Why Iran should be worried!

[swerve]

Well in 1981 Israel didn't ask anybody for overflight rights when they bombed Osirak reactor right ?
I agree Turkey would refuse those rights and its air force is good enough to be able to enforce control over its airspace. However Jordan doesn't and I'm not sure USAF or USN still patrol that tightly northern Iraq's Kurdish airspace. Besides, would USAF jets really open fire on IDF fighterbombers ? Hmmm.
As an alternative, IDF jets could fly low over Saudi desert close to the Iraqi border and reach Iran by flying over the Persian Gulf. I'm not sure Saudis control their airspace very tightly despite their very good F15s. Though the Persian Gulf is very crowded with USN jets off Bahrein and carriers. So I'd go for the first route through Jordan and northern Iraq.

cheers

Not the same situation.
1) It was shorter range. They could fly nap of the earth. Not possible to the more distant Iranian targets. They'd have to be up at economical cruising altitude, where anyone could see them.
2) The air defences of the overflown countries (Saudi Arabia on the way out) were far, far weaker. Partly in response to that raid, the Saudis have greatly improved their radar & figther coverage of the north. The same raid now would be detected before it entered Saudi airspace. Back then, it wasn't spotted at all.
3) It was a surprise. It wouldn't be this time. Makes a difference.
4) More countries to overfly this time.
5) They had one target, in the nearest part of Iraq to Israel. This time, the targets are dispersed, hundreds of kilometres apart (& that ain't an accident!) & not close to the western border.
6) The targets now have dedicated air-defence assets, unlike Osirak.

7) Flying over northern Iraq would mean a roundabout route to some of the targets. Remember, they're dispersed!

It's a different world!

 

[radiosilence]

There will be two carrier battle group in Gulf by the end of the month and Patriot missiles heading for Arab states in the region. This seems to be more than a show of force to Iran as some have claimed.

 

[Ths]

I think You should notice that Israel has special F-16's with extra tanks. Must cut into payload, so who says they haven't been training this for quite some time.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I think You should notice that Israel has special F-16's with extra tanks. Must cut into payload, so who says they haven't been training this for quite some time.

Well that may be the case but it would still not allow a lot of room for error and a low level attack profile will really go through the gas. I cannot think of an Israeli raid that would go undetected, it would have to have tacit US approval to go through US controlled airspace and an air strike would have to include ECM/AWACs/AR etc assets wouldn’t it?

After all Iran would be expecting this attack and has had time to prepare for it as well I would think.

 

[eckherl]

What if Israel already has approval from the US, why couldn`t they use a abandoned airbase in Iraqi or a air fueler ,the US is making alot of public statements lately at Iranian involvement with the insurgency problems in Iraq, plus there is twenty thousand additional soldiers with impressive naval assetts enroute to that regoin. Also China knows something is shaking down with the formal threat to the US not to jeapordize China`s relations with Iran.

 

[Whiskyjack]

What if Israel already has approval from the US, why couldn`t they use a abandoned airbase in Iraqi or a air fueler ,the US is making alot of public statements lately at Iranian involvement with the insurgency problems in Iraq, plus there is twenty thousand additional soldiers with impressive naval assetts enroute to that regoin. Also China knows something is shaking down with the formal threat to the US not to jeapordize China`s relations with Iran.

That may well be the case, in any event an attack against Iran will not help the US in Iraq at the moment.

IMHO it all comes down to how close is Iran to developing a nuke capability and what the US will do if it believes that Iran is close.

It will not be a pretty situation.

 

[eckherl]

That may well be the case, in any event an attack against Iran will not help the US in Iraq at the moment.

IMHO it all comes down to how close is Iran to developing a nuke capability and what the US will do if it believes that Iran is close.

It will not be a pretty situation.

Agreed it will not be a good situation but only add to our concerns in Iraq.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Agreed it will not be a good situation but only add to our concerns in Iraq.

The main potential problem as I see it is that Isreal takes unilateral action, which US assets in the region would be able to see coming. What then are their orders? Allow the airstrike to pass through? Try and warn it off?

This is obviously a worst case.

 

[radiosilence]

1981 was a lifetime ago. The Israelis surprised everyone with that attack, including Israelis......

I don' t think it was that surprising when the Israeli chief of army Intelligence publicly urgue Iran to bomb Osirak in september 1980.

 

[Distiller]

I think a lo-lo-lo mission with buddy-buddy refueling somewhere over Iraq is the most probable scenario. With two more refueling by KC-707 if they take the long way back via the Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Straits of Tiran, because if they really attack everybody will be up in arms on the way back. And in case of battle damage a pilot could eject over the Arabian Sea to be picked up by submarine.

And if they want to hit a number of dispersed targets simultanously, using the "bomb-drill" (to clear the way for a tactical nuke, or not) they'll need their whole fleet of F-15I and F-16I. And what do you do in case one of the nulear armed fighterbombers go down? Setting it to detonation on impact, to avoid the Persians getting their hands on it?

Air-opposition shouldn't be a problem, surface based anti-air assets also not, as long as those attacks are precisely timed and take no more than a few minutes. If more time is needed then launching LGBs might become problematic.

A wild scenario would be using a remote auxiliary airstrip (e.g. from aluminum matting) somewhere on the coast of Oman, supplied by submarines.

 

[swerve]

I think a lo-lo-lo mission with buddy-buddy refueling somewhere over Iraq is the most probable scenario. With two more refueling by KC-707 if they take the long way back via the Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Straits of Tiran, because if they really attack everybody will be up in arms on the way back. And in case of battle damage a pilot could eject over the Arabian Sea to be picked up by submarine.
...
A wild scenario would be using a remote auxiliary airstrip (e.g. from aluminum matting) somewhere on the coast of Oman, supplied by submarines.

The wild scenario is pure fantasy. You couldn't buil such a strip without being spotted. You'd need earth-moving equipment, which you couldn't bring in by submarine.

I don't think Israel has enough tankers (5 KC-707?) to support the number of aircraft necessary to carry out the raid, flying all the way round Arabia. Also, it would mean putting the tankers within range of potential hostiles.

Picking up a pilot by submarine would need the sub to know where he was, & beat the Iranians to him. Tricky, to say the least. Could end up with a sunk submarine.

 

[WAR]

What if Israel already has approval from the US, why couldn`t they use a abandoned airbase in Iraqi or a air fueler ,the US is making alot of public statements lately at Iranian involvement with the insurgency problems in Iraq, plus there is twenty thousand additional soldiers with impressive naval assetts enroute to that regoin. Also China knows something is shaking down with the formal threat to the US not to jeapordize China`s relations with Iran.

Well there is a strong possibility of US approval to the Israelies. Though it would be tough for US soldires stationed at Iraq to bear the brunt of rising insurgencies. But then political decisions are taken by keeping in view broader spectrum, with wide-ranging interests.

And on home front, Mr. Bush would tackle the Democrats by the stick of old and proven theory that -- Unusual situation demands unusual decisions and actions, and that in any case the US had to cover up Israeli actions, no matter what they are, and how far reaching their impact would be.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Yeah the patriots seem a bit suss to me. An extra battlegroup could be just posturing but bringing the ABM SAMs says to me their preparing something.

Do the Israeli's have TLAM or similar cruse missile systems? Why would you risk contending with Air defence networks and aircrews? I would assume they have MRBM's but then were looking at medium yield fission weapons and thats a verry bad thing. What other options do the Israeli's have?

 

[Rich]

Yeah the patriots seem a bit suss to me. An extra battlegroup could be just posturing but bringing the ABM SAMs says to me their preparing something.

Do the Israeli's have TLAM or similar cruse missile systems? Why would you risk contending with Air defence networks and aircrews? I would assume they have MRBM's but then were looking at medium yield fission weapons and thats a verry bad thing. What other options do the Israeli's have?

Yeah, they have several versions of PopEye Turbo cruise missiles, one such version we also use. Its reported that one of them has a range in the 1,500 km class, tho only they know for sure. Many Iranians targets would be past the max range of this missile. They can fire them from submarines but they have only a few boats that could do it and those boats and missiles are probably tasked with a nuclear mission, That and cruise missiles would not be the preferred weapon to attack many of the possible targets.

They have IRBM systems called "Jericho". These systems make up the bulk of their nuclear retaliatory capability and its doubtful they would task them conventional for such an attack. I doubt they are accurate enough anyways and shooting them off would cause itchy trigger fingers on the Iran side, which has IRBMs of its own and a robust chemical weapons capability to arm them with. Which the Chinese supplied much of.

 

[eckherl]

Well there is a strong possibility of US approval to the Israelies. Though it would be tough for US soldires stationed at Iraq to bear the brunt of rising insurgencies. But then political decisions are taken by keeping in view broader spectrum, with wide-ranging interests.

And on home front, Mr. Bush would tackle the Democrats by the stick of old and proven theory that -- Unusual situation demands unusual decisions and actions, and that in any case the US had to cover up Israeli actions, no matter what they are, and how far reaching their impact would be.

Yes - even the U.S congress is getting a little paranoid now, but President Bush will not care, he doesn`t need their approval in this possible scenario with Israel, if we go in with troops, then that will be a different matter. I could see us letting Israel use our fuel tankers for this mission, we may even covertly give them the weapons needed, which I doubt that they need. And the sad thing for Iran will be that after it happens, the world will turn their backs and breath a big sign of relief.

 

[eckherl]

Yeah the patriots seem a bit suss to me. An extra battlegroup could be just posturing but bringing the ABM SAMs says to me their preparing something.

Do the Israeli's have TLAM or similar cruse missile systems? Why would you risk contending with Air defence networks and aircrews? I would assume they have MRBM's but then were looking at medium yield fission weapons and thats a verry bad thing. What other options do the Israeli's have?

I think we may be in for a big surprise on what Israel has for this type of technology.

 

[radiosilence]

I think we may be in for a big surprise on what Israel has for this type of technology.

Do you mind telling us about some of the "big surprise" that you are referring to? The suspense is killing me.lol

 

[eckherl]

Do you mind telling us about some of the "big surprise" that you are referring to? The suspense is killing me.lol

Well - if I did, it would not be a big surprise would it?nfloorl: Honestly, I do not know and will be just as surprised as everybody else. Israel seems to be getting around to alot of different countries and they are offering weapon platform upgrades that countries are buying into, plus do we really know what our country gives them until they use it.

 

[radiosilence]

Well - if I did, it would not be a big surprise would it?nfloorl: Honestly, I do not know and will be just as surprised as everybody else. Israel seems to be getting around to alot of different countries and they are offering weapon platform upgrades that countries are buying into, plus do we really know what our country gives them until they use it.

Oh i thought you were in know on some of their special projects. Yes last year was the best year for the Israeli arms industry.

 

[Grand Danois]

On Israeli systems, I find it interesting that they might replace Arrow with THAAD.

Israel may replace Arrow missile defense system with U.S. version

These reports have been pretty persistent.