Thinking About the Unthinkable: An Israel-Iran Nuclear War

AmericanThinker ^ | August 23, 2015 | John Bosma

[Ghost of SVR4]

...Israel needs to impart a powerful, disorganizing shock to the Iranian regime that accomplishes realistic military objectives: digging out its expensive underground enrichment plants, destroying its Arak plutonium reactor and maybe Bushehr in the bargain, killing its bomb and missile professionals, scientists and technicians, IRGC bases, its oil production sites, oil export terminals and the leaders of the regime where they can be found.

...its initial strike must move very fast and be conclusive within 1-2 hours, like the Israeli air attack opening the 1967 Six-Day War. The goal is to so stun the regime that Israel controls the first and subsequent phases of the war and its ending. This means that Israel must hit enough critical targets with maximum shock – and be willing to revisit or expand its targets – so as to control blowback and retaliation from Iran's allies. In essence, this involves a very fast-paced Israeli redesign of the Middle East in the course of a nuclear war for survival.

...what is poorly appreciated is that nuclear weapons from 10 to 300 kilotons (KT) – depending on accuracy – can destroy deep hard targets to 200+ meters depth by ground coupling if they penetrate merely 3 meters into the ground (Effects of Nuclear Earth Penetrators and Other Weapons: National Research Council / National Academy Press, 2005, pp. 30-51). Israel could lower bomb yields or achieve deeper target kills by its reported tests of two-plane nuclear attacks in which the first plane drops a conventional HTM like a GBU-28 to open up a channel; the second plane drops its tactical nuclear bomb into that 'soft' channel for greater depth before bursting. This unavoidably

[SaveFerris]

OK, but I thought you mentioned S-300’s in regards to the Syrian reactor as well. As I recall, those were Tor M-1’s.

But I believe you that the S-300 and 400/500 will be used.

I’m not yet convinced the Israelis can counter them. Dunno.

[DiogenesLamp]

We are handing a gun to a fanatic, who intrends to use it against someone in the same room with us, and that intended target is holding a hand grenade with the pin out.

The intended target also has a gun, loaded and aimed at the nutjob, so he might not have to use the hand grenade.

On the other hand, if it gets that far, the idiot handing the gun to the Nut needs to catch some shrapnel.

[SaveFerris]

But I believe you that the S-300 and 400/500 will be used AT Russian facilities like you mentioned.

Didn’t fully explain that.

[Yosemitest]

"Obama will go down in History as the stupidest leader ever. "

Not "Incompetent" .
They want you to THINK that.
They're accomplishing everything they want to accomplish by breaking the law themselves.
They ARE EVIL !

He's a BIBLICAL CURSE !

Remember:
Don't let anyone deceive you in any way,
for [that day will not come] until the rebellion occurs
and the man of LAWLESSNESS is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.
He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped,
so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?
And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.
For the secret power of LAWLESSNESS is already at work;
but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.
And then the LAWLESS ONE will be revealed,
whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth
and destroy by the splendor of his coming.
The coming of the LAWLESS ONE will be in accordance with the work of Satan
displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders,
and IN EVERY SORT OF EVIL THAT DECEIVES those who are perishing.
They perish because THEY REFUSED to love the truth and so be saved.
For this reason God sends them a POWERFUL DELUSION
so that THEY WILL BELIEVE THE LIE
and so that ALL will be condemned who have NOT BELIEVED the truth
but have DELIGHTED in wickedness.

Let us remember ...

"You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept Communism outright.
But we will keep feeding you small doses of socialism
until you finally wake up and realize you already have communism.
We won’t have to fight you;
we’ll so weaken your economy
that you will fall like over ripe fruit into our hands. "


Nikita Khruschev, Former Soviet Premier

[Iscool]

Reading through the whole article, it argues very well why Israel might preemptively attack and go nuclear from the outset.

They have no choice...Iran says, 'as quick as we can get ready, we're going to destroy you'...

I wonder if Obama has ordered the military to target Israel with our nuclear missiles...

[archy]

Maybe if Israel has a couple of subs with nukes on them they could inspire shock and awe very quickly.

Six total, Dolphin class

Dolphin class [Dolphin I]

Dolphin – delivered May 1998 – commissioned 1999
Leviathan (trans. "Leviathan" or "whale") – delivered 1999 – commissioned 2000
Tekumah (trans. "Revival") – delivered 2000 – commissioned 2000

AIP Dolphin 2 class

Tanin (trans. "Tannin" or "Crocodile") – delivered 23 Sept 2014 – entered service in 2014
Rahav (trans. "Rahab" or "Splendour") – delivered 29 April 2013 – entered service in 2014
Name not assigned yet. Ordered 21 March 2012. Expected to enter service in 2017.

Popeye Turbo SLCM, 200 kiloton nuclear warhead, range 1500 km-plus

Dolphin II class Dolphin Class future #6

[Jan_Sobieski]

Based on Jeremiah 49, my money is on Israel!

[archy]

It’s like living in the Soviet Cold War era. Nuclear annihilation is once again a viable possibility.

Yes, it's possible. It's much more possible if you reside in Tehran or Qum or in Haifa or Tel Aviv.

Within 24 months it won't matter. Israel will not be the first to introduce the use of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. But in the event of another Holocaust, Israel will pull down the pillars of the Temple of Humanity.

The Group advised the Prime Minister in 2003 that Israel must display flexibility in its nuclear deterrence posture in order to contend with future enemy expansions of nuclear weapon assets. It may even become necessary under certain circumstances, we recognized, that Israel should deploy a full "triad" of strategic nuclear forces. For the present, however, we recommended that Israel continue to manage without nuclear missile-bearing submarines. This recommendation still holds only as long as it remains highly improbable that any enemy or combination of enemies could destroy Israel's land-based and airborne-launched nuclear missiles on a first-strike attack. Presently, it seems absolutely clear that Israel’s strategic retaliatory forces remain fully secure and penetration-capable.

--Project Daniel, Purdue University, Lafayette, IN USA, 2009."

And now we are past that point that they had hoped would not come, and so have moved on beyond the limits within which they had hoped to remain.

[archy]

I wonder if Obama has ordered the military to target Israel with our nuclear missiles...

Do you think that the former community organizer ever read Sun Tzu?

[DiogenesLamp]

Do you think that the former community organizer ever read Sun Tzu?

Or any sort of book at all? Can he read?

[TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed]

It is going to happen.

[archy]

That is what I worry about most, an Iranian EMP.

Expect the worst and prepare for it. Hope for the best.

They’ve already been monitored in the Caspian Sea playing around with vertical launches (and subsequently destroying their rockets) that would put *something* in orbit in such that it would float right up our southern border.

Yes. They're all ready for the last war. Question is, is it the *last one* from several years ago, or *the last one* as in the final one for everyone. Or will it simply be the last one for most of the Iranian land and people.

How'd those Iranians do against Saddam without nukes, when everyone believed he either had them or soon would? The Israelis have been facing nuclear annihilation since 1967 when Soviet submarine K-172 pulled out of port with her eight 1-megaton nuclear missiles.

[okie01]

Popeye Turbo SLCM, 200 kiloton nuclear warhead, range 1500 km-plus

If Israel concludes that they must launch a first strike -- a reasonable assumption, to be sure -- then don't they have to go atomic?

The Iranian sites are hardened, possibly beyond the IAF's ability to penetrate with conventional weapons. Plus, there are a lot of them...and the distance is great -- limiting the payload.

Further, there is no point in attempting the attack if you're not absolutely certain it will be successful. And the only way to assure success is to employ atomic weapons.

Accordingly, if Netanyahu says "Go!", we're probably going to see the first nuclear attack in 70 years.

[tanknetter]

Read Seymour Hersh’s “The Samson Option”. I know his later stuff is crap, but this one is definitely worth reading.

Israel is prepared to pull the temple down upon itself, if need be. If the US launches on Israel we’re talking WWIII. And Israel does have the ability to cook it off.

[JimRed]

Better that Israel arrange for Iran to have a nuclear “accident” (with plausible deniability) than to let them get the bomb at all.

[okie01]

Gee...and I just posted to you on another thread positing this very same chain of events.

Given the psychology of our current president and his emotional investment in his Iran deal, what might follow could challenge the military chain of command with orders that previously were unthinkable.

The concluding sentence, however, gives us something else to ponder. Would this President order an attack on Israel, in support of Iran?

Yes, I believe he would.

Leaving us with this question: How would the U.S. military respond to such an order...???

[archy]

Popeye Turbo SLCM, 200 kiloton nuclear warhead, range 1500 km-plus

If Israel concludes that they must launch a first strike -- a reasonable assumption, to be sure -- then don't they have to go atomic?

Probable, and likely, but not necessarily an absolute. But note the distinction between *atomic* weapons and those that are thermonuclear. And I can think of at least one scenario in which they might get the job done with conventional weapons, and with which a great many Americans would certainly approve.

The Iranian sites are hardened, possibly beyond the IAF's ability to penetrate with conventional weapons. Plus, there are a lot of them...and the distance is great -- limiting the payload.

For the IAF/ air force. But they too now have their own Popeye Turbo ALCM cruise missiles, air-launched rather than submarine-tube launched. Shorter range, [320 KM] to be certain, but that is why they'd launch from well away from the target areas, after a naval [or other] first strike removed the local antiaircraft defences.

Further, there is no point in attempting the attack if you're not absolutely certain it will be successful. And the only way to assure success is to employ atomic weapons.

I concur, though there may be a couple of other ways. Even a rework of the former US Plan Crimson contingency plan declassified in 1974 might have an application. Re read my quote above from the late Moshe Dayan.

Accordingly, if Netanyahu says "Go!", we're probably going to see the first nuclear attack in 70 years.

I used to teach the history of nuclear warfare to USAF officer cadets. There have been four uses of atomic or nuclear weapons in warfare during the last hundred years, but they might not be what you think. Two in 1945, one in 1967, and one in 1982.

[archy]

Gee...and I just posted to you on another thread positing this very same chain of events.

I'll get there shortly.

Given the psychology of our current president and his emotional investment in his Iran deal, what might follow could challenge the military chain of command with orders that previously were unthinkable.

You ever read an old book called None dare call it treason? It was popular in some circles, including military ones, until around 23 November 1963.

The concluding sentence, however, gives us something else to ponder. Would this President order an attack on Israel, in support of Iran?

Yes, I believe he would.

Concur. But he'd want to have a whiny *I had to do it; we had a TREATY* excuse.

Leaving us with this question: How would the U.S. military respond to such an order...???

I, [FReeper archy], having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of Major do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."
(DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

Note that my oath is not to the president or presidency; it is to the Constitution. And it is against ALL enemies, foreign, and domestic.

[okie01]

More like, Wait till January 22 2017, when that stupid, lazy, ignorant but arrogant, bastard can't do any more damage to the world.

One problem with that timetable.

Iran will want to strike before January 22, 2017...

[Cold Heat]

It would be the shortest war in history.