that Israel will almost certainly use force to prevent or hinder Iran's development of nuclear weapons, based on the public opinion numbers:
Well yeah, we're all helpless before historical necessity, but nothing? Really? I'm not a weapons expert, but it seems to me that if you put together enough toothpicks you can do a lot of damage. Provided we know where the nuclear development facilities are located there's not really very much the Iranians could do to prevent Israel (or somebody) from taking them out. So their only real protection is secrecy. This, of course, is not the conventional wisdom... which may be all the cover that's necessary. Again, this is just pure speculation, but I should think that precision rather than firepower is the name of the game. While it's true that a conventional bunker buster would not be able to take out a deeply hardened target, it doesn't seem plausible that a series of five hundred strikes drilling down through the earth's crust with an average deviation from target of only a few inches could fail to eventually blow the smithereens out of anything inside the subterranean trajectory. Is this really a technical problem American and Israeli scientists can't possibly lick? Moreover, the deeper they go to reach the buried facilities the less likely the collateral damage would trigger The American Conservative's "nightmare scenario". In this case (in terms of raw explosive power) less might well be more.
Just speculating, of course. If anyone knows more about this I bow to your superior knowledge. On balance, I'm with David. And the mullahs are in for a lesson.
1
This will require more than bombs. Look for boots on the ground. We're going to be waking up to some amazing headlines in the near future.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 27, 2005 06:57 PM (8e/V4)
2
The problem with repeatedly blasting the same spot is that rubble is pretty good at attenuating blast energy, so when the rubble from the first blast falls back into the hole it will blunt the effect of the next blast, etc. But maybe if your timing was really, really good - to the fraction of a second - you could phase a second blast in behind the first in a 'resonant' frequency, sort of like when you push someone on the swings, each subsequent blast hitting before the rubble from the preceding blast has had a chance to re-settle. I don't know if it is possible, but I don't know that it is not.
Posted by: Glenmore at December 27, 2005 07:55 PM (jqFNo)
3
Agent Smith says we need to get the draft going RIGHT NOW so we can have 500,000 troops trained and ready to defend Iraqi Freedom against Jihadidad.
Agent Brown says that rubble is nothing but trouble, as within it, the rabble babbles.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 27, 2005 08:13 PM (Gy73I)
4
Just for the sake of argument, what would EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) weapons do to a nuclear installation? Render them harmless? Cause them to explode?
Barring incredibly good intelligence, conventional weapons and special forces ops would seem to be of limited value.
Posted by: Allan at December 27, 2005 08:18 PM (4c+c6)
5
An EMP attack would fry their circuits, which would take weeks or months to replace. Unless they've protected their stuff with Faraday cages which ground the emp pulse.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 27, 2005 08:29 PM (8e/V4)
6
Carlos,
You might know this, but didn't I hear that the Iranians had tested a missle with the ability to explode 300 kilometers above a target, which would be useful only for an EMP device?
Posted by: jesusland joe at December 27, 2005 08:33 PM (rUyw4)
7
Okay, maybe a Winter's vacation in sunny Yazd would be ill-advised after all.
Posted by: ShannonKW at December 27, 2005 08:33 PM (dT1MB)
8
JC
Not likely - nuclear power has been on Iranian drawing boards for 30 years - as for weapons - who know if they will or not.
If they want to - its a forgone reality. Key is realization that UN Nuclear Non-Proliferation Teaty is a joke and failure - and has alway been.
In a strange way, the Iranians are probably the most rational and smartest of the whole middle-eastern bunch (I know - sounds crazy). Just got to learn to live with it and deal with it.
If its any consolation - BS about Israel is for public consumption - have internal economic and domestic problems? - change the subject to the Jews. They all do it - and they all really don't give a damn about the Palestinians.
Biggest threat of nukes? - muslims nuking muslims - oh, I'm sorry - muslims don't kill other muslims ...
Posted by: hondo at December 27, 2005 08:35 PM (3aakz)
9
I'm with Carlos on his first comment, we need an invasion most rikki-tik.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 28, 2005 12:04 AM (0yYS2)
10
Hondo -- available evidence shows you are wrong. Ahmadinejad stirs up trouble where logic suggests simply waiting for a fait accompli. And Iran went to considerable trouble to blow up a bunch of Argentinian Jews in Buenos Aires, for no reason or benefit and considerable risk, in 1994.
This attack btw was from the "moderate" faction.
OF COURSE Iran will attack Israel with as many nukes as possible to wipe "Israel off the face of the map." As a Holocaust survivor said, when someone says they want to kill you, believe them. Israel of course will retaliate but it's explicit Iranian policy to "absorb" the counterattack with a much larger population.
So yes we are staring genocide in the face. Of Jews. Once again. While the world blames the Jews. Again.
Of course we also will get hit. Ahmadinejad has made it clear he believes several strikes against the "Great Satan" will topple us in our weak wickedness. Osama felt the same. We are looking at probably 3.2 million dead at least and good-bye NYC and San Diego or LA.
Lurching towards apocolypse. I see nothing from the Bush Admin and the Dems are so tied into a Tie-Dyed hippiedom "Peace Now!" utopian pacifism that they can't even SEE what would happen if Iran actually nuked us.
Posted by: Jim Rockford at December 28, 2005 01:05 AM (4878o)
11
Salhani's "nightmare scenario" you linked to is indeed frightening. But it centers on Israel being overtly irrational. When they hit the Osirak facility the political atmosphere was very different. Pakistan didn't even have a bomb yet and many others, as well as Iran, were happy to see it go.
But Foulmood Almondjeans is
itching for a war. He's trying to pick a fight with words right now by provoking Israel. However, he doesn't want to throw the first punch for fear of losing support for his side when trouble starts. The Mullahs may be ill-tempered zealots, but they're not stupid.
What would be the ideal thing to do? How many portable bombs is Russia missing? I've heard anywhere from "a few" to 48. Even if it's only 5, (providing they're missing any - they deny it) we don't have any idea at all who has them. Wouldn't it be great if we had them all along? Getting them into Iran's facilities would be hard, but not impossible. There has to be room for doubt. It would have to be unclear
who attacked them. A lot of people don't like the Mullahs. Of course Iran would blame Israel right away, but that's not what's important. Ideally, the rest of the world has to be unsure where it came from, so if Iran hits Israel for it they won't garner as much support.
I know. Spy novel stuff and wishful thinking. So my input can be ignored. I just couldn't resist it.
Posted by: Oyster at December 28, 2005 05:59 AM (YudAC)
12
Watch Bill Frist he is floating some Iran speech this week. Irael will not have to if the EU lives up to it's word. Oh wait a minute what did I just say. Oh that's rich.
Posted by: Howie at December 28, 2005 08:27 AM (D3+20)
13
Jim says that Israel will counterattack, but that Iran has a policy of absorbing those, with a larger population to expend. But he neglects to mention that we'd probably counterattack as well, even if they didn't hit us. The fact that they hit Israel would convince any war policy person that no one is safe until Iran is simply defeated militarily, and the regime changed. And you can bet we'd soften them up first with a few nuclear devices at very specific targets. They'd have no military left, at the very least. And no one would blame us either, given that they acted first.
So, there's at least a chance that deterrence and sanctions would work until the regime can be changed by other means. It's just that I'm not too anxious to give that a try.
Posted by: Demosophist at December 28, 2005 10:30 AM (Jo69s)
14
Frist is a moron and I'm glad we get the chance to replace him next year, only I'm afraid there are enough idiot liberals and moron democrats to get a dhimmicrat into office.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 28, 2005 11:24 AM (0yYS2)
15
JR
I could be wrong - crazy people will and can do crazy things. If that Iranian maniac successfully purges Iranian society again (the thing I'm looking at) - including the military - then all bets are off.
Listen - I fully expect a nuclear war of some kind in the world in the future - a regional contained conflict is the best I can hope for - people gotta learn - over and over again.
At this point - I'd prefer to watch - and profit from it.
Posted by: hondo at December 28, 2005 12:10 PM (3aakz)
16
Agent Smith agrees with vowel-shifter and shares the same penchant for watching the grotesqueries on The Architect's screens.
Agent Brown says that the nuclear war already happened in the early-mid 21st Century, so your predictions were spot on at the Diamond Hill - (later, Crater) Casino.
Agent Jones says that there are plenty of crazies, especially as Powell referred those ones in the basement.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 31, 2005 02:10 AM (HuVhz)
17
The basement lock is always broken, and the crazies are rounding around the house. Question is which room goes boom - and is there enough spam for several hundred million refugees?
Will muslims eat spam? - or just generate it with requests for my acct #s and promises of millions (but sadly - no virgins).
Posted by: hondo at December 31, 2005 10:39 AM (3aakz)
18
rounding: running - sorry - if they are outside the house - everything burns.
Posted by: hondo at December 31, 2005 11:32 AM (3aakz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
