MILAVIA Forum
Military Aviation => Defence in General => Topic started by: Eldorado82 on April 21, 2009, 12:31:23 PM
-
The Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government.
Among the steps taken to ready Israeli forces for what would be a risky raid requiring pinpoint aerial strikes are the acquisition of three Airborne Warning and Control (AWAC) aircraft and regional missions to simulate the attack.
Two nationwide civil defence drills will help to prepare the public for the retaliation that Israel could face.
“Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defence official told The Times.
Officials believe that Israel could be required to hit more than a dozen targets, including moving convoys. The sites include Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium; Esfahan, where 250 tonnes of gas is stored in tunnels; and Arak, where a heavy water reactor produces plutonium.
The distance from Israel to at least one of the sites is more than 870 miles, a distance that the Israeli force practised covering in a training exercise last year that involved F15 and F16 jets, helicopters and refuelling tankers.
The possible Israeli strike on Iran has drawn comparisons to its attack on the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad in 1981. That strike, which destroyed the facility in under 100 seconds, was completed without Israeli losses and checked Iraqi ambitions for a nuclear weapons programme.
“We would not make the threat [against Iran] without the force to back it. There has been a recent move, a number of on-the-ground preparations, that indicate Israel's willingness to act,” said another official from Israel's intelligence community.
He added that it was unlikely that Israel would carry out the attack without receiving at least tacit approval from America, which has struck a more reconciliatory tone in dealing with Iran under its new administration.
An Israeli attack on Iran would entail flying over Jordanian and Iraqi airspace, where US forces have a strong presence.
Ephraim Kam, the deputy director of the Institute for National Security Studies, said it was unlikely that the Americans would approve an attack.
“The American defence establishment is unsure that the operation will be successful. And the results of the operation would only delay Iran's programme by two to four years,” he said.
A visit by President Obama to Israel in June is expected to coincide with the national elections in Iran — timing that would allow the US Administration to re-evaluate diplomatic resolutions with Iran before hearing the Israeli position.
“Many of the leaks or statements made by Israeli leaders and military commanders are meant for deterrence. The message is that if [the international community] is unable to solve the problem they need to take into account that we will solve it our way,” Mr Kam said.
Among recent preparations by the airforce was the Israeli attack of a weapons convoy in Sudan bound for militants in the Gaza Strip.
“Sudan was practice for the Israeli forces on a long-range attack,” Ronen Bergman, the author of The Secret War with Iran, said. “They wanted to see how they handled the transfer of information, hitting a moving target ... In that sense it was a rehearsal.”
Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.
Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would “train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning ... We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning”.
Israel will conduct an exercise with US forces to test the ability of Arrow, its US-funded missile defence system. The exercise would test whether the system could intercept missiles launched at Israel.
“Israel has made it clear that it will not tolerate the threat of a nuclear Iran. According to Israeli Intelligence they will have the bomb within two years ... Once they have a bomb it will be too late, and Israel will have no choice to strike — with or without America,” an official from the Israeli Defence Ministry said.
found in one of the aviation forums.......
opinions guys.. ill keep you updated if there is something going on
-
I wont cry if Iran gets the crap blown out of them.
Especially after their presidents comments at that meeting thing in Switzerland the other day
-
we've done it back in 1981 so why we can't do it now? IAF improved himself very much since then. and if we say we can than we can. Nothin that wasn't checked and trained hundreds of times won't be activated. As a matter of fact, I'm almost sure that the plan of this maybe-upcoming attack was written months ago and now lies in some vault of some general office. technically we can do it- to fly to strike and to fly back. Iran AF improved also but i tend to think that we are better. what consequences it might bring? Not me nor you probably don't know ( unless you are one of the pilots). Most of the times if there are some secret or a very importat mission like this even the pilots themself dont know where are they ging to fly and what for, and might be told only in a final debriefing, minuts before leaving to the planes.
Ahmedinijad says that " no one can threat them", that "their nation is a great part of the world and strongest in their region."
that ahmedinijad told not once and not twice things thath were exaggerated. their army is not that developed and don't have technical level that he can fight an armed conflict. this land is based on religious Fantatism. lots of times Ahmedinijad called "clown" here in israel. He prefers to speak great words and to present apperance of the strongest leader in the world... but after all Iran is very poor country and i'm in doubt that they have at least half of what he speaks.
I know that IAF have the main plan, so-called plan "b" and emergency plan.
from a familiarization with my AF and army i know that we prefer to thing over all possible consequences and turn-outs of this operation and to prepare accordingly.
GO IAF!
-
Israel <3
Iran pffffffftttttttttttttttttttttttt
:)
-
In my opinion, there is no doubt in mind that the IDF can't carry out such attack it has proven time and time again in battle. In my opinion the IDF are some of the more experienced combat proven fighting force, not to mention it's pilots. However with that being said, the question that we should be asking is this,
1. What would the IDF do when the retaliation from Iran is carried out?
2. would a full scale war take into effect?
3. Would this disstablelize the region and would we see Arab (or Muslim countries) side with Iran?
4. If that's the case would we see another full scale world war which would see NATO countries involved, and or allied countries?
5. Could this be the beginning of WWIII?
One thing to understand is that most of the NATO and other allied countries are already involved in other campaigns, Israel is expecting an approval from the U.S. to act, I can tell you this we would more than likely will not condone such strike, and our troops are already committed in other theaters not to mention the economic scale of funding yet another major involment, not only for the US but for other allied countries. Of course this is only my opinion, and I could be blowing this out of context.
Cheers
-
I wish the bombing operation would have taken place under Bush. Our current President is checking to see if he has a pair soon he'll be giving F-16 parts to Chavez. I hope the target selection is done very carefully and it takes Iran ten years to get back on track.
-
I wish the bombing operation would have taken place under Bush. Our current President is checking to see if he has a pair soon he'll be giving F-16 parts to Chavez. I hope the target selection is done very carefully and it takes Iran ten years to get back on track.
I think you're missing the point, it's not "under whose administration" this should fall under. Think about the reprecussions this attack could bring to the world, if a full scale retaliation takes place.
-
Retaliation from Iran I think is limited military wise because they lack an modern air force. Iran's missiles & rocket's are the really the only concern. There one squadron or of Su-24s a pretty solid platform would find if difficult reaching Israel. US forces won't let them flying over them period and Hawk missile armed F-14s don't really scare much.
Talk to this guy who said he's from the UAE and he said nobody on Gulf wants Iran to have nukes. None are real time Israel supporters but Iran having them isn't a good thing. The Saudi's who most likely support as much or even more world terrorism then Iran, doesn't want Iran to have them.
-
Very true and you have valid points.
-
We have forces spread all around the Gulf region so the rocket threat isn't taken lightly. Iran doesn't have a modern military they would be pissed but striking back might bring more response, something they might want to avoid. We have hundreds of USAF fighter and tactical aircraft in the region. The USN has at least one carrier and maybe more assets (subs) in the region as well. Every USN ship have Tommy's or Harpoonies so more land targets can be hit and I think we have something like 42 ships in the Gulf or nearby.
If Iran fired on our nearby bases a lot of hurt would be brought down and what the Israelis missed on their attack we wouldn't leave much. Iran is surround on all side besides Russia, Pakistan and Turkey would raise hell and we might only get one launch from there bases but it's from next store. Every inch of Iran is mapped and marked so good targets are abound.
A few tankers might be hit but shutting down the Gulf cuts there oil off to so I don't think anything would be long term. They would be pissed beyond words and every terrorist group would get a double pay check
I would like to see some nice USAF tankers making sure the Israeli got back ok. They would be doing us the US and others a favor. Iran hate us anyway and basically always will so it wouldn't change much and some crazies would have a nuclear weapons.
-
In my opinion, there is no doubt in mind that the IDF can't carry out such attack it has proven time and time again in battle. In my opinion the IDF are some of the more experienced combat proven fighting force, not to mention it's pilots. However with that being said, the question that we should be asking is this,
1. What would the IDF do when the retaliation from Iran is carried out?
2. would a full scale war take into effect?
3. Would this disstablelize the region and would we see Arab (or Muslim countries) side with Iran?
4. If that's the case would we see another full scale world war which would see NATO countries involved, and or allied countries?
5. Could this be the beginning of WWIII?
One thing to understand is that most of the NATO and other allied countries are already involved in other campaigns, Israel is expecting an approval from the U.S. to act, I can tell you this we would more than likely will not condone such strike, and our troops are already committed in other theaters not to mention the economic scale of funding yet another major involment, not only for the US but for other allied countries. Of course this is only my opinion, and I could be blowing this out of context.
Cheers
Hi there! sorry for such a late answer just arrived to work where i can write:) now for the answers:
1. first of all i don't think there would be a retaliation or something similar like that would carry out. If we strike iran it would take her lots of time to come back to herself after being knocked out.
2. Full scale war?!? no. Iran doesnt has the needed power to attack any country. I suggest you to remember in a last armed conflict in iraq when Us troops were advancing already inside Saddam's residence, his general ( forgot the name the only thing i remember about that general is that he was wearing glasses and military unifrom) was speaking that Glorious Iraq armies are crushing the enemy and soon he will be retreated...untill the troops captured him. Same with Ahmedinidjad- "the most powerful country in the region", "everybody afraid to deal with them"......
3. At least not of the reginal arabs.. Everybody there dislike Iran, they know that Iran is a country that in armed state if very dangerous because she might use her pwoerful weapon agains almost anybody she dislikes. Even the Emirates (they dont say it in open) dislike Iran. to conclusion,the supporters of the anti- Iran idea are in the underground.nobody really wants to come with a statement of his country agains Iran because it will make this country to be discreminated. We'll see the thing after the bombardment of the nuclear installations ( if ther would be one)
4. Nato may interferr but I think that there would be enough aircraft carriers, missle boats and AFB's around Iran (that they already have all the targets inside Iran marked) and it will be enough to turn Iran into Largest parking lot in the middle east ( after Gaza strip: )
5. WWIII? naaaa............. armed regional conflict possible.but not more than that.
-
I wish the bombing operation would have taken place under Bush. Our current President is checking to see if he has a pair soon he'll be giving F-16 parts to Chavez. I hope the target selection is done very carefully and it takes Iran ten years to get back on track.
tend to think that target selection was made under Bush. if not even earlier, and Obama only updated in existance of such files and the targets within.
Obama has to make less connections with people like Chavez, thats true... dont forget that he is Barak H Obama
-
A massive aerial assault?
I'd prefer to see "surgery"
-
A massive aerial assault?
I'd prefer to see "surgery"
one thing i can promiss you is that you won't see any "surgery" here. like in the Opera in 1981
no surgery hits just getting the ground flat:) >:D
-
Im very sure the "muslims" will retaliate with more frequent suicidebombings if these plans were carried out. It will also lead to a full scale war between the Israel state and the surrounding muslims countries. They will definatly unite into a stronger force so they can attack Israel. And im not so sure the US or Nato would back Israel up in this case, atleast not openly.
The muslim fanatics is just waiting for something like this to occur. Then they can prove their point of Israels unprovoced attack with civilian casualties. You will see dead children in the news and the regular demonstrations. Irans president will call the other muslim countries for aid to help them destroy the evil Israel. I belive that they would actually answer his call. How that confrontation would end, i have no answer to.
However this is all speculation from my side, how i think this scenario would play out.
-
Im very sure the "muslims" will retaliate with more frequent suicidebombings if these plans were carried out. It will also lead to a full scale war between the Israel state and the surrounding muslims countries. They will definatly unite into a stronger force so they can attack Israel. And im not so sure the US or Nato would back Israel up in this case, atleast not openly.
The muslim fanatics is just waiting for something like this to occur. Then they can prove their point of Israels unprovoced attack with civilian casualties. You will see dead children in the news and the regular demonstrations. Irans president will call the other muslim countries for aid to help them destroy the evil Israel. I belive that they would actually answer his call. How that confrontation would end, i have no answer to.
However this is all speculation from my side, how i think this scenario would play out.
Thank you!!!! finally someone is seeing it from my perspective. Of course again let me just say, this is all one of the many scenarios that could happen.
-
Hey Viggen buddy how are you?
Its not 1967 or 1973 anymore and don't think the Muslims are united as you think. In the Gulf region nobody wants Iran to have such power they don't openly support Israel don't get me wrong but Iran having nukes one day is a nightmare. Iran would be able to bully them which means messing with the oil money and that's a no, no.
Hi WRCKid
I can see you point and totally don't want this to grow into a long drawn fight involving many countries but I can't see many countries actually taking part in real fighting and taking Iran's side. Iran's biggest supporter is Syria which at times clashes with Iran's government but overall are friendly toward each other. Syria is like Iran are one of the biggest supporter for the outside fighters in Iraq killing Americans and others daily, Syria will not step toward Israel period. There trying hard to survive in the "Iran friendly" world on one side and trying to become a little more US friendly at the same time. I think Syria has got a free ride for too many years and are one of the worlds most used terrorist hubs but don't seem to get blamed for it, I never understood that. Attacking Syria would have made a lot more sense then Iraq but that's another story.
To both WRCKid & Viggen
What country's do you think would directly support Iran? Take in effect how US support in trade, finance, and arms, etc, has with any country you come with. For example Egypt has treaties with both Israel and the US and depends mainly on the US for weapons and aide, they are not going to "all the sudden" jump onto Iran's side. Besides Colombia, Egypt receives the second largest American aid package out there and aren't going to chance that for a nuclear Iran.
-
let me bite folks: are we gonna beat the s**t out of them or not?!:) :police:
-
Hi Eldorado82
I say attack I think there rockets & missiles are overrated and just don't want them one day to have control over future n-weapons period.
-
Hey Viggen buddy how are you?
To both WRCKid & Viggen
What country's do you think would directly support Iran? Take in effect how US support in trade, finance, and arms, etc, has with any country you come with. For example Egypt has treaties with both Israel and the US and depends mainly on the US for weapons and aide, they are not going to "all the sudden" jump onto Iran's side. Besides Colombia, Egypt receives the second largest American aid package out there and aren't going to chance that for a nuclear Iran.
Im fine, thanks for asking. Though im off to the hospital with the whole family on friday for a full day of experiments and talks with doctors. LOL :D
The countries i was thinking of are (in no particular order) : Libya, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Pakistan. Also i would like to remind everyone, that this would not be any "conventional" war like in Iraq. These people have targets that are much closer then the ones on US soil. If there is a will, then there is always a way. Unless nukes or any bio or chem weapons are used, then it will be a long war. High rate of casualties among civilians on both sides. Sure the IAF would kick ass and manage their share. But its the war on the ground that will cause problems for Israel. One thing that i have learned is that war never goes as planned.
-
Interesting view but in my opinion I don't think it would go down that way.
Libya - Just getting accepted back into the western world, Libya not religious enough for Iran and hasen't been in 30 years. So no strong ties there.
Iraq - Hated enemies both shared an almost 8 year year long war. Iraq is will aware that outside people and weapons are coming from Iran and messing up their country.
Syria - A little Iran and would support but dare not do anything there not doing already
Lebanon - Not a real country and already does there part on making sure there will never be peace with Israel. What could they do launch more rockets, Israel would come down harder then they have ever before.
Pakistan - Everybody tells me the two don't like each other. India and Iran trade together and both support the real government in A-stan which pisses off Pakistan, big time. I don't believe that myself 100% I still think it will surface one day some connection with Iran, Pakistan, and the bad guys in A-stan, but that's just me.
I think Sudan would support Iran's cause but can do little military wise. Other governments would voice there displeasure mainly China.
There already UN trade bans on Iran already so its not like there good guys or anything.
There usually three sides to most topics and it's interesting hearing your on this. I sense you want peace for the West Bank, Gaza, but realize that Iran might be almost the biggest reason why in more then thirty years there isn't. This is a complex issues but if one forum can disgust this without fights breaking out it's Milavia. We tend to talk to each other and not down to each other wish the Middle East could do that. (thumbs up)
Countries like UAE and Kuwait will be very happy and I'm sure Turkey wouldn't mind either.
-
Well, im not saying that im right or wrong, or that any other scenarior presented here is wrong. :)
Im just thinking of the history between these nations and the longtime growing hate for Israel. (Which is not without complete blame). But i also understand the fear from Israels pov if Iran get their hands on nukes.
I belive Iran is crazy enough to make a first pre emptive strike against the Israeli state with nukes. The hate is that strong.
Anyway, my point is that many fanatics from all of these countries that i mentioned, would answer the call for Jihad against Israel just as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq against the US and NATO forces. Israel will have to deal with the same problems as US-troops do in Iraq at the moment, but on a larger scale. They would get more determined if they know they are backed by a country that harbours nuclear capacity and offers a sanctuary for so called "freedom fighters".
-
Good point, Viggen.
Surreptitious Surgery, then.
A few "Industrial Accidents" perhaps.
Or, does Israel once again need to send the message-"We're here, and we intend to stay", via overt action?
Iran should cool it, the rhetoric they spout is reminiscent of the cold war male bovine feces I grew up with.
Shawn A.
-
Anyway, my point is that many fanatics from all of these countries that i mentioned, would answer the call for Jihad against Israel just as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq against the US and NATO forces. Israel will have to deal with the same problems as US-troops do in Iraq at the moment, but on a larger scale. They would get more determined if they know they are backed by a country that harbours nuclear capacity and offers a sanctuary for so called "freedom fighters".
The difference between the current US operations (Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom) and any future Israeli operation against Iran is that the US has boots on the ground. And a very large footprint at that! The US has a vast logistics and support system that can ensure that the US presence in Iraq, Afghanistan and surrounding nations remains at a level where operations can persist.
Israel does not have this ability. The IDF (surface elements) is geared for defensive wars and pre-emptive, short range punches. Israel cannot support boots on the ground in a place as far away as Iran, so the issue of fighting an insurgency like the US is doing in both OIF and OEF will not exist. Besides, the last time Israel was up in Lebanon they got given a bloody nose and caught unprepared by holding onto their historic military successes. Hezbollah has made some technological advances with their surface to surface missiles and UAV capability.
Surgical strikes will only postpone the inevitable. I don't believe that kinetic strikes alone will ensure that Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons. Unless the strikes are sustained over a year or longer there will be no way of enforcing a stop to Iran's ambitions. Israel cannot sustain this, nor is it feasible from a political or tactical stand-point.
Politically, the US cannot permit a sustained Israel air dominance over Iran, especially once collateral damage reports reach the media. The worldwide public outrage and political backlash will be bigger than anything the US is prepared to handle.
Tactically, after the first strike, let alone after a day worth of aerial strikes, the element of surprise will be lost. Any successive sorties will have a risk that will increase exponentially over time.
Israel will need a different approach, or at least augment a strike with a more persistent form of deterrence. Sabotage may be one option, but something that can be countered after the first few events. Political pressure on countries assisting Iran probably won't work. Targeted assassinations until a more favourable government takes over? Maybe extremely high altitude UAVs with JDAMs that are out of the reach of Iranian SAMs will provide Israel the ideal aerial strike persistence over a longer term.
In the event of a strike I believe Iran will attempt to fight back by proxy, as it has done in the past. Hezbollah and perhaps even the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. But this will be difficult unless Israel moves into foreign territory. I doubt Iran or any asymmetrical force fighting on Iran's behalf will be able to fight its way into Israel; that is the one thing Israel trains for more than anything. Just looking at their MBT, the Merkava; it is designed to fight defensive wars and ensure crew survivability.
The other options is artillery and rockets, similar to what Iraq did in the early 90s. But to do this, Iran would need to put their artillery units on alert and any indication that shows these units are going active will force the US to destroy them. Having Iraq between Israel and Iran may well work in Israel's favour.
-
=> This post has been written before RecceJet's last reply. Sorry.
I can't agree with those of you promoting this so much. Although the typical 1980s Middle-East scenario won't happen, it will hurt almost everyone of those countries. Iraq's fragile stability will be lost, Lebanon's government will be overthrown, Egypt's government will be reelected and those parties against Israel will be in power. Israel will face a huge threat from inside. Syria / Iran will supply anything to Hamas. But in the end, it will be Iranian people who don't hate the US and don't care about Israel and just want some prosperity to get on with their lives, that will suffer the most from any "justified" action their government will take.
I agree with Shawn A that there are other options. You're saying sabotage of the nuclear program / facilities. Although difficult and risky, I'd say I would prefer that over any kind of strike. Then they'll still blame Israel and the US of course, hopefully without proof, the rest of the world will let it pass. Still, it will feed extremists.
I'd say no Israel has no need to send any message this time, with Lebanon and Gaza fresh in everyone's mind. Israel should be careful now, the EU and Arab liga won't let them get away with it a third time in such a short period, not saying they'll take direct military action. Even if it is just trade embargos, this might hurt Israel badly.
The US administration won't be happy either, of course that won't mean anything.
Not sure what Iran will do, maybe it won't respond in a military sense at all, but let the extremists take care of it.
Iran should cool it, the rhetoric they spout is reminiscent of the cold war male bovine feces I grew up with.
Right, and to prevent it going 'hot', Israel should not pre-empt anything and let them talk and mess around with their rockets. Iran will use their nuclear weapon as deterrent and as political bargaining tool, like N.Korea, if it ever does succeed. The president may be a hot shot, but the real people calling the shots there aren't and they know it will put their country back into the stoneage if they try something. But any pre-emptive move from Israel, might justify for them to let the president do whatever he wants in response.
-
I agree with the Webmaster here.
In my last response I was just speculating on the actions and reactions between Israel and Iran in the event of a strike, but as with any conflict (although in the Middle East in particular when Israel is involved) there are direct effects on the neighbouring countries. I would also recommend for cooler heads to prevail and hope that Israel exercises restraint.
The US called for Israel's restraint in the first US Gulf War, when Hussein launched SS-1 Scud missiles. Hussein knew that if Israel were to retaliate and join the conflict the Coalition Forces that supported the US operation in Iraq would disintegrate. Arab and Muslim countries may bicker amongst themselves, but when the Jewish nation joins a conflict against an Arab country, the entire Muslim world will rally in support.
Countries such as Egypt and Jordan have relatively friendly relations with Israel and the US. The balance of power in these two countries - as an example - will rapidly shift after military action against Iran by Israel. If their respective governments want to stay in power they must bow to the will of the masses and join forces with their fellow Muslim countries. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has a minority government in a majority Palestinian country. The late King Hussein of Jordan has in the past struggled to stay in control when an insurgency against Israel based itself in his country and threatened to cause a major Palestinian uprising.
There are many other countries in the region on friendly terms with the US and the western world. Even if Israel retaliates after a strike by Iran, the region could collapse into a mess. I just hope that the MIM-104 Patriot and the Israeli Arrow intercepting missiles are up to the task!
-
Hey guys
I can't say I agree with Webmasters or RecceJet last post, but that's what makes the world and forums so special.
RecceJet
Even if Israel retaliates after a strike by Iran, the region could collapse into a mess.
Hi RecceJet
What happens if that first strike by Iran is a nuclear there might not be an Israel left? Do the people in Israel and if you think of it the surrounding country's would be effective if some sort of bomb was exploded, have to live in fear because of Iran? There President has made it clear Israel should be wiped from the map. I don't see Iran retracing any of these remarks and trying to lessen the situation, in fact there President goes on anti-Israeli tours trying to gain support and peaching his points. Not exactly happy times if you live in Israel and this nut job is building nuclear reactors that can produce the needed I'll say "things" for making weapons? All it takes in some 2nd or 3rd party group to carry out the evil deed and Iran's governments makes a press release saying "The government of Iran had nothing to do with the attack on Israel" at that point its too late.
Hi Webmaster
But in the end, it will be Iranian people who don't hate the US and don't care about Israel and just want some prosperity to get on with their lives, that will suffer the most from any "justified" action their government will take.
The Iranian people don't hate the US what? There basically taught that webmaster not much you could say or do to get around that, they don't how the same kinds of schools and teachers that they do in Europe. That type of play fair, be nice, don't hate, etc, gets eaten up by them and used against us in general in the west. They don't care about Israel? Wow is all I can say. Remember we the US supported the Shah and they overthrew the country, the new powers started teaching hate Americans and Jews right about that time. They killed thousands of Iranians who didn't believe or who were slow to change over to the new rules? Not a happy bunch overall and it's these happy hater's who control things.
Iran will use their nuclear weapon as deterrent and as political bargaining tool, like N.Korea, if it ever does succeed.
Are you sure it will go like that? It could be a cargo ship in some harbor with a nasty dirty (blank) on it, I don't want these crazies to have that chance. I don't think it will be deterrent as much as there bully other smaller countries around in the Gulf region, making them top dog in a sense.
I look at this way say some crazy guy threaten you, family, etc and you see him buying a gun at a gun store (Russia in this case). What are you going to do? You know this guy has killed before, you know guns he bought have been given to others have killed. Are you going to sit back and do nothing while this crazy guy who said "I'll wipe your whole family out" and you know he buying a gun? You can see through his window and see him putting the gun together. To me this is where Israel stands and Iran does nothing to ease this at all in fact makes it worse when ever the shit head speaks.
-
Are you sure it will go like that? It could be a cargo ship in some harbor with a nasty dirty (blank) on it, I don't want these crazies to have that chance. I don't think it will be deterrent as much as there bully other smaller countries around in the Gulf region, making them top dog in a sense.
Or you can smash Iran so bad that it's in the orbit around the planet and Pakistan will crash down under islamic revolution, they get the nukes from there and it goes KABOOM. There's millions of chances how it could happen. However lets not forget that one of the most agressive states in the region are not Iran and Syria but US and Israel, who both have the A bomb and one has used it already, TWICE just to see how the thing works.
If anything Iran could want an A-bomb for protection. Lets face it, ever since the 1979 world has tried to eliminate Irani regime. The big and bad Saddam Husein was supplied by US, Europe AND Soviet Union* in war against Iran, just to eliminate the Iranian regime. Then Soviets moved into Afganistan, who were closly followed by the yanks, after which Iraq was attacked. IDF takes annual trips to Lebanon. I wouldn't call that a friendly enivroment for Iran.
*And that is highly illogical since we're deep in the Cold war.
Futhermore currently we are fighting Taliban in Afganistan. It's a sunni organisation. I'd never for one second buy it that a shia state would risk its existance so a sunni organisation could triumph. It only leaves us with Hezbollah and Israel, but luckily christians, jews and muslems have one thing in common - we're all crazy for same holy places, specially Jerusalem. Also lucky that our crushades to the city are over.
Apart of that nonsense NATO simply doesnt have the strenght to attack Iran. Econimic crises, the army is not so popular in the US anymore, European bigger states just don't feel like it and Russia is just sparking mad about everything NATO does so they sell weapons here and there like crazy. And I hardly doubt IDF can do anything but few air strikes with out and major support.
Webmaster Edit: Removed F-words
-
Hi alyster
You made some really interesting point. You mentioned Pakistan in your post with Islamic revolution and maybe having special weapons fall into the wrong hands is a very valid point. They might even be more unstable then Iran if that's possible.
The two most aggressive states comment is a little vague I know attacking Iraq the second time was a mistake but at the time 911, Bush and his adviser over reacted big time really miss the bus on that one. Let's face it part of the reason Iraq is taking so long to fix in a sense is that it's was and is really messed up, not much different then most of the Middle East, I don't like saying it but backwards country's. The country was held together by an inner secruity that basically killed who ever they want and local government and military was run by fear, so it was never a happy place. Just non public and most that happen didn't always make it out. If you really care about the poor in the West Bank, Gaza, then Iraq should have been on the list as well plenty of same.
The A-bomb was not used just to see how its works and it used to shorten the future ground war. In 1945 it seem like the right thing and I think at that time if other governments had it I think would have used it. You don't think if Russia had it they wouldn't have used it on the Germans? Let not throw stones in glass houses here. It was a different era of warfare and fighting and it was a weapon. I think Germany would have used if they finished there's and it's the weapons part of it is why I don't want Iran to have it. Russia and the US were smarter enough and had enough control never to use even at the height of the Cold War, sorry but I don't feel that control with Iran.
Israel and it's surrounding lovely areas is a very complex topic. Some in this forum see Israel as the wrong and the big evil. I see little chance of convincing others differently on this matter. The people in the West Bank and Gaza are there mainly because of others and held there in different ways by others. Other Muslim country's which don't get any of the blame for making or helping the bad situation grow in the first place. Being throw out and dump on Israel's border and then being screw over by own and used time after time to face a powerful force, well the locals pay for it. The UN gave Israel some land in 1948 and voted on and agreed to, I can't change that. This is a military forum how many countries in war after winning give back land? Why should Israel after being attacked by so many? I know I wouldn't and why should I if your letting other come though your country and kill woman and children. I know its complex and I'm leaving out a bunch of stuff. But to me the locals shoved on Israel's border in the first place by there own that have been used and suffered the most. Thirty plus years of turning their backs to the shithole situation they help make. I really think and I might piss people off here and I'm not Jewish but it's a Christ thing deep down. If Israel was a Christian country and if it was the big bad Muslim countries ganging up on them it would be different.
Back to the topic
I to wish there was a way of just taking out the reactors and making it look like an accident. It is the way human life is valued in the Middle East for example blowing up each other at a anti-Israeli rally in Iraq. Its these types and group which are currently active in Iran that I don't want them to have control over future weapons. They may even use against each other never mind against the US or Israel, that's something else to think about.
-
You all make intresting and valid points. But lets face it, even if Iran manages to weaponise their plutonium from a reactor. They still need to make a bomb and a reliable way of delivering the payload. Takes alot of money, time and science to achive so far.
I would be more worried about biological weapons finding their way into Iranian hands. :)
-
Hi Viggen
I so agree with you on the biological weapons weapons.
Sadly China could help them shorten that process the way they did with Pakistan M-11 (direct imports from China)
-
Hi Tiger!
Nothing freaks me out as much as biological weapons. You cant hide from bacteria or viruses. The shit is easy to make and cheap. Not to mention how easy it is to deliver to your enemies front door. :o
Today you can buy anything you want from China, from cheap replica Rolexes to cheap weaponsgrade biological viruses. The world is going crazy and not thinking that we all live and share the same planet. All ABC-weapons should be outlawed by UN and sent into the sun for inciniration. ;D
-
Hey guys
I can't say I agree with Webmasters or RecceJet last post, but that's what makes the world and forums so special.
RecceJet
Even if Israel retaliates after a strike by Iran, the region could collapse into a mess.
Hi RecceJet
What happens if that first strike by Iran is a nuclear there might not be an Israel left? Do the people in Israel and if you think of it the surrounding country's would be effective if some sort of bomb was exploded, have to live in fear because of Iran? There President has made it clear Israel should be wiped from the map. I don't see Iran retracing any of these remarks and trying to lessen the situation, in fact there President goes on anti-Israeli tours trying to gain support and peaching his points. Not exactly happy times if you live in Israel and this nut job is building nuclear reactors that can produce the needed I'll say "things" for making weapons? All it takes in some 2nd or 3rd party group to carry out the evil deed and Iran's governments makes a press release saying "The government of Iran had nothing to do with the attack on Israel" at that point its too late.
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but in your own response above you've come up with an alternative to Israel bombing Iran flat. You are right; the Iranian president stated that Israel should be wiped off the map. The Iranian president goes on anti-Israel tours. That should not paint all of Iran with the same brush. I'm sure you've known national leaders who you do not agree with, and that doesn't mean all the people of that country think the same way.
Solution? Well there are several! But apart from a pre-emptive strike, how about a Mossad assassination operation? Or a smear campaign to undermine the authority of the Iranian president. Perhaps if the country found out about some dirty little secrets he has kept, members of the Iranian leadership might launch a coup and the new government has a less aggressive stance.
The bottom line is that we don't always have to resort to bombs right away. There are endless alternatives before it gets as far as a shooting war. And on top of that, Israel has an entire military leadership that are exploring every means to stop Iran. I don't have to lose sleep over the difficult decisions that need to be made :) .
It's not as though it's quiet one day and suddenly there's an inbound nuclear missile heading to Tel Aviv.
And as far as happy times go, if you live in Israel; that's all relative. People still go to night clubs and have holidays and play sports. It's life as usual in Israel, because they've been living with varying degrees of a threatened existence since 1948.
-
I look at this way say some crazy guy threaten you, family, etc and you see him buying a gun at a gun store (Russia in this case). What are you going to do? You know this guy has killed before, you know guns he bought have been given to others have killed. Are you going to sit back and do nothing while this crazy guy who said "I'll wipe your whole family out" and you know he buying a gun? You can see through his window and see him putting the gun together. To me this is where Israel stands and Iran does nothing to ease this at all in fact makes it worse when ever the shit head speaks.
So let's remove the gun, or remove the guy, or remove the firing pin, or the bullets. Maybe we can convince his family to kick him out. Bombing the house flat is not the only option.
-
Hi RecceJet
If that was truly an option by all means. I prefer taking out the reactor like the "the firing pin, or the bullets" and not leveling the entire country.
-
Which AWACS did they buy????
By the way, do you think that Iran will be relocating their TOR M1 close to the factories and that in case of full scale war their will be airplane losses in the Israeli side??
-
Hi SukhoiLover
I don't believe the TOR M1 is combat proven somebody correct me if I'm wrong on but I couldn't find anything. The system is mid to short range so I it can be targeted by aircraft using standoff weapons. Alone it's mainly effective in close but if used correctly in a layered setup with mid and long range SAM's then at least on paper looks deadly. I think it's best used as a "part" of a SAM network and not how Iran is using it because it has limitations.
I don't think you'll get country's military saying in the open yes we know how to jammed it and take it out. It's mobile so as a target it's harder to hit and see but most SAM's as history has proven can be taken out. As crazy as it sound air power is needed to protect a SAM network or at least the outside edges and gaps. From what was explained to me from the edges you can get under and around to take shots.