"What If Israel Bombed Nuclear Facilities In Iran?" Topic

Do you think there's a greater likelihood of that happening now after the Israeli elections are over?

And, most importantly, how do you think such an attack would go these days? What type of aircraft and other weaponry would it involve?

Dan

Well, rumor has it the President ordered any Israeli jets shot down, if they attempted that a while back, so……

Given the admin's defeat last night, and Bibi's reelection, I suspect relations are even worse today. Supposedly, he hasn't received a congratulatory call on his reelection, from the US, yet.

What Mako11 said.

If the Israelis want a shooting war with Hezbollah and Iran, they can start one any time on the Lebanon/Syria front.

The Izzies very nearly did start that war a few weeks ago when they blasted a carload of Hezbollah and IRG brass in Syria near the Golan. Both sides backed down. It looks like the Israelis don't want to start a war with Iran right now.

Mako11: "Well, rumor has it the President ordered any Israeli jets shot down, if they attempted that a while back, so……"

How do the aircraft and pilots compare on each side nowadays? Would refueling issues to Iran and back become a prohibitive obstacle for Israel?

Dan

Despite the bluster by our current administration under no scenario do I see the US military engaging the Heyl Ha'Avir. Before that happens, other less drastic measures will be taken, such as cutting back our military and material support to Israel and imposing economic sanctions.

The threats of shooting down their planes are just to make the current Israeli president think twice about initiating any provocations against Iran that would sabotage our delicate negotiations with them in Geneva right now.

One legitimate problem the Israelis would face is that the Iranians have dispersed and hardened their most important nuclear facilities. I don't think there's anything in the Israeli arsenal that could touch their underground facilities.

I suspect they'd probably be comparable, pilot skill-wise, CC (e.g. US vs. Israel).

No doubt, the Israelis are better than the Iranians, in terms of pilot skill.

Yes, aerial refueling is a concern, but the Saudis have a lot of aerial tankers that probably have low hours on them, and they don't want Iran to have nukes (or for them to own Yemen, or conduct a proxy war against them), so that issue is not insurmountable.

The Saudis also have airbases much closer to Iran as well, which could be used too.

The real issue are the number of nuke production sites that need to be hit, and that a lot of them have been hardened, or are underground. There are probably some we don't even know about as well.

Realistically, it will take an ongoing bombing campaign to really disable their weapons program, so you'll have to take out their aircraft and air defenses too.

A leadership decapitation strike seems to me to be much easier to accomplish.

How do the aircraft and pilots compare on each side nowadays? Would refueling issues to Iran and back become a prohibitive obstacle for Israel?

Yes, it is a major obstacle. Not even the conformal fuel tanks on F15s and F16s give them enough legs to get there and back, they'd have to have tanker support over Saudi Arabia (or stage out of Saudi).

One legitimate problem the Israelis would face is that the Iranians have dispersed and hardened their most important nuclear facilities. I don't think there's anything in the Israeli arsenal that could touch their underground facilities.

Short of a nuke, at any rate, and I don't think Bibi would open that can of worms anytime soon.

Dusting cobwebs here but didn't the US sell Israel bunker busting bombs a few years back? Does Israel have the capability to get such heavy loads to Iran?

These aren't just bunkers – we're talking deep underground AND hardened for particularly sensitive sites.

The idea that there was an order to shoot down Israeli planes if they attacked Iran apparently was a quote from a single Israeli newspaper, quoting a Kuwaiti newspaper, quoting an unnamed source. Of course it was then picked up by domestic US news sources with a particular political axe to grind. YMMV.

Damon.

From what I've read, and as Mako suggests, Iran learned from Iraq'a mistakes. The Iranian facilities are many, scattered, and hardened. Six F16s ain't gonna cut it. It would take a sustained air offensive to achieve any meaningful result.

I don't think it's in the cards.

But if they did, we would be talking about a wider, regional conflict. I'll bet Putin can't wait.

Yes, they have lots of bunker busters for just such a raid, though nukes will be a lot more thorough to ensure stuff can't be recovered after the strikes.

IIRC, the BBs are designed to penetrate deep underground, in hardened structures, like they have. How effectively they'd destroy stuff is anyone's guess though.

Let's see, the idea may be for the Israelis to use nukes against Iran so that Iran can't develop nukes because nukes are bad and they might use them – which, of course, only an insane terrorist state would do.

OK, that's… fine…

Modern deterrence is sometimes messy, especially against a nation/foe that's threatened to wipe your nation off the face of the Earth, in order to create the apocalypse, and to summon their great Mahdi for the final battle.

And issued a fatwah against the use of weapons of mass destruction. Presuming your talking about iran and not isis that is.

As many have pointed out the Iranians have learned the lessons of history well and have probably hardened their facilities to the point that conventional strikes wouldn't work. And Israel isn't about to be able to march across the ME and conquer Iran.

The most likely war in which Israel will be involved in the near future is a general war with the Palestinians. Bibi eliminated all hope they had for a deal on their own state as long as he's in office and revealed that his settlement policy in the 90s was designed to isolate East Jerusalem making a peace deal impossible.

Put yourself in the Palestinian's shoes. You've just been told that you'll never get control of your homeland back through peaceful negotiation. What would you do? Keep negotiating?

Theyve known all along that negotiations are just a cover for colony building; unfortunately theres absolutely nothing they can do about it that will make any difference.

Ironically Bibi letting the mask slip might make the rest of the world realise it has to face facts.

I'd celebrate, and the US gov't. would condemn it.
-Kle.

Most of the world would celebrate the destruction of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Saudi would provide tanker support.

A nuclear Iran is not in their best interest.

Thirty seconds after nuking Israel…..a phone rings in Riyhad.

link

Can anyone tell me why iran is the bad guy in this while its israel whos been threatening to attack?

Can anyone tell me why iran is the bad guy in this while its israel whos been threatening to attack?

Because in 1951 the Iranians had the audacity to think that their oil wealth belonged to Iran. It went downhill from there for the Iranians.

:-)

The nerve of some people!
Mind you, as a Scot, it might help explain why I empathise..

And we already have nukes….

I'm not much of an advocate of Biblical prophesy. But what appears that a nuc arms race may occur in this region so close to Armageddon/har-megiddo
… well … just say'n …

Can anyone tell me why iran is the bad guy in this while its israel whos been threatening to attack?

You must have forgotten that Iran has been calling for the destruction of Isreal, the death of Isreal and for Isreal to be wiped off the face of the earth.

You must not be aware that if Iran develops nukes, then all of their Arab neighbors will seek nuclear armaments as well. Saudi Arabia is already moving to acquire nukes from Pakistan if this happens.

Then again, are you really willing to believe Iran's promises that they have no ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons -when every nation in the world, including Russia and China and other moslem countries don't believe them?

You probably aren't aware that according to the Koran, it is OK to lie to deceive your enemy. I read your link, you can read mine: link

Well america seems to believe them for one thing…
Pakistan which borders iran has nukes, saudi reportedly has them, israel has them.
Israels rhetoric towards iran has been just as bellicose as ahmedinijads (whos no longer in power)has been towards them, but that seems to be Ok.
They have murdered each others citizens – terrorism when iran does it but "targeted assasination" when israel does it.
Im not blind about iran but at least lets apply the same moral standards to all parties involved.
I read your link – but a fatwah isnt aimed at idolators or infidels its aimed at muslims; it may be, as youre arguing, part of a huge maskirovka but then the islamic republic would later be exposed as decieving fellow muslims (in iran)through a holy writ or whatever its called and your link says thats wrong.
That would be the end of any further holy writs and probably the end of the islamic republic Id reckon. So unlikely to happen in my book.

This is interesting
link

Well america seems to believe them for one thing…

Sadly, the current POTUS is even more naive than Jimmy Carter was about international relations.

Though I suspect that a single nuke going off anywhere in the Middle East would rapidly result in the nuking of all the rest of it.

Iran wants nukes because Israel has them. It doesn't increase the chance of war but may decrease its likelihood due to MAD. After all, India and Pakistan haven't had any major military clashes for a long time and both nations have nukes. Likewise, the US and USSR didn't nuke each other to smithereens or even engage directly in conventional military conflicts (only proxy wars) at any time during the four decades of the Cold War.

I'm not saying Iran should have nukes, but I think we're being too fearful of countries (Iran, North Korea, etc.) having them.

I don't think Iran wants nukes because Isreal has them. Iran wants nukes because they want to dominate the Middle East. There are more Arabs and Muslims worried that Iran will get nukes than Isrealis.

And there is a huge difference between Iran and Isreal. The Iranians go after soft targets like embassies, cultural centers, hotels, etc. for the simple sake of killing and maiming civilians. Isrealis are trying to kill combatants.

I never mentioned fatwahs, that's a separate issue. I'm talking about Iran having no problems in deceiving the world that they want don't want nuclear weapons. Lying to further your goals, yes, this is OK by the Koran.

I've not made my point clear maybe; every culture lies to its enemies but your link says clearly that lying to fellow Muslims is a bad thing. An Iranian fatwah that's shown to be a clear lie would totally discredit the mullahs as muslims. Which is why I tend to believe them.

Iran doesn't want nukes for deterrence.

It wants them to use against Israel, which its stated it will wipe off the face of the Earth, in order to bring back their "great Mahdi".

Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism around the globe, and plans to use the nukes against Israel and the USA (the Little Satan, and Great Satan, respectively in their rhetoric) in order to create an apocalypse, since it is lead by a religious death cult, just like those from ISIS.

They've clearly stated the above, like Hitler did, before WWII, but sadly, some people are not willing to heed their warnings.

It's crazy, I know, but it is what they believe, and what they are working towards.

They could have nuke powerplants now, where Western nations provide the fuel for them, as many nations do around the globe, if they'd give up their centrifuges and ballistic missile program, but they won't do that.

"Little Satan"? Is that like "Little Nicky"?

link

Dan

After all, India and Pakistan haven't had any major military clashes for a long time and both nations have nukes.

They also get divisions, hell, multiple Corps of Chinese troops massing on their border when they start nuclear test "competitions."

I am unwilling to allow a nation that currently advocates the utter annihilation of a non-neighbor state to develop nukes, because there have been cases in the past where what everyone thought was rhetoric was a mission statement.

Let's separate the rhetoric from the reality. For all her doomsday proclamations of "wiping Israel off the face of the earth," Iran is by-and-large a secular society whose government, as fundamentalist as we'd like to believe, is unlikely to do anything that would amount to suicide.

And this isn't the same Revolutionary Iran which did something even Hitler and the other Axis powers didn't do back in '79, violating "diplomatic immunity" by storming our embassy and holding American hostages for 444 days.

Given Israel lacks the capability of destroying any nuclear programme the Iranians have, and that the fallout from any attack would be astronomical, I doubt it'll happen.

For a start, they'll have to cross airspace heavily used by allied air forces – and ask nicely. I doubt permission will be given.

Or they could simply use Jordan without asking – with attendant risks. If Jordanian jets get shot down attacking a tanker and escorts over Jordanian air-space, I know who will cop the worst of the international opinion.

Thanks to Netanyahu, Israel is fast running out of friends. Hence it has tied its own ahnds.

And this isn't the same Revolutionary Iran which did something even Hitler and the other Axis powers didn't do back in '79, violating "diplomatic immunity" by storming our embassy and holding American hostages for 444 days.

It isn't? When did the counter-revolution happen? When did they stop calling us Big Satan and Little Satan? When did they acknowledge Israel's right to exist as an independent, Jewish national state?

Theres an argument over translation of "that" speach, it seems very plausible that iran was advocating the destruction of israel as a jewish state through a one state solution, right of return and equal rights for all. Not by killing or expelling jews (nuclear weapons being notoriously indiscriminate in that regard). I dont think ethnically based states are such a good idea myself..

Bickering over the exact translation of 'that' speech is a distraction. Statements by top Iranian officials over many years, until today, have consistently demonized and called for the destruction of Israel:

link

I dont think ethnically based states are such a good idea myself..

There are an awful lot of them in Europe. Most mid-eastern states have been explicitly 'Arab' republics, are now tending towards becoming 'Islamic' republics, like Iran. Your own United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is trying hard to evolve past its ethnic roots. Don't project your own experiences into places where they don't apply.

Isrealis are trying to kill combatants.

including children?

Thankfully I dont have experiences that would apply in israel. I have no knowledge of what its like to be part of a ruling class based on my ethnic/religious origin or thankfully be part of a second class or occupied minority because of my ethnic/religious origin. Maybe an South African my age could give you a better insight?

Which european states are you calling ethnically based – 90s serbia or Kossovo, 40s italy or germany? None of those are models to follow.

"You probably aren't aware that according to the Koran, it is OK to lie to deceive your enemy. I read your link, you can read mine: link"
WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Irish Republic. Bulgarian Republic. Romanian Republic. Greek Republic. Turkish Republic. Don't play stupid with me, boy.

Youre not in modern israel, 80s south africa or 50s alabama now bell end and as for playing stupid, Im here learning from the master amnt I?

None of those are ethnicities theyre nationalities, read a dictionary – none of them are exclusive ethnically or religiously,israel is. None of them in the last 50 years have expelled those of the wrong ethnicity, flattened villages of the wrong ethnicity or felt free to colonise land because the owners are the wrong ethnicity. Israel has,
boy.

Doesn't take much to infuriate you, does it? Your spell-checker is hemorrhaging.

Talk to a Kurd about the enlightened Turkish Republic, or a Bulgarian or Greek muslim. I'm not wasting any more keystrokes on your invincible ignorance. Has it been 50 years since the Irish were bombing you?

Can anyone tell me why iran is the bad guy in this while its israel whos been threatening to attack?

Because Israel has shown great restraint through it's history, and Revolutionary Iran has shown little.
-Kle.

What? Is there another Israel I don't know about?

Wow… Sorry, somehow I missed this one.

"Let's see, the idea may be for the Israelis to use nukes against Iran…"
Before this gets turned into "Israel is planning to nuke Iran," let's please acknowledge this came from a TMP poster and is not Israeli gov't policy.

"Put yourself in the Palestinian's shoes."
And then put yourself in the Israelis' shoes. What would YOU do, and feel free to leave out rainbows and unicorns.

"Ironically Bibi letting the mask slip might make the rest of the world realise it has to face facts."
Your facts, or THE facts? Is Chortle back?

"Because in 1951 the Iranians had the audacity to think that their oil wealth belonged to Iran."
I'm so tired of people that heard something about history but didn't feel like reading the whole thing…

"Iran wants nukes because Israel has them."
So, Israel has nukes and Iran fights a proxy war against them, but when Iran gets nukes they'll stop? Gotcha…

"…terrorism when iran does it but "targeted assasination (sic)" when israel does it."
For those not aware, going after military leaders and defense scientists is going after civic centers, diplomatic establishments, houses of worship, etc…

"Isrealis are trying to kill combatants. -including children?"
Once again a case of "I heard 'x' happened, but I didn't bother to get the WHOLE story. What do you mean Hezbollah/Hamas/PLO/IJ/PIJ/EIJ, etc…, put the rocket launcher in a schoolyard?' Cute though…

"An Iranian fatwah that's shown to be a clear lie would totally discredit the mullahs as muslims."
So is killing Muslims, or even deists if you really want to get technical, but that hasn't seemed to get in the way, now has it? And it says lying to the enemy is okay, whilst also saying lying to Muslims is bad. But what about lying to enemy Muslims? Seems we've seen that every now and again as well…

"…Iran is by-and-large a secular society whose government, as fundamentalist as we'd like to believe, is unlikely to do anything that would amount to suicide."
Yeah, all that 'Mahdi' talk is just for fun. A secular state? What are you talking about, where is this coming from?

"…it seems very plausible that iran was advocating the destruction of (I)srael as a (J)ewish state through a one state solution…"
Oh, okay then, no sweat; I thought we were talking about the destruction of the Jewish state. Oh, we still are? Nevermind…

"Thankfully I dont have experiences that would apply in (I)srael."
Your ignorance is showing again, Sir. First, if you live in a place with many different cultures and ethnicities, and even a few different religions, where the normal folks are just trying to go about living their daily lives, you have exactly the daily Israeli experience.

What you're missing out on are the rockets that come in to kill and maim people of different cultures and ethnicities, and even a few different religions, or when some ideologically motivated straps a bomb to himself and strolls into your favorite restaurant, or a similarly ideological who can't get a rocket or a bomb just drives his car into a group of (multi-ethnic/culture/religious) people.

"Which european states are you calling ethnically based – 90s serbia or Kossovo, 40s italy or germany?"
This is one of my personal favorites, when a compares the country full of people that were rounded up and killed to the countries that did it, aided it, or turned a cowardly blind eye to it. Very clever. Yeah, I don't know why 'those' folks would want to have their own country. Matter of fact, I don't know why anyone fights for their existence, or even gets up to eat so they don't starve…

"Because Israel has shown great restraint through it's history…"
Indeed. 'Better' nations have kept far more of what they won in battle.

"What? Is there another Israel I don't know about?"
Yes, er, there is, which is to say you don't enough about the situation to be able to honestly tell folks you have a passing familiarity with the subject. But you can't admit you've only heard a tiny sliver of reality, not all of reality, that you didn't bother to look into the situation yourself and form your own opinion.

And here I promised myself I'd stick to wargaming…

V/R,
Jack

What if we talked about games with miniatures and you know left the politics out of it……?????

Kinda tough to do that when you're talking modern conflicts, Kyote.

But I can't see any way with any weapon I know the Israelis have for the IAF to hit the Iranian nuclear program.

It's not like the Osirak reactor that was "only" 1600km from Israel, the Iranian facilities are over twice that distance from Israel!