U.S. Army report: Israel can't stop Iran nukes

World Tribune ^ | December 5, 2005

[gakrak]

Ah yes and they couldn't rescue their people in Ethiopia either. Amen.

[jslade]

See my post #80.

[PerConPat]

Western Europe is the real target and should put the Iran government and military down.

No question that Europe is a target, as well as the entire free world. But Europe will not generate the political will to do anything about it. I don't like to underestimate Israel's capabilities; they are an excellent ally with immense brain power. But Iran is a formidable enemy.

The US is also at great risk from terrorist attacks utilizing Iranian WMD. Therefore, given this and the facts outlined above, the problem of defanging the Mullahs will fall to the US- sooner or later. Unless there is movement from within Iran to implement sensible leadership after American, or Israeli, surgical strikes have destabilized the fanatics in Tehran, there must be massive strikes.

We have the capability to cripple Iran from the air, and follow up with heavily supported search and destroy operations. And I am not talking about policing or nation building. Time is running out; the responses of China, Russia etc. are aspects to consider and plan for, but they cannot be allowed to stay our hand in a fight for our survival.

Ladies and gentlemen, IMHO, we are at one of the most perilous cross roads in our nation's history. Think of England staring across the water at Nazi Germany in 1939...

[null and void]

Or Uganda.

[redgolum]

The range is to long for a "super gun". A stealth cruise missle would work better.

[redgolum]

Its not like we wouldnt refuel their planes in mid-air.

We do that and we would be at war with most of the Middle East.

[jslade]

See Popeye Cruise Missle

[null and void]

We're not now?

[IamConservative]

The Japanese had a simple solution for such a situation. The US solved this problem on the Doolittle raid.

Turn the plane into a weapon.

[familyop]

That was well written. But wouldn't it be cheaper to develop thicker security around our coasts (thus costing and frustrating Iran) and a greater anti-ballistic missile defense for Israel?

[Israel] Air Force successfully tests Arrow Scud buster
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1532753/posts

Israel has some defense (much more than a "Scud buster") and a great offense. It seems that a country in western Europe would be an easier target and a more enticing path to power for the Iranian leadership.

"Ladies and gentlemen, IMHO, we are at one of the most perilous cross roads in our nation's history. Think of England staring across the water at Nazi Germany in 1939..."

That's exactly what I had in mind: a western Europe that could be sincerely "with us" again. If there is no direct threat against western Europe, it will continue to blame us, defame us, deflect its problems to us, and give no more than occasional, token assistance.

[jackson29]

reality? "coming soon to a theatre near you"

the part i like best? pecuiar how the mideast has unfolded.

loads of landing strips in iraq


loads of landing strips in afghanistan

loads of ocean to the south for those new german subs

and who knows? perhaps loads of support from those bases

[SJSAMPLE]

They may be right.
The Osirak reactor wasn't hidden because nobody thought Israel had the balls to attack the relatively undefended facility.

Times have changed:
1. The Israeli's have spread this out with many dummy sites.
2. The location of many of the locations is unknown.
3. Iran has been buying current-generation Russian AtoA missiles and radar and placing them HEAVILY around the sites that we know about.

When we attacked Iraq, we had up to date intel (which I'm sure we'll help the Israeli's with) and the first waves destroyed SAM and radar installations. The Israeli's don't have the staging areas and they certainly don't have stealth bombers to plow the road.

Not that I wouldn't like to see them try, but taking out Iran's nuclear facilities should be a TEAM EFFORT.

[Big Red Clay]

This thing seems to be getting further out of control by the day. I thought your post was quite interesting and have a couple of questions for you.
First, do you think that we (or the Israelis) can effectively wipe out the Iraninan's nuke program with conventional weapons? I have read alot of conflicting information in the last couple of days but I am getting the feeling that those facilities will not be effectively neutralized unless they are hit with nukes. It seems the only alternative would be a massive strike that would simultaneously decapitate the Iranian leadership structure and assault the nuclear facilities first with airstrikes and then with boots on the ground. Your thoughts?

Question 2 is this. Will the president take the political risk of acting pre-emptively? You, me, and I would hope that most of the folks on this board realize the calamity that a nuclear armed Iran would pose to the western world. I just dont know that the president can act pre-emptively now in almost any situation. The idiots on the left and in the media would destroy the president even though taking action seems completely warranted.
I agree that the U.S. is in a situation that is likely more precarious than 1941 or the Cuban Missle Crisis. The difference is that the media and the left seem to have turned a sizable chunk of the countries population against any type of action necessary to ensure our security.

[Jim Verdolini]

"...or if they smuggle in a suitcase nuke, as a poster suggested, to make it look like an Iranian accident."

Bingo...there is the answer. The mission becomes a ground op and the target is the most likely one to contain a nuclear program. If it goes boom!, then the international commuity will squeal so loudly the iranians will have to pause, at least long enough to make sure the same oops does not happen again.

Failing that we also have ops where the israeli's use remote and abandoned iraqi air fields to refuel. Fly in special forces and fuel under the radar, seize the field, let the air force conduct the strike, run back, make a quick refuel and rearm, and run like hell for home. If you cut down the round trip distance, you indrease payload or target selection. I would see what there is available in the Kurd regions to the north near Iran. Heavens knows the iraqi air force is not using any bases right now.

[Rutles4Ever]

First use of nukes in a pre-emptive attack will be seen as beyond the par. I doubt even America would publically endorse this for Israel....

I agree it would be beyond the pale, but we're not talking about conventional saber-rattling, either. When the head of one nation publicly declares that another nation should be wiped off the face of the earth, the stakes have gone through the roof - especially with the backdrop of Iran's nuclear ambitions and all the wrangling going on with the U.N.

If Israel does nothing and Tehran follows through, will they receive the ultimate Darwin Award for sitting back and letting it happen with so much advance warning?

[Jim Verdolini]

"2. For the survival of the state of Israel, against a nuclear armed leadership that has public stated that it's goal is to wipe out Israel, plenty of pilots will make the trip one way."

Might not need to. Another possibility no one is mentioning is a straight overflight on to Afghanistan. Lots of old unused russian airfields there. From there they could do a lot of things including getting rid of the aircraft (and getting replacements from us)and returning home the long way.

[Roccus]

I'm with you. That French fiasco over the gunboats back in the 70's comes to mind.

[Rutles4Ever]

Excellent post - let me ask you this:

There is one trump card that has yet to be mentioned here, and that's OIL. What, in your opinion, is the possibility that Russia, China, Britain, and the United States will effectively agree to dismantle the Iranian regime to save the world economy? A nuclear war in the Middle East would spoil a lot of oil fields, would it not? At the end of the day, China may not like our form of government, but money always ALWAYS talks. They need that oil as much as we do.

[safisoft]

The Entebbe raid did not require a strike force of jets protected by high cover and ECM aircraft either....

They did have fighter cover over half the way, and Entebbe was almost 30 years ago - and I was there.

[PerConPat]

But wouldn't it be cheaper to develop thicker security around our coasts (thus costing and frustrating Iran) and a greater anti-ballistic missile defense for Israel?

I would do all of this. But what can one do to stop a suitcase nuke from coming across a border. I pray to God there's not one here already. We must do everything we can to prevent terrorists from having access to atomic bomb factories.

If there is no direct threat against western Europe, it will continue to blame us, defame us, deflect its problems to us, and give no more than occasional, token assistance.

There already is a direct threat against Europe. In spite of militant Islam's long history of conflict, justified or not, with European powers our former allies cannot see the current danger. Years of stifling socialism and now a low birth rate indicate that Western Europe may be at the beginning of an end.