Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will Israel Attack Iran in 2012?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
    Do you gentlemen think it makes sense, having read the article.?
    The article or my reply? As for my reply I said "maybe" after first Tuesday of November.

    From the article:
    For the first time since the Iranian nuclear threat emerged in the mid-1990s, at least some of Israel’s most powerful leaders believe that the response to all of these questions is yes.

    At various points in our conversation, Barak underscored that if Israel or the rest of the world waits too long, the moment will arrive — sometime in the coming year, he says — beyond which it will no longer be possible to act. “It will not be possible to use any surgical means to bring about a significant delay,” he said. “Not for us, not for Europe and not for the United States. After that, the question will remain very important, but it will become purely theoretical and pass out of our hands — the statesmen and decision-makers — and into yours — the journalists and historians.”
    Iran's nuclear program is being delayed with various means (worms, assassinations, things we don't know...).

    If BHO secures second term will the attack be a distant option as it is now?

    BTW, why all these ships are parking so close to Iran? Why the the Big E is heading there? If the pressure don't come up with wanted results what will happen?

    For now IRI agrees to talks, but they did so many time before.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by ArtyEngineer View Post
      Question:

      All discussions regarding Irans Nuke Program seems to involve either teh US or Israel taking action. Where do the Saudis fit into this. After Israel surely they are the most "Capable" military force in the region and my understanding is that the last thing they want to see is a Nuclear capable Iran.

      Regards

      Arty
      Can't see the Sauds buing into this to the extent that they actually start dropping bombs. They will play their usual role - egg on the side they want to win (US in this case), lend support such as basing facilities & overflight & then try to capitalize on the anger & anti-Western sentiment afterward.
      sigpic

      Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

      Comment


      • #18
        I don't know whether the Israeli's will do or won't do so. However, IMHO, they should do so, if the capabilities are in place. This is probably their last opportunity to stall/delay an Iranian bomb.

        I recall with nostalgia, a similar debate doing the rounds here in my country in the 1980's, whether India should have struck the Kahuta facilities to stall a Pakistani bomb. It is for everybody to see the inevitable. Whether we had the required capabilities is a different question.

        More interesting questions are -

        Which country/countries provide the necessary flight path and allow mid-air-refuelling?

        How much hover time do the Israelis require to achieve the mission objectives?

        What counter measures do the IAF have to evade the Iranian Air Defence?

        What would be the Iranian targets, once they are attacked and decide on counter attack?

        Can the Israelis get alternate staging grounds for their mission?
        sigpicAnd on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Doktor View Post
          The article or my reply? As for my reply I said "maybe" after first Tuesday of November.
          Can't tell, unless you give your reasons.

          From the article:

          Iran's nuclear program is being delayed with various means (worms, assassinations, things we don't know...).

          If BHO secures second term will the attack be a distant option as it is now?
          Substitute 'last for 'distant'. And BTW that's no matter who gets elected, assuming Paul and Santorum don't.


          BTW, why all these ships are parking so close to Iran? Why the the Big E is heading there? If the pressure don't come up with wanted results what will happen?
          We always have a presence in the region. We just had a rotation.


          For now IRI agrees to talks, but they did so many time before.
          True, but now they are going down the tubes economically. That threatens the regime's existence. They'll want to see the west's best deal, but they know they can't count on lifting of sanctions just because they smile nice.
          To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

          Comment


          • #20
            You guys are still talking about Iran?Havent't you noticed JAD's avatar?
            Those who know don't speak
            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
              Can't tell, unless you give your reasons.
              It was your question

              Substitute 'last for 'distant'. And BTW that's no matter who gets elected, assuming Paul and Santorum don't.
              OK, last option.

              My remark for after elections was noone in the current administration wants a replay of Operation Eagle Claw ruining the chances for reelections. I think Israel can wait that much delaying Iran with everything Mossad has at hand.

              When you will have new administration, be it Obama's second term (more comfortable position) or someone else's first, closing Iranian question one way or the other might be a good move, especially if it is not US who will start it, but who will end it.

              We always have a presence in the region. We just had a rotation.
              To be more specific, you think in few months there will be more, same or less western naval firepower in the region then a year ago?

              True, but now they are going down the tubes economically. That threatens the regime's existence. They'll want to see the west's best deal, but they know they can't count on lifting of sanctions just because they smile nice.
              Let's see. Economy there is going from bad to worse with each cycle of sanctions, but that just seems not enough.

              And not be take wrong, I am for waking up tomorrow with Scandinavian elections in Iran and with agreements someone else to build their civil nuclear program, while they close all the questioned facilities. Just not an optimist on that.
              No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

              To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                You guys are still talking about Iran?Havent't you noticed JAD's avatar?
                He is off to Hawaii
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                  You guys are still talking about Iran?Havent't you noticed JAD's avatar?
                  What else do you think is pulling me back to this thread over and over again?;)
                  sigpicAnd on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Definitely an improvement over his previous avatar. At least this one's in color...
                    Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                    Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                      You guys are still talking about Iran?Havent't you noticed JAD's avatar?
                      A little family promotion. :)
                      To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                        It was your question
                        So, what is your answer?


                        My remark for after elections was noone in the current administration wants a replay of Operation Eagle Claw ruining the chances for reelections. I think Israel can wait that much delaying Iran with everything Mossad has at hand.
                        Good point.

                        When you will have new administration, be it Obama's second term (more comfortable position) or someone else's first, closing Iranian question one way or the other might be a good move, especially if it is not US who will start it, but who will end it.
                        Key phrase: if US doesn't start it.

                        To be more specific, you think in few months there will be more, same or less western naval firepower in the region then a year ago?
                        I can't answer that with specifics, and of course no one knows what the situation will be week by week. But the US plans and trains for every possible scenario. I think it is safe to say that the US believes the level of its forces is sufficient given the level of Iranian forces now deployed in the region. If the latter changes, the US would adjust its force composition accordingly.


                        Let's see. Economy there is going from bad to worse with each cycle of sanctions, but that just seems not enough.
                        On the first day in the desert, you keep walking. On the second day, you walk slower. On the third day, you begin to stumble. On the fourth, you begin to crawl. On the fifth day, you begin to pray. On the sixth day, you don't care anymore. On the seventh day, you drink from the enemy's canteen, or die.
                        Last edited by JAD_333; 28 Jan 12,, 03:47.
                        To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          "Iran is moving closer to the point when it will be too late to destroy its nuclear facilities with a precision air strike, Israel's defence minister has warned... Ehud Barak gave one of the clearest signs yet that Israel's support for new US and EU sanctions remains strictly limited. "We are determined to prevent Iran from turning nuclear," he told the World Economic Forum in Davos." Iran moving closer to stage where it will be too late to destroy nuclear facilities, Israel warns - Telegraph

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Snapper Reply

                            "...We are determined to prevent Iran from turning nuclear,"

                            If Israel is bound by their determination then, at some point, they'll be committed to the most comprehensively complex air assault they've ever imagined and will do so without calibrating their timing nor level of response to U.S. internal political concerns.

                            OTOH, warfare can also be conducted after-the-fact in a sufficiently punative manner to coerce Iran into reversing their intent and submitting to an effective internat'l inspection regime. In short, war need not destroy all their nuclear facilities and/or knowledge base. It must, however, destroy Iran's preparedness to see through to becoming a nuclear-armed state.

                            I prefer this outcome. Destruction of Iran's nuclear weapons-making potential will, however comprehensive, not remove the desire for such. They can, and likely will, start again. The willingness to do so must be destroyed to assure a lasting solution. This, of course, only if Iran doesn't see fit to voluntarily reverse their predilection for these weapons.
                            Last edited by S2; 28 Jan 12,, 08:58.
                            "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
                            "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by S2 View Post
                              OTOH, warfare can also be conducted after-the-fact in a sufficiently punative manner to coerce Iran into reversing their intent and submitting to an effective internat'l inspection regime. In short, war need not destroy all their nuclear facilities and/or knowledge base. It must, however, destroy Iran's preparedness to see through to becoming a nuclear-armed state.
                              That idea has has driven our policy all along. The question is, how long can we pursue that policy without achieving the desired goal? And, are we intent on achieving that goal come what may?

                              Destruction of Iran's nuclear weapons-making potential will, however comprehensive, not remove the desire for such.
                              True, but desire is one thing. Ability to satisfy it is another.

                              They can, and likely will, start again.
                              I respect your opinion, but this is still just an opinion.

                              The willingness to do so must be destroyed to assure a lasting solution.
                              I's much harder to change willingness than to prevent it from playing out.

                              This, of course, only if Iran doesn't see fit to voluntarily reverse their predilection for these weapons.
                              I think you just answered my first question.:)
                              To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Nope, Israel will not attack in Iran in 2012 as there isn't anything effective enough to do it with.

                                Pentagon Seeks Mightier Bomb vs. Iran | WSJ | Jan 28 2012

                                * BUSINESS
                                * JANUARY 28, 2012

                                Pentagon Seeks Mightier Bomb vs. Iran

                                By ADAM ENTOUS And JULIAN E. BARNES

                                WASHINGTON—Pentagon war planners have concluded that their largest conventional bomb isn't yet capable of destroying Iran's most heavily fortified underground facilities, and are stepping up efforts to make it more powerful, according to U.S. officials briefed on the plan.

                                The 30,000-pound "bunker-buster" bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, was specifically designed to take out the hardened fortifications built by Iran and North Korea to cloak their nuclear programs.

                                But initial tests indicated that the bomb, as currently configured, wouldn't be capable of destroying some of Iran's facilities, either because of their depth or because Tehran has added new fortifications to protect them.

                                Doubts about the MOP's effectiveness prompted the Pentagon this month to secretly submit a request to Congress for funding to enhance the bomb's ability to penetrate deeper into rock, concrete and steel before exploding, the officials said.

                                The push to boost the power of the MOP is part of stepped-up contingency planning for a possible strike against Iran's nuclear program, say U.S. officials.

                                The Defense Department has spent about $330 million so far to develop about 20 of the bombs, which are built by Boeing Co. The Pentagon is seeking about $82 million more to make the bomb more effective, according to government officials briefed on the plan.

                                Some experts question if any kind of conventional explosives are capable of reaching facilities such as those built deep underground in Iran. But U.S. defense officials say they believe the MOP could already do damage sufficient to set back the program.

                                Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal Thursday, acknowledged the bomb's shortcomings against some of Iran's deepest bunkers. He said more development work would be done and that he expected the bomb to be ready to take on the deepest bunkers soon.

                                "We're still trying to develop them," Mr. Panetta said.


                                President Barack Obama has made clear that he believes U.S. and international sanctions can curb Iran's nuclear program if they are given more time to work. At the same time, however, Mr. Obama has asked the Pentagon to come up with military options.

                                In Tuesday's State of the Union address, Mr. Obama said: "Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal." Iran denies it is trying to develop atomic weapons.

                                The U.S. has sought in recent weeks to tamp down tensions with Iran, but the Pentagon is at the same time pushing ahead with contingency planning.

                                "The development of this weapon is not intended to send a signal to any one particular country," Pentagon press secretary George Little said. "It's a capability we believe we need in our arsenal and will continue to invest in it."

                                Officials said the planned improvements to the MOP were meant to overcome shortcomings that emerged in initial testing. They said the new money was meant to ensure the weapon would be more effective against the deepest bunkers, including Iran's Fordow enrichment plant facility, which is buried in a mountain complex surrounded by antiaircraft batteries, making it a particularly difficult target even for the most powerful weapons available to the U.S.

                                Developing an effective bunker-buster is complicated in part because of the variables, experts say. Penetration varies depending on factors such as soil density and the types of stone and rock shielding the target.

                                Boeing received a contract in 2009 to fit the weapon on the U.S.'s B-2 Stealth Bomber. The Air Force began receiving the first of the bombs in September, a time of growing tensions with Iran. The Air Force has so far contracted to buy 20 of the bombs, and more deliveries are expected in 2013, after additional tests are made.

                                Should a decision be made to use the MOP as currently configured, it could cause "a lot of damage" to Iran's underground nuclear facilities but wouldn't necessarily destroy them outright, Mr. Panetta said.

                                "We're developing it. I think we're pretty close, let's put it that way. But we're still working at it because these things are not easy to be able to make sure that they will do what we want them to."

                                Mr. Panetta added: "But I'm confident, frankly, that we're going to have that capability and have it soon,"

                                The decision to ask now for more money to develop the weapon was directly related to efforts by the U.S. military's Central Command to prepare military options against Iran as quickly as possible, according to a person briefed on the request for additional funds.

                                A senior defense official said the U.S. had other options besides the MOP to set back Iran's nuclear program. "The Massive Ordnance Penetrators are by no means the only capability at our disposal to deal with potential nuclear threats in Iran," the official said.

                                Another senior U.S. official said the Pentagon could make up for the MOPs' shortcomings by dropping them along with other guided bombs on top of a bunker's entry and exit points—provided the intelligence is available about where they are all located.

                                Successful strikes on bunker entry and exit points could prevent an enemy from accessing such a site and could cause enough damage to stop or slow enrichment activity there.

                                "There is a virtue to deepness but you still need to get in and out," the senior U.S. official said.

                                The Pentagon was particularly concerned about its ability to destroy bunkers built under mountains, such as Iran's Fordow site near the Shiite Muslim holy city of Qom, according to a former senior U.S. official who is an expert on Iran.

                                The official said some Pentagon war planners believe conventional bombs won't be effective against Fordow and that a tactical nuclear weapon may be the only military option if the goal is to destroy the facility. "Once things go into the mountain, then really you have to have something that takes the mountain off," the official said.

                                The official said the MOP may be more effective against Iran's main enrichment plant at Natanz but added: "But even that is guesswork."

                                The Pentagon notified Congress in mid-January that it wants to divert around $82 million to refine the MOP, taking the money from other defense programs. The decision to sidestep the normal budget request process suggests the Pentagon deems the MOP upgrades to be a matter of some urgency.

                                Mr. Panetta said Iran wasn't the only potential target. "It's not just aimed at Iran. Frankly, it's aimed at any enemy that decides to locate in some kind of impenetrable location. The goal here is to be able to get at any enemy, anywhere," he said

                                Mr. Panetta and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates have argued that a military strike would at best delay Iran's nuclear development for a few years. Advocates of a strike say such a delay could be decisive by buying time for other efforts to thwart the program.

                                According to Air Force officials, the 20.5 foot-long MOP carries over 5,300 pounds of explosive material. It is designed to penetrate up to 200 feet underground before exploding. The mountain above the Iranian enrichment site at Fordow is estimated to be at least 200 feet tall.

                                Israel has large bunker-buster bombs but the U.S. hasn't provided the MOP to any other country.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X