User Panel
Posted: 1/2/2007 2:04:36 PM EDT
www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=2&subID=1061
|
|
|
In an interview 6 months ago Bush said , quote , Letting Iran become a nuclear
power is not an option , I will not let it happen. and I believe him on this , how it will play out who knows. |
|
They have been planning this for years. I will put money on that they will bomb the piss out of Iran. They did it before, in Iraq. They have purchased experimental weapons designed for destroying armored underground targets (very large bombs for very hard targets). And they have re-vamped their strike aircraft, the F16 with extra gas tanks for long range flights to say... Iran. Where the hell else would long range Israeli aircraft go?
|
|
|
|
Avigdor Lieberman is a nutjob rascist. Do a search, you will see that this guy is a freak, not a mere 'hardliner'. The fact that he is in the governement shows that the Izzies are over run by their own brand of religous nutjob and fruitcake.
|
|
Trust me, they will, with hardware we sold them... hmmmm... |
||
|
If they want to take care of Iran, fine by me. Saves U.S. lives and $$$.
Nuke 'em; for all I care. |
|
They've been 'gearing up' for this ever since they acquired the F-16i and F-15i variants. They each have increased fueling capacity and the ability to annihilate the Bushehr complex with maybe one aerial refueling - which they both can also do.
They can pretty much strike all their neighbor-enemy arab capitals with these planes, while their shorter-range assets protect the home front. It's been 25yrs since the Israelis splashed Saddam's reactor. They've certainly had teh same thing in mind for Iran since '79. |
|
Turn 'em loose. It's time to quit fucking around with these fucking savages. Start prepping for five dollar plus fuel prices and all of the severe effects of this on the worlds economy. That said, turn 'em loose, we can't afford NOT to. |
|
They have done it before - so I don't think that there is much "gearing up" to do. I'm sure they know exactly where they going. Its more a question of triggering events and perceived risk.
|
|
As much as I'd love this to be true, I'll believe it when I see it. Glad to see they finally got someone in office that appears to not have a problem taking care of business. Hopefully he'll counter out some of Olmert's weakness.
|
|
the funny thing is that even liberal commentators respond 'I sure hope so' to this quesiton...
|
|
Damn right they won't, and it appears 6 months is 3 months too long. We won't, and they won't do a damn thing unless Bibi gets back in there. Olmert doesn't have the stomach for it. HH |
|
|
The problem is that they lack the range and airspace clearance to bomb Iran effectively... Israel is not going to be able overfly -- much less do air-air refueling over -- Syria, and due to the problems it would cause for us they won't be allowed to do it over Iraq either.... Do they even have A2ARF capability? Plus Iran has built their nuke facilities to withstand air attack - we're probably the only force that could touch them (even if Israel used the nuclear option, they would not be able to hit the hardened underground facilities)... And these facilities are dispersed, not stuck in one central location like Osirak... Iraq was easy, Iran will be harder.... Now, if it could be arranged for Iran to have a major nuclear 'accident' that would possibly make China, Russia, and maybe even the Iranian people themselves realize the 'hazards' of further development, that might work a bit better... If they do it, the USN had better be prepared to keep the Persian Gulf open... |
|
|
Agreed... We can pay a little now, or a lot more later. |
|
|
Yep, and even without the extra fuel I don't think Israel would mind losing a few planes due to not enough fuel to make it back. Pilots can punch out on their way back. Which is a hell of a lot better option than our B52 crews going to Russia had. |
|
|
I agree........but I hope we're both wrong. |
|
|
Israel bombed an Iranian nuclear plant before completion some years ago. They can deliver if they have to.
But I would truly hope we'd nuke Iran first. But with the cut and run weenies in charge of both houses of the legislature that is not likely to happen. I wish Israel the best of luck and LIGHT 'EM UP!!! |
|
|
|
The range issue is resolved by the F-16i and F-15i. Yes, they have aerial refueling capability. They can fly over any shitbird arab country they choose to, at any time of their choosing - AND the Saudi, sonsabitches that they are, would just as readily look the other way while Israel bombs the crap out of their main Shia/Persian rivals. Iran's as much a threat to the House of Saud as they are to Israel. And it doesn't matter how distributed they are or how deeply bunkered. The location of their gas-enrichment faciltiy is known and every bunker has a door / elevator / railroad track. And that f'n reactor containment building isn't going anywhere. Israel has JDAMs. They have the range. Most importantly they have the NEED to stop nuclear bomb production by Iran. The Iranian mullahs, their previous leader Rafsanjani, and the current nutjob Ahmedwhatever have all plainly stated their intent to nuke Israel the very moment they are able to. Israel MUST strike. |
||
|
|
|
|
Israel will have to put EVERYTHING they have in the air, to guard against an attack by Syria, Saudis, every other pissant arab neighbor. Their strike package for Iran will get the job done, whatever the losses. And I fully expect them to shithammer the storage bunkers in the Bekaa (Syria) where Saddam's WMD were trucked in Mar/Apr 03. And most likely spike Syria's runways the same way the struck Lebanon's last August. It's an all or nothing play. And no matter how muddled and liberal most of Israel's government is, they still make hard decisions when they have to because for them it really is nothing less than a matter of life or death. |
|
|
Who's to say we wouldn't lend a hand behind the scenes with the new asymetric payload capability of the B-2 to carry a single large penetrator in one of it's payload bays? We could have 10 B-2s hitting targets in Iran during an 'Isreali' strike flying out of Whitman or Diego Garcia and no one would be the wiser that we were involved but would actually allow the Iranian deeply burried hardened facilities to be hit.
I'm just saying, in any event something has to be done, even if that something is Isreal playing their ace in the hole that happens to be made of Uranium 235 and Lithium-6 Deuteride... |
|
Since when has the NY Times been pro-Israel?
What about the the capability of Izzy subs to assist in such a strike or recovery of downed/ditched pilots? -K |
|
yup............. |
|
|
Im not saying they are unassailable but i am saying that this piece of equipment is a very able piece.And depending on how many of these Iran has could make takeing the targets out extremely hard.But i hope and pray that isreal is able to do this for i fear there is no other option. |
||
|
Enduring bases in Iraq Bases in Afghanistan And our Allies history of not tolerating threats Way I see it. israel does an ocirek style raid on multiple targets in Iran. Iran declares war on israel. As Israels ally. We enjoin them with army on the ground and a ferrying point for their troops and resupply demands. Look for an additional 100-200k reinforcement of Iraq and afghanistan in the next year. It will work out well politically, to start this campaign in spring of 2008. |
|
|
Yep. Unfortunately, neither of us will do a fucking thing. |
|
|
According to Bibi... Israel is attempting engage in a
|
|
|
From my thread here:
|
|
|
The Bushehr reactor is not the proliferation concern. Light water reactors are very poor at producing weapons grade plutonium, that is why we agreed to let Russia keep building it and why we agreed to give the North Koreans two of them. The concern is their heavy water reactor they are building at Arak and their uranium enrich facility they have built at Natanz, along with whatever other sites that function in a similar capacity. |
|
|
|
|
|
You are very wrong about their capabilities. They cannot do it on their own. Click on the link and see for yourself. francona.blogspot.com/2006/03/iran-israels-air-strike-options.html |
|||
|
Can I borrow your Rose color glasses? mine seem to be broken. |
||
|
So what is with our government wanting a troop buildup in Iraq? Could this preclude something bigger and Iraq is the cover story?
ETA: Will Bush let Iran get the bomb on his watch or deal with them before his term is up? I tend to think that Bush is a man of conviction and the thought of Iran getting the bomb when he could have stopped it is bugging him in the back of his mind. |
|
The IDF lacks the ability to do this on it's own, it has @ 50 aircraft with the range, (and even they would only be carrying a light load), and lacks the SEAD/AWACS/A2A Refulling assets to carry it off. Iran has scatterered it's nuclear facilities right across Iran and dug them in deep, real deep, they've had NK contractors digging in like moles for the last two years. At best the IDF could destroy one or two installations but 98% would still remain.
Realistically, the only people with the ability to mount a sustained air assault on the Iranian WMD infrastructure is the USA/UK. Both got together in the Summer of 2006 and wargammed this option. It would have to be a combined TLAM/PGM campaign over a period of up to a week to make a serious impact. ANdy |
|
|
|
And we'd still have to go in afterwards on the ground... If the military option is going to be exercised, the only way to ensure destruction of the whole thing will involve Combat Engineers, alot of explosives, and the main-line (heavy armored) combat forces to get them there.... Air power can help 'kick the door in'... But you've still go to drive your tanks thru once it's open.... |
|
|
The 'Chiefs' reckoned an attack would only buy time… about two, maybe five years tops. ANdy |
||
|
i just wanted to say something that looked cool on the internet and use a bunch of periods......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
|
|
Hey! I just used 3! |
|
|
I disagree. Israel would have to hit every major Iranian nuclear facility simultaneously, and with a massive aerial bombardment that is in no way guaranteed to fully suspend or even significantly slow down development. Osirak was one target six hundred miles from Israel and not hardened in any way. Iran learned from Iraq's humiliation and not only spread their facilities, but hardened them in a way that denies the ability of a few JDAMs to penetrate and destroy them. Though the gas centrifuge facility at Natanz would probably be the main focus of attack, clearly Iran has decentralized its operations to allow concurrent enrichment. Bombing Iranian facilities would probably only set them back a year or two (not nearly enough time to be really useful) and also provide a convienent pretext for retaliation, whether that means terrorist attacks, closing the Persian Gulf (which the USN would have a MONSTER of a time fighting against), or a surprise nuking of Tel Aviv a few years down the road. I don't think Iran has any sort of first-strike policy against Israel. It would mean the end of Iran. However, Ahmadinejad's saber rattling is likely designed to provoke the Israelis into a very public, very strategically ineffective first strike, giving Iran a wide range of options to pursue thereafter. My two cents SO |
|
|
I concur… ANdy |
|
|
that's exactly the problem with the airstrike-only model: it isn't a fight-ender. if they could be assured of taking out the vast majority of iran's capabilities, the political fallout would be manageable. but if israel takes its shot and misses, they're in a world of hurt politically. IMO, a non-nuclear israeli strike is not a viable option, and a nuclear strike would be slow suicide. |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.