MIDDLE EAST TIMES
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (bottom) leads the Eid Al-Fitr, the holiday marking the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, at Imam Khomeini Grand Mosque in Tehran on October 13, 2007. Mostafa Khomeini, Iran's late supreme leader Ayatollah Rohollah Khomeini's grandson is seen on the left. (UPI Photo/Payam Borazjani/Soureh Photo Agency)    
The sharp criticism of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad by an Iranian newspaper close to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei has understandably attracted world-wide attention.
Wednesday's editorial in the Islamic Republic daily said that President Ahmedinejad's treatment attack on critics of his nuclear policies was immoral, illogical and illegal. In a recent angry speech, Ahmedinejad had denounced some as traitors and others as spies for foreigners.
Experts on Iranian affairs believe that such a sharp public attack on such a crucial issue would have been unthinkable without the ayatollah's approval. And if the ayatollah is indeed behind this attempt to rein in Ahmedinejad's aggressive rhetoric, then this is likely to be welcomed across the Middle East and elsewhere.
This week, one of Washington's top strategic experts, Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, issued a chilling report on the likely results of a future nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel. A former director of intelligence for the secretary of defense and a former director policy planning in the Department of Energy (which administers the U.S. nuclear weapons program), Cordesman knows the subject alarmingly well.
Based on the best current knowledge of the Israeli and Iranian nuclear arsenals in the years after 2010, Cordesman concludes that a nuclear war between them would kill up to 800,000 Israelis and up to 28 million Iranians. Israel might just be able to recover as an organized society, but Iran would not.
Cordesman assumes that Iran, with less than 30 nuclear warheads in the period after 2010, would aim for the main population centers of Tel Aviv and Haifa, while Israel would have over 200 warheads and far better delivery systems, including cruise missiles launched from its 3 Dolphin-class submarines. Israel also has a far more robust civil defense system and antimissile defenses.
The assumption is that Israel would be targeting Iran's nuclear development centers and the main population centers. Cordesman points out that the city of Tehran, with a population of 15 million in its metropolitan area, is“a topographic basin with mountain reflector. Nearly ideal nuclear killing ground.”
But Cordesman adds that Israel would need to keep a reserve strike capability to ensure no other power can capitalize on Iran's strike.”This means Israel would have to target key Arab neighbors, and in particular Syria and Egypt. Were this escalation to take place, up to 18 million Syrians and tens of millions of Egyptians could also die.
Original Source