[lostlakehiker]

You are wishing for a nuclear war? Praying for it? Iran's nuclear facilities are distributed, hidden, and buried deep. Nothing short of a full scale invasion and an occupation lasting some months could comprehensively destroy the bulk of them. The only other way to stop Iran getting nukes would be to lay waste the cities, killing the people who work in the facilities and destroying the industrial base that makes that work possible. Killing, into the bargain, hundreds of thousands if not millions of civilians who didn't {actually} vote for Ahmadinejad.

Even so-called tactical nukes would kill tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of civilians, all that without even setting back Iran's nuclear program that much.

Considering the cost to Iran of launching a first strike, isn't it more likely that even if Iran does get nukes, it will follow the lead of all other nuclear powers and keep the bombs as insurance?

[Lunatic Fringe]

I agree.

A nuclear strike had better hit everything, because if they miss one warhead... Israel is toast.

[mjp]

You are wishing for a nuclear war? Praying for it?

Yes, I cannot imagine a future any worse than Iran with nuclear weapons. The Hiroshima model is the way to stop that.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

On April 28, 2005 the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of the sale of 100 GBU-28 "bunker buster" guided bombs to Israel. Designed to penetrate hardened command centers located deep underground, the GBU-28 is a 5,000-pound laser-guided bomb that uses a 4,400-pound penetrating warhead and contains 630 pounds of high explosives.
http://irmep.org/GBU.htm

Israel challenges Iran's nuclear ambitions
By Anton La Guardia, Diplomatic Editor 22/09/2004

Israel admitted yesterday that it is buying 500 "bunker-buster" bombs, which could be used to hit Iran's nuclear facilities, as Teheran paraded ballistic missiles as a warning against attack.......The BLU-109 bombs, which can penetrate more than 7ft of reinforced concrete, are among "smart" munitions being sold to Israel under America's military aid programme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/22/wnuke22.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/09/22/ixportaltop.html

Israel Builds up its Stockpile of Deadly Military Hardware

A massive buildup in military hardware has occurred in preparation for a possible attack on Iran.

Israel has recently taken delivery from the US of some 5,000 "smart air launched weapons" including some 500 BLU 109 'bunker-buster bombs. The (uranium coated) munitions are said to be more than "adequate to address the full range of Iranian targets, with the possible exception of the buried facility at Natanz, which may require the [more powerful] BLU-113 bunker buster ":

"Given Israel's already substantial holdings of such weapons, this increase in its inventory would allow a sustained assault with or without further US involvement." (See Richard Bennett
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BEN501A.html

[etraveler13]

Not true, low yield 500K tactical nukes would not kill millions, rather make it impossible for them to survive in those areas for many years in the future. The 14 facilities under construction, and 44 uranium mines (of the 120 known) would have to be neutralized. EMP bombs (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) would wipe out electronics on aircraft and computers and really everything electrical with no loss of life. Right now, the Iranian congress is well aware of the trouble Armadidejan has put them in with the world watching. The US just imposed sanctions on Iran and Syria and Russia is protesting, and for good reason, they are a chief supplier to terrorism in the world, and were a chief player in the corruption in the Oil for Food program in Iraq. It is not out of the rhelm of possibility that when the first bombings happen in Iran, the Bekkah Valley in Syria will also be demolished. That is where the WMD from Iraq was moved to before the coaltion forces came in and Deposed Saddam Hussien.

[The_Reader_David]

You assume that the Iranian goverment makes calculations based on a rational and entirely-this-worldly power calculus. Unfortunately, the president of Iran is a member of a sect of Shi'ite Muslims that believes that plunging the world into chaos will hasten the arrival of the Madhi, the Muslim 'Messiah', in their interpretation, the 12th Imam who has been hidden in a well in Samarra (in the golden domed mosque AQ in Iraq blew up) (Sunnis also expect the Madhi, but don't identify him with the last Imam.)

Add to that the cult of martyrdom-by-self-destruction that has become part and parcel of jihadism both Sunni and Shi'ite since Sayyed Qutb imported the existentialist idea of absolute commitment as the source of 'authentic meaning' into Koranic interpetation so that the Koranic injunctions against suicide no longer seem to be operative if one is trying to kill 'infidels', and it is by no means certain that the Iranian government will not launch a first strike, even without the overwhelming superiority needed under Cold-War-style nuclear doctrine.

[finnman69]

Even so-called tactical nukes would kill tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of civilians, all that without even setting back Iran's nuclear program that much.

That's likely not true, in terms of casualties and effectiveness. The only reason nuclear weapons are bing considered is everyone knows where the facilities are, but they are in hardened facilites, not easily destroyed in a conventional attack.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke-fac.htm

Taking out Natanz alone would really cripple their program as this where they are building their centrifuge plants underground in huge 300,000sf rooms. Hitting Isfahan and Arak would also take out reactors being used for weapons research. That's 3 targets. Natanz is isolated 20 miles South from Kashan. East of it is a desert so prevailing winds would carry bad stuff to unpopulated areas. Arak would be a tougher urban target, Isfahan is close to its city but to the SE.

[Prodigal Son]

The only other way to stop Iran getting nukes would be to lay waste the cities, killing the people who work in the facilities and destroying the industrial base that makes that work possible. Killing, into the bargain, hundreds of thousands if not millions of civilians who didn't {actually} vote for Ahmadinejad.

I'm for laying waste to the cities and people. I feel bad for the innocent ones but we are at war with this culture and it's a war to the death. No peace agreement will ever be signed between our cultures. The only certain way to ensure the war coming out in our favour is to use strategic nukes. Not just in Iran either. More like the entire region.

Anybody that promises to do that will get my vote.

Tactical nuke from Israel might serve as a triggering event though. It would break the ice, so to speak. If they want to do this I support it.

[word_warrior_bob]

Good points...but.

It would end all discussion of the "Paper Tiger" theory they've been operating under the last 30 years. This will make some of these nuts think twice, they claim to worship death anyway. What are we going to do make them MORE radical?

Fair warning to the civilians has been issued, get out because you're leader has threatened nukes against Israel and the USA. These countries take his threats seriously and are going to wipe out your nation in a quick decisive war. Head for the hills and don't blame us that your leader threatened to kill us. If I walk into your house with a gun and threaten to kill you I wouldn't be too shocked if you killed me.

[I see my hands]

"Killing, into the bargain, hundreds of thousands if not millions of civilians"

Many, many people are going to be killed in the next twenty-five years. Fewer if sooner and as always better them than us.

[Joan Kerrey]

it will follow the lead of all other nuclear powers and keep the bombs as insurance?
-----
Have you been listening to Ahmadinejad? He doesn't follow anyone. He leads. Suggestion: When someone says they will destroy you, believe that they mean it.

[plain talk]

Many underestimate how hard it would be to truly dismantle the program. It would take an invasion and we would have to occupy the country and rebuild it like Iraq.

I don't feel comfortable assuming Iran would act rational with nukes. Their leader is clearly irrational and wants to destroy Israel.

The only course I see that's pragmatic and it's almost an impossibility is for the world to gang up on Iran, invade and dismantle the program. I don't think we have the political capital or will given a dem congress and the Iraq aftermath to do it alone nor would Israel be able to occupy Iran alone without starting a world war, oil embargo and world depression.

The only way forward I see is for the major powers to agree to dismantle their program. Yes that means the U.N. So this will probably never happen. As a result I see absolutely nothing happening of any significance except a lot of talk and posturing.

Have a nice day.

[cpdiii]

Considering the cost to Iran of launching a first strike, isn't it more likely that even if Iran does get nukes, it will follow the lead of all other nuclear powers and keep the bombs as insurance?

We are not dealing with a rational leadership. They would use them. If Israel does strike Iran I would hope also hope for a decapitating strike against the civilian leadership and military leadership. This would immediately plunge Iran into a revolution. It would not go well for the Mullahs.

[Zack Nguyen]

Considering the cost to Iran of launching a first strike, isn't it more likely that even if Iran does get nukes, it will follow the lead of all other nuclear powers and keep the bombs as insurance?

This is possible, and probably what the realists in Washington think will happen. But if Iran just wants the nuclear weapons for insurance, why do they continually threaten Israel with total destruction? Why do they deny the Holocaust? Why do they put a President in office (arranged in part by the Ayatollah) who has been a hardcore radical all his life, who probably participated in the American hostage crisis?

In other words, through their words and actions they exponentially increase the tension unnecessarily. I am beginning to think that they are true believers, and really would destroy Israel if they could.

[Lurker]

Iran's nuclear facilities Germanys industrial facilities are distributed, hidden, and buried deep. Nothing short of a full scale invasion and an occupation lasting some months could comprehensively destroy the bulk of them. The only other way to stop Iran getting nukes Germany would be to lay waste the cities, killing the people who work in the facilities and destroying the industrial base that makes that work possible. Killing, into the bargain, hundreds of thousands if not millions of civilians who didn't {actually} vote for Ahmadinejad Hitler.

Try it that way and let me know what you think.

L

[jschwartz]

No, there is substantial evidence that they plan to actually use the stuff. The rest of what you said is correct, unfortunately.