• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Do you believe that Israel will preemptively attack Iran? If yes, when?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,660
3,138
126
How long do you think the Israelis could keep it up, Modelworks?

Do you think they could do so for 10 years or so, which is what the Iranians did in a total war effort against the Iraqi invaders?

Your bravado is touching, if completely lame.
Actually israel is not iraq and they wouldn`t need to do it for 10 years. That`s what you idiots seems to forget....
This will not last long trust me!
YES!! Israel is very capable without nuclear weapons!!
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
How long do you think the Israelis could keep it up, Modelworks?

Do you think they could do so for 10 years or so, which is what the Iranians did in a total war effort against the Iraqi invaders?

Your bravado is touching, if completely lame.
What Iran did against Iraq was to throw manpower at the opponent.
With Israel, they can not do it.

They have either what manpower that can be musted through proxies (Hezbollah/Hamas/Syria) or missile capability.

Iran does not have any air power that can reach Israel, nor any Naval power that is blue water.

If Israel attacks Iran; it will be at targeted locations, not across a front with manpower.

It may incise the Muslim world; but what retaliation capability does that world have. No more than what has already been thrown at Israel and slapped down.

LL claims that Israel ground forces were stalemated by Hezbollah. Yet it was Hezbollah that cried out to the UN for peace after they were driven back. It just took time for Israel to be able to adjust to the new threat.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,149
14,361
136
Yeh, right, Jedi Yoda. Iran exists at extreme range across several intervening sovereign states who might not want to be seen as complicit, who might actually oppose Israeli invasion of their airspace. Much of Iran actually lies beyond the operational range of Israeli aircraft, anyway. It's a big place, inhabited by 70 million people, rich in resources, largely self-sufficient, fiercely proud and independent. If attacked, they'll persist until victorious or completely destroyed, something Israel can't possibly achieve w/o resorting to nuclear weapons.

rave on, fool.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Yeh, right, Jedi Yoda. Iran exists at extreme range across several intervening sovereign states who might not want to be seen as complicit, who might actually oppose Israeli invasion of their airspace. Much of Iran actually lies beyond the operational range of Israeli aircraft, anyway. It's a big place, inhabited by 70 million people, rich in resources, largely self-sufficient, fiercely proud and independent. If attacked, they'll persist until victorious or completely destroyed, something Israel can't possibly achieve w/o resorting to nuclear weapons.

rave on, fool.
Israel->Jordan->Iraq->Iran
Israel->Syria-Iraq->Iran

Pre-stage some fuel bladders along roads near the Iran/Iraq border
Now you have the range with a heavy payload.

Jordan will not intercept and will be lucky to detect
Syria will be lucky to detect - we saw what happened a couple of years ago when their nuke program was exposed.

Even though the US is in Iraq, I do not think Iraq is manning the radar sites.
So it will probably be up to Iranian radar to detect anything coming in.
Israel would carry along with the attack payload some HARM platforms also.

Given that the Iran has minimal airforce capacity, they would be betting everything on their AA systems.

The new stuff has not been delivered; the existing stuff is of the same par (or below) that Syria used.

So from the air, Iranian targets are close to sitting ducks. Protected only by distance, politics and empty threats.

Retaliation against Israel from Iran will be minimal; retaliation against the world via oil is a different issue. But does Iran want to actually take on the world?

Check back in 3 months.

Disclaimer: the use of "Iran" is related to its military and political leadership; not the people itself.
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
The Israeli air force has more than enough capability to completely destroy anything Iran has just using conventional bombs. People seem to think all Israel has is a bunch of nukes , but they also have a well equipped air force.



They would have no problem destroying the ability of Iran to make war.
The difference between Lebanon/Syria and Iran is distance. From what I am aware Iran is far enough away that most Israeli aircraft don't have the range as well as having to rely on mid air fueling which can not support Israels entire air force. That extreme range also reduces bomb loads.

This though is assuming they have to go the long way around to the south if they are unable to use Turkish/Iraqi airspace. Syria is not a issue as they signed a mutual defense pack with Iran recently, meaning the full force of Israeli's military which is very much in range will be bearing down upon them. Now that I think of it, if this is the case then it could get messy if Syria uses their chemical weapons on civilian population centers which could result in Israeli nuclear retaliation (Remember, Israel is vveerryy small).
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
5
76
How long do you think the Israelis could keep it up, Modelworks?

Do you think they could do so for 10 years or so, which is what the Iranians did in a total war effort against the Iraqi invaders?

Your bravado is touching, if completely lame.
Do you realize that Iran military equipment is reaching 20+ years old , without any replacement parts since it was US supplied equipment ? Israel has modern equipment and weapons and it is well maintained.

Some of us actually read things that tell us what the facts are vs pulling things out of thin air.

Read the battle plan for how they would attack Iran.

http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/working_papers/wp_06-1.pdf

They currently have over 150 planes that can deliver bombs and make the target, total they have over 300 aircraft but the rest wouldn't have the necessary fuel. Guess how many they need to do the job ?
12 planes and that is attacking multiple sites.

The only reason Israel does not attack Iran is because of the problems it would cause with Gaza, and right now they do not want that.

Not to even mention that Iran is using F14 planes, in poor shape, compared to F16 planes. There is no competition even when both are in prime condition, putting a well maintained fully equipped F16 against a poor condition F14 isn't even a fair fight, its a massacre.
 
Last edited:

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
5
76
The difference between Lebanon/Syria and Iran is distance. From what I am aware Iran is far enough away that most Israeli aircraft don't have the range as well as having to rely on mid air fueling which can not support Israels entire air force. That extreme range also reduces bomb loads.
It has already been worked out by a professor at MIT, they have more than the ability to do it, and this was 3 years ago before they got some new planes.

http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/working_papers/wp_06-1.pdf
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,660
3,138
126
Yeh, right, Jedi Yoda. Iran exists at extreme range across several intervening sovereign states who might not want to be seen as complicit, who might actually oppose Israeli invasion of their airspace. Much of Iran actually lies beyond the operational range of Israeli aircraft, anyway. It's a big place, inhabited by 70 million people, rich in resources, largely self-sufficient, fiercely proud and independent. If attacked, they'll persist until victorious or completely destroyed, something Israel can't possibly achieve w/o resorting to nuclear weapons.

rave on, fool.
You are a certified nutcase!!!
Israel has the capability and ability to attack Iran at will.
It has already been worked out by a professor at MIT, they have more than the ability to do it, and this was 3 years ago before they got some new planes.

http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/...rs/wp_06-1.pdf

You need to understand that you know nothing about what israel is capable of and you really know nothing about the Iranian people!!

pity your mind is such a waste!!
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,149
14,361
136
404, file not found.

Something that's true on too many levels wrt jediyoda.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
2
0
JediYoda is a Zionist to the very core

Any race or creed is inferior to his Jewish (fake) roots
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Israel?

Their aircraft barely reach the edge of Iran at their maximum distance. What weapons are they limited to if they want to travel the maximum distance? what speed? what altitude?
How much fuel will they lose for defensive maneuvers against enemy missiles? What about enemy aircraft?

Where are they going to refuel? Over a well equipped Saudi Arabia? Over a well equipped Jordan? Over Syria where Iran has radar posts?
Over Iraq? Might as well let the U.S do it then.
U.S does it then Iran will make Obama's Iraq and Afghanistan a nightmare. Israel does it over Iraq and Iran will blame U.S for allowing Israel to do it and Obama will have a nightmare on his hands.

Should have bombed Iran before the U.S invaded Iraq and gave the Iranians 100,000 soldiers within the reach of their missiles. We didn't. Blame the idiots we elected who agreed to go into Iraq. Blame the idiots for dragging the war in Afghanistan out when it should have been finished years ago.


If Israel were to do it, it wouldn't be by the air because that has the potential for disaster. It would be by sea from one of their submarines but all that would do is destroy nuclear sites. Not underground facilities where research and enrichment will continue.
 
Last edited:

DesiPower

Lifer
Nov 22, 2008
15,366
740
126
NO, they have already run out of time... its too late. The window for "preemptively attack" closed about a year back
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
5
76
Israel?



If Israel were to do it, it wouldn't be by the air because that has the potential for disaster. It would be by sea from one of their submarines but all that would do is destroy nuclear sites. Not underground facilities where research and enrichment will continue.
Read the pdf posted above. They have more than enough capability to destroy facilities by air and destroy the underground sites.
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Read the pdf posted above. They have more than enough capability to destroy facilities by air and destroy the underground sites.
I know what Israel has. Have you ever looked at a map?

Where is Israel going to refuel on the way back?
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,660
3,138
126
JediYoda is a Zionist to the very core

Any race or creed is inferior to his Jewish (fake) roots
Actually you enjoy owning yourself don`t you??
It`s not a matter of races being inferior or superior. It`s a matter of people like you and others sitting on the sidelines being armchair idiots and never having actually lived in Israel or visited any of the arab countries pretending to know what`s in the best interest of my people.

Again we need to sit at the Peace table and lay everything on the table and see what we can do to effectively give the Palestinians a homeland as well as securing our borders.

Sit with no preconcieved conditions with open minds on both sides.
Speaking as an Israeli, I doubt that will ever happen until there is one government that has absolute control over what happens with the Palestinians!

Shalom!

It`s ok to be jealous of my heritage Dahunan......most ignorant people are!! :)
 
Last edited:

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
5
76
That easy huh?
Israel must not be aware of this.
They are completely aware of it.
Israel is not attacking Iran , not because of the inability to do so, but because the situation at this time does not warrant it. I can have a shotgun in my home and see a suspicious person walk up to my door and shoot him or I can wait till he does something to give me a reason to do so. If I don't shoot at him does that mean that I no longer have a gun ?
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,149
14,361
136
Not my job to fix your busted links, JEDIyoda. But thanks anyway.

Basically, the link paper describes a best case set of scenarios, all dependent on US complicity, and on the complicity of intervening states to achieve a one-time attack on Iranian targets.

Peachy. Then what, after the Iranians eject the IAEA and go to work on facilities protected at the level of Cheyenne mountain, further from Israel? When they begin in earnest to arm Hezbollah, Hamas, Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban? disrupt shipping in the Persian Gulf?

Do you really think anybody other than the Former Bush/Cheney admin would be entirely stupid enough to let that happen? Hell, even they weren't that stupid. They had the opportunity and passed it up, for truly compelling reasons pertaining to American interests in general, not just Israeli interests.

If the Zionist tail couldn't wag the Bush Admin dog, what makes you think they can wag the Obama admin dog?
 

arran

Junior Member
Dec 19, 2009
1
0
0
Lets look at this logically, If Israel does nothing and lets Iran get nuclear weapons there will be an arms race and other countries in the middle east will also get nuclear weapons and Israel will end up being surrounded with countries in the middle east with nuclear weapons which would be a huge threat to Israels existence and given the fact that Israel is a tiny country this would not go down very well.

So because of this I think Israel will attack.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY