• 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."

Has Iran reached the "immunity threshold"

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,563
3
0
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/former-top-idf-officials-worry-that-netanyahu-is-bent-on-an-iran-strike.premium-1.454048

Interesting article.

Basically it says Iran may have already reached the immunity threshold and that air attack can no longer destroy its important nuclear assets. Assuming of course a conventional attack, not a nuclear one.

It brings up the point that an Israeli attack would not be expected to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities, but to serve as an example to what the Israeli air force could to to Iran in the event of war.
 

GrGr

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2003
3,204
0
76
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/former-top-idf-officials-worry-that-netanyahu-is-bent-on-an-iran-strike.premium-1.454048

Interesting article.

Basically it says Iran may have already reached the immunity threshold and that air attack can no longer destroy its important nuclear assets. Assuming of course a conventional attack, not a nuclear one.

It brings up the point that an Israeli attack would not be expected to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities, but to serve as an example to what the Israeli air force could to to Iran in the event of war.
As soon as Iran has an effective nuclear weapon they will be immune to attack. If they don't have it, Israel and the US will attack them sooner rather than later.

If you were an Iranian leader what would you do? Surrender?
 

Oyeve

Lifer
Oct 18, 1999
21,106
383
126
Hopefully when israel decides to attack iran the US lets them do it solo. I dont want my tax dollars supporting a bunch of war mongering douches.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Pakistan is a nuclear power, but that does not stop the USA from trying to dominate their internal politics.

After that three points to make.

1. After the US puppet Iranian Shah got the ole heave ho, Ayatollah number one let the excellent military the Shah left him fall into rust and ruin. And when Saddam of Iraq saw his opportunity and took it, Iran was militarily defenseless before Iraqi tanks. Iran barely survived the Iraqi invasion and it came at the cost of Iran losing the better part of two generations of men. Nor could Iran buy the weapons to defend itself without US help in the form of Iran Contra.

2. Iran learned its lesson thereafter, never rely on outsiders as they learned to make anti-invasion weapons themselves. As a few of those weapons fell into Hezbollah hands
and were able to destroy State of the arts Israeli tanks when Israel raped Lebanon in 2005. Nor does Iran lack long range ballistic missiles, subs, and other military technology as they have become basically the arsenal of Islam. As I submit Iran has immunity from attack even without any nukes. With all those weapons caches Iran has, a wounded Iran is the greatest threat to mid-east stability. After all, look back into recent history and learn, when GWB&co sold us a phony Iraq war on lies, even the mighty US army and its coalition of the billing, could not control or even slow the Iraqi insurgency from basically controlling Iraq. Iran would be like Iraq except about a billion times harder.

3. Then we come to Israel and realize its totally absurd to think, from a 1000 kilometers away, that they can have a hope of even denting Iran. But Israel can sure force Iran into a war Iran does not want. And then boys and girls, despite what Leon Pin head tells us, and Rumsfeld before Leon, and Les Aspin before than, and we can trace US over optimism back to William MacNamera and even before that. Long odds, with or without US Help, the Persian Gulf will be almost totally shut down for months if not years. The second the first Israel bomb, oil speculators will push world oil prices to over 1,000 dollars a barrel, within a week every oil dependent country will go into a deep depression, and large parts of Israeli cities may become blazing wrecks. The USA did not surrender to the bullshit of the Brits in 1776, why should we assume Iran will surrender to Israeli and US bullshit in 2012?
 

Rebel44

Senior member
Jun 19, 2006
742
1
76
Pakistan is a nuclear power, but that does not stop the USA from trying to dominate their internal politics.

After that three points to make.

1. After the US puppet Iranian Shah got the ole heave ho, Ayatollah number one let the excellent military the Shah left him fall into rust and ruin. And when Saddam of Iraq saw his opportunity and took it, Iran was militarily defenseless before Iraqi tanks. Iran barely survived the Iraqi invasion and it came at the cost of Iran losing the better part of two generations of men. Nor could Iran buy the weapons to defend itself without US help in the form of Iran Contra.

2. Iran learned its lesson thereafter, never rely on outsiders as they learned to make anti-invasion weapons themselves. As a few of those weapons fell into Hezbollah hands
and were able to destroy State of the arts Israeli tanks when Israel raped Lebanon in 2005. Nor does Iran lack long range ballistic missiles, subs, and other military technology as they have become basically the arsenal of Islam. As I submit Iran has immunity from attack even without any nukes. With all those weapons caches Iran has, a wounded Iran is the greatest threat to mid-east stability. After all, look back into recent history and learn, when GWB&co sold us a phony Iraq war on lies, even the mighty US army and its coalition of the billing, could not control or even slow the Iraqi insurgency from basically controlling Iraq. Iran would be like Iraq except about a billion times harder.

3. Then we come to Israel and realize its totally absurd to think, from a 1000 kilometers away, that they can have a hope of even denting Iran. But Israel can sure force Iran into a war Iran does not want. And then boys and girls, despite what Leon Pin head tells us, and Rumsfeld before Leon, and Les Aspin before than, and we can trace US over optimism back to William MacNamera and even before that. Long odds, with or without US Help, the Persian Gulf will be almost totally shut down for months if not years. The second the first Israel bomb, oil speculators will push world oil prices to over 1,000 dollars a barrel, within a week every oil dependent country will go into a deep depression, and large parts of Israeli cities may become blazing wrecks. The USA did not surrender to the bullshit of the Brits in 1776, why should we assume Iran will surrender to Israeli and US bullshit in 2012?
What a (mostly) nonsense
1. true

2. destroying Irans navy, airforce and nuclear program is much much easier than taking control of large country - it can also be done with minimal losses to attacker - you just need to use lots of aircraft and ships.

3. Iran wont be able to block strait for more than few days - it takes tons of firepower(much more than what Iran have) to stop USN + regional allies. Especially if Iranian navy, coastal defences and airforce are attacked at the same time as attack on nuclear program.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,563
3
0
I think the point about "immunity from attack" means that they have either hidden or placed their nuclear assets in areas immune to anything except nuclear attack.

Its pretty easy to drill into a mountain.
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,956
33
91
and large parts of Israeli cities may become blazing wrecks.
So how would all of a sudden Israeli cities become blazing wrecks? What type of military power can Iran project over 1000+km that is causing this destruction in Israeli?
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,563
3
0
I think you have to look at the military realities.

The smartest thing that Iran could do would be to do nothing and just protest.

Iran cannot attack Israel with its air force. That only leaves its rockets which would have to fly over Saudi Arabia or Iraq or Jordan. Once that happens the US comes in and destroys the Iranian air defense system, any military targets it can find, and even a few power stations. The US also announces it will enforce a totatl embargo on Iran.

The Iranians could arm their missiles with radioactive materials, but the Iranian missiles are inaccurate and could land anywhere. And the US would still do all the things it would do if it were conventional warheads, but with greater world wide support.

A majority of Iranians are against building a bomb. The current government is supported by a minority. Once Iranians have no food or electricity the government would fall.
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,956
33
91
I think you have to look at the military realities.

The smartest thing that Iran could do would be to do nothing and just protest.

Iran cannot attack Israel with its air force. That only leaves its rockets which would have to fly over Saudi Arabia or Iraq or Jordan. Once that happens the US comes in and destroys the Iranian air defense system, any military targets it can find, and even a few power stations. The US also announces it will enforce a totatl embargo on Iran.

The Iranians could arm their missiles with radioactive materials, but the Iranian missiles are inaccurate and could land anywhere. And the US would still do all the things it would do if it were conventional warheads, but with greater world wide support.

A majority of Iranians are against building a bomb. The current government is supported by a minority. Once Iranians have no food or electricity the government would fall.
It would be really embarrassing for Iran if they launch those rockets and they are shot down by Israeli's national ABM system.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Oh techs, the best laid plans of mice and men. How well I remember the first Battle of Bull Run in 1861 or was it 1862". Such a bright Sunny day, a perfect day for a picnic, as everyone who was anyone in Washington DC flocked to Bull Run in their horses and buggies to see the first and last battle in the American Civil war being successfully concluded.

Who could of thunk of it then, that it would take countless millions of American lives and nearly four years to achieve the slam dunk assumptions of over optimistic twits.

Sadly for the Twits in England in 1776, they could not easily have a picnic lunch in America and watch the firsts and last battle of the American revolution being fought on a American battlefield. So they had to settle for a picnic in London.

But now we can always rely on American twits coming out of the woodwork to tell us we would win in Vietnam, we would win in Iraq, we would win in Afghanistan and it would cost us no more than 50 glass beads and 50 peanut tops. And even better yet, in jig, time, no more than one battle required.

I must be a Lemon Law traitor to this country for being the voice in the wilderness screaming bullshit. I can hardly wait until I am deported to homeland security and waterboarded.

Gotta admit it may fix my Wagon, but when and if Iran stops the bulk of world oil from going through the Persian Gulf for months and years, don't blame me.

I look at it on the bright side, if I am in GITMO, I won't have to pay $500.00 a gallon for gasoline like all you over optimistic twits.
 

Jadow

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2003
5,962
2
0
in Civ 5, I'd nuke Tehran, then move in the mechanized infantry to finish em off.
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,775
0
76
China has already said that if we attack Iran they will defend Iran, who is their 2nd largest trading partner for oil. If we do that the whole world is fucked. Russia has already sent troops and armaments to Syria. WW3 could be just around the bend and if we jump into that mess we are fucked. China AND Russia, are you kidding me?
 

peonyu

Platinum Member
Mar 12, 2003
2,038
23
81
Its no wonder the Islamic nations see the US as biased. Israel has nukes and that is A'ok, yet if Iran tries to build them its horrible. Its obvious whose side the US is on to the Muslim world, and it is not theirs [we just fake being impartial for oil kickbacks]. Also what is to say that the Nuclear fiasco in Iran is not a lie...WMDs hello ? Remember Iraq ? The government has a tendency [a habitual one] to lie to the American people whenever it wants to bomb a country.

Next on the list is probably Syria, the war drums are already starting to beat and the drum its beating is screaming "they have WMDs!". Which is most likely a lie and one we already heard 10 years ago. Iran is likely exaggerated aswell in hopes of us [the US] doing the dirty work for Israel and helping to clean up the region for them. Iran is on the other side of planet Earth from the US, why exactly is it extremely important for us to tell them what to do ?..Oh, for Israel's sake. The money spent helping them out would be better spent manning the southern US border since if you want to talk about a real security threat then nothing tops that, we have millions coming in and out per year through there doing who knows what..

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20120728/OPINION/307280009/Syria-s-weapons-mass-destruction
 
Last edited:

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Well as a matter of fact, Iran is far from being a defenseless paper Tiger like Iraq circa 2003. Its why Afghanistan was going to be so easy to conquer.

And after 10 years Leon Pinhead keeps telling us, there is light at the end of the tunnel! Stay the course, damn the Torpedoes, we will have peace with honor by 2014.

Afghanistan is a piece of cake, so easy to take over, as Alexander the great first found out. Then the Brits made a run at Afghanistan and found getting in a large army was ever so easy, too bad only a few of them ever made it out alive. Then the Russians made a go at conquering Afghanistan with equal success. But surely Leon Pinhead will succeed, because like William MacNamera, he is the smartest guy in the room. And if you don't believe me, you can ask Leon Pinhead. Any Moment now we can declare victory in Afghanistan, if we just kill two more #1 Al-Quida figures, victory will surely be ours.
 

dawheat

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2000
3,123
71
91
Well as a matter of fact, Iran is far from being a defenseless paper Tiger like Iraq circa 2003. Its why Afghanistan was going to be so easy to conquer.

And after 10 years Leon Pinhead keeps telling us, there is light at the end of the tunnel! Stay the course, damn the Torpedoes, we will have peace with honor by 2014.

Afghanistan is a piece of cake, so easy to take over, as Alexander the great first found out. Then the Brits made a run at Afghanistan and found getting in a large army was ever so easy, too bad only a few of them ever made it out alive. Then the Russians made a go at conquering Afghanistan with equal success. But surely Leon Pinhead will succeed, because like William MacNamera, he is the smartest guy in the room. And if you don't believe me, you can ask Leon Pinhead. Any Moment now we can declare victory in Afghanistan, if we just kill two more #1 Al-Quida figures, victory will surely be ours.
Several folks have made this point before - occupation is hard, destruction of a organized military is not hard (for the US).

In a conventional war with Iran, their ability to mount an organized response would be gone in a couple days. Sure, some schmuck with a powerboat may make a suicide run at a USN ship, but that would be about it.

Now any idea of an occupying force is utterly idiotic. If there is war, destroy their military and then embargo them. The boot of a single US solider shouldn't touch the ground.
 

slag

Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
10,473
80
91
Its no wonder the Islamic nations see the US as biased. Israel has nukes and that is A'ok, yet if Iran tries to build them its horrible. Its obvious whose side the US is on to the Muslim world, and it is not theirs [we just fake being impartial for oil kickbacks]. Also what is to say that the Nuclear fiasco in Iran is not a lie...WMDs hello ? Remember Iraq ? The government has a tendency [a habitual one] to lie to the American people whenever it wants to bomb a country.

Next on the list is probably Syria, the war drums are already starting to beat and the drum its beating is screaming "they have WMDs!". Which is most likely a lie and one we already heard 10 years ago. Iran is likely exaggerated aswell in hopes of us [the US] doing the dirty work for Israel and helping to clean up the region for them. Iran is on the other side of planet Earth from the US, why exactly is it extremely important for us to tell them what to do ?..Oh, for Israel's sake. The money spent helping them out would be better spent manning the southern US border since if you want to talk about a real security threat then nothing tops that, we have millions coming in and out per year through there doing who knows what..

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20120728/OPINION/307280009/Syria-s-weapons-mass-destruction
Saddam gassed his own people. Gas is a WMD. Saddam admitted to having it and using it. The UN inspection force could not find the WMD but concluded that there was a strong possibility they still existed.
 
Feb 4, 2009
29,953
10,490
136
Its time to bring back the MAD doctrine, basically tell N. Korea, Iran and any other yahoos out there that we are holding ALL of them responsible if any nuclear device goes off ANY WHERE. They'll complain and call us Satan but the nukes would be locked down tight.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Several folks have made this point before - occupation is hard, destruction of a organized military is not hard (for the US).

In a conventional war with Iran, their ability to mount an organized response would be gone in a couple days. Sure, some schmuck with a powerboat may make a suicide run at a USN ship, but that would be about it.

Now any idea of an occupying force is utterly idiotic. If there is war, destroy their military and then embargo them. The boot of a single US solider shouldn't touch the ground.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where do you get this idea that once the Iranian military is kaput, all resistance will become futile. That sure did not happen if Afghanistan or Iraq. As individual small Guerrilla war insurgencies form up rapidly and can find many places to hide in a large country. Then what gives you the idea an fanatical Iranian rebel is going to take suicide runs at US Navy ships armed to the teeth, when they will instead target oil tankers.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Hopefully, the US has learned to not try to nation build.

Destroy the military and let the chips fall where they may in terms of the people choosing a government.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
Well as a matter of fact, Iran is far from being a defenseless paper Tiger like Iraq circa 2003. Its why Afghanistan was going to be so easy to conquer.

And after 10 years Leon Pinhead keeps telling us, there is light at the end of the tunnel! Stay the course, damn the Torpedoes, we will have peace with honor by 2014.

Afghanistan is a piece of cake, so easy to take over, as Alexander the great first found out. Then the Brits made a run at Afghanistan and found getting in a large army was ever so easy, too bad only a few of them ever made it out alive. Then the Russians made a go at conquering Afghanistan with equal success. But surely Leon Pinhead will succeed, because like William MacNamera, he is the smartest guy in the room. And if you don't believe me, you can ask Leon Pinhead. Any Moment now we can declare victory in Afghanistan, if we just kill two more #1 Al-Quida figures, victory will surely be ours.
Leaving Afghanistan EVER, is a victory for terrorism, because even once you leave and the nation is 2 generations into democracy, the terrorists will come down from the mountains and take control. We will do what it takes, because we are Americans, we win.

Our leaders, Bush, Obama, Leon Pinhead, haven't yet figured out how to break the news to us that there is no exit plan from Afghanistan, Afghanistan occupation IS THE PLAN. Just go ahead and tell us, just follow it up shortly that the next 4 years of Call of Duties will all be free and I think we'll get over it.
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
10,940
230
106
Hopefully, the US has learned to not try to nation build.

Destroy the military and let the chips fall where they may in terms of the people choosing a government.
Problem with that is oil. Instability with the region increases oil prices. I don't see how you can peace until Iran gives up on its destroy Israel rhetoric. I don't think they would act on it unless pushed into a corner but it's not something you can take a chance on.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
The instability is caused by the threat that Iran want to inject into the region.

Remove the threat and the concerns about instability in the market place goes away.

The lack of Iranian oil is not so much a concern - their sales output is seriously dropped due to the EU embargo kicking in and the lack of buyers.

they are already storing most of their output in ships that are going nowhere.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY