• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Iran Super Thread- Merged

Love793 said:
I don't think the Americans would strike first, but Isreal would have a good argument in the World Courts for a Self Defence strike, as Iran has repeatedly threatened them.

:rofl:

I hope you were joking when you suggested the State of Israel (or any other sovereign nation) needs to justify themselves to some external agency tfor the actions they can take for their self defense and survival......

 
No actually I was serious, and yes speaking within the context of international law the Israeli's would have to justify their actions. One sovereign state can't just attack another in a pre-emptive attack unless there is just cause, such as Self Defence/Immediate Threat. In this case I believe Israel would have a good argument for it.
 
Infidel-6 said:
So riddle me this. ...
How long before you take action?
Working in Iraq I can tell you the above is a perfectly clear analogy.  I dont think anyone is saying it will be nice, or it will be easy -- but sometimes you have to act.

- If you are refering to the Iranian SOF activities in Iraq, all I have to say is that the West is learning the hard way that one can overthrow a regime with minimum force, but to actually 'isolate the battlespace' in that country by securing it's borders takes a lot more than a light punitive expedition.

- Know who has an army big enough to sort out Iraq?  Iran.
 
Know who has a force big enough to stop Iran?

The US.

Strategically offensive - launch to poorly held vital ground - Iraq.
Operationally defensive - hold vital ground, Iraq, and wait for enemy, Iran-Al Qaeda, to come to you
Tactically flexible - offensive action is the key to a solid programme of defense, along with the ability to hold ground with minimal resources.

Iran's greatest fear is that the US will stay put, just as they have in Kuwait.  Obama's plan is the greatest thing since sliced bread as far as they are concerned.
 
There are still a few cards in our hands, although ones involving the EU are very weak (given their apparent triangulation between the US and Iran and their dependence on oil from the Middle East)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/time_for_an_indifferent_world.html

Time for the World to Stand Against Iran
By Bob Feferman

I recently returned from a trip to Israel. During my stay there, I was reminded of a lesson from my days as a political science major. It is the aphorism, "Where you stand depends upon where you sit".

When you sit in Tel Aviv and admire the beautiful seashore, you also read the local newspapers and have to imagine the unimaginable. This city could one day be the target of an Iranian Shahab-3 missile carrying a nuclear warhead. Then you instinctively understand what every Israeli already knows: An indifferent world may soon force Israel to defend its right to exist with a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. That's why the world must finally take a stand and impose tough sanctions against Iran for its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Over the past five years, representatives of the European Union have tried to negotiate a reasonable solution to the standoff with Iran over its nuclear program. More recently, the negotiating team has expanded to include the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany. Iran has consistently refused to cooperate. It has turned down the most recent generous offer of incentives, and it continues to enrich uranium in total defiance of three United Nations Security Council resolutions. Yet, the world's response to Iranian defiance has been weak and ineffective.

As each day passes, it becomes more obvious that Iran's real intention is to develop nuclear weapons. Why does Iran need nuclear weapons? Iranian leaders have given us the answer- they seek the destruction of Israel- yet the world has chosen to ignore it.

Unfortunately, some analysts naively believe that Iran's threats to Israel are a recent innovation of the current President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The truth is that the goal of the destruction of Israel has long been a fundamental pillar of Iran's foreign policy. Iran's Supreme leader Ali Khamenei, said in a sermon on Iranian television on December 15, 2000, "Iran's position, which was first expressed by the Imam Khomeini and stated several times by those responsible, is that the cancerous tumor called Israel must be uprooted from the region."

However, there is no doubt that Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has taken this madness to a new level. His repeated calls to "wipe Israel off the map" were also accompanied by a government sponsored conference titled "A World Without Zionism" (October, 2005). His most recent outrage was calling Israel "a stinking corpse" on the occasion of its 60th birthday.

Israelis cannot ignore these threats and for good reason. They know that Iran backs its threatening words with deeds. This became evident during the summer of 2006. Following the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, proceeded to fire 4,000 rockets into the cities of northern Israel. These rockets, which were supplied by Iran, sent a clear message to every Israeli: When Iranian leaders speak of the destruction of Israel, they need to be taken for their word.

That explains why Israeli leaders have repeatedly warned that the international community must not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. To reinforce these warnings, the Israeli Air Force recently held a massive air exercise over the Mediterranean with 100 warplanes. The message was clear: If the international community does not effectively deal with Iran, then Israel will do it alone.

For Israelis, the Iranian nuclear threat is seen through the experience of the Nazi Holocaust. This outlook was relayed in a rare interview on the CBS program "60 Minutes", (April 27). Then commander of Israel's Air Force, General Eliezer Shkedy, the son of Holocaust survivors, shared his views on the Iranian threat in light of the Holocaust with reporter Bob Simon.


"They are talking about destroying and wiping us from the earth...We should remember. We cannot forget. We should trust only ourselves."

Since the Iranian revolution in 1979, the international community has turned a blind eye to Iran's sponsorship of terrorism and its repeated threats to destroy Israel. With the exception of the United States, business as usual has been the guiding principle of most nations. The lure of profits from Iranian oil and natural gas has blinded the world to the immorality of doing business with the world's leading state sponsor of terror. Iran's defiance of three United Nations Security Council resolutions to continue its pursuit of nuclear weapons demands a radical change in policy.

It is time for the United Nations to live up to the reason for its creation: preserving world peace. Whereas the current United Nations sanctions on Iran are weak and ineffective, strong economic sanctions can force Iran to halt its nuclear weapons program without a shot being fired. After all, Iran is highly dependent upon the outside world to develop its oil and natural gas fields and even to refine its oil into gasoline.

If Russia and China prevent effective action in the Security Council, then sanctions can be implemented outside of the U.N. by the European Union together with the United States.

In addition, the American people must demand that their state's public pension funds divest from investments in foreign companies doing business in Iran.

Israel must not be put into a situation where it has to act unilaterally. If Israel is forced to bomb the Iranian nuclear facilities, oil prices will skyrocket and economies will falter. If that happens, then the blame must be placed squarely on an indifferent world.

The world's leading state sponsor of terror must not be allowed to acquire the ultimate weapon of terror. If the world continues to ignore this threat, then it must understand that Israel has no alternative but to defend its right to exist, and the lesson of the Holocaust, Never Again, may be implemented very soon.

American Thinker
 
I would hope that the US waits until they have withdrawn the majority of their forces from Iraq, ensuring that they have an overland resupply route, and limit their engagement to a bombing campaign.

Otherwise....

Is there a possibility that fast attack craft swarms in combination with mobile shore based anti-ship missile batteries could shut down the Persian Gulf?  Some think so and argue that Millennium Challenge 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 proved that.    Thus starve out a deployed army in Iraq.

Combine that with the potential of a significant Shia resurgency in Iraq?

And consider that Iran has a population 2 to 3 times that of Iraq and a much more difficult topography to conduct a ground offensive?

And even if it was just a bombing campaign, I would be concerned that a bombing campaign would end any hope of a internal regime change by coalescing public opinion defensively and nationalistically... and against the west.

Not that Iran isn't begging for a spanking, however the current situation doesn't appear favourable from anything other than the lowest tactical level.  I fear Operational and Strategic failure awaits, regardless of who attacks.


ps see Wm S Lind who is prepared to take this scenario to even greater lengths


 
Devil39,

Welcome back.

I think there is one route into Iran that might be viable, assuming a longterm wearing strategy, and that is its traditionally weak Eastern Flank.  While most of Iran's conquerors have come from the Northeast they are also weak through Baluchistan.

The Mountains of the West have sustained Empires and warring tribes over aeons but the Eastern Deserts and Plains have been harder to  hold. 

I think a decadal strategy of bite and hold in the Baluchi East along with similar strategies in the Kurdish mountains of the NW and the Arab swamps of the SW may pay dividends.

I do agree with your point that the Americans need to create a functional reserve by disengaging a good chunk of their deployed troops.
 
Hello Kirkhill,

I wouldn't argue that there are routes.... long term wearing strategy (likely an operational level campaign) combined with your approach does not get much beyond the tactical or lower operational level of war. 

We are talking about a country with an ability to unhinge us (at the least) in our two important operational theatres namely Iraq and Afghanistan.

We are also talking about a country with the myriad of fair weather friends who will feed them many many nice technologies, not unlike our assistance to the ISI/Mujhadeen in the 1980s.

If we expect to spend 10 years sorting out Iran, we should likely put our effort into the inside-out vice the outside-in.

Softly softly.... Catchee Monkey.....
 
Agree with the inside out approach, perhaps with the occasional more kinetic activity around the loose edges.

As to the length of the engagement - Next year it will have been a 30 year long discussion.  The Cold War was 44 years long (45-89 or 72 years if you prefer the 1917 start date).  What's another decade here or there.
 
Considering the current state of Iran's infrastructure, the lack of investment in it's renewal, the population demographics, the government already has their hands full, a sustained and backed insurgency could push them over the top. The Insurgency would have to be careful not to alienate the people from it's cause.
 
Another headache for AESOPs and other members of the ASW community out there.

http://www.gmanews.tv/story/115953/Iran-produces-mid-sized-missile-firing-submarine

Iran produces mid-sized, missile-firing submarine
08/25/2008 | 07:06 PM

TEHRAN, Iran - Iranian state TV says the country has launched the production of an all-domestically built, mid-size submarine that will be able to fire missiles and torpedoes.

Defense Minister Gen. Mostafa Mohammad Najjar inaugurated the production line of the sub, named Ghaem, at a ceremony Monday. According to the TV, he said Iran has made huge investments to attain self-sufficiency and equip its armed forces with modern weapons.

The TV also said two other submarines, named Ghdair, have been delivered to the Iranian Navy. Their production began in 2005.

Iran occasionally announces making advanced weapons but rarely makes statements about submarines. Years ago, Tehran said it bought some Russian subs and would produce its own, smaller-sized ones. - AP

 
Silly of them to do something like that. Dont they know we pronounced ASW dead ?

Oh wait..........

[/sarcasm]
 
Will anyone be surprised at this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/2800255/Iran-renews-nuclear-weapons-development.html

Iran renews nuclear weapons development
Fresh evidence has emerged that suggests Iran has renewed work on developing nuclear weapons, according to Western security sources.


By Con Coughlin and Tim Butcher in Jerusalem
Last Updated: 1:08AM BST 12 Sep 2008

Nuclear experts responsible for monitoring Iran's nuclear programme have discovered that enough enriched uranium, which if processed to weapons grade level could be used to make up to six atom bombs, has disappeared from the main production facility at Isfahan.

American spy satellites have identified a number of suspicious sites, which the Iranians have not declared to nuclear inspectors, that intelligence officials believe are being used for covert research.

The new discoveries emerged as it was revealed that Israel had asked America for military supplies, including "bunker buster" bombs and re-fuelling planes, suitable for an attack on Iranian nuclear installations.

The Israeli paper Haaretz reported yesterday that Israel has also asked for permission to use an air corridor through Iraqi airspace, currently controlled by America, to Iran.

So far the requests have been turned down by Washington, which is currently not as keen as Israel to consider a military strike against Iran.

But concern that Iran has resumed work on building atom bombs has deepened following the revelation that large quantities of uranium has gone missing from Iran's conversion facility at Isfahan.

The Isfahan complex, which enriches raw uranium "yellow cake" into material that can be used for either nuclear power or atomic weapons, is supposed to be subject to close supervision by the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But the Iranians only allow IAEA inspectors access to the final stage of the production process, where the uranium in gas form - UF6 - is stored.

By conducting a careful study of the amount of material stored at Isfahan, and the amount of "yellow cake" known to have been processed at the plant, nuclear experts believe between 50-60 tons of uranium - which if enriched to weapons grade level would be sufficient to produce five or six atom bombs - has gone missing from the plant.

IAEA officials believe the Iranians have deliberately removed the uranium at a stage in the production process that is not under their supervision. "The inspectors only have limited access at Isfahan, and it looks as though Iranian officials have removed significant quantities of UF6 at a stage in the process that is not being monitored," said a nuclear official. "If Iran's nuclear intentions are peaceful, then why are they doing this?" Nuclear inspectors have also been concerned to discover that Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, recently ordered scientists to increase the amount of UF6 being diverted from Isfahan to another storage facility.

IAEA officials have no idea where the missing uranium is being stored, but suspect it could be held at one of several suspicious installations that have been spotted by American spy satellites.

The Iranians will be asked to give a full account of the missing enriched uranium when the IAEA's board of governors meets in Vienna later this month to discuss the continuing crisis over Iran's nuclear enrichment programme.

The mounting concern over Iran's nuclear intentions has intensified Israeli efforts to prepare for a possible pre-emptive strike on Iran, which has led Jerusalem to presenting Washington with a "wish list" of military equipment.

In the past America has been prepared to provide Israel with "bunker buster" bombs, known by their serial number GBU-28. They weigh over two tons each and are designed to penetrate deep underground, even through reinforced concrete, before detonating.

Israel used them in unsuccessful attempts to take out the leadership of Hizbollah, the militant Shia group, during the war of 2006.
 
Russian alignment with Iran and Syria almost guarantee's a US strike against Iran Nov-Dec timeframe. The Russians are about to restart work on Bushehr. There is a large USN presence near Iran so many elements of an attack are in place.
 
tomahawk6 said:
Russian alignment with Iran and Syria almost guarantee's a US strike against Iran Nov-Dec timeframe. The Russians are about to restart work on Bushehr. There is a large USN presence near Iran so many elements of an attack are in place.

- High risk - low payoff.
 
For the US striking after the election takes that burden off of the next administration - although any blowback will have to be dealt with by a President McCain or President Obama. Of course we can do nothing and see what the future holds.
 
GBU-39 sale to Israel. Would come in handy in their next blowup with Hezbollah. :)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1221142470441&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The US Department of Defense has notified Congress of a potential sale of 1,000 small diameter bunker-buster missiles to Israel, which would likely be used in the event of a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

The notification of the possible sale to Congress was made over the weekend by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), the branch of the Pentagon responsible for evaluating foreign military sales. The bunker-buster missile Israel has asked for is called GBU-39.

The deal is valued at $77 million and the principal contractor will be Boeing Integrated Defense Systems.

In addition to the missiles, Israel has also asked for 150 mounting carriages, 30 guided test vehicles as well as two instructors to train the Israei Air Force how to load the missiles on its aircraft.

In its recommendation to Congress, the DSCA wrote that Israel's strategic position was "vital to the United States' interests throughout the Middle East."

Congress has 30 days to obstruct the deal.

"It is vital to the US national interests to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives," the statement read.

The DSCA announcement came amid growing concern in Israel that the Pentagon was not willing to sell Israel advanced military platforms such as bunker-buster missiles in an effort to dissuade Jerusalem from attacking Iran's nuclear facilities. Bunker-buster missiles are a vital component of a potential airstrike since many of the Iranian facilities, such as the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, have been built underground in heavily fortified bunker-like facilities.

During the Second Lebanon War Israel reportedly received an emergency shipment of bunker-buster missiles from the US to use to attack underground Hizbullah facilities. The GPS-guided GBU-39 is said to have a 50 percent chance of hitting its target within 5-8 meters, thereby minimizing collateral damage. It is also said to be capable of penetrating several meters of thick reinforced concrete
 
tomahawk6 said:
For the US striking after the election takes that burden off of the next administration - although any blowback will have to be dealt with by a President McCain or President Obama. Of course we can do nothing and see what the future holds.

I say the Bush administration should go out with a bang, a strike against Iran in the last day of their mandate.

Now that would be going out with style. ;)
 
The incongruous said:
I say the Bush administration should go out with a bang, a strike against Iran in the last day of their mandate.

Now that would be going out with style. ;)

HA! Perhaps McCain will put on his old USN flight suit and pilot an F18 to lead the carrier air wings in air strikes against Tehran!
;D
Since when is old too old to fly? Retired USAF General and sound barrier breaker legend Chuck Yeager did it on an F15 a few years ago, IIRC.
 
Back
Top