Anyway, it seems Iran is in the lead. the latest intelligence report make any effort to attack Iran extremely difficult. any attack by Israel on Iranian facility will harm Israel interest more then it will effect the progress of Iranian Nuclear program and give Russia and China a bigger leverage in their contest with US. I don't get this Olmert guy. he could've undermine Iran with a more subtle tactics. yet he choose a hysterical approach which only make Israel look's like a "Panic stricken rabbit".
Nuclear facilities in Iran "no easy target to go after"
- Thread starter gulfsecurity
- Start date
SaudiArabian
New Member
during the Iraq war 2003 , the US forces were firing over a 1000 Tomahawk cruise missiles per day.
today with the US buildup in the Gulf i'm sure the US forces can fire much more than 1000 Tomahawks perday and i seriously doubt any middle eastern country (including Iran) ability to stand against such cruise missiles "storm" considering the facts that this missile is very accurate and flies at very low altitude at speed of 880 km/h with a range of 1100 km's.
but that means the US will have to use thousands of that $1.5 million/unit missile and therefore it will cost billions.
so yes , the Nuclear facilities in Iran are no easy targets to go after
today with the US buildup in the Gulf i'm sure the US forces can fire much more than 1000 Tomahawks perday and i seriously doubt any middle eastern country (including Iran) ability to stand against such cruise missiles "storm" considering the facts that this missile is very accurate and flies at very low altitude at speed of 880 km/h with a range of 1100 km's.
but that means the US will have to use thousands of that $1.5 million/unit missile and therefore it will cost billions.
so yes , the Nuclear facilities in Iran are no easy targets to go after
indian bull
Banned Member
Yes, but they(US) have done this in past and can do it again.
Ofcourse the Nuclear facilities in Iran are no easy targets to go after, but that is what a super power means.
Ofcourse the Nuclear facilities in Iran are no easy targets to go after, but that is what a super power means.
I agree with you , not much else to say..Satellites produce pictures of the outsides of buildings, not what's inside them. Identifying the uses of buildings is done by human beings, who study the pictures, having first decided which of the vast number of pictures satellites take to look at (Iran's a big country). Not all nuclear facilities have to be large, purpose-built, & isolated.
The Americans 1) can't be sure that they'd hit every Iranian nuclear facility, & 2) can't be sure that everything they'd hit would be a nuclear facility.
To more or less get back to the subject.
I dont't think there is one simple solution to the Iranian missile problem - actual or potential.
One way of eliminating (reducing) is to knock out production facilities and even protective storage facilities. But You can't be sure to get them all.
Another way is to deny the Iranians the supplies needed: If the missiles can't fly, they are not threat. But some may fly.
Sabotage is another possibility.
Special forces yet another.
I personally would take a look on the Boeing AL-1 - currently in its YAL-1 fase.
Due to range consideration they seem pretty useless against superpower ICBM's. But rogue-state hardware may be a different matter.
I think this is pretty much a containment problem and a play for time: Lot may change in half a year.
I dont't think there is one simple solution to the Iranian missile problem - actual or potential.
One way of eliminating (reducing) is to knock out production facilities and even protective storage facilities. But You can't be sure to get them all.
Another way is to deny the Iranians the supplies needed: If the missiles can't fly, they are not threat. But some may fly.
Sabotage is another possibility.
Special forces yet another.
I personally would take a look on the Boeing AL-1 - currently in its YAL-1 fase.
Due to range consideration they seem pretty useless against superpower ICBM's. But rogue-state hardware may be a different matter.
I think this is pretty much a containment problem and a play for time: Lot may change in half a year.