Maybe we should attack Iran's Reactors

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Aegeon

Originally posted by: Specop 007
Which brings us back to America has to assist them by at least giving flight permissions through Iraq.

The reality is Israel has F-15I and F-16I aircraft that can at least hit most of Iran without having to refuel at all if they go over Iraq. They also have quite a large a substancial refueling aircraft force. With the right planning its distinctly possible they could go by sea around the Arabian Peninsula and then refuel on last time before getting really close to Iran and they launch their strike. They can then rejoin the refueling aircraft back on their trip to Israel.

U.S. Army report: Israel can't stop Iran nukes



SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Monday, December 5, 2005
WASHINGTON ? Geopolitical limitations render Israel's air force militarily incapable of halting Iran's nuclear weapons program according to a new report published the by U.S. Army War College.

The report asserts Israel lacks the military capability to locate and destroy Iranian nuclear assets. The report said the Israel Air Force cannot operate at such long distances from its bases.



"The Israeli Air Force has formidable capabilities and enjoys unchallenged supremacy vis-à-vis the other Middle East air powers, but Israel has no aircraft carriers and it cannot use airbases in other Middle East states," the report entitled "Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran," said. "Therefore its operational capabilities are reduced when the targets are located far from its territory."
[On Sunday, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz warned that diplomatic pressure would not stop Iran's nuclear weapons program, Middle East Newsline reported. Halutz was one of three senior Israeli officials who warned that Iran would soon be able to turn into a nuclear power.]

In an article authored by Shlomo Brom, former head of air force strategic planning, the report said Israel's deep-strike air capability was based on the F-15I and F-16C/D aircraft. At a range of more than 600 kilometers, Brom said, Israel could not sustain an air campaign. Iran is about 1,000 kilometers from Israel.

"It is possible to determine that at long ranges ? more then 600 kilometers ? the IAF is capable of a few surgical strikes, but it is not capable of a sustained air campaign against a full array of targets," the report said.

An Israeli air attack on Iran must also include such support aircraft as air refueling, electronic countermeasures, support, communication, and rescue, the report said. The mission would also require precision intelligence.

Brom said Israel's intelligence and military community was divided over the Iranian threat. He said military intelligence regards Iran as determined to destroy Israel. The Mossad and National Security Council see Teheran as preoccupied with national defense and regime survival.

"While the first school assumes no political pressure can force Iran to stop its military nuclear program, the other school believes that political pressure can be effective in at least delaying the nuclear program significantly," the report said. "The second school believes that a nuclear Iran with a different regime will not pose a high risk to Israel and can be easily deterred."

The report said the Bushehr nuclear power plant was vulnerable to attacks but does not constitute a key element of the military nuclear program. As a result, the destruction of Bushehr would not have a significant effect on Iran's military program.

Brom said Iranian nuclear assets are located between 1,500 and 1,700 kilometers from Israel. The report expressed doubts whether such Israeli allies as India and Turkey would allow Israel to launch a military strike from their territory.

"This means that the Israeli attack aircraft would have to take off from air bases in Israel, fly 1,500-1,700 kilometers to the targets, destroy them, and then fly back 1,500-1,700 kilometers," the report said.

The Israel Air Force has 25 F-15I and 137 F-16C/D fighter-bombers. The air force has already received more than 20 F-16Is, with longer range on the F-15I, but the report said the F-15I aircraft contains greater capabilities at long ranges.

The report said the F-15I has an operational radius of 1,270 kilometers. The F-16I has an operational radius of 2,100 kilometers while that of the F-16C/D is 925 kilometers.

But the report said the real operational radius was shorter because the planes would have to fly at low altitude to avoid radar detection. Brom said the Israeli aircraft could avoid Iranian air defense but would be detected.

"In any case, any Israeli attack on an Iranian nuclear target would be a very complex operation in which a relatively large number of attack aircraft and support aircraft ? interceptors, ECM [electronic counter-measures] aircraft, refuelers, and rescue aircraft ? would participate," the report said. "The conclusion is that Israel could attack only a few Iranian targets and not as part of a sustainable operation over time, but as a one time surprise operation."

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: Aimster
F-15s are nice targets for S-300s

Its not at all clear if Iran actually has any S-300s. If they do right now its a very small number. Regardless Israel is definately more than capable than dealing with them and a low flying F-15 or F-16 could simply launch a Delilah Cruise Missle or anti-radiation missile at the SAM system from a range beyond when Iran's S-300s can effectively respond.
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/...tems/air_missiles/delilah/Delilah.html

Israeli Aircraft could also use ITALDS to confuse the Iranian Air Force, by have the decoys fly bogus strike paths, and get Iran's SAM systems to reveal their positions attempting to hit false targets.
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/..._systems/air_missiles/itald/ITALD.html

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Aimster
F-15s are nice targets for S-300s

Russians sell a lot of really advanced weaponry to Israel's enemies. Yet it seems that in their hands, it generally winds up doing little damage, because they are unable to use it properly. The T-72 is a very good tank... it's not a match for the Abrams, but it's also not the pushover that it showed itself to be in Iraq. If the people operating those weapons had the training and mental abilities on part with the Russians who designed them, the war would've been a lot costlier for the Americans.

Therefore, while it is tragic that Russia is selling S-300s to Iran, it's by no means decisive. If destroying the Iranian reactor becomes a necessity, two waves of aircraft may be required - one to attract the fire, as well as destroy the radar systems... and the other to mop up the reactor.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aimster
F-15s are nice targets for S-300s

Russians sell a lot of really advanced weaponry to Israel's enemies. Yet it seems that in their hands, it generally winds up doing little damage, because they are unable to use it properly. The T-72 is a very good tank... it's not a match for the Abrams, but it's also not the pushover that it showed itself to be in Iraq. If the people operating those weapons had the training and mental abilities on part with the Russians who designed them, the war would've been a lot costlier for the Americans.

Therefore, while it is tragic that Russia is selling S-300s to Iran, it's by no means decisive. If destroying the Iranian reactor becomes a necessity, two waves of aircraft may be required - one to attract the fire, as well as destroy the radar systems... and the other to mop up the reactor.

The T-72 is not Russia's latest tank. The T-72 is old. There is an upgraded version of the T-72 that Iraq never had. The new Russian tanks are very nicely equipped. I believe only China and India have these new tanks.

Iraq's army didn't want to fight the U.S. They were forced into it by Saddam. What were they fighting for? The generals ordered their troops into the desert when they had no air support. The generals were idiots.

Iran has plenty of other air defense systems. They build their own plus import from Russia/India/China. If Israeli sends in two waves they have to deal with the annoyance of knocking out Iranian aircraft from the sky as well. Iran doesn't turn on their air defense systems. U.S Jets go into and out of Iran on a daily basis trying to locate them. If Iran turns them on the U.S jets can pinpoint their position and knock them out when a strike happens.

 

[arsbanned]

Aside from the political implications, knocking out that reactor would NOT be the cakewalk people in here are making it out to be. Yeah, they did it in Iraq. You think the Iranians didn't take notice of that and have designed defenses accordingly? Get real.
As far as experience goes, the Americans have far more of combat flight experience under their belts. The whole "The Israelis are the best warriors on the face of the Earth!!!!" thing is a myth. Yeah, for a small force, they are capable, but don't overstate it.

And judging hardware on how the Iraqis used it, after being ground down by an international air force for weeks or, for Iraq II, 10 years of sanctions, is hardly a good indicator. But as Aimster indicated, the T-72 is old hardware anyway.

 

[Meuge]

Well... worst case scenario, they can just use cruise missiles.

The point isn't "is it possible to knock that reactor out", it's whether someone other than a desperate Israel would do it... and I am saddened to conclude that I do not think so.

 

[rickn]

Good idea. Let Israel do it. it would probably spark WW3, but atleast we will see tangible results in this so-called reshaping the middle east.

 

[Meuge]

I doubt it would spark WW3. The world doesn't really care enough for Iran.

 

[dahunan]

When reading this thread please take this one into account with it
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1751931&enterthread=y

 

[DarkKnight69]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Specop 007
I'd like someone to tell me how the Israelis will dothis, considering the fact that they have no aircraft which could make the trip.

They have fleets of our F15s, they could always stop for fuel in Iraq

Its the only option. America will have to get this done to have the mission accomplished by conventional means (Not implying nuclear). Now, it *could* be done but the losses for the Israelis would be 100%.

That said, Israel has neevr lost a conflict, and they have an amazing ability to overcome what others view as impossible odds so I wouldnt rule them out completely.

Not to mention the cheap american weapons and training. That usually helps.

100 men with ak-47's vs 10 guys with a few jets, log range artillery and missles...hmm.

 

[Meuge]

Well during the Yom Kippur war the difference in equipment was very small, yet an Israeli tank crew that destroyed less than 40 Lebanese tanks was considered less than skillfull.

People who fight for the survival of their families fight better than people who fight because of religious convictions or nationalistic fervor.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Meuge
I doubt it would spark WW3. The world doesn't really care enough for Iran.

it wouldn't happen overnight, but there would be major crisis to follow. And they may not care about Iran, but they sure care about their oil and natural gas.

 

[dahunan]

I can bet that the technology gap has narrowed quite a bit between many countries in the ME ..

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I really don't care much anymore, but has anyone stopped to consider that those beyond the borders are looking at these kinds of actions, and are wondering if the right thing to do is to attack an enemy (which one automatically is when one attacks another) before they can attack?

Hmm, well a direct confrontation would be suicide.

Maybe it's time for a strike on the mainland of that enemy.


Every action has a reaction. Do what you must, but understand that others may just do the same.

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: dahunan
I can bet that the technology gap has narrowed quite a bit between many countries in the ME ..

Depends who you're talking about. I'd say the technoloyg gap has actually gotten greater if you're talking about Israel in comparison to its likely Middle Eastern opponents in a war. Israel has a very formidable domestic weapons industry today, which gets alot of its money for R&D through weapons exports.

 

[tommywishbone]

"Meh, the Israelis will take out their enrichment facilities eventually.

We don't have to do a thing except possibly pass them some intel under the table.'


And provide the fighter-bombers, train the pilots, train and pay the ground crews, give them the technology to pull the whole thing off, and give them the nukes (we already have) to defend themselves if Iran gets mad.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: tommywishbone

"Meh, the Israelis will take out their enrichment facilities eventually.

We don't have to do a thing except possibly pass them some intel under the table.'


And provide the fighter-bombers, train the pilots, train and pay the ground crews, give them the technology to pull the whole thing off, and give them the nukes (we already have) to defend themselves if Iran gets mad.

1) Israel has it's own air force (and it is very good)
2) They don't have to use an airstrike
3) They already have domestically produced nuclear weapons

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Specop 007
I'd like someone to tell me how the Israelis will dothis, considering the fact that they have no aircraft which could make the trip.

The F15 has in-air refueling capability.

They could do the same thing that we did against Libya when our forces had to launch from England and were refused overflight over France.

Tankers refueling tankers that supported the attack aircraft.

Which brings us back to America has to assist them by at least giving flight permissions through Iraq.

America does not own Iraqi airspace.

Oh really.... Tell that to Saddam's air force. :roll:

Originally posted by: Meuge
Well during the Yom Kippur war the difference in equipment was very small, yet an Israeli tank crew that destroyed less than 40 Lebanese tanks was considered less than skillfull.

People who fight for the survival of their families fight better than people who fight because of religious convictions or nationalistic fervor.

Hmmm, I thought training and experience might be of value. Silly me.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Aegeon

Originally posted by: Specop 007
Which brings us back to America has to assist them by at least giving flight permissions through Iraq.

The reality is Israel has F-15I and F-16I aircraft that can at least hit most of Iran without having to refuel at all if they go over Iraq. They also have quite a large a substancial refueling aircraft force. With the right planning its distinctly possible they could go by sea around the Arabian Peninsula and then refuel on last time before getting really close to Iran and they launch their strike. They can then rejoin the refueling aircraft back on their trip to Israel.

U.S. Army report: Israel can't stop Iran nukes



SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Monday, December 5, 2005
WASHINGTON ? Geopolitical limitations render Israel's air force militarily incapable of halting Iran's nuclear weapons program according to a new report published the by U.S. Army War College.

The report asserts Israel lacks the military capability to locate and destroy Iranian nuclear assets. The report said the Israel Air Force cannot operate at such long distances from its bases.



"The Israeli Air Force has formidable capabilities and enjoys unchallenged supremacy vis-à-vis the other Middle East air powers, but Israel has no aircraft carriers and it cannot use airbases in other Middle East states," the report entitled "Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran," said. "Therefore its operational capabilities are reduced when the targets are located far from its territory."
[On Sunday, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz warned that diplomatic pressure would not stop Iran's nuclear weapons program, Middle East Newsline reported. Halutz was one of three senior Israeli officials who warned that Iran would soon be able to turn into a nuclear power.]

In an article authored by Shlomo Brom, former head of air force strategic planning, the report said Israel's deep-strike air capability was based on the F-15I and F-16C/D aircraft. At a range of more than 600 kilometers, Brom said, Israel could not sustain an air campaign. Iran is about 1,000 kilometers from Israel.

"It is possible to determine that at long ranges ? more then 600 kilometers ? the IAF is capable of a few surgical strikes, but it is not capable of a sustained air campaign against a full array of targets," the report said.

An Israeli air attack on Iran must also include such support aircraft as air refueling, electronic countermeasures, support, communication, and rescue, the report said. The mission would also require precision intelligence.

Brom said Israel's intelligence and military community was divided over the Iranian threat. He said military intelligence regards Iran as determined to destroy Israel. The Mossad and National Security Council see Teheran as preoccupied with national defense and regime survival.

"While the first school assumes no political pressure can force Iran to stop its military nuclear program, the other school believes that political pressure can be effective in at least delaying the nuclear program significantly," the report said. "The second school believes that a nuclear Iran with a different regime will not pose a high risk to Israel and can be easily deterred."

The report said the Bushehr nuclear power plant was vulnerable to attacks but does not constitute a key element of the military nuclear program. As a result, the destruction of Bushehr would not have a significant effect on Iran's military program.

Brom said Iranian nuclear assets are located between 1,500 and 1,700 kilometers from Israel. The report expressed doubts whether such Israeli allies as India and Turkey would allow Israel to launch a military strike from their territory.

"This means that the Israeli attack aircraft would have to take off from air bases in Israel, fly 1,500-1,700 kilometers to the targets, destroy them, and then fly back 1,500-1,700 kilometers," the report said.

The Israel Air Force has 25 F-15I and 137 F-16C/D fighter-bombers. The air force has already received more than 20 F-16Is, with longer range on the F-15I, but the report said the F-15I aircraft contains greater capabilities at long ranges.

The report said the F-15I has an operational radius of 1,270 kilometers. The F-16I has an operational radius of 2,100 kilometers while that of the F-16C/D is 925 kilometers.

But the report said the real operational radius was shorter because the planes would have to fly at low altitude to avoid radar detection. Brom said the Israeli aircraft could avoid Iranian air defense but would be detected.

"In any case, any Israeli attack on an Iranian nuclear target would be a very complex operation in which a relatively large number of attack aircraft and support aircraft ? interceptors, ECM [electronic counter-measures] aircraft, refuelers, and rescue aircraft ? would participate," the report said. "The conclusion is that Israel could attack only a few Iranian targets and not as part of a sustainable operation over time, but as a one time surprise operation."

They key word is sustained

it is not capable of a sustained air campaign

This would not be the bombing campains done against Iraq in 91 and 2004.

Precision attacks to nail certain targets that have been located, verified and considered a threat.

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I really don't care much anymore, but has anyone stopped to consider that those beyond the borders are looking at these kinds of actions, and are wondering if the right thing to do is to attack an enemy (which one automatically is when one attacks another) before they can attack?

Hmm, well a direct confrontation would be suicide.

Maybe it's time for a strike on the mainland of that enemy.


Every action has a reaction. Do what you must, but understand that others may just do the same.

Well, yeah, but most of these kids can't see past their own noses let alone have the foresight to understand what doing something like what they are proposing might mean, what all the ramifications might be.
I hope they're kids anyway.
Course...look what Bush did....

Originally posted by: Aegeon

Originally posted by: dahunan
I can bet that the technology gap has narrowed quite a bit between many countries in the ME ..

Depends who you're talking about. I'd say the technoloyg gap has actually gotten greater if you're talking about Israel in comparison to its likely Middle Eastern opponents in a war. Israel has a very formidable domestic weapons industry today, which gets alot of its money for R&D through weapons exports.

Not to mention the billions we give them every year.

 

[arsbanned]

DP sorry