Israel - Iran Scenario (Israeli Attack on Iranian Nuke Assets) Discussion

**phrozenflame** · 22nd December 2003, 08:21

Thought time for some interesting stuff..listen no flames..its not against iran or israel..just purely for millitary purpose..israel iisnt gonna send merkavas, so airforce obviously thats why its right place for discussion..any thoughts??

Iranian defence?
Possible assets israel will use?
How can iran counter them etc..

Scenario without a storyline is no fun...so here it is:

AL QUDS, Dec 21: Israel is considering an operation to destroy the nuclear capabilities of Iran, now regarded as the Jewish state's number one enemy, Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz was quoted as saying on Sunday.

If a decision is made to destroy Iran's nuclear capability, "the necessary steps will be taken so that Iranian citizens will not be harmed," the Haaretz daily cited Mofaz as telling Israel radio's Persian service last week.

Since the collapse of Saddam Hussein's rule in Iraq, Israel has come to regard the Islamic regime in Tehran as its number one enemy, despite Iran's acceptance of a tough new international inspections regime for its nuclear facilities last week.

Meir Dagan, head of Israel's Mossad overseas intelligence service, told MPs last month that Iran's nuclear programme posed the biggest threat to the existence of the Jewish state since its creation in 1948.

Dagan said Israel had discovered in recent months that Iran was close to finishing construction of a uranium enrichment plant in the central Kashan area which could eventually give it the capacity to build around a dozen nuclear bombs.

The Iranian-born Mofaz said in a speech at a security conference near Tel Aviv that Iran was "a terror-supporting country". Avi Dichter, the head of the Shin Beth domestic security service, told delegates that Iran was "trying to exert its influence" over Palestinian militant groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Iran won plaudits from the international community by signing Thursday the additional protocol of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which opens the way for snap UN inspections of suspect sites.

Its signature of the protocol was part of a deal brokered by Britain, France and Germany in October to address US-led concerns about its nuclear programme. Iran says Israel should now follow its lead and bring its own nuclear facilities under international oversight. -AFP

**m.ileduets** · 22nd December 2003, 09:06

Well, looking at it from a political perspective I can't see how Israel could launch an attack now given the recent Iran signature under the nuclear non proliferation treaty.
It is Israel is in the defensive now. It has to justify it's own non- signing. If UN- inspectors should be allowed into Israel after all, I'm sure they would find more interesting objects in Israel than in Iran...
With the Palestine issue still unresolved, Israel is too much occupied with more pressing issues than Iran anyway.

If Iran should be made a target in the near future, the more likely agressor seems to be the US of A, since Bush jr. might be in need of an other boost of popularity during his second presidency period, but only if Iran should be stupid enough to oppose inspections again.

**Erez** · 22nd December 2003, 09:07

What's the point of this thread?
Israel will have to destroy these facilities. We are talking about life and death here.
It's only a question of time until we'll see videos of F-15Is over Tehran. We may suffer some losses. The Iranian Air Force has F-14s for example, and some MiG-29s. It will be different from the 1981 attack on Iraq. They're Air Force started shooting only after our airplanes finished the job. I trust it won't be the same this time. Iran is far more clever than that.
Too bad we came to this situation. We could have been best friends

**Erez** · 22nd December 2003, 09:13

Well, looking at it from a political perspective I can't see how Israel could launch an attack now given the recent Iran signature under the nuclear non proliferation treaty.

Right...
You know what?
I don't eat this $hit.

Really, If they will stop what they are doing now so yes, we will be happy and won't attack. But given the fact that the work on these facilities continues, I just don't trust them... what can I do...

**matt** · 22nd December 2003, 09:14

NPT has no reall meaning..

Its used as a control to allow countries to control arms transfer to their prospective fo's its more of a valve.

**phrozenflame** · 22nd December 2003, 09:15

Originally posted by Erez
What's the point of this thread?
Israel will have to destroy these facilities. We are talking about life and death here.
It's only a question of time until we'll see videos of F-15Is over Tehran. We may suffer some losses. The Iranian Air Force has F-14s for example, and some MiG-29s. It will be different from the 1981 attack on Iraq. They're Air Force started shooting only after our airplanes finished the job. I trust it won't be the same this time. Iran is far more clever than that.
Too bad we came to this situation. We could have been best friends

The point of this thread is technical stuff discussed, Sams etc.

and can we keep it non-political? I dont care what Israelis or palestinians or iranians think of each other..r... why start the most controversial political discussion??? keep it millitary ok..thanks

**seahawk** · 22nd December 2003, 09:20

Honestly such strike is impossible. The Iranian programm is much too well hidden and there are too many installations around the whole country. Nearly all installations are redundant or deep within Iran.

The IDF/AF lacks the range to attacks those facilities. And hitting a running nuclear facility could lead to a major pollution accident for which Israel would be responsible.

It would also be an act of war, which should see Iranian attacks on Israel. (read ballisitc missile attacks perhaps with WMDs)

**Erez** · 22nd December 2003, 09:35

The point of this thread is technical stuff discussed, Sams etc.

and can we keep it non-political? I dont care what Israelis or palestinians or iranians think of each other..r... why start the most controversial political discussion??? keep it millitary ok..thanks

I understand, and I was talking about some technical details.
BTW, I think the Iranians are good people. I just "dislike" the regime. I'm sure you all know how good allies we were in the past.
BTW#2, Did you know we even offered them to develope the Arye with us?
And look what's happening now. It's truly sad.

**PAF Fan** · 22nd December 2003, 09:42

IDF F-16Is and F-15I can be refuled mid air over Turkey and fly over Iraq ( a request the US would not deny them methinks) and strike at Iranian targets anyhwhere, they can then head back over Iraq and refuel again...........

Everyone knows what wepons and planes the IDF have and I am sure there pilots would be up to the task....

**m.ileduets** · 22nd December 2003, 10:00

Originally posted by PAF Fan
IDF F-16Is and F-15I can be refuled mid air over Turkey and fly over Iraq ( a request the US would not deny them methinks) and strike at Iranian targets anyhwhere, they can then head back over Iraq and refuel again...........

Well, even though Iraq and Turkey are not really Iran- friendly, I doubt they would appreciate this strategy. It could rise some minor unrest in their countries.
If they want to opt for this strategy, they better do it over Iraq and fast, as long as the US still has a firm grip on it.

**Arthur** · 22nd December 2003, 10:00

Hey, Israel even supplied the Ayatollah's with Phantom spares. Can't say Israel hasn't tried to befriend the Islamic Republic of Iran...

However, i just can't see how Israel could pull that one off. The routes to the targets are firstly very long (as Seahawk stated, the Iranian nuclear facilities aren't exactly conveniently located for an attack. Also, it isn't like the countries in between are really eager to allow F-15I's to overfly their territory to and from the targets in Iran. No matter how much most Arab states dislike the Persians, Israel is outhated by far.

Let's just look at the potential ingress/egress routes, not even thinking yet about Iran's own defences:
- over Saudi Arabia, Persian Gulf:
They did this with the Osirak strike, but the RSAF didn't have any AWACS back then. Since flying over SA would take quite some time, i doubt this would be a good idea. Even a poorly organised airforce as the RSAF is often stated to be will be able to scramble an interception party for a bunch of intruders still some 600kms out.

- Jordan, Iraq
Militarily less of a problem, but from a political point of view too stupid even for Sharon. Flying over Jordan would enrage one of the few Arab countries which has agreed to a peaceful coexistance with Israel. Flying over Iraq would be even stupider: while the IqAF obviously is no threat anymore, i don't think the Iraqi population would be happy - and (quite rightfully) blame the US as well as the Israelis. I don't think this is exactly helpful in bringing peace to Iraq. It would be an interesting scenario though: i would love to see an Israeli aircraft strike being engaged by the US, although i'm not sure the latter won't have the guts for that. I do think this is the kind of political brinkmanship Sharon is keen on.

- Syria, Iraq
Same problem as above, but in this scenario the IDF/AF would need a whole bunch of SEAD aircraft to get through Syria. Politically, i don't think the Syrian-influenced terrorist groups would leave such an action unanswered either.

- Med, Turkey
Again, this is AWACS-controlled territory. I don't think it's politically possible: the Turks would not allow it, and doing it secretly is impossible.

Erez wrote

Israel will have to destroy these facilities. We are talking about life and death here.

By that logic, Dimona should be destroyed as well.

**phrozenflame** · 22nd December 2003, 10:02

Originally posted by Erez
I understand, and I was talking about some technical details.
BTW, I think the Iranians are good people. I just "dislike" the regime. I'm sure you all know how good allies we were in the past.
BTW#2, Did you know we even offered them to develope the Arye with us?
And look what's happening now. It's truly sad.

To tell you a thing, ppl everywhere are good but these politicians really mess up things, i have a personal view that every political leader is corrupt to some extent. you know i have many indian freinds, one of them is among my best freind, i know him for 11 years..we never had a fight, you may think i'm like very anti-india here etc, personally i'm not, its just when someone make comments you get mad and i beleive its like that for many other ppl here...anyway back to the topic...

@PAF fan..why need to refuel over turkey?? it'll make the route even longer, they can jus refuel over iraq, given current situation its unlikely becuase iran has done what USA asked for, it has no excuse to take hostile action against iran, maybe Israeli subs can do someting? they'll have sea-to-land missiles? if they do its the safest bet for israelis, Iran cant do anything about that, israel may not carry out air strikes becuase iran will be expecting it, and it only needs a beep on the radar before it throws everything at israel planes..so the safest way for israel will be sea-to-surface missiles..now i dont know if Israel has any or its subs are capable of launching ballistic missiles from subs..someone can enlighten me up..

**GarryB** · 22nd December 2003, 10:07

"IDF F-16Is and F-15I can be refuled mid air over Turkey and fly over Iraq ( a request the US would not deny them methinks)"

Do you think that both Turkey and the US would assist such an attack? Turkey didn't even allow US basing for attacks on Iraq (because they knew the removal of Saddam would pave the way eventually for the kurds to get their own state in Northern Iraq presumably.) What makes you think they will assist Israel in Bombing Iran? Iran can certainly make things hard for the US as well, by promoting unrest in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is quite amusing that it is OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons and Iran is not. Previous military action in the area seems to suggest the arabs have more to fear from the jews than the jews have from the arabs.

They would certainly need very accurate intell and the main result of the previous raid on the Iraqi facility was to accelerate and decentralise most of the WMD development activity in the Arab world. Now you won't have an easy target. A breeder reactor could be the size of a basketball court and hidden almost anywhere... and there are likely to be several operating at once to create the necessary material quickly... did you get all of them?

**Distiller** · 22nd December 2003, 10:53

Scenario:
Isreal transfers a strike package of unmarked F-16s and F-15s all the way through the Med, down the Atlantic, round Africa, up the Indian Ocean (all with USAF air-to-air refuelling), heading for Diego Garcia about three days before the strike. From there it will strike Iran, again with air-to-air refuelling from USAF. Some minutes before the IAF airstrike hits the Natanz, Arak and Bushir facilities, SLCM from subs will be launched against the Iranian C3 infrastructure. At the same time CNN will air a press conference with Sharon tellinbg about self-defense and declaring the state of national emergency and general mobilisation to defend against possible counter-attacks. Maybe when the first attack wasn't sufficient, IAF will attack directly through Jordan and Saudi-Arabia.

Problem I see is, nobody can be sure that Natanz, Arak and Bushir are the only facilities, perhaps there is some hollow mountain somewhere, where the real stuff goes on.

See http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/wo...n/facility.htm

**Vaiar** · 22nd December 2003, 11:40

Militarily less of a problem, but from a political point of view too stupid even for Sharon. Flying over Jordan would enrage one of the few Arab countries which has agreed to a peaceful coexistance with Israel.

I read somewhere that Israeli aircraft make small intrusions in Jordan airspace regularly. Didn't the F-16s which scared Syria recently come from Jordanian airspace?

Israel has also an ally in the region which could be useful fro such a strike: Eritrea. Israel has a submarine base in that country and could perhaps use airfields there if needed.

**m.ileduets** · 22nd December 2003, 11:42

Isreal transfers a strike package of unmarked F-16s and F-15s all the way through the Med, down the Atlantic, round Africa, up the Indian Ocean (all with USAF air-to-air refuelling), heading for Diego Garcia about three days before the strike. From there it will strike Iran, again with air-to-air refuelling from USAF. Some minutes before the IAF airstrike hits the Natanz, Arak and Bushir facilities, SLCM from subs will be launched against the Iranian C3 infrastructure. At the same time CNN will air a press conference with Sharon tellinbg about self-defense and declaring the state of national emergency and general mobilisation to defend against possible counter-attacks. Maybe when the first attack wasn't sufficient, IAF will attack directly through Jordan and Saudi-Arabia.

Well, it would seem a whole lot easier for the US to strike themselves, with their carrier wings and all, instead of being Israel's "assistant" in a shaky gamble. If the gamble went the wrong way, they would be blamed for failure, if it went the right way, they would have to endure the fury of Islamic extremists just as much.
But first of all an again after Iraq it seems to me that the cheapest and most effective mean to rid the Middle East of WMDs would be to let the UN- inspectors do their job in Iran and then let them proceed to Israel.

**Erez** · 22nd December 2003, 11:43

By that logic, Dimona should be destroyed as well.

I wish.
Funny that some people in the world are thinking that we are such an aggresive nation. We have the right to have nuclear weapons, as a last option, or at least for scaring off enemy nations. While we aren't planning to use it, Iran does.
Technically, can they actually destroy Israel without damaging or destroying Al-Aqtza, Al-quds, the entire Arab population in Israel and the Palestinian authority, as well as parts of the other countries around us?
Not really.

**matt** · 22nd December 2003, 11:44

I dont think the nuke facilities should be attacked (too much to risk and cant garantee that civilians will not be effected)

but if it did have to happen then the Israeli subs with cruise missiles would be the most obvious choice.

**thekyle** · 22nd December 2003, 13:52

Unfortunately, Israel doesn't have stealth aircrafts, which could make it much easier, or even possible.
I believe that with enough effort, intensive intelligence collecting, and a lot of money (which, btw, we don't have), IDF/AF can do it (not sure if it's needed).
____________________________

And now for the political part:
Iran is not a democracy, meaning - The leader can decide he wants to bomb the whole world and no one in his country will stop him.
Israel is a democracy, meaning - If, I say again, IF, Sharon decides to bomb the whole world, he can't do so without the authorization of the rest of the government.
That's the difference between democracy and dictatorship - Israel will never use the weapon, because it's only for deterring, Iran certainly can use it!

**h177** · 22nd December 2003, 14:41

Its easy . Rent a Base from Azerbaijan and flew through Caspian sea.

**Srbin** · 22nd December 2003, 14:58

I wish.
Funny that some people in the world are thinking that we are such an aggresive nation. We have the right to have nuclear weapons, as a last option, or at least for scaring off enemy nations. While we aren't planning to use it, Iran does.
Technically, can they actually destroy Israel without damaging or destroying Al-Aqtza, Al-quds, the entire Arab population in Israel and the Palestinian authority, as well as parts of the other countries around us?
Not really.

OMG you're an idiot, I love the comment "Israel wouldnt use their nukes, and Iran is and they will therefore they shouldn't have them"

Man some people are really really stupid.

Anyways, Subs could be an option, but can Israel launch ballistic missiles from their subs?

Also that option from Azerbaijan, can Israel really do that? Azerbaijan is another Muslim country, I doubt it.

Ok Let's just say Israel can get through some way, how prepared are Iranian Tomcats/Fulcrums/Sams to stop/counter this attack?

**PAF Fan** · 22nd December 2003, 15:00

against the best F-15s and F-16s in the world, supported by very good EW!? The Iranians would not stand a chance....

**seahawk** · 22nd December 2003, 15:12

Ok take a realistic look at possible options.

- Turkey : Highly doubtfull that the current government would allow to pass through their airspace. Furthermore they would have to fly a long way through Iran to get to the targets.

- Syria : not really an option, if they don´t want to start a large scale conflict

- Jordan and Iraq : Looks possibe. But that strike would increase opposition to the US forces in Iraq tenfolds. So highly unlikely that the US would aproove this.

- Saudi Arabia : Has AWACS and fighters. Unlikely that the US would not notice.

- Diego Garcia : Ask the Brits, I doubt they like the idea.

- Eritrea : possible. Israel has operated aircraft from there. Would be the best staging base available.

Yet it leaves more problems. First is that we can assume that a moving those aircraft and tankers will not go unnoticed by Iran. Especially if they appear in Eritrea. So I would be on very ready defenses. Then you would need dedicated fighter and SEAD support for the bombers. Given the available tankers that means they can only go for one target and that is most probably the reactor at Busher. But how much damage do you need to inflict to destroy it permanently ?? Hard question. It would not really stop the Iranians from making the weapons, it might only increase their resolve.

So imo that is political suicide and millitary difficult. Sanctions against Israel would be a sure bet. And open war with Iran is likely.

US will not bakc this mission too, as it would destroy all their efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq for sure.

**h177** · 22nd December 2003, 15:28

Azerbaijan is possible because it is only out of place nation in Russia and Iran sphere of influence place But cost of retribution will be too high for that nation to pay. Otherwise Iranians are much more educated and clever than Arabs and have large influence in ****e population of Iraq and persian speaking population of Afghanistan. This thing will require great skill to be sucessfull pulled off.

**Distiller** · 22nd December 2003, 15:32

Preps for an attack from NAVSUPPFACDG could go unnoticed, done mostly by night etc. And if Bushehr is the primary target the egress could be made west via Iraq and Jordan, no point returning to Diego and politically less captious since they could say they ingress was made the same way and hide US involvement. But I doubt that only one site would be attacked.

I'm very aware that such an action could end in major theatre conflict. I can't look inside Sharon's head, but I wouldn't bet that Israel wouldn't use nuclear warheads in a pre-emptive nuclear strike. And I can't second other notions here, that Isreal would only use their nuclear warheads as deterrence. Contrary I can't imagine a country more likely to do a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

But how realistic is an Israeli action against Iran altogether?

@ 177: How should they get their jets there unnoticed? Why should Turkey or Russia let that stunt be pulled? Azerbaijan is as far away from Bushehr as Tel Aviv. Egress very difficult.

**h177** · 22nd December 2003, 15:38

Originally posted by Distiller
Preps for an attack from NAVSUPPFACDG could go unnoticed, done mostly by night etc. And if Bushehr is the primary target the egress could be made west via Iraq and Jordan, no point returning to Diego and politically less captious since they could say they ingress was made the same way and hide US involvement. But I doubt that only one site would be attacked.

I'm very aware that such an action could end in major theatre conflict. I can't look inside Sharon's head, but I wouldn't bet that Israel wouldn't use nuclear warheads in a pre-emptive nuclear strike. And I can't second other notions here, that Isreal would only use their nuclear warheads as deterrence. Contrary I can't imagine a country more likely to do a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

But how realistic is an Israeli action against Iran altogether?

@ 177: How should they get their jets there unnoticed? Why should Turkey or Russia let that stunt be pulled? Azerbaijan is as far away from Bushehr as Tel Aviv. Egress very difficult.

Sign treaty with Azerbaijan and announce large scale military exercises and at the end do the strike.

**thekyle** · 22nd December 2003, 15:50

Originally posted by Srbin
OMG you're an idiot, I love the comment "Israel wouldnt use their nukes, and Iran is and they will therefore they shouldn't have them"

There's no problem with that line.

**matt** · 22nd December 2003, 16:02

Diego Garcia is a bit of a no no...

I still say a attack using Cruise missiles and subs would be the best way..

and I dont think the US would have much of a problem in lettin Israel take out one of the other Axis of evil saves them the trouble and they dont have to do anything but put their hands up and say well they were funding terrorists.

**Srbin** · 22nd December 2003, 17:40

Yes Azerbaijan would be be nice because all you have to do is fly down the Caspian Sea and you're over Iran, but would Azerbaijan realllly do it? Arent they a muslim country too? I doubt any Muslim country would really support a Jewish country attacking another Muslim Country, with the exception of Turks but they prolly wouldnt do it either.

Yes Subs would seem the best option but does Israel really have the capability to fire ballistic missiles from subs?

**h177** · 22nd December 2003, 17:44

Originally posted by Srbin
Yes Azerbaijan would be be nice because all you have to do is fly down the Caspian Sea and you're over Iran, but would Azerbaijan realllly do it? Arent they a muslim country too? I doubt any Muslim country would really support a Jewish country attacking another Muslim Country, with the exception of Turks but they prolly wouldnt do it either.

Yes Subs would seem the best option but does Israel really have the capability to fire ballistic missiles from subs?

Iran has much better relation with Russia and Armenia and inside Azerbaijan didnot like that but is forced to do so due to opposing forces.

Thread: Israel - Iran Scenario (Israeli Attack on Iranian Nuke Assets) Discussion

Thread Tools

Display

Israel - Iran Scenario (Israeli Attack on Iranian Nuke Assets) Discussion

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions