Officer of Engineers

Stay on topic.

The only way the US can supply Israel in such a war as you described is to strip the American flag off the USAF and paint a Star of David on them. Wake up.

Oh for Pete sakes, Iran didn't go to Lebanon because

1) They didn't need to
2) They didn't want to
3) They didn't have the ability even if they wanted to.

L O G I S T I C S !!!!!!!!!!!

__________________
Chimo

Ironduke

LOL.

__________________
The Buck Stops Here

Ironduke

Define us.

Dreadnought

The blast radius circumfrence of three superbowl fields showed human beings, concrete buildings, wooden buildings and metal structures shatter like an empty glass and blown away like dust in the wind. Its my guess that the six field theory is for heavy sustained damage to structures, foundations, vehicles etc and Im sure that includes human, animal ear drums,organs and the like. The shockwave alone emitted sees to that without prejustice. I wouldnt want to be anywhere around when it goes off. That is if you want to still function some what normally as human being. Ive been around and have seen some god awful explosions in my life the kind that throw you to the ground and you still hear the echo in the distance moments afterwards and thats before you have the "stones" to open your eyes and accept that someone/something maybe even someone you know just got beemed off the planet via the express lane. Good or bad its gone with no chance of ever coming back.

I have found that extreme high voltage electrical explosions in past experience tend to holster the largest bang decibel wise and produce the "scary" blinding light nanoseconds before you and everthing around gets slammed on the ground and deaf for the next several moments

I learned these things one night working in a power house that had an accident when two 4140 lines at the powergrid collapsed and crossed onto each other while covered in approximately 3/4" thick ice for anybody here that recalls the heavy ice storms of the early 90's. The explosion sound was reported up to 15 miles away. A day I will never forget nor will the people I worked with. Luckily no body was lost.

__________________
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

HistoricalDavid

Your guess is not really the same as an authoritative answer, no offence. The simple fact is, there's not enough energy released to really destroy a city in a feasible number of devices, even with the greater mathematical efficiency of more numerous small bombs versus a citykilling nuke. MOABs are not JDAMs in their liberality of use.

tehran - Google Maps

PS The shockwave is the only significant method of anti-materiel destruction for the MOAB, unlike the thermal radiation of a nuke or the ignition of an incendiary device.

Harbinger

Asim vs WAB!!!

Ok, I was being a bit dramatic. I think the simple answer is that United States will never let Iran become a nuclear power (especially with MAD Mullahs around).

Asim Aquil

I remember posting an article in the history forum way back then.

You always hear about the US firing thousands of cruise missiles in any given campaign. I'm sure it would be more than happy to do Israel's bidding in this respect.



Any of their regulars? It could've easily become Iran/Lebanon/Syria vs Israel. A lot of speculation went into that too.

Asim Aquil

This you say now after we've proven ourselves. But I remember back then we heard rumors about a test exercise being conducted by Israelis to blow up Khan Research Labs (KRL), etc. Plans on what would happen if the Mullahs took over in a coup. People were so dead sure Mullahs are taking over Pakistan... :D

Yes, because they've been warring a whole lot more than Pakistan and India?


Hmmm yes, it can't take out Iran's capability but back then Pakistan had almost all its egg in the KRL basket.

American media say, American people think.

There is NO similarity. Do your freaking research before spouting this nonsense. India had the bomb since 1974. Pakistan estimated in the mid-80s. Both sides were checked by the superpowers and by China.[/quote]

Iran does have a lot of close links with Russia and China. Russia btw, is also working on a nuclear power plant in Iran. I'm pretty sure the countries Iran is surrounded with are in the know about their nuclear ambitions.

Russia and China keep vetoing military action against Iran since it keep saying the nuke tech is for civilian use only. Iran may still be attacked by the US, but Russia and China can't be forced into supporting them. Russia and China WANT Iran to go nuclear too. Just when the time is right.

Asim Aquil

Countries in the gulf. It's already arming Pakistan's enemy so that's a hostile move we are SURE about. But the others continue to live under the threat of an Israeli nuclear strike without anything to threaten them back with.

Asim Aquil

Haha you mentioned it first.

Or declare "Hey we'll fight alongside them!"

Yes Syria would've been so unwilling if Iran demanded it...

They didn't go in because that would've given all sorts of excuses to hit Iran directly. They did need/want to, hence they covertly sent missiles and some missile groups in to aid Hezbollah. Who do you think blew up that Israeli ship firing away too close to the coast?

Asim Aquil

With their current strategy, they don't have a choice.

- Threats have not worked
- Sanctions have not worked
- Air raids would only delay it out. Plus I recall some military cooperation pact between Iran-China? US needs China and perhaps even Russia on board.
- The US congress would never give an OK to invade Iran. Plus I suspect the US also fears failure in this plan.

Iran can be dealt with. Negotiate. Put the same nuclear disarmament pressure on Israel. Ask Iran to allow IAEA operatives to push day and night shifts in every Iranian nuclear facility. If they still betray you guys then all the Superpowers will HAVE to pitch in and fight Iran.

HistoricalDavid

You're underestimating the power of the air raids. Not only is it ludicrous that China or Russia would ride to Iran's defence for not much discernible interest of their own, it would delay it, yes - and indefinitely, cause you can just repeat the raids.

Ergo it stops being an "Israel-Iran" War! Whatever Israel does will be a sideshow compared to US efforts.

On the PAF wiki page I see a lot of boasting about how Pakistan sent pilots to fight in the various Arab-Israeli wars (and boasting in general) but nothing about directly engaging Israeli airplanes over or near her own airspace.

What kind of nonsense is this? To my recollection, 288 Tomahawks were fired at Iraq in Gulf War I, certainly the largest US war since Vietnam. A quick wiki confirms this. I don't know about AGM-86es but I'm confident that expenditure didn't reach into the thousands - all I can find is how 35 were launched by the famous 14,000 mile B-52 raid.

As OoE said, once there is so much US involvement then, you might as well stop calling it an Iran-Israel conflict, because the US's firepower dwarfs that of Israel's. The idea of the US giving them so much munitions (and even planes, as would be necessary to actually deliver them, and pilots, necessary to fly them) is almost as ludicrous as Caspar Weinberger's (admittedly well-intentioned) offer of a Nimitz-class to the Royal Navy to fight the Falklands.

I don't understand. What does this part of the post mean? Does it say anything, or is it just vapid fluff which contradicts your previous logic, where you can still call it an Israel-Iran conflict, but here, when you have lots of assistance, those assisting countries deserve a mention?

Asim Aquil

Not many people will agree with you... You won't be able to continue air raids indefinitely as the number of civilian casualties would be on the rise.

You are overplaying the impact of air raids.

Was there any doubt to this? I mean hardly anyone in the world does not synonymize an Israeli military campaign with automatic US involvement. The only difference being the Israelis are more gung ho and radical and the US would search for ample justification. Justification which the US government is already convinced it has.

Maybe one of the Mod's can help post a link to one of my older threads. Rest assured I "sh!t you not". This was in the news/editorial.

Dude I didn't provide a specific number because I didn't know it. But there you go, by your own numbers 288 cruise missiles is way too many! AGM's as you pointed out... Of course, these days other more lethal weapons would be used too. MOABs? Were they used recently? Against the Taliban?
Well Israel will draw the US in. My point that Iran is incapable of taking on Israel (not invasion, but you know the random occasional bombing), Iran won't mess with a USA around there too. The conflict IS between Israel and Iran, the US is just choosing sides and butting in.

Ok now, I won't call the US's ability to actually pull off a very good supply of bombs and munition as ludicrous. It CAN be done. They got some youngsters from the tribal belt, supplied (AND TRAINED!) them with a big stockpile of weaponry who took on the Soviet Union! Israel which is one of the best trained and equipped armies in the region would probably fare better.

Leave it. I had to look back too. I asked a question somewhere up there and it was responded by another question and... Well leave it.

Asim Aquil

I'm reminded of the time when Clinton tried to get us to disarm our nuclear arsenal.

We were like "Fine, but get India to disarm too".

So they asked India.

India was like "Fine, but ask everyone else to disarm too".

So the US just let it go. Imposed sanctions on both the countries. Hilarious.

Dreadnought

Im only going by what the documentary states my friend. I am of the impression that documentaries are based upon fact. Perhaps not the most accurate of fact but factualy based.