‘Moment of truth is near:’ Israeli Air Force set to attack Iran

[USAHawk785]

US managed to install a friendly administration in Iraq and had a graceful exit from the country. Whether Iraq becomes neutral or not in the long run, it is not a threat to US interests any more.

Downfall of Saddam was naturally beneficial to Iran as well and not just the other players in the Middle East. Let us hope that Iraq gets back on its feet.

Agreed, let us hope that the democracy now set in place in Iraq leads the country into stability. Iraq is a success story.

I also hold the same view for Afghanistan; the Afghani military's ability to neutralize Taliban attacks early this week is an example, a testament to that country's military readiness and ability.

 

[Sergi]

Agreed, let us hope that the democracy now set in place in Iraq leads the country into stability. Iraq is a success story.

I also hold the same view for Afghanistan; the Afghani military's ability to neutralize Taliban attacks early this week is an example, a testament to that country's military readiness and ability.

I will not call it success story. But it's on the way to be one. Infact I am not the one who supports the war on Iraq. USA handle the situation wrongly. Now it's their moral responsibility to build and aid Iraq. I think they will and have to keep it.

Afghan decision was right. But still USA should continue to help these two nations to overcome thier problems and help them to prosperity.

I blaim Bush for war on Iraq. May be a causality of egos.

 

[USAHawk785]

I will not call it success story. But it's on the way to be one. Infact I am not the one who supports the war on Iraq. USA handle the situation wrongly. Now it's their moral responsibility to build and aid Iraq. I think they will and have to keep it.

Afghan decision was right. But still USA should continue to help these two nations to overcome thier problems and help them to prosperity.

I blaim Bush for war on Iraq. May be a causality of egos.

There were many things that are questionable, bro, and yes, it is a moral responsibility of the United States to maintain close strategic relations with Iraq. I had some friends who served in the Army who lost their lives in Iraq during the first 4 years. Considering how Iraq has transitioned since its liberation to the present, we're pleased with the results.

I also understand and respect your opinion, thanks for sharing it.

 

[Fantasy]

Not really. An Iranian attack on Iran would also include devastating its missile forces. Besides US Warships and Missile Batteries in the Gulf will shoot down most incoming Iranian Missiles and the Iranian damage will be superficial.

Iran can mine the Straits of Hormuz but US Mine Sweepers will get the straits open in 48 to 72 hours.

What Iran can do is create havok in Afghanistan and start global bombing campaign against Western targets.

The USA do not have anywhere close to the capability to devastate Iranian missile forces, numbering in the tens of thousands, that is why they are pressing for a NATO defense shield, and military basing in Afghanistan, something which will not be completed within this decade or two IMO, by then Iran would probably have found ways to counteract this. Don't forget Iran is immovable and have plenty of manpower and firepower, and completely energy sufficient, American bases in the gulf, it's forward deploy forces are limited in what they can do, no oil = no economy, no economy = no military. If America cannot resolve this war within a year, they will face their own social backlash and economic collapse at home. The myth about the USA able to secure the strait of Hormuz along such a long and narrow coastline with a few battleships is nonsense, against Iran who have plenty of ways, not just mines to completely choke off the straits. There will be no war, 99.5% sure of that.

 

[mosu]

israel is going for her destruction israel cant win a war with hezbullah labnon then how they going to win iran war iran is a powerfull country good economy and oil so israel is going to be hell china and russian and pakistan and syria going to help iran so israels
destruction is near

 

[LeGenD]

Agreed, let us hope that the democracy now set in place in Iraq leads the country into stability. Iraq is a success story.

Indeed

I also hold the same view for Afghanistan; the Afghani military's ability to neutralize Taliban attacks early this week is an example, a testament to that country's military readiness and ability.

My friend, unfortunately the situation of Afghanistan is vastly different from what ISAF wants to publicize. Afghanistan is split between US backed factions and Taliban. It should be acknowledged that Taliban enjoys local support within Afghanistan. This is why it thrives to this day. Afghanistan is in a state of civil war and ISAF knows this.

Point is that International Community should work to bring all Afghan factions to negotiation table to reach an understanding. This is the only solution for Afghan problem.

Afghanistan is one nation that can never be tamed with military power alone.

The USA do not have anywhere close to the capability to devastate Iranian missile forces, numbering in the tens of thousands, that is why they are pressing for a NATO defense shield, and military basing in Afghanistan, something which will not be completed within this decade or two IMO, by then Iran would probably have found ways to counteract this. Don't forget Iran is immovable and have plenty of manpower and firepower, and completely energy sufficient, American bases in the gulf, it's forward deploy forces are limited in what they can do, no oil = no economy, no economy = no military. If America cannot resolve this war within a year, they will face their own social backlash and economic collapse at home. The myth about the USA able to secure the strait of Hormuz along such a long and narrow coastline with a few battleships is nonsense, against Iran who have plenty of ways, not just mines to completely choke off the straits. There will be no war, 99.5% sure of that.

Is this a 'fantasy' of yours?

 

[Gessler]

@Mercenary

An Israeli attack on Iran will be unsuccessful.

You've taken up to Astrology now? You cannot say Israel's attack will be unsuccessful without assesing the military capabilities of either side completely. I could take yours (and others') words that Israeli attack will be unsuccessfull only as fanboy statements at the best.

It needs repeated sorties with heavy bombers and that is something militarily it lacks.

Whatever for? The objective of the war will basically be to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. Not to invade and vanquish Iran completely, atleast not yet. And how did you arrive at the conclusion that it'll take repeated sorties with heavy bombers??? Iran's facilities are not located inside Hoover Dam, you know A couple of F-16s and F-15 Strike Eagles loaded with JDAMs would be more than enough. "Heavy Bombers" like B-52/B-1 Lancer, B-2 Spirit might not even be required to complete the mission. Its well within the capabilities of Israeli Air Force itself.

The only country that can deliver a knockout blow to Iran's Nuclear Program is USA

Thats a misconception. Iran's nuke programme is FAR from mature. Not even one bomb has been churned out as yet. Knocking out this programme which is still in its nascent stages is very much within the abilities of Israel, however we cannot rule out US/NATO help anyway. But Israel is capable enough to knock it off, yes sir.

 

[Mercenary]

The USA do not have anywhere close to the capability to devastate Iranian missile forces, numbering in the tens of thousands, that is why they are pressing for a NATO defense shield, and military basing in Afghanistan, something which will not be completed within this decade or two IMO, by then Iran would probably have found ways to counteract this.

USA certainly has the capability to devastate Iran's missile forces. By deploying 3 Air Craft Carrier Battle Groups each with over 80 Fighters, plus Land Based fighters in the gulf and B-52 Bombers from Diego Garcia and B-2 Stealth Bombers from Italy and Tomahawk Cruise Missiles, Naval bombardment, Electronic Warfare, Submarine Missiles, etc. USA the ability to inflict hundreds if not thousands of sorties on Iranian Missiles round the clock and utterly devastate them.

Don't forget Iran is immovable and have plenty of manpower and firepower, and completely energy sufficient, American bases in the gulf, it's forward deploy forces are limited in what they can do, no oil = no economy, no economy = no military.

All that movement is tracked by USA Spy Satellites and Radio and Military Telecommunication Intercepts by NSA.

Iran's Manpower is useless in a war which will be conducted through an Air and Naval bombardment.

American bases in the Gulf are protected by tertiary missile defense shields. As for Oil, USA has the Strategic Reserves which can keep the country going for 10 years. And the Straits of Hormuz won't remain closed for a long period of time if that ever happens. USA has robust capability to sweep away the mines and escort oil tankers under naval escort something it did in 1988 when USA devastated the Iranian Navy and escorted the oil tankers.

If America cannot resolve this war within a year, they will face their own social backlash and economic collapse at home. The myth about the USA able to secure the strait of Hormuz along such a long and narrow coastline with a few battleships is nonsense, against Iran who have plenty of ways, not just mines to completely choke off the straits.

USA has over 300 Naval Vessels in its Armada. US Navy is larger than the rest of the world combined. USA has developed contingencies in the case if Iran tries to mine the Straits.

There will be no war, 99.5% sure of that.

That is something I agree with you.

 

[Mercenary]

You've taken up to Astrology now? You cannot say Israel's attack will be unsuccessful without assesing the military capabilities of either side completely. I could take yours (and others') words that Israeli attack will be unsuccessfull only as fanboy statements at the best.

Maybe because Iran's Nuclear Facilities are dispersed across this vast country and are deeply buried underground. Israel lacks the ability to penetrate deep within those facilities to take them out. And Israel will only have the ability to perform 1 sortie of this kind over Iran. Iran's nuclear facilties need multiple sorties to be decimated.

Whatever for? The objective of the war will basically be to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. Not to invade and vanquish Iran completely, atleast not yet. And how did you arrive at the conclusion that it'll take repeated sorties with heavy bombers??? Iran's facilities are not located inside Hoover Dam, you know A couple of F-16s and F-15 Strike Eagles loaded with JDAMs would be more than enough. "Heavy Bombers" like B-52/B-1 Lancer, B-2 Spirit might not even be required to complete the mission. Its well within the capabilities of Israeli Air Force itself.

Iran's nuclear facilities are buried deep underground and beneath mountains. It needs Tactical Nukes or Very Heavy Ordnance Bombs to penetrate through so much earth to reach their targets. Read Seymour Hersh's articles about the strategies used by Bush and Obama administrations to deal with Iran. Both arrived at the same conclusion that Tactical Nukes were the best option but it will look highly hypocritical to use nuclear weapons on a country to prevent it from making nuclear weapons.

Thats a misconception. Iran's nuke programme is FAR from mature. Not even one bomb has been churned out as yet. Knocking out this programme which is still in its nascent stages is very much within the abilities of Israel, however we cannot rule out US/NATO help anyway. But Israel is capable enough to knock it off, yes sir.

I don't believe Iran is making a nuclear weapon. I believe the USA's NIE which stated that Iran stopped pursuing Nuclear Weapons in 2003 when Saddam was overthrown.

Israel can set Iran back by a max for a year in its nuclear program but it will not deliver the knockout blow required. Thats not my assessment, thats the assessment of Chairman of Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey. No offense to you, I trust his assessment over yours.

 

[Gessler]

@Mercenary

Maybe because Iran's Nuclear Facilities are dispersed across this vast country and are deeply buried underground. Israel lacks the ability to penetrate deep within those facilities to take them out. And Israel will only have the ability to perform 1 sortie of this kind over Iran. Iran's nuclear facilties need multiple sorties to be decimated.

Israel can conduct numerous sorties according to the need. They have the equipment and everything else needed to do so. Iran's facilities are not at one place, agreed. But for fighters/ground-attack aircraft this distance can be easily skimmed. Also we must remember the Israeli attack might not come from only Israeli land, they would use other areas as bases/etc.
for launching the attack. Plus, eventhough it might be capable enough, Israel would definitely get
US support.

Lets not forget USS Enterprise and the 5th fleet (redeployed from Bahrain) are right there to counter Iran. Long-range F/A-18 fighters from these aircraft carriers and battle groups would be fully capable of destroyring Iran's nuke facilities, irrespective of under which rock they might be located.

Plus, eventhough it might be hypocritic (like you said) to use nukes on Iran, we cannot rule out a conventional missile strike on Iran's nuke facilities via Israel (Jericho-series an' others). This woud be game over for Iran's n-programme.

Iran's nuclear facilities are buried deep underground and beneath mountains. It needs Tactical Nukes or Very Heavy Ordnance Bombs to penetrate through so much earth to reach their targets.

Still nothing that cannot be executed properly. A Strike Eagle with full ordnance of air-to-ground bombs/munitions or cruise missiles like Delilah can do the job to some extent as well. Although I think sprays of JDAMs would be the best resort for Israel to wipe them out. Can't tell what US would use if they barge in though. Majority of the facility would be destroyed
with proper armament, that would be enough to render them non-functional. However IF and when it proves futile, or is not
planned to be so this way, then they'll use the bomber option for all they care.

Read Seymour Hersh's articles about the strategies used by Bush and Obama administrations to deal with Iran. Both arrived at the same conclusion that Tactical Nukes were the best option but it will look highly hypocritical to use nuclear weapons on a country to prevent it from making nuclear weapons.

Rule out use of tactical nukes by allied side. They'll use conventional missile strikes on nuke facilities if the situation gets really worse. But nukes wont be used.

I don't believe Iran is making a nuclear weapon. I believe the USA's NIE which stated that Iran stopped pursuing Nuclear Weapons in 2003 when Saddam was overthrown.

Israel can set Iran back by a max for a year in its nuclear program but it will not deliver the knockout blow required.

Ahhh...okay lets not divert this into the topic of "will Iran make a nuke or not". What Iran is doing right now is more well-assesed by the Israeli and US militaries rather than others. And they would decide whether a strike is required or not directly upon what Iran plans to do.

An Israeli strike would set back Iran for ATLEAST 4-5 years to 8 maximum. This can be estimated because we would know what stage Iran's nuke programme is, what their economic and infrastructual abilities are, how much help they would recieve from foreign nations, and how much help/assistance they would be allowed to receive, etc.

Thats not my assessment, thats the assessment of Chairman of Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey. No offense to you, I trust his assessment over yours.

Take it for his word on the issue for all you like. I wont forbid you. But I would like to tell you that the assesments of these so-called experts on world affairs and others could go completely wrong in specific situations. Same point was raised by Gambit a while ago. One thing is, they do not assess the actual inside situation, they comment on what they think, how it appears to be, and where it could go if this appears to continue. Two, they cant read the minds of the
world leaders and military high command concerned here. Their thoughts and plans could be completely different from what is assessed by these guys.

regards,

 

[Hack-Hook]

Dear gessler think a little about this
USA 13.5 tons bunker-buster penetrate 60-70m in 5000PSI concrete but it only can penetrate less than 10m in 10000PSI concrete ,Iran Uses 60000PSI concrete to strengthen its facilities .

 

[IranZamin]

Good thing that there are many hyenas in and outside of Iran to finish the job.

You are calling your country,your ally and few of your mercenaries ''hyenas'' ?
Btw, Iran isnt going to get attacked. You only attack your enemy in surprise and not brag about attacking every day in the world media making your opponent more prepared then ever and reducing the success of the striking force. And finally, Iran is to powerful to be attacked. Israel is just a ant

 

[LeGenD]

Dear gessler think a little about this
USA 13.5 tons bunker-buster penetrate 60-70m in 5000PSI concrete but it only can penetrate less than 10m in 10000PSI concrete ,Iran Uses 60000PSI concrete to strengthen its facilities .

Penetration is one thing. It is the shockwave that does the damage.

 

[Mercenary]

Iran has hardened bunkers and triple layer protection which make them very difficult to penetrate with one sortie.

The only way to take them out is fire these bunker buster bombs on them and then use follow up waves to strike in the crater created which will punch through the reinforced concrete and inflict critical damage on them.

The problem for Israel is the distance it has to cover which limits the amount of time it has to damage over Iran before its fighters run out of fuel.

Israel could do a combination of using its Dolphin Submarines and Jericho missiles to attack the targets first to create the craters and then use its fighters to deliver the knockout blow to Iran's Nuke facilities but this is a horrendously complicated scenario where many things can go wrong and needs total precision to be correct.

Only USA with its massive fleet of heavy bombers, stealth bombers, missile forces, battleships, attack and air superiority fighters can project the kind of destructive power needed to deliver Iran's Nuke facilities a knockout blow.

But USA is in no mood to start another war in the middle east when its winding down its current war in afghanistan and rebuilding its Pacific forces to counter the growing might of China.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Penetration is one thing. It is the shockwave that does the damage.

indeed , tremors would be disaster for high speed centrifuges , but for the same reason they install those centrifuges in a way to stand against earth quacks so don't you think a tiny tremor produced by a bomb will be nothing extraordinary for such facilities .