Attack on Iran: Two Strategic Strikes One Waiting in the Wings

[kotzabasis]

In my opinion, if Iran is going to be attacked either by the US or Israel or both the strategic planning of the attack would be made up with two strikes. The first one would be to attack Iran with a devastating “rain” of conventional weapons that would target not only its nuclear plants but also its civilian, military, and religious leadership with the aim of decimating them. If however, its triangular leadership miraculously escapes its destruction and retaliates either against the naval and land forces of the US or Israel or any of the other Gulf States, then such retaliatory action by Iran would call a second strike executed either by Israel or the US with nuclear weapons. And it’s in this dual strike, if it becomes evident to the Iranian leadership of American or Israeli determination and resolve to use their powerful armaments against Iran, that a real possibility exists of a palace revolt among its leadership that would oust the radicals and replace them with moderates who would be prone to accept the international community’s demand that Iran ceases the enrichment of uranium.

http://kotzabasis11.wordpress.com

[The Reaper]

No way any nation is going to pop a nuke against Iran except POSSIBLY in retaliation.

I also believe that when targeting, we should avoid civilian casualties and go for their critical nuclear infrastructure, Air Defense, and C2 nodes.

Just my .02.

TR

[Richard]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

No way any nation is going to pop a nuke against Iran except POSSIBLY in retaliation.

I also believe that when targeting, we should avoid civilian casualties and go for their critical nuclear infrastructure, Air Defense, and C2 nodes.

Just my .02.

TR

Concur. Iran certainly does not rate such an option. And with the quality/variety of our conventional munitions inventory today and unparallelled ability to deliver them, it would be a difficult 'sell' to anyone to use a nuclear weapon - unless, as our national policy has stated for decades - it is in direct response to a nuclear attack.

One has to remember - in the world of nuclear gamesmanship, the key elements are (1) possession, (2) delivery capability, and (3) national will to use them...and in the relatively brief history of nuclear armaments - only America has actually demonstrated to the world that it does possess all three of those elements. The world knows this.

A piece of fiction - but Clancey's Sum of All Fears does give an interesting scenario which thoughtfully covers some of the complexities such a decision might entail in that particular part of the planet. A word of advice - read the book - the movie's a POS.

Richard's $.02

[afchic]

IMHO we are not going to get involved in this, tactically. Isreal will take care of whatever it sees as a threat against it. I think it is quickly coming to the point, that even if we don't agree with Israel and their plans, they are going to go ahead and do it anyway.

I honestly don't think there will be the "Muslim Outrage" many foresee, as far as governements are concerned. I believe there are many Middle Eastern nations that would be more than happy to see the Iranian nuclear program destroyed (don't see that happening) or at least delayed by a few years.

[Defender968]

Originally Posted by Richard

Concur. Iran certainly does not rate such an option. And with the quality/variety of our conventional munitions inventory today and unparallelled ability to deliver them, it would be a difficult 'sell' to anyone to use a nuclear weapon - unless, as our national policy has stated for decades - it is in direct response to a nuclear attack.

One has to remember - in the world of nuclear gamesmanship, the key elements are (1) possession, (2) delivery capability, and (3) national will to use them...and in the relatively brief history of nuclear armaments - only America has actually demonstrated to the world that it does possess all three of those elements. The world knows this.

A piece of fiction - but Clancey's Sum of All Fears does give an interesting scenario which thoughtfully covers some of the complexities such a decision might entail in that particular part of the planet. A word of advice - read the book - the movie's a POS.

Richard's $.02

I concur with you that we as a country DID have and display all the elements you described, but I'm not sure we still do, specifically the national will.

I would also argue that Iran will not play the same type of gamesmanship that you described above, mutually assured destruction will work on a Soviet Union, China, or even N. Korea but I don't think it will on Iran. I think it was from the movie the Peacemaker, but the theory is sound IMO, specifically of not fearing the nation with 100 Nukes, but rather the nation with only 1.

Personally I don't think we will go nuclear unless the weapon that strikes the US is on a missile that was tracked from a country and even then I'm not sure our leaders will have the stones, not to mention I doubt that will be the way we will get hit, if and when it happens. My personal feeling is that Iran will move to use their weapon shortly after it is operational, but not on top of a missile, that would take too much time as they would not only have to develop the weapon but also the delivery system. I think it's much more likely they will ship it to us one way or another through our very porous border or just use it on Israel, I think they'll hand it off to a quote on quote third party and it'll get popped, then they'll fabricate a story about it being stolen and our leaders will scold them and shake fingers and go to the UN for sanctions, but under those conditions I personally don't see us retaliating in kind at all.

I truly hope I'm wrong, but given the events of the last week and more importantly our leader’s reactions to those events I think it's just a matter of time.

Just my .02

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Defender968

I concur with you that we as a country DID have and display all the elements you described, but I'm not sure we still do, specifically the national will.

I would also argue that Iran will not play the same type of gamesmanship that you described above, mutually assured destruction will work on a Soviet Union, China, or even N. Korea but I don't think it will on Iran. I think it was from the movie the Peacemaker, but the theory is sound IMO, specifically of not fearing the nation with 100 Nukes, but rather the nation with only 1.

Personally I don't think we will go nuclear unless the weapon that strikes the US is on a missile that was tracked from a country and even then I'm not sure our leaders will have the stones, not to mention I doubt that will be the way we will get hit, if and when it happens. My personal feeling is that Iran will move to use their weapon shortly after it is operational, but not on top of a missile, that would take too much time as they would not only have to develop the weapon but also the delivery system. I think it's much more likely they will ship it to us one way or another through our very porous border or just use it on Israel, I think they'll hand it off to a quote on quote third party and it'll get popped, then they'll fabricate a story about it being stolen and our leaders will scold them and shake fingers and go to the UN for sanctions, but under those conditions I personally don't see us retaliating in kind at all.

I truly hope I'm wrong, but given the events of the last week and more importantly our leader’s reactions to those events I think it's just a matter of time.

Just my .02

I agree.

The only reason to launch a single weapon against the U.S. on a ballistic missile is to gain the altitude needed for an EMP burst, with which one could take out half the electric grid of the US for years.

Any ground use will almost certainly be smuggled into the U.S. via any one of a number of means (ala Tom Clancy's novel), and will be anonymous to avoid the retribution of the ever shrinking U.S. nuclear arsenal.

It would be relatively easy to shut down commerce and panic the populace of this country with a determined team of a dozen or so individuals and a small amount of financing. No, we are not going to discuss the details here.

I hope that when it happens (and I think it will in the not too distant future as we dismantle our GWOT capabilities), the American people remember it longer than they appear to have remembered 9/11, and we regain the resolve necessary to bring Hell to our enemies who wish to destroy us.

My .02 as well.

TR

[Richard]

I truly hope I'm wrong, but given the events of the last week and more importantly our leader’s reactions to those events I think it's just a matter of time.

Ever seen a weasel when it gets backed into a corner?

Richard's $.02

[zauber1]

Israel stands ready to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6115903.ece
Israel stands ready to bomb Iran's nuclear sites
Sheera Frenkel in Jerusalem
The Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government.
--- snipped for brevity ---
He added that it was unlikely that Israel would carry out the attack without receiving at least tacit approval from America, which has struck a more reconciliatory tone in dealing with Iran under its new administration.
An Israeli attack on Iran would entail flying over Jordanian and Iraqi airspace, where US forces have a strong presence.
Ephraim Kam, the deputy director of the Institute for National Security Studies, said it was unlikely that the Americans would approve an attack.
“The American defence establishment is unsure that the operation will be successful. And the results of the operation would only delay Iran's programme by two to four years,” he said.
A visit by President Obama to Israel in June is expected to coincide with the national elections in Iran — timing that would allow the US Administration to re-evaluate diplomatic resolutions with Iran before hearing the Israeli position.
---- snip -----
Among recent preparations by the airforce was the Israeli attack of a weapons convoy in Sudan bound for militants in the Gaza Strip.
“Sudan was practice for the Israeli forces on a long-range attack,” Ronen Bergman, the author of The Secret War with Iran, said. “They wanted to see how they handled the transfer of information, hitting a moving target ... In that sense it was a rehearsal.”
Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.
Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would “train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning ... We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning”.

My .02...After the presidential visit, after the civil defense drill...then calculate the next new moon. Coordinated airstrike from Isreali Air Forces

[incarcerated]

For those with deeper interest in this subject (and a good deal of reading time):
http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/...strikeiran.pdf

[redleg99]

For those with deeper interest in this subject (and a good deal of reading time):

That report is very good – thanks for posting it.

One interesting quote from page 90:

• Attacking the Bushehr Nuclear Reactor would release contamination in the form of radionuclides into the air.
• Most definitely Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE will be heavily affected by the radionuclides.
• Any strike on the Bushehr Nuclear Reactor will cause the immediate death of thousands of people living in or adjacent to the site, and thousands of subsequent cancer deaths or even up to hundreds of thousands depending on the population density along the contamination plume.

I’m thinking that significantly raises the stakes.

[The Reaper]

All the more reason to make it look like an accident.

TR

[Red Flag 1]

Originally Posted by afchic

IMHO we are not going to get involved in this, tactically. Isreal will take care of whatever it sees as a threat against it. I think it is quickly coming to the point, that even if we don't agree with Israel and their plans, they are going to go ahead and do it anyway.

I honestly don't think there will be the "Muslim Outrage" many foresee, as far as governements are concerned. I believe there are many Middle Eastern nations that would be more than happy to see the Iranian nuclear program destroyed (don't see that happening) or at least delayed by a few years.

Concur. The question will be how much US support will Isreal see?. The second question is what role will Putin play in this?



RF 1

[Blitzzz (RIP)]

I've been watching the Israeli nation being under continual missile attacks. I was wondering what thoughts were out there on Israel defending small border towns with "Phalanx" or "GoalKeeper" anti missile systems.
Seems cheeper than missile batteries and each town could be defended with one or two of these mounted on platforms. Goal keeper is 30mm. Don't know the effective ranges.
Dave

[Dusty]

To Israel, "red line" means something.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-al...e-expert-says/

Iran has essentially crossed the “red line” set by Israel for its nuclear activity, and the coming few months will be a crucial period, Maj. Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin, a former head of IDF Military Intelligence, said on Tuesday.

Speaking at a security conference in Tel Aviv, Yadlin said that “for all intents and purposes, Iran has crossed Israel’s red line… in the summer, Iran will be a month or two away from deciding about a bomb.”

Unless there is a drastic increase in international pressure on the Islamic Republic, Yadlin said, Iran will continue to expand its nuclear program.

“There won’t be an agreement if there isn’t a price for [not] reaching one,” he added.

In a speech before the UN last September, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid out a “red line” for Iran, and in later interviews he clarified that Iran’s enrichment activities must stop before they produce enough 20%-enriched uranium for a single bomb, some 240 kg. (529 lbs).

Yadlin said that because of the June Iranian elections, Israel and the West had until then to decide on a military option to destroy or curtail Iran’s nuclear operation, and expressed assurance that Israel was up to the task with or without direct help from the US.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sets out his ‘red line’ for Iran on a cartoon bomb drawing during a September 27 speech to the General Assembly (photo credit: Avi Ohayun, GPO)

Also speaking at the Tel Aviv conference, former intelligence and justice minister MK Tzachi Hanegbi said time was running out.

“it’s now or never,” said Hanegbi, but “the option of never does not exist.”

Hanegbi addressed his comments to US President Barack Obama and said, “You cannot subject your considerations to our needs,” meaning that the US has many other considerations and Israel has to act according to its own imperatives.

The possibility of an Israeli strike on Iran gained additional traction on Monday, when US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon announced in Tel Aviv an unprecedented US sale of advanced military equipment to Israel, including radar systems, missiles, refueling planes and V-22 planes, which would greatly increase the IAF’s capacity to carry out a long-range attack.

Snip

[MR2]

I've been taking a closer look at the following magazines: The Economist, Aviation Week & Space Technology, Air Forces, and Jane's Defence Weekly in order to gain some insight as to "when".

They sure have been stocking up on supplies and spare parts. Drills are no more frequent, but seem more intense.