Take a Xanax

So what, so Iran gets nuclear weapons. China, the Soviet Union, India and Pakistan are countries that are incredibly UNSTABLE!!!

Difference is this would be a weapon in allah's arsenal, and we all know what allah's agenda for the non muslim world is.
Iran's loyalty to that agenda can be summed up in their willingness to use tens of thousands of their small children as assault waves against iraqi forces in the iran iraq war. They wore small keys around their necks, the "keys to heaven" as they were labeled.
The global intelligence agency Stratfor summed it up in the book"america's secret war" by saying that iran, like other fanatical islamic groups, is willing to sacrifice their entire population and country to retaliatory nuclear strikes for the will of allah. They believe the muslims will win the jihad and that allah's will will be done.
Consider a nuclear iran as 1 big suicide bomber, and it becomes obvious the reason a nuclear iran is much more dangerous than other nuclear countries, regardless of how unstable some of those might be.
If iran's nuclear program is as advanced as suggested,  in my opinion, I don't see how not responding is an option, even if that means a u.s. invasion and a draft. I didn't think there were any limits to defending the u.s. in matters of survival.

Quoted: Take a Xanax

Why would I do that?

The problem with all of this sabre-rattling is that Ahhamdinijad wins either way.
World does nothing= Iranian nukes, Hezbolah nukes, AQ nukes.
World attacks Iran = Iran a martyr to the Islamic cause, Ahmadinijad a hero, and he gets his wish for masive bloodshed for Madhi calling purposes.
Israel attacks Iran = Arabs withdraw support for U.S., America gets booted out of Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi, Oman, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. because, whether America supports Israel or not on this, it will be blamed regardless.

Either way, the loonies win. The price of oil will go through the roof, causeing major economic damage to the West. If Israel or the U.S. actually nuke Iran (I doubt America will, but Israel I'm not so sure about), the jihad against Israel/ the West will be total. Once again, the loonies win. For a bunch of loonies, they seem to be holding all of the cards.

I find it hard to believe that there is not someone on the inside working with the reactor that will go  Oh, Oh maybe that valve, switch etc should be in the other position.

What about one of those nuclear bunker-busters?  Plus what would happen say if a B2 where to drop 4 1,000lb JDAM's every day.  I am sure the activity would stop then.

Quoted: To my knowledge, Iraqis are an Arabic people;

I've heard that calling a Persian an Arab is a good way to start a fight.

...they may be Shiites, but that has more to do with their historical proximity to Iran than anything else I think. I think Aryan could also be taken to mean Indo-European.

Shiite refers to a branch of Islam, not ethnic group.

Quoted: Quoted: AHEM......you're forgetting one very strong people: img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/burleysmythe1/Israel_Mt_Hermon_israeli_flag.jpg Israel will do nothing, it lacks the capability to do it conventionally and going nuclear is suicide. ANdy

+1
And as for Israel losing a war, they came very, very close in the Yom Kippur War.

Quoted: To my knowledge, Iraqis are an Arabic people; they may be Shiites, but that has more to do with their historical proximity to Iran than anything else I think. I think Aryan could also be taken to mean Indo-European.

BRAVO!
Damn, this has to be one of the most factually correct posts I have ever seen on AR15.com

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [ i'm no historical expert, but haven't syria, iran, and egypt tried that before? Yeah, and USC won 34 games in a row... But USC didn't have nuclear weapons in the end zone either Should Syria, Iran, and/or Egypt attempt to invade Isreal, the Isrealis would certainly be expecting it.  I wouldn't be surprised if at the same time they launched strikes on those nations' air bases.  Isreal has destroyed entire air forces on the ground before, and I'm sure they could do it again.  The United States also has a great deal of military strength in theater.  Our carriers would most certainly be diverted to assist.

Much like they expected the sneak attack by Egypt in 1973?

Quoted: Quoted: To my knowledge, Iraqis are an Arabic people; I've heard that calling a Persian an Arab is a good way to start a fight. ...they may be Shiites, but that has more to do with their historical proximity to Iran than anything else I think. I think Aryan could also be taken to mean Indo-European. Shiite refers to a branch of Islam, not ethnic group.

I believe he is refering to the large shi'ite population that is in both Iran and Iraq.
I think he means, "while both may be shi'ites, there is no love lost between the two because of their millenia old rivalry."

Or calling an Arab a Persian.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: SO what are you then? Israeli Defence Minister? You seem to be the 'Expert in an Instant'..... So spending a large part of my life in Israel makes me an 'expert in an instant'? Yet you, having probably never been there, can somehow read the minds of people you've never met? Yeah, sure. You need to try and look at a map sometimes and plot some ranges on it.... Hitting Iraq was a short hop over the desert... Iran has facilities on the far side of Iran way outside the practical range of the IDF. If you'll recall, back in 1981, everyone said Iraq's nuclear facilities were out of range of Israels short-ranged early model F-16s. Last I checked, Osirak is still an empty landmark to a forgotten nuclear program. And you're the one that needs to look at a map and plot some ranges on it. Israels current strike range is well in excess of 2,200 nautical miles. Iran's eaternmost territory is only 1,500 nautical miles away. And it really pisses ME off when people assume I have no knowledge of things I speak about... I'm with the .Mil and do speak with reasonably high ranking staff who are in Iraq. Then you'd best buy earplugs, those sonic booms you'll to be hearing are going to be Israeli. So you're another 'Israeli' dreaming of slaying the dragon.

So just what are you, other than a Brit dreaming of slaying a dragon?

Israel has been talking tough for years about Iran and done diddly squat. They are doing now what they always do, rattle their sabres hoping the USA will get drawn in and do the work for them.

1948 War of Indepenence: Israel, aid from Jews all over the world.

1954 Sinai Campaign: Israel.

1967 Six Day War: Israel.

1968-71 War of Attrition: Israel.

1973 Yom Kippur War: Israel.

1976 Operation Jonathan: Israel.

1978 Operation Litani: Israel.

1981 Osirak Strike: Israel.

1982 Peace for Galilee War: Israel.

1982-85 Lebanon Campaign: Israel.

1993 Operation Accountability: Israel.

1996 Operation Grapes of Wrath II: Israel.

All victories, and, with the exception of the 1948 War, with no outside support at the time of the conflicts.


Let's compare that to the United States modern military record.

1950-53 Korean War: United States, South Korea, United Kingdom, Philippines, Canada, Turkey, Australia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Thailand, Ethiopia, Greece, France, Colombia, Belgium, South Africa, Luxembourg.

Result: Victory for the United States.

1965-73 Vietnam War: Republic of Vietnam, United States of America, Australia, New Zealand, Philippines, Thailand.

Result: Effective defeat for the United States.

1980 Operation Eagle Claw: United States.

Result: Complete failure.

1983 Invasion of Grenada: United States, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent.

Result: Victory for the United States... against a rag-tag group of Cuban backed rednecks.


1991 Operation Desert Storm: United States, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Honduras, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, The Netherlands, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Korea, Spain, Syria, Turkey, The United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom.

Result: Victory for the Coalition.

[Let's also not forget that George Bush had to beg Israel not to get involved].


War on Terror: 2001-present.

United States, United Kingdom, France, Northern Alliance, Albania, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Deutschland, Djibouti, Egypt, El, Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan.

Result: Undetermined.

Which country is it that always depends on others to come to their aid, again?


I'm not even going to start on the UKs modern military record.

The only people ranting and raving about Iran are the Israelis, Iran only poses a 'threat' to them.

And Osama bin Laden only poses a 'threat' to the United States.

Who is in Afghanistan right now, again?

Iraq didn't pose much of a threat at all to anyone outside the Middle East.

Where are you, again?


You know, I think if Iran was within missile range of New York, was developing nuclear weapons, and openly called for New York to be wiped off the map, that United States would be doing something about it.

Why is Israel any different?

20 F-16I's & 25 F15I's are not going to bring Iran to it's knees.

Actually, they will be more than enough.

Just a small 'heads up'. The Iranians have surrounded their facilities with scads of I-HAWKS

The Israelis have the guidance codes on for the I-Hawks, thus the Israeli electronic warfare suites [which are VERY good, by the way] will be able to jam them with ease. Not an issue.

and double digit SAMS including S-300's,

And who was it that invented the concept of SAM Standoff again?

Oh yeah, that was I-S-R-A-E-L.

Who did the United States learn the concept of SEAD from again?

Oh, that was I-S-R-A-E-L.

Who is the United States buying SEAD weapons from again?

Oh, that's right, Eretz Yisrial.

they are not stupid, and those systems are rather capable.

And the Israeli ECM and SEAD systems are much more capable, your point is?

Osirak, in Iraq BTW, is just a short hop.

And early model F-16s, BTW, weren't supose to have enough combat range for said 'short hop'.

Doesn't change the fact that Iran is still well within Israels strike range.

And your concepts of range are most interesting. The Israelis actually quote the maximum operational radius of the F16I at 2,200 KILOMETRES, not Miles! 2,200Km is about 1,300 miles, and at the range you're carry all the fuel you can and not much in the way of disposable ordnance, certainly not a plane load of draggy bunker busters.

And your concept of the Israeli inventory is most interesting.

The range of an F-15I is well in excess of 4,100 kilometers.

Thats for a Hi-Lo-Hi mission, with two bunker busters and a full load of fuel.

And that doesn't even consider Israels quite capable combat in-flight refueling ability.

Suck on those facts for a few minutes.

If the easternmost parts of Iran are 1,500 miles away you will need planes with a least a radius of action of  1,500 miles + @10%... say 1,650 miles unless you are flying on a one way Kamikaze mission.

Those are nautical miles, you should note them as such.

The range of an F-15I is over 2,200NM without even refueling after leaving Israeli airspace.

Now I wonder why the Iranians put some of their facilities so far away? Maybe the same reason North Korean puts their sites as far north as they can? Not because it's out of South Korea or the United States range, but because every mile helps. The reality is the only people who can or could take down Iran and have the forces in theatre to do it are the US and Britain (Our PM yesterday would not rule out using force gainst Iran).

That's what was said about Osirak too.




But just to prove I'm not a total asshole, I'll gladly mail you a set of earplugs. Wouldn't want those sonic booms of ours to hurt your hearing, that wouldn't be nice.

Quoted: Quoted: The problem with all of this sabre-rattling is that Ahhamdinijad wins either way. World does nothing= Iranian nukes, Hezbolah nukes, AQ nukes. World attacks Iran = Iran a martyr to the Islamic cause, Ahmadinijad a hero, and he gets his wish for masive bloodshed for Madhi calling purposes. Israel attacks Iran = Arabs withdraw support for U.S., America gets booted out of Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi, Oman, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. because, whether America supports Israel or not on this, it will be blamed regardless. Either way, the loonies win. The price of oil will go through the roof, causeing major economic damage to the West. If Israel or the U.S. actually nuke Iran (I doubt America will, but Israel I'm not so sure about), the jihad against Israel/ the West will be total. Once again, the loonies win. For a bunch of loonies, they seem to be holding all of the cards. Pretty incisive analysis there Lert! Pretty much a 'no win' now.

And when you find yourself in a no-win situation, you pick the least damaging of the options.

Lets review the options from an Israeli point of view.

Option One: Sit on their asses, watch as the rest of the world does nothing, Iran goes nuclear, and a 100KT warhead falls on Tel-Aviv.

Option Two: Take out Irans nuclear program, piss off everyone, and be forced to fight a convention war against all of Arabia... again.

Option Two is much more attractive.

Iran could have been dealt with back in 2001/2 by opening up to overtures from the moderates under Rafsanjani & Khatami but that time seems to have passed. Although there are significant overtures of compromise from the Iranians and signs of an internal power struggle,

Great idea, lets go to the table with a bunch of madmen.

And an internal power struggle in a nation full of Jihadis that want nothing more in life than to wipe Israel off the map with Nuclear Weapons is a great thing, if you want a second holocaust.

the Israelis are stirring up a hornets nest for their own ends as usual.

Those pesky Jews, always stirring up trouble, how dare they want to live without the threat of a Jihadi madman raining down megatonnage on them .

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 1973 Yom Kippur War: Israel.. All victories, and, with the exception of the 1948 War, with no outside support at the time of the conflicts. . S'funny? I could have swore I saw news footage at the time of USAF C-5's flying in round the clock with mountains military equipment and USAF F-4's being flown direct from US bases and handed over to the IDF while the war was in progress.

True, I forgot about Operation Nickel Grass, but that was only in response to Soviet airlifts into Syria and Egypt.

The Soviet airlifts, by the way, contained one hundred times the tonnage of the American airlifts.

Without the massive US airlift during the Yom Kippur war Israel would have lost.

I can almost hear you say "Shucks" at the end of that.

Your statement isn't true, if the Israelis hadn't held their own for the first few hours, they would have been overrun. By the time the US airlifts arrived, the Arab attack had already been repulsed.

It did help prevent the loss of territory, however.

I could see a small nuclear explosion taking place at one of the nuke facilities in Iran in a spectacular "accident". Next would be the everyone jumping up and saying how the Iranians just can't be trusted as technical buffoons. From there, either the leadership topples or we have our way with them with everyone onboard.  C'mon CIA/DIA/NSA/Mossad. What are we payin' you for!  

With the CIA's budget, this shouldn't even be an issue...

Quoted: I am just going by what the experts were saying , There is no way to bomb them because they are to far underground , even with the bombs we have. The only way to do it would be a invasion by air and ground force. The experts say that's not a option at this time due to to many of our troops tied up. Once they become nuclear ,then what

You're attacking the wrong target. Don't hit the nuke facilities. Kill the Iranian leadership who wants to use those nukes.

Eh, tag.

... Inclined to believe nothing will happen. The world will learn to live in the shadows of rouge nations with canned sunshine at their fingertips.

... The world is a different place than it was 40 years ago

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: AHEM......you're forgetting one very strong people: img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/burleysmythe1/Israel_Mt_Hermon_israeli_flag.jpg Israel will do nothing, it lacks the capability to do it conventionally and going nuclear is suicide. ANdy In case you've forgotten, ignoramus, the Israelis did the same thing to Saddam's nuclear plant in 1981. Their aircraft have only gained range since '81, and their weapons more accuracy. They WILL strike Iran, if it becomes the only option to keep them from going nuclear. How many times have you been to Israel? How many Israeli F-15s or F-16s have you seen? How many Israeli pilots do you know? How many Israeli government officials do you know? If you answered 'none' to three or more of these questions, then shut up and stop spewing bullshit. I mean no insult to you, but it really pisses me off when people talk about things that they have no knowledge of.

Your just a little bit too much of a newbie to know who you are talking to but suffice it to say you are stepping on your dork big time here.

first off the Israelis can't get there if we don't want them too.  (They can't fly over Iraq unless we let them)  And most people who are in a real position to have any idea about Israels nuclear capability would expect it is insufficient to do the job, unless they have damn good real time intel.  (Too many sites too few things that go boom for all of them, and not able to get them there all at the same time anyway.

Although with really really good intel , you might be able to get them when they are in transit from fastory to storage to delivery vehicle.

Iraqis are Arabs, Iranians are Persians and Aryans.  Aryans (Hitler not withstanding) are a racial group from the northern Persia, trans-caucasus to Afghanistan area (roughly)

Are the Iranians really great militarily?  Not hardly remember Saddam more or less kept them in a stalemate.  Doesn't bode well for them to come up with the gusy that cleaned the Iraqi clocks twice in just a few days each time.

As far as our training them, that stopped abruptly in 1979.  Most of those senior officers we trained left or got killed off.  And from personal experience in trying to impart some military knowledge to Iranians, I would say they are almost as dangerous to themselves as we are to them.

Quoted: ... Inclined to believe nothing will happen. The world will learn to live in the shadows of rouge nations with canned sunshine at their fingertips. ... The world is a different place than it was 40 years ago

Sounds like your talking about a nation of pooftahs.

Or did you mean rogue?  rouge is a polish or stuff you put on your rosy cute (face) cheeks.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: AHEM......you're forgetting one very strong people: img.photobucket.com/albums/v690/burleysmythe1/Israel_Mt_Hermon_israeli_flag.jpg Israel will do nothing, it lacks the capability to do it conventionally and going nuclear is suicide. ANdy In case you've forgotten, ignoramus, the Israelis did the same thing to Saddam's nuclear plant in 1981. Their aircraft have only gained range since '81, and their weapons more accuracy. They WILL strike Iran, if it becomes the only option to keep them from going nuclear. How many times have you been to Israel? How many Israeli F-15s or F-16s have you seen? How many Israeli pilots do you know? How many Israeli government officials do you know? If you answered 'none' to three or more of these questions, then shut up and stop spewing bullshit. I mean no insult to you, but it really pisses me off when people talk about things that they have no knowledge of. Your just a little bit too much of a newbie to know who you are talking to but suffice it to say you are stepping on your dork big time here.

Doesn't change the facts.

first off the Israelis can't get there if we don't want them too.  (They can't fly over Iraq unless we let them)

The United States will never fire on Israeli aircraft that are not actively being hostile, regardless of airspace violations, for the following reasons:

The United States isn't going to fire on an ally that isn't directly threatening the United States, no matter how badly their actions are looked upon.

The United States is not going to shoot down modern F-15s or F-16s over a warzone, or the middle east in general, the odds of sensitive information about said aircraft ending up in the hands of the enemy are far too high.


Those are simple facts, the United States may yell at them, buzz them, scream at them, radar lock them, cut of support to them, and everything else they can think of, but they aren't going to fire on them.

And that's all that matters to the Israelis.

And most people who are in a real position to have any idea about Israels nuclear capability would expect it is insufficient to do the job, unless they have damn good real time intel.

The problem with your statement is that Israel would not use nuclear weapons to halt Irans nuclear program. There's no need, the Israelis have access to conventional weapons that will do the job.

(Too many sites too few things that go boom for all of them, and not able to get them there all at the same time anyway.

Iran has many research sites, however, halting a nuclear program does not require you to take out all of them, Nuclear programs have several, much smaller Achilles heels. Strike those, and Iran won't be going nuclear for a very long time.

Although with really really good intel , you might be able to get them when they are in transit from fastory to storage to delivery vehicle.

And who has the best middle east intelligense services in the world?

I'll give you a hint, it isn't the United States, the United Kingdom, or g-d damned France.

Are the Iranians really great militarily?  Not hardly remember Saddam more or less kept them in a stalemate.  Doesn't bode well for them to come up with the gusy that cleaned the Iraqi clocks twice in just a few days each time. As far as our training them, that stopped abruptly in 1979.  Most of those senior officers we trained left or got killed off.  And from personal experience in trying to impart some military knowledge to Iranians, I would say they are almost as dangerous to themselves as we are to them.

And for a change of pace, we're on the same page here.

Some things to keep in mind are the facts that, while the Iranian military, in simple terms, sucks, their air to ground and ground to ground missile systems are actually quite effective. Much more so than their Iraqi counterparts, by an order of magnitude.

Also, you're correct that most of the Iranian military that was trained by the United States has died off, been killed off, or is currently far past military age. At the same time, their ex-American military systems are in a similar dilemma. They haven't been able to acquire or fabricate spare parts for most of said systems. The few that they have been able to keep running [some F-14s, a handful of Hawk missile systems, some artillery, a few other items] are either so old that effective countermeasures have been formed, or they aren't battle-tipping weapons to start with.