This is what a US strike on Iran would look like.....

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by MDDoxs
In my mind, there is yet to be enough justification to warrant any strike, or even enough to warrant the covert operations under way.

But Iran has been Covertly active for decades.
Doesn't Warrant any kind of legitimate response?

Legitimate response is in the eye of the responder, Iraq comes to mind was that and is that a legitimate response?

I ask what is legitimate about invading a nation minding its own business?

Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
1. There is no way of bombing most of the underground facilities. They're too deep and no bomb or bunker buster or whatever has the power to get THAT deep.

2. If chemical or biological weapons are stored also underground they're not as deep as the facilities, so bombing it will basically release EVERYTHING into the atmosphere - SMART.

3. Nukes are out of the question.

4. So you can hit 1 or 2 facilities. What about the others? Oh yes, the theory is "seal the entry and exit points".... which is so stupid and so pointless that I cant even comment.

5. The shahab is the only missile raining on israel? No. It will be LOTS of them. It will be the freakin missile monsoon season in israel - along with the shahab of course.

6. Israel cant do it alone. Iran is not palestine where you just bulldoze your way through people's houses

7. US cant do it alone. Iran is not Iraq, and if Iraq was already a mess, can you imagine Iran?

8. Its obvious it needs an "invasion plan" to really put a stop to this (imaginary) "nuclear threat" - again Teheran is not Baghdad.

9. The chain reaction is too big and too dangerous to predict.

I don't agree with most of this, but I'm on my phone and don't want to type long message.

Iran is not Iraq, you are right. They fought for a decade, conventional, and ended without victor.
US alone, defeated the Iraqi army in 2 weeks. lol

I kind of figured that any airstrike on Iran would be a big endeavor. Especially, since Iran has been given over a decade to prepare and fortify their enrichment facilities. In addition, they have been given more than ample time to distribute their sleeper cells throughout the globe, and will most likely respond as soon as the news breaks about an attack on Iran. They have quite a covert capability, and were operating under the noses of a large military presence in Iraq. The blow-back is definitely something to take into account. Furthermore, they have quite the formidable terrain on their side. Rugged terrain galore. It is certainly not Kansas!

My hope is the geniuses in the government think long and hard about deploying ground troops. As for bombing? What guarantee can be given that they have got it all, and what are the estimates of how long such a military operation would take? Are the necessary contingency measures in place to contain escalation?

Anyway, the US is going to have to attack sooner or later, because if they do not? It will be a significant hit to their credibility, and reputation as a Super Power. They have been going on and on about this for years, and to see them successful detonate a nuke like North Korea would be a facepalm of epic proportions. Lets hope they got their eggs in row instead of going into this half-cocked like a bunch of cowboys. We could not destroy the Ho Chi Minh Trail during the Vietnam War, and the US dropped more bombs on it than in all of WWII. Something to think about? Great thread Slayer!

Originally posted by beezzer

You anti-Israel folks will have to find another word other than war-monger to call us.

Ive been called worse by the Pro-War crowd. That doesnt bother me, name calling.

But if you must "label" me Beez, Call me what I am.

A Patriot of the US.

If Israel wants War with Iran, let them have it, Just keep the US out of it.

TextAnyway, the US is going to have to attack sooner or later, because if they do not? It will be significant hit to their credibility, and reputation as a Super Power.

reply to post by Jakes51

Holey cow I see some real ego problems with your post and what I quoted .

A significant hit to the ego and credibility of a nation is reason for war now?

If so we are all doomed.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by SLAYER69

This is why I love your threads. We may not always end in agreement, but it's fun getting there without even a hint of personal mixed in.

This is why we can't just bomb them in like moles and let them die down there. (Aside from the fact, they'd be dug out by their own..eventually)



They thought it through when they located their facilities. 2 of the high value ones are on the outskirts of Tehran. This one, perhaps the key facility, is on the outskirts of Qom. That is, to the Shiites, one of the most Holy places on Earth. A lot can be said for the bad intent behind locating such a facility where it is.....where by contrast the American and Soviets made a point of NOT basing the most critical places outside the most valuable civilian centers. Crazy people, in some ways.

It leaves us with 2 major problems though.

First...the obvious. The whole purpose of hitting Fordow is exactly why it can't be hit without 100% certainty of destruction. It's suspected to be the center of their refinement and experimentation efforts. Of course, that means it's full of the stuff. So imagine someone destroying the Yucca Mountain containment facility after it was stocked up....and then imagine it sitting 16 miles from downtown Las Vegas when it happens. I sure wouldn't want to be IN Vegas to see if all the planners had it EXACTLY right for how nothing would escape outside after the hit.

Second..... Fordow IS that close. VERY VERY close. In fact....it's TUNNEL CLOSE. I wonder how closely we watch the #1 and #2 topside entrances for flow of traffic in and out vs. what SHOULD be seen in and out. How many are driving 30 minutes across the desert to work and how many MAY just take a tube the 20 miles or less? We don't know....no one does. It would be BEYOND OOPS to hit Fordow, feel VERY good about ourselves...and then see THIS appear in the center of Qom:



I have NO idea HOW they would do it. We both know they would though. Within a day or two you would have media of some flavor inside Qom and showing the slow and horrible radiation deaths of over 1 million civilians of all ages and descriptions.

There *ARE* ways to do it. No question. They are just not ways this or any recent Government would (or maybe even should) realistically consider, given the evidence of threat we absolutely DO know to exist. Just not enough evidence to decide we have the right to risk over a million for JUST THAT facility. The others..all over Northern Iran (which ALL have to be destroyed essentially at once) have similar problems if it's a half ass strike to stay on the right side of the UN and World Press. ..In my opinion.

reply to post by Iwinder


Yeah, I know what you are saying. I am only calling it as it is. They have been groveling about this for years, and to wait and watch it happen? It would be akin to political seppuku on the international stage. It would embolden any "Johnny Come Lately," nation to do what ever they want in terms of atrocities, acts of terrorism, or nuclear proliferation, because the US would be regarded as a pushover. Inaction could lead to dire consequences as much as action. It is called being in between a rock and a hard place. That is the situation as I see it.

This is a rubbish plan. All the major plans for a real war begins with a few Israel, atmospheric nuclear detonations, followed up by U.S support "protection". This because the resulting Electromagnetic Pulse will destroy anything in iran with an electrical circuit in it. So Iranian retaliation will be zero, no missiles, no nothing, but purely mechanical things like their most primitive rockets.
By the time the US comes in to protect-defend Israel. Iran may disrupt oil shipping with its primitive Sea Mines, but that really is it.
But there will be no war. Iran is a perfect paranoia project for the U.S military industrial complex. Nobody but Israel wants us to go to to war with Iran -and even Israel is only willing to fight to the last American (all diplomatic indications are they don't actually want to join America in being the second country to have used nukes).

Good script for a movie though -or real life if Iran does something aggressive, but in real life they won't be first -they already know they will lose.

Originally posted by Jakes51
because the US would be regarded as a pushover. That is the situation as I see it.

You have to Stop listening to the MSM mate.

There is not 1 person in Any Country with an IQ over normal room temperature, that views the US as a Pushover.

Outside the US , (your concerning target group) the US is viewed as a Maraudering , Imperialistic Bully.

No one outside the Us bought the" Weapons of Mass Destruction" reason for Iraq.

And no one outside the US is buying "Nuclear weapons" in Iran.

reply to post by Liberal1984

You bring an interesting point and it borders on where I'd get into those 'other ways' where this absolutely can be done. We can 100% win and without any meaningful loss or retaliation out of anyone. I doubt we'd even have American injuries through the entire operation, start to finish...if we're willing to go far enough in method.

What would world reaction be to the U.S. (Or Dear God..Israel??) detonating Nuclear Weapons in an air burst pattern over populated Iran? You and I both know what you're suggesting wouldn't likely lead to direct deaths. Of course...anyone on medical equipment or carrying something like a pacemaker will be dead within a few moments, but no military action comes without loss somewhere....true enough for what the planners would figure to that. Tell the WORLD that it was an 'acceptable' and 'non lethal' use of Thermonuclear weapons though? Somehow..I'm really sure the world wouldn't care to hear us?


Here is a thought that ought to sober anyone thinking a few EMP's might make a safe working environment for our guys though. Russia and the U.S. both shield their military gear and electronics for EMP blast. They have for decades. Maybe it works 100%? Maybe it won't. Hopefully the world never learns. However, most Iranian tech is bought from or based on Russian and Chinese design. See where I'm going?


Imagine...half a dozen mid-altitude EMP blasts (mid..so we don't zap the whole REGION in splash damage) and Iran goes dark. Lights out... We're happy! Now we can fly tankers right to Tehran itself if needed. NO plane has to stay out and yes, even the venerable Apache Gunships can make the tri[. So...We head on out with our Air Force..and our Tankers...and our whales of all descriptions to go clean the clock of those Persians we just clocked out.

......and after all the American boys and girls are well inside Iranian airspace and 100% committed to the milk run of bombing a helpless target.......the whole damn thing turns back on below our people for air defense and aquisition/target finder radar systems. ...oops...is about all they'd ever have time to say.

This underestimation of our enemies has worked now for 2 major wars. We're courting catastrophe to do it a 3rd time, IMO.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

But Iran has been Covertly active for decades.
Doesn't Warrant any kind of legitimate response?

In my opinion, going into Iran/attacking Iran would be a disaster. There are just too many super powers with their hands in Iran for it to end well.

We are looking at potentially ticking off China and Russia, who very well could take sides with Iran. Yes, Russia is our ally, but they don't want us messing with Iran and have stated before their intentions should we do so.

We are looking at Israel taking our side, Japan, South Korea, Britain and our usual allys....

While Iran has China, Russia, North Korea and potentially many other countries taking their side...

With all these countries potentially fighting... Well, I just don't see how it is worth it. There is a word for when the world divides up into sides and fights.... That word/phrase was used twice in history.... Anyone know what it is?

Now, I am not saying that invading/attacking Iran will lead to world war... But there is actually potential there.....

And that alone, is reason enough for me to think that the diplomatic approach is the best way to handle Iran and in my opinion, that would be the most appropriate and legitimate response.

Attacking them just has way too many risks involved for my liking.


Popular or not, that is where I stand.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
But Iran has been Covertly active for decades.
Doesn't Warrant any kind of legitimate response?

No, I don't believe that it does at this time SLAYER. Iran has attacked nobody whatsoever since the Iraq War, which Iraq started. I just think we should be very careful about what we do right now. That type of military action could set off World War 3. I mean come on people, We are gonna start World War 3 over what they might do, or at the very least, what they might have?

I hope that cooler heads prevail with this one. That would be nothing short of insanity. Yes, I understand the game that is being played in the battle for resources, and yes I understand the reasons why. I am just not sure if this is the right time. If Israel wants to attack Iran, then so be it. However, I would not advise that either at this time. I understand their concerns though. ~$heopleNation

reply to post by SLAYER69


A little food for thought. If someone really wanted to disable Iran they don't need to worry about hardened deep underground facilities they simply take out the power grid. Iran grinds quickly to a stop in the dark. This can happen at least two ways, 1) a couple EMP devices and it is pretty dark there but better and even more long lasting 2) they can strike 25 power plants and take out half of their electrical generating capacity. The grid will crash with a loss of as little as 10% of its operating capacity. Destroying half of it will, with small exceptions, put them in the dark for a long time. Power plants are long lead time items, years to build.

This wouldn't stop a retaliatory strike by Iran but it will take the wind out of their sails and will pretty well limit their resupply capacity.

So, 25 strikes, missiles, F18s, B2s, or what-have-you. Not particularly challenging to pull off. I know they have pretty good air defense but others are pretty good at disabling it.

I am not saying it should be done and certainly it carries risk, just saying it is simple to turn off the lights.

That's the discipline

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

*** now this doesn't even TOUCH on the fact that by known intelligence the public can see, nothing the United States has in conventional weapons can destroy the Fordow facility. The 30,000lb MOAB goes DEEP. Indeed. Fordow is KNOWN to be deeper. Not by much....but close doesn't count when 100% destruction is absolutely essential. Using Tactical Nuclear Weapons? Oh hell....Fordow won't even know what hit them.....but then, nor will Obama when the world comes down on him with the weight of the entire planet

Devils advocate.


Why would it need to touch the facility?

They could theatrically use 3 or 4 and just obliterate all access deep down and entomb those working there ....

Remember, the bombs don't need to penetrate all the way to the depth of the target to destroy it.The energy is transmitted through the ground for some distance in a manner similar to a localized high magnitude earthquake.

Britian's RAF Bomber Command proved the concept works back in WWII by destroying a number of hardened underground German targets with the highly successful Tall boy and Grand Slam "earthquake" bombs.

The USAF knows what they are doing with the GBU-57 and have publicly acknowledged that it might require more than one MOP on each target to guarantee they are completely destroyed.

While the morality of military interdiction of Iran's nuclear facilities is debatable, whether or not the U.S. has the technical capability is not.

reply to post by Iwinder


so iran is the new iraq... so are we going to have the president make a joke about how he was wrong about WMD again.........

using the same play book.. and we fall for it hook line and sinker. whatever enjoy this bs

Originally posted by votan
reply to post by Iwinder

 

so iran is the new iraq... so are we going to have the president make a joke about how he was wrong about WMD again.........

using the same play book.. and we fall for it hook line and sinker. whatever enjoy this bs

I just wanted to say that I appreciate everybody's input thus far.

Thanks for keeping the discussion civil.

reply to post by Drunkenparrot

You'll have to show me where either the 15,000lb or 30,000lb weapons have ever ..once...been tested on a 200 meter deep, heavily fortified and well defended facility built SPECIFICALLY to defeat THAT ONE WEAPON.

I'd love to see a mock-up in Nevada to see...but no, I'm sure they will go on World War II performance as well as the bunkers that were busted in Iraq I and II. Yeah.... ever looked at those? They failed as much as they worked.

This case? We get one shot. ONLY ONE SHOT. So, you really want to risk the fate of millions of human beings on the claims of a defense contractor for this super-moab? Personally, I'd be fine with it, if it were a target that didn't have the possible start of a World War hinging on unqualified success the very first try. Given Military track records though? If they go in assuming what you are, we're doomed.....and so are millions of innocent people. Starting with over 1 million in Qom.

Reuters Story on Likeliehood of Success at Fordow

Since I can't seem to find a cut away I'd seen a couple years ago showing the 200 meter depth..we can go with the 80 meter this quotes and most sources start at. It's still outside the range..by too much, IMO...of our conventional explosives when a mistake means we're fighting a World War we've literally STARTED.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
This is why I love your threads. We may not always end in agreement, but it's fun getting there without even a hint of personal mixed in.

Having a fair and open discussion is hard to come by these days.

I appreciate your input and contributions.

Always gives me food for thought

reply to post by FraternitasSaturni

The U.S. could most certainly do it alone but why do so when the current Iranian Regime is at odds with it's own Military? The REAL Iranian Military Leadership is PISSED OFF that the Iranian Regimes MOUTH PIECE is spouting off about how Iran will be Victorious and how it will easily handle the U.S. Navy and Military.

Try telling that Bull to the REAL Iranian Military Leadership. They believe they have been placed in a SUICIDAL POSITION of being asked to fight a WAR against the U.S. Military which can easily destroy the entire Iranian Navy in short time.

The Iranian Military is secretly talking with the U.S. Military to find a way to Stand Down as apposed to being OBLITERATED. You are right...Iran is not Iraq...for an Iran Military Option the U.S. Military would bring it's A GAME...and there is NO COUNTRY ON EARTH that can stop our A GAME. Split Infinity