M.A.D. prevents an Israel vs Iran war

So I've been on this forum long enough to know that a war between these two countries should have happened in 2006, otherwise 2007, 2008 , 2009 if not 2010 etc.
So now in 2012 we hear the same rhetoric, and i have been thinking. Israel has the capacity two turn Iran into a big new lake with their Jericho's and Dolphin Submarines, however Iran has invested in their relations in South Lebanon, Syria and even Shia Iraq, while doing that they have also extensively invested in their Shahab 2 and 3 program(and other missile systems). If Iran is going to ashes, they still might have second strike capability to strike Tel Aviv with at least Shahab 2's from some of the above countries and level a city like that with even conventional warheads, remember Israel is a very, very tiny country. And if not, in a later stage they might strike Israel with other biological, chemical or even nuclear devices with the help of those proxy countries (might even be the stock of Assad).
The other way around, Israel would keep their second strike capability with their subs if their country has gone to hell. And still the subs of Israel and the proxy countries from Iran also have their own weaknesses as they're also vulnerable or in small quantity, see it as a M.A.D. light.
Like to hear your views and if you agree or not with this theorem.

And if Iran strikes at US assets after the Israeli strike?After we retaliate what would be left for an Israeli counter strike?

And you neglect the religious fanaticism of Islam
They want death to prove their love for their god.

Actually M.A.D. practically assures war. Both Israel & Iran are far too eager to bring about WW3. They actually think they are living out religious prophecy by doing so & for that they can't wait! Stupid religion.

Originally posted by TopherWayne
Actually M.A.D. practically assures war. Both Israel & Iran are far too eager to bring about WW3. They actually think they are living out religious prophecy by doing so & for that they can't wait! Stupid religion.

I mean MAD is assured destruction, so for a rational being it prevents you from going to war.
About the US bases, i think Iran is aware that Obama and Bibi are not best friends and that Obama is pretty reluctant going to war, If Iran can ward off an attack (Israel needs at least 40 aircraft to do the job) and hurt them back in Tel aviv or so, the US might still be out of it.
If the US intervenes, all bets are off.

Israel would probably need their first and second strike capability as backup against Russia if Israel bomb Iran.

Israel doesn't have the capability to fight Russia conventionally and win. If Russia response with a immediate attack on Israel as Israel attack Iran. The US might be forced to reconsider their role and active support.
This is probably why Israel is looking for a combined attack with the US. Because that leaves Russia and China on the sideline. If Russia or China do step in we will probably have WW3.

What a damn mess.Israel has had nukes for decades and hasnt used them.Iran has changed the status quo for the worst.

MAD only works if both parties do not want to be destroyed.
Iran, IMO, would not mind being blown up for the cause...

But that is just an opinion.

Originally posted by Darkblade71
MAD only works if both parties do not want to be destroyed.
Iran, IMO, would not mind being blown up for the cause...

But that is just an opinion.

There isn't a mutually assured destruction scenario at the moment.

Israel could strike Iran without fear of destruction. If they were confident they could get the job done solo they would have done it already.

When Iran has nuclear capability then a MAD situation would exist. Thats what Iran is trying for. They want to be impervious to regime change.

At some point in the near future Israel will strike. The only question is whether the USA will participate. Its a difficult scenario.

While aspects of the Iranian regime (especially the guards) would probably like Martyrdom the wider public probably isn't queuing up to get their children melted. The protests a couple of years ago that had to be murdered and tortured into silence shows that there are forward thinking people there, just not in power.

You assuming the target would be Israel. Say Iran decides to enforce its claims on it has made on the gulf states under the threat of nuclear action. Iran also says that if the US gets involved they will hit US allies in Europe. The GCC have no nukes to create a MAD scenerio and would the US risk a nuclear exchange to protect GCC territory? MAD only works when both sides can and will destroy each other.

reply to post by justwokeup


Actually if Iran does have chemical/biologic warheads for their missiles than it woukd be a M.A.D. scenario as they could destroy Israel...

Originally posted by AgentX09
reply to post by justwokeup

 

Actually if Iran does have chemical/biologic warheads for their missiles than it woukd be a M.A.D. scenario as they could destroy Israel...

Given the small geographic footprint of Israel i'll concede thats possible.

Although they would have to get more through the defences to have a similar effect.

Originally posted by justwokeup
There isn't a mutually assured destruction scenario at the moment.

Israel could strike Iran without fear of destruction. If they were confident they could get the job done solo they would have done it already.

When Iran has nuclear capability then a MAD situation would exist. Thats what Iran is trying for. They want to be impervious to regime change.

At some point in the near future Israel will strike. The only question is whether the USA will participate. Its a difficult scenario.

While aspects of the Iranian regime (especially the guards) would probably like Martyrdom the wider public probably isn't queuing up to get their children melted. The protests a couple of years ago that had to be murdered and tortured into silence shows that there are forward thinking people there, just not in power.

The people dont run the country, extremists run the country. Go watch the news.
they kill their own people, what respect do they have for others, isnt it obvious.

I don't see there being any war at all. Maybe if you're lucky you'd see a small exchange. The same thing seen between the palastinians and isreal. for a breif period of time. Just small scale conventional weapons. Anything big wouldn't exactly fit well with the time frame of what is told in the bible about the way that final battle will play out.

Originally posted by borntowatch
And you neglect the religious fanaticism of Islam
They want death to prove their love for their god.

Gen. Martin Dempsey views the Iranian Regime as a "rational actor" -



Israeli General Moshe Dayan once said that : 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' Is it so shocking that the Iranian dogs are barking back ?

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by justwokeup
There isn't a mutually assured destruction scenario at the moment.

Israel could strike Iran without fear of destruction. If they were confident they could get the job done solo they would have done it already.

When Iran has nuclear capability then a MAD situation would exist. Thats what Iran is trying for. They want to be impervious to regime change.

At some point in the near future Israel will strike. The only question is whether the USA will participate. Its a difficult scenario.

While aspects of the Iranian regime (especially the guards) would probably like Martyrdom the wider public probably isn't queuing up to get their children melted. The protests a couple of years ago that had to be murdered and tortured into silence shows that there are forward thinking people there, just not in power.

The people dont run the country, extremists run the country. Go watch the news.
they kill their own people, what respect do they have for others, isnt it obvious.

Agreed. Its just unfortunate that circumstances may force the Israelis hand resulting in a strengthening of the regime we would like to get rid of and the death of countless innocents.

I think at this point a strike is inevitable and I don't see any good outcomes.

Originally posted by justwokeup

Originally posted by AgentX09
reply to post by justwokeup

 

Actually if Iran does have chemical/biologic warheads for their missiles than it woukd be a M.A.D. scenario as they could destroy Israel...

Given the small geographic footprint of Israel i'll concede thats possible.

Although they would have to get more through the defences to have a similar effect.

because of their small footprint, a barrage of conventional weapons could also do enough damage,i think its unlikely that Iran will use biological weapons and jeopardize the position of the Palestinians or a city as Jerusalem altogether.On the other hand, being a martyr as an Iranian or Palestinian would also be convenient for them, that's the thing about rationale and MAD and the unpredictability of those religions.

Originally posted by justwokeup

Originally posted by AgentX09
reply to post by justwokeup

 

Actually if Iran does have chemical/biologic warheads for their missiles than it woukd be a M.A.D. scenario as they could destroy Israel...

Given the small geographic footprint of Israel i'll concede thats possible.

Although they would have to get more through the defences to have a similar effect.

Israel would have to get past Jordanian and Iraqi air defences without being shot down. Saudi Arabia has told them they won't let Israel use Saudi territory. Syria is a battlezone and after shooting down that Turkish Fighter Jet they have showed they will willingly blast any aircraft out of the sky (thereby sealing that route for an Israeli strike), Egypt (with the MB in power, and the peace treaty with Israel not being re-signed) is also likely to shoot down any Israeli jets and/or block them from using the Suez canal from shipping their fighter/bombers to UAE (Egypt and Iran are becoming closer diplomatically).

The only route left would be to fly to Turkey and then directly eastwards into Azerbaijan (there was talk of the Azeri allowing Israeli jets to land, and Iran moved air defences towards their northern border) and then southwards into Iran which would cost them hundreds of millions and by the time they got to Azerbaijan word would get out to Syria/Iran about it and it could be severely reduced to only a handful of aircraft.

Iran, on the other hand, don't have to bother with those limits. They would simply fire hundreds of Shabab-3 missiles across (relatively friendly) Iraq and their Syrian allies territories. They could pound Israel pretty easily, whereas Israel would need to maneuver pretty rapidly to deliver their first strike. Also, Syria would be likely to join in if Israel attacked Iran and would fire their Scuds tipped with biological/chemical warheads and just cripple the Israel populace.

This is a lose-lose scenario. It's really just a case of doesn't lose the most.