posted
Last time Iran tried to actively develop nuclear weapons, Israels air force made a quick surgical strike on the facilities and eradicated them. It will be interesting to see if an apparently more diplomatic Israel will use some other means to stop Iran if other countries fail to.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't be surprised to see them try, we talked about this in a different thread. But the Iranians have made it much more difficult for surgical strikes to totally wipe out the program like last time (edit) in Iraq. Last time it was a single light water reactor I believe.
Numinor -
My bad, I didn't realize that was still in reference to the giant gun thing. Judging from the size of the gun, it didn't seem feasible to mount on a fighter. Gunship maybe. Either way, it's a moot point I think. The next generation of fightercraft WILL have lasers on it, I guarantee it. The next generation after the Raptor and JSF I mean.
posted
Pretty sure it was Iran Dag, let me check. My Iranian IR teacher lectured on it.
I can't find it, but I can find strikes on Iraq, which makes me feel really stupid because I paid attention in that class and I have never mistooken Iraq for Iran before.
But I guess it makes little difference in terms of principle as Israel was willing to stop Iraq, In Israel's mind, Iran is not much different. I found this quote though
Israeli military Chief of Staff, Daniel Halutz, was quoted as responding to the question of how far Israel was ready to go to stop Iran’s nuclear energy program with the statement "Two thousand kilometers".
posted
Iran's program isn't vulnerable like Iraq's reactor was. Also, many of the targets are in dense civilian areas.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Without wishing to open an egregious Israel debate, I would imagine that Israel's leaders are willing to take the risk of killing some Iranian civilians in exchange for not facing the threat of an Iranian nuke. And given the public statements of Iran's president, I am not convinced they would be wrong to do so. The dispersion and hardness of the targets is a more difficult problem, certainly.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob the Lawyer: People always worry about ammo, but I've always found that there are plenty of breakable crates around when I need more.
Bob wins the thread.
Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob the Lawyer: People always worry about ammo, but I've always found that there are plenty of breakable crates around when I need more.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Without wishing to open an egregious Israel debate, I would imagine that Israel's leaders are willing to take the risk of killing some Iranian civilians in exchange for not facing the threat of an Iranian nuke. And given the public statements of Iran's president, I am not convinced they would be wrong to do so. The dispersion and hardness of the targets is a more difficult problem, certainly.
I have a fairly pro israeli stance, (though I do believe in providing for an independant possibly joint palestinian state) I agree with KOM that Israel is certainly capable, and willing to do what it takes to stop the current regime in Iran from doing what it says its doing. What confuses me is how the president of Iran's cabinet often tries to tone down what he is saying, and then the President comes out and reaffirms what he is saying in no uncertain terms.
The total destruction of Iran's nuclear plants is indeed daunting, but Israel has possibly the 2nd most effective air force in the world, 2nd to the US. Their academy and entrance restrictions are extremely refined.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But in a cruel historical irony, doing so required concentration -- putting all the eggs back in one basket, a tiny territory hard by the Mediterranean, eight miles wide at its waist. A tempting target for those who would finish Hitler's work.
His successors now reside in Tehran. The world has paid ample attention to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declaration that Israel must be destroyed. Less attention has been paid to Iranian leaders' pronouncements on exactly how Israel would be "eliminated by one storm," as Ahmadinejad has promised.
Former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the presumed moderate of this gang, has explained that "the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam." The logic is impeccable, the intention clear: A nuclear attack would effectively destroy tiny Israel, while any retaliation launched by a dying Israel would have no major effect on an Islamic civilization of a billion people stretching from Mauritania to Indonesia.
As it races to acquire nuclear weapons, Iran makes clear that if there is any trouble, the Jews will be the first to suffer. "We have announced that wherever [in Iran] America does make any mischief, the first place we target will be Israel," said Gen. Mohammad Ebrahim Dehghani, a top Revolutionary Guards commander. Hitler was only slightly more direct when he announced seven months before invading Poland that, if there was another war, "the result will be . . . the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."
He's obviously very partisan on this issue, but assuming those quotes are accurate, I'd be planning the strike against Iran right now if I were Israel.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am sure the plans have been in place for decades, and are updated on a regular basis.
Lyr, ythe entire point of that part of the program was Metal Storm, and it was the Metal Storm guns placed on a plane that did that type of damae to those tanks, I saw that section of the show myself.
Also, as I mentioned above the personal weapons were even more amazing in their own way.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Estimates made by military experts include that the largest non-nuclear bombs we have (which are a darn sight better than anything Israel has) would be unlikely to take out the most hardened targets.
Furthermore, Iran's air defenses are far better than Iraq's were. Many of the more interior targets would be difficult to reach with a quick strike, much less destroy.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
