Who Will Attack Iran and When?

paleocon · by **paleocon** on 06/27/08, 11:32 pm

There is growing speculation that both the USA and Israel are preparing to attack Iran's nuclear weapons capability.

Israel just mounted a huge air training exercise involving 100 F15 and F16 aircraft.  America has hundreds of aircraft already in theatre able and ready to launch a prolonged aerial assault.

Will either the USA or Israel actually carry out a strike?
Who will go first?
When will they do so?
What are the political and economic repercussions of conducting a strike?
What are the political and economic repercussions of NOT conducting a strike?
Will an aerial attack by either the USA or Israel lead Iran to invade Iraq?

I hate the idea of Iran gaining nuclear weapons.  But, I hate the idea of the USA doing something without considering all the consequences of action.  We were not prepared to govern Iraq after we conquered the nation.  We have to be ready to deal with the consequences of attacking Iran.

watcher · by **watcher** on 06/28/08, 12:52 am

Iran will attack Israeli out of paranoid delusions of President Tom
Israel will endure 'the one hit’.
The US will retaliate back with controlled strikes along side Israel.
Sometime late fall 2008.
The rest of the middle east; Kuwait, Iraq, Turkey, Jordan as well as Lebanon will breath a collective sigh of relief and stand behind Israel because “What ever did the Iranians think was going to happen. Of course they would be hit back. They certainly asked for it.”
The Saudi government will lead the call for all middle east to help the citizens of Iran rebuild with a peaceful government in place.
The price of oil will go down and trade will open with Iran.
Other conflicts in the regions will slow down because Iran will no longer be feeding the hatred and the weapons.
North Korea will wet their pants and finally shut up, at least for a while.

No facts, no inside info, just an educated guess based on what has been going on in the last 30 years.

If I’m wrong I won't have to worry about any long-term energy plans or CO2 emissions. Those of us that are left will be happy to still be making our own personal carbon foot-print.

Eyas · by **Eyas** on 06/28/08, 1:19 pm

paleocon wrote:Will either the USA or Israel actually carry out a strike?

Yes. If the intelligence shows that they've already developed or are within, say, a month of finishing development of functional nukes.

paleocon wrote:Who will go first?

Israel. Absolutely. Actually, I'd be surprised if we were involved at all. Israel is certainly capable of handling it by itself; and we're too confused and cowardly to actually do something this bold ..... this right.

paleocon wrote:When will they do so?

When intel shows they've got a nuke capable of hitting Israel, or are very very close to finishing one.

paleocon wrote:What are the political and economic repercussions of conducting a strike?

For the U.S.: Nothing worth worrying a Nation or a President with any guts or conviction.

For Israel: Nothing that would make them any more hated in the Middle-East, .... or World-wide for that matter.

paleocon wrote:What are the political and economic repercussions of NOT conducting a strike?

Horrible beyond imagining.

paleocon wrote:Will an aerial attack by either the USA or Israel lead Iran to invade Iraq?

Oh, dear God I hope so. I pray that Iran is dumb enough to invade Iraq while we're still there. It would save us from making a decision of whether or not to invade Iran.

paleocon wrote:We were not prepared to govern Iraq after we conquered the nation. We have to be ready to deal with the consequences of attacking Iran.

The only real consequences from Iraq have been within our borders .... politically and ideologically.  The same would go for Iran.

China won't get involved.
Russia (probably) won't get involved.  (But if I'm wrong about that, watch out!) Although the rhetoric may be heated.
Saudi Arabia (the government) probably won't do anything.  Some official condemnation, maybe; but they won't stop selling us oil.
Just about everybody else already hates us.

AND, the UN and the EU can suck my *(%&!

paleocon · by **paleocon** on 06/28/08, 3:01 pm

Eyas wrote:
paleocon wrote:
Will either the USA or Israel actually carry out a strike?

Eyas wrote:Yes.  If the intelligence shows that they've already developed or are within, say, a month of finishing development of functional nukes.

I don’t have any trouble with this other than the fact that we don’t know what actionable intelligence the US or Israel actually has.  Our CIA and State Department seem to be more interested in understating any actual threat.  And the Mossad don’t go around advertising what they know.

paleocon wrote:
Who will go first?

Eyas wrote:Israel.  Absolutely.  Actually, I'd be surprised if we were involved at all.  Israel is certainly capable of handling it by itself; and we're too confused and cowardly to actually do something this bold ..... this right.

Bolton seems to think Bush may order a strike after the election if Obama wins.  I read another pundit that things Israel may also launch a strike after the election if Obama wins.  Of course, I can’t make any informed prediction.  But, I don’t see Bush making that choice.  At that point the Bush administration will be in full-blown “legacy mode” and I can’t believe he will be willing to endure the “perceived” hit to his legacy for “widening the war.”  Of course, the war is already “widened” to include Iran.  It is just that we still pretend they are not at war with us.

The only military issue is the ability to wage a “sustained” air war over Iran.  Israel can make a devastating first strike but I don’t believe they can knock out everything in one strike.  They lack the smart weapons we have.  And they lack the stealth technology to penetrate Iranian airspace as effectively as we can.  Therefore, they won’t do as much damage per strike and they will have to use more assets in air defense suppression on each strike.  Failure to suppress air defenses this will lead to more losses which lessens combat effectiveness on subsequent strikes.

paleocon wrote:
When will they do so?

Eyas wrote:When intel shows they've got a nuke capable of hitting Israel, or are very very close to finishing one.

This is a probably a difficult question to predict in a meaningful way.  But, do you see a strike before the election?  Suppose Iran announces or demonstrates a weapon in October?  Does Israel strike immediately or wait for our election?

Remember, detonating a nuke is not the same as being able to deliver a nuke.  There is that window to address as well.  Usually, a first nuke is a relatively HUGE device that won’t fit on a delivery platform.  Miniaturization requires a lot of additional effort.  Getting a nuke on a missile is a big task.

paleocon wrote:
What are the political and economic repercussions of conducting a strike?

Eyas wrote:For the U.S.: Nothing worth worrying a Nation or a President with any guts or conviction.

For Israel: Nothing that would make them any more hated in the Middle-East, .... or World-wide for that matter.

Well, I am not sure there are no economic repercussions.  What if Iran goes on a full scale insurgent attack on middle eastern oil production and distribution assets?  If they manage to reduce the supply of oil to world markets by 5% to 50% there would certainly be economic repercussions.

What if Russia or China do take actions?  What actions might they take?  There are lots of things they can do to make life interesting short of shooting back at us.  China could start dumping T Bills, or stop buying them.  This could drive the dollar down even more.  China could shoot off missiles at Taiwan.  This would divert American military assets from the Middle East even if we don’t get caught up in the shooting near Taiwan.

I mean there are a lot of things to consider.

paleocon wrote:
What are the political and economic repercussions of NOT conducting a strike?

Eyas wrote:Horrible beyond imagining.

Agreed.  But how?  Specifically?  What are the earlier threats?  What are the long term threats?

paleocon wrote:
Will an aerial attack by either the USA or Israel lead Iran to invade Iraq?

Eyas wrote:Oh, dear God I hope so.  I pray that Iran is dumb enough to invade Iraq while we're still there.  It would save us from making a decision of whether or not to invade Iran.

A direct military incursion into Iraq is something I wonder about.  Remember, there are lots of them to stream across the border.  We got our heads handed to us in November 1950 when a million Chinese caught our forces unexpectedly.  How would the US respond to such a military situation?  Our forces in Iraq are now largely light infantry equipped to wage counter insurgency operations.  Are they prepared to fight a heavier, conventional opponent?

paleocon wrote:We were not prepared to govern Iraq after we conquered the nation.  We have to be ready to deal with the consequences of attacking Iran.

Eyas wrote:The only real consequences from Iraq have been within our borders .... politically and ideologically.  The same would go for Iran.

China won't get involved.
Russia (probably) won't get involved.  (But if I'm wrong about that, watch out!) Although the rhetoric may be heated.
Saudi Arabia (the government) probably won't do anything.  Some official condemnation, maybe; but they won't stop selling us oil.
Just about everybody else already hates us.

AND, the UN and the EU can suck my *(%&!

Russia and China may not become involved militarily in Iran or Iraq.  But there are other types of pressure they can bring to bear.  What if Russia threatens to turn off the natural gas supplies to Europe?  What if they stop pumping as much oil?  That could cripple our friends in Europe.

What if China started to dump dollar investments?  What if they started buying more oil just to drive up the price on the world market?  What if they ceased efforts to restrain North Korea?  What if they shut down the Panama Canal?  Or encouraged Hugo Chavez to increase pressure on Columbia or make other mischief in South America?

Privately, the Arab states in the Middle East will be relieved if we do something.  I am not worried about them.  But, if Israel does something, will they react differently?  Their hatred for Israel is irrational and defining for most of these nations.

Eyas · by **Eyas** on 06/29/08, 3:42 pm

Well, the threat is directly to Israel.  Iran doesn't have ICBMs (that I know of) but they do have missiles that can reach Israel.  It may be difficult to mount a nuke on a missile, but I have no doubt that Iran has been working on that problem for just as long as they've had nuclear ambitions.  Besides, there are individuals in several other countries (including Russia) who would be more than happy to help Achmedinejad figure ouit this pesky problem.

It's true that China could do us a lot of economic harm -- some days it seems like our entire economy continues to operate only via the good will of China.  For some reason, I just don't see them getting involved over this.  I'm not sure it would be in their interests (whatever inscrutable interests those may be).  I could easily be wrong, but I'd be more worried about reaction from Russia than China.

Russia can't really hurt us directly.  The EU is likely to condemn any action by Israel or by the U.S. anyway, so I just don't care if the EU is harmed.  Besides, harming the EU wouldn't make much sense if it is only the U.S. and Israel that Russia wants to harm.

I don't think Ahmedinejad would wait ONE DAY after he has the ability to strike Israel with a nuke before he actually does it.

I would think that an Israeli airstrike before our election is likely.  Israel is not in the habit of asking U.S. permission before defending themselves -- no matter who our president might be.

I agree that it's not likely that Pres. Bush will order any strike in his last 6 months of office.  But, then again, I obviously don't understand the way the man thinks (a la Globalization and our Southern Border).

Israel may not be able to sustain their attacks the way that we could.  And, our current forces in Iraq would be ill-equipped to handle an invasion by Iran.  The real question is, what will our next President's policy be towards aiding Israel?  Obama is an out-and-out anti-semite, and I don't trust McCain as far as I can throw him.  For either President, it would be hard to go against the inevitable tide of anti-war, and anti-Israel, activism and coverage by the MSM.  I suspect that if Obama wins, Israel will be totally on its own.  And, if McCain wins, Israel might get our support only if Iran invades Iraq.

If Iran invaded Iraq with Obama as Pres, all of our troops would be out of there lickety-split -- regardless of our obligations, and regardless of the repercussions of our withdrawal.

Of course, I'm probably wrong.  I'm not the best at figuring out international relations and politics.  My brain just doesn't work that way.  My first thoughts are always about the U.S. and what we ought to do - not necessarily what we're likely to do.

bedbug · by **bedbug** on 07/02/08, 10:35 pm

I'll add the historical perspective to the discussion. Israel has, twice, attacked neighboring nuclear facilities, Iraq and Syria. Beyond the expected grumbling, the response from Arab Street in both cases was minimal. The Arab leaders know that Israelis will literally fight to the last man, woman and child rather than meekly submit to another Holocaust. And, they know Israel has nukes.

Israel WILL launch an offensive strike against Iran. The Israelis wield sabers, they do not rattle them.

So, with this in mind, the question becomes, what will Iran do in response to an Israeli strike? My opinion, Ahmadinejad will order a naval and aerial blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. This will immediately send the price of oil soaring to the moon. A brief, violent battle will follow. The greatest threat will be from Iran's diesel/electric submarines. After Iranian aircraft are swept from the sky, subs and gunboats sunk and coastal bases reduced to smoking ruin, oil prices will remain extremely high for months. Eventually, the UN will adopt a resolution restricting Iranian overflight of the Strait and Gulf. China and Russia will resist, but they have to buy oil too. Price will force blustery acquiescence.

China, as always, will do what is in China's best interest. The PRC does billions of dollars of business with the US. China will not take any direct action. China has leverage against us, but if American companies unilaterally pull up stakes and leave China, the unemployment wave would be crippling. It is the 21st century version of mutually assured destruction.

We, most likely, will allow Israel to do the deed, without lending assistance. The world, anti-Semitic as it is, will forgive Israeli action due to lingering Holocaust guilt. They will shake fists and demand apologies, but, in the end, will do nothing of substance. The western Europeans, beyond the UK, haven't done anything of substance since WW II. They are content to leave the defense of freedom to us. And, in this case, Israel.

In the end, we will face economic pain and the usual political bickering. But, the cost of inaction will be far worse.

paleocon · by **paleocon** on 07/18/08, 9:10 am

The latest in Mullah military prowess. We need to draft the Road Runner or Bugs Bunny!

Igmond50 · by **Igmond50** on 07/18/08, 10:23 am

The bloodlust from people on this thread is astounding.

paleocon · by **paleocon** on 07/18/08, 10:45 am

Igmond50 wrote:The bloodlust from people on this thread is astounding.

There is no "bloodlust" on this thread.  This is a discussion of the possible military responses to the Iranian nuclear weapons program and consequences of those military responses.  No one on this post is hoping for or advocating war.  But, we recognize that Iran is already in a de facto, if not de jure, state of war with Israel and the US.  They have been since 1979.

In fact the underlying point of the original post was that if our government was considering military action against targets in Iran that I hoped they fully understood the ramifications and consequences of any decision to act or not act militarily.  And that they had thought through the entire scenario and not just the first strike.

The initial military campaign into Iraq was brilliant.  But once we "won" we clearly had no idea what to do next.  The last thing I want is for our government to act without thinking through the whole range of possibilities that such a decision might bring.  To take military action against Iran only to find ourselves wondering what to do after the first strike would be a disaster of unimaginable proportions.

SoldiersMum · by **SoldiersMum** on 07/18/08, 12:34 pm

I'm really not so sure Israel will do anything prior to their taking an Iranian nuke.  The left has infiltrated them over the past years and they are not the Israel of yesteryear.  Just look at their recent trade of 5 terrorist prisoners for the two dead soldiers.  It should have been two for two with bullets in the heads of the prisoners.  (Yes, I'm that bloodthirsty, hatemongering conservative.)  Benjamin Netenyahu made a tour through the U.S. trying to rally U.S. support for Israel.  If he were to get back into power, then perhaps they would do a first strike.

Should Iran nuke Israel, when you consider they are a very tiny nation, how much of Israel would be left?  Would they have their Government remain and their nuclear capability still available to return fire?

You gotta think that an immediate precursor to any bombing Iran does will be the barracade of the Strait of Hormuz to get ready for the US to reciprocate.  This is another reason we should be drilling our own product.

If Bush were still President if this occurred, I believe we would strike Iran.  If Obama were President, he would ask Gyorgy Soros what he should do and Gyorgy would say make a statement of condemnation of Iran and let it go.  There's no way Obama would do anything other than "words, just words, just speeches."

In reality, what needs to be done is for a hit squad to covertly go into Iran and take out sweet Mahmoud and his mullahs.  Overall, the people of Iran are not in support of his end of the world and would probably welcome his demise no matter who did it.

Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Re: Who Will Attack Iran and When?

Conservative Videos

Rush Limbaugh Graphics

Right Resources

Sites We Like