel must consider conducting “an operation” before Iran reaches an “immunity zone,” referring to Iran’s goal of protecting its uranium enrichment and other nuclear operations by moving them to deep underground facilities such as one at Fordo, near the holy city of Qom.
‘Nearing Readiness’

“The world has no doubt that Iran’s nuclear program is steadily nearing readiness and is about to enter an immunity zone,” Barak said in an address to the annual Herzliya Conference at the Interdisciplinary Center campus north of Tel Aviv. “If the sanctions don’t achieve their goal of halting Iran’s nuclear weapons program, there will arise the need of weighing an operation,” Barak said.

The U.S. holds the view that “there is still time and space to pursue diplomacy” with Iran over its nuclear program, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said today in Washington. He added that the U.S. “is absolutely committed to preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons.”

In Iran, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said today that his nation won’t abandon its nuclear efforts and warned that a strike against the nuclear program would damage U.S. interests in the Middle East “10 times over,” according to the Associated Press. He said, without providing details, that he would disclose a letter that he said President Barack Obama sent Iran’s leaders.

Referring to Israel as a “cancerous tumor,” Khamenei said in his Friday sermon that “if any nation or any group confronts the Zionist regime, we will help.” He said that Iran has assisted anti-Israel groups such as Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.
SWIFT Sanctions

The U.S. Senate Banking Committee unanimously approved yesterday a bill that would increase the economic pressure on Iran. The proposal targets Iran-related banking transactions, Iran’s national oil company and leading tanker fleet, joint ventures in mining and energy projects. It also would require corporate disclosure of Iran-related activity to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

One provision calls on the administration to provide a report to Congress within 60 days detailing Iran-related financial transactions facilitated by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, the Belgian member-owned institution known as Swift, and its competitors. The measure would give the president authority to sanction Swift to cut off such services. A similar bill, with stronger language mandating the imposition of sanctions, was submitted in the House yesterday.

Within Israel, there isn’t consensus that striking Iran is either good or necessary. Ephraim Halevy, a former head of Israel’s Mossad security agency, is one of two former intelligence chiefs who have spoken against a strike.
Panetta’s Concerns

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta declined to comment directly on a report by Washington Post columnist David Ignatius that Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June. Panetta and other U.S. officials have repeatedly warned Israel not to act alone.

“Israel has indicated that they’re considering this” through public statements, Panetta told reporters traveling with him yesterday in Brussels. “And we have indicated our concerns.”

Israelis think Iran will reach the immunity zone in “half the time the Americans think it will,” Miller said. “To take that difference and talk about a growing rift” between Israel and the U.S. “is by and large an overstatement,” he said.
Obama-Netanyahu Relations

Tension between Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be complicating communications on the issue, a U.S. defense official said. “There’s no love lost between the two of them, and there’s a trust deficit,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak to the news media.

Defense officials have been concerned that Obama hasn’t warned Netanyahu directly enough about the risks of a Israeli preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, including for U.S. interests in the region such as bases in in Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar, according to the official.

James Clapper, the U.S. director of national intelligence, said Jan. 31 that communication with Israel was good. “We’re doing a lot with the Israelis, working together with them,” he told the Senate intelligence panel.
Unknown Intentions

The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, has said it is “premature” to resort to military force because sanctions are starting to have an impact on Iran. In a Jan. 26 interview with National Journal, Dempsey said he delivered a similar message of caution to Israel’s top leadership during a visit to the Jewish state in early January.

U.S. intelligence agencies think Iran is developing capabilities to produce nuclear weapons “should it choose to do so,” said Clapper.

“We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons,” he said.

While leaders of both countries agree that time must be given to gauge the impact of the latest set of economic sanctions on Iran, Israel’s patience is shorter than that of the U.S., Ephraim Kam, deputy director of Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, said.
‘Too Late’

“It will take at least six months to see whether sanctions are effective and by then it may be too late,” said Kam, author of the 2007 book, “A Nuclear Iran: What Does it Mean, and What Can be Done.”

“We’re definitely using different clocks,” he said.

Israeli Army Chief of Staff Lieutenant-General Benny Gantz told the Herzliya conference on Feb. 1 that his nation must be “willing to deploy” its military assets because Iran may be within a year of gaining nuclear weapons capability. Gantz said international sanctions are starting to show some results.

Moshe Yaalon, Israel’s vice prime minister and its former top military commander, played down Iran’s ability to shelter its activities from a military attack. “It’s possible to strike all Iran’s facilities, and I say that out of my experience as IDF chief of staff,” he said at the conference, referring to the Israeli Defense Forces.

The U.S., its European allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency have challenged the government in Tehran to prove that its nuclear work is intended only for energy and medical research, as Iranian officials maintain.

Mehdi Khalaji, an Iran specialist at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said in an interview that he doubts that the U.S. or Iran will launch a military strike this year. Rather, he cited the possibility than Iran might stage a provocation and use any response as an excuse to launch an asymmetrical attack against U.S. and Israel targets using proxies such as Hezbollah.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-0 ... -iran.html

[rubini]

Mais uma vez, os judeus.

Nada de novo, esta espécie consegue estar em tudo o que é confronto militar, quase sempre a iniciar a provocação e sempre sem razão, e depois admiram-se que haja quem não goste deles.

Fico-me por aqui, senão ainda sou apelidado de anti-semítico pela brigada de bons costumes e do politicamente correcto.

[atomez]

Growing concern Israel may strike Iran this spring

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says Israel could strike Iran as early as April if sanctions fail to halt their nuclear program

(CBS/AP) There is growing concern about an Israeli military strike against Iran to stop it from developing a nuclear weapon.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is quoted as saying it is likely Israel will launch the attack this spring. CBS News correspondent David Martin reports that Panetta believes specifically that there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June.

That quote came from columnist David Ignatius, writing shortly after he completed a trans-Atlantic flight with the defense secretary. Panetta, on Thursday, did not dispute it.

He noted that Israel has stated publicly that it is considering military action against Iran. He said the U.S. has "indicated our concerns."

As Panetta explained in an interview with "60 Minutes" an Israeli attack would almost certainly have consequences for the U.S.

[Ulrich]

Viva,
obrigado pela partilha.

Abraços

[migluso]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/satellite ... -destroyed

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east ... y-1.398312

Espero que não seja nada...

[Fenicio]

Algo está MESMO para acontecer. O trigger é que hoje começa a ser activado o reactor nuclear de Bushehr com combustível russo. É que depois de carregado o reactor não pode ser bombardeado devido à contaminação que iria provocar.

Arab sources: A major military surprise is close.

E antes de ser activado também não pq aquilo está cheio de técnicos russos.

Bombardear uma instalação nuclear e matar cidadãos russos, dando uma desculpa à Rússia para não apoiar uma eventual guerra em larga escala contra o Irão? Não é isso o que os americanos querem.

[atomez]

Algo está MESMO para acontecer. O trigger é que hoje começa a ser activado o reactor nuclear de Bushehr com combustível russo. É que depois de carregado o reactor não pode ser bombardeado devido à contaminação que iria provocar.

Arab sources: A major military surprise is close.

[katanga]

Com as suas teorias de Finanças Comportamentais. Com muita coisa plagiada.

Foi descoberto e aqui desmascarado.

Na altura provocou celeuma quando prognosticou quedas superiores a 50% nos índices americanos!? Ninguém -quase- acreditava, mas revelou-se verdade.

Agora regressou com novidades. Como bom sionista é um esclarecido por graça divina.

Tenha-mos em consideração as suas palavras.

[Clinico]

Estes árabes continuam a ser uns artistas de primeira...O Rodrigues dos Santos é que os conhece bem com a "Fúria Divina"...

A Síria, "coitada" , que teve o reactor atómico a norte destruido pela aviação israelita e quis manter o silêncio, não se vai aventurar a entrar em guerra com Israel.
Se houver guerra, não será só Israel a entrar em combate e espera-se mais rockets do Hezbollah do que chatices da Síria, a não ser que esta seja o liaison Irão-Hezzbollah.

Mas, tal como aconteceu com os regimes comunistas, se cair o encéfalo (Irão) caiem os neurótomos todos...

Enfim Atomez, Bom Natal, Boas Festas, Bom Ano de 2010 e... Boa Viagem
Abraço
Clinico

[atomez]

Isto vale o que vale, prvavelmente nada. Mas aqui fica fyi.

A noticia tem um ponto interessante -- se de facto lá para o fim do ano o Obama declarar que a via diplomática com o Irão falhou, isso será o "tipping point". E como ele dizia ao receber o Nobel da Paz "há alturas em que a guerra é necessária para defender a paz"...

If attacked, Iran wants Syria to hit back at Israel

DEBKAfile's military sources report that this message Iran's defense minister Ahmad Vahidi brought to Damascus where he is attending a session of the high Iranian-Syrian defense committee which went into its second day Thursday, Dec. 10. Syrian defense minister Ali Habib is in the chair.

The Iranian visitor indicated that Tehran expects an Israeli attack within a month. According to Iranian intelligence, Jerusalem will take its green light from President Barack Obama's forced admission after Christmas that his policy of dialogue and stiffer sanctions have failed in the face of Tehran's rejection of the international proposal to send its enriched uranium for overseas processing.

"The countdown for war is coming close to its end," said Vahidi to the joint defense committee. "And we must get our strategic partnership in shape ahead of time."

Aproveito para desejar desde já Boas Festas e Boas Entradas no Novo Ano a todos/as foristas.

Agora vou para outras paragens, Até pró ano.