What do u think?

[USArmyMan]

i copied this off another site,


Some of the good folks at MIT have just figured how many bombs it would take for the Israeli Air Force to blow up Iran's entire nuclear weapons infrastructure. Apparently, it isn't so hard after all.
For those keeping score at home, here's what the Israelis would need: (24) 5,000-pound BLU-113 penetrator warheads to collapse the underground centrifuge halls at Natanz
(2) 2,000-pound bombs to destroy the above ground pilot production plant at Natanz
(12) 2,000-pound BLU-109 penetrator warheads to blow up the underground uranium conversion facility at Esfahan
(10) 2,000-pound GBU-10 laser guided bombs to hit the heavy water production plant and reactor site at Arak
But, according to the MIT report, there is one major catch: the air strike on Natanz could fail if Iran's air defenses succeed in downing only two of the IAF's strike package of 24 F-15Is if each is loaded with a single BLU-113.
MIT concludes, however: "The foregoing assessment is far from definitive in its evaluation of Israeli military potential. However it does seem to indicate that the IAF, after years of modernization, now possesses the capability to destroy even well-hardened targets in Iran with some degree of confidence. The operation appears to be no more risky than the earlier attack on Osirak and provides at least as much benefit in terms of delaying Iranian development of nuclear weapons."

[ya2]

you forgot the many 1000 pounds against AA which should be used if not first..

[shelory]

how many pounds dos a nuke weigh? im not sayng israel has one im just asking :)

[ya2]

how many pounds dos a nuke weigh? im not sayng israel has one im just asking :)
less enough to be carried by every israeli jet..

[USArmyMan]

gosh, its only about just bombing of the facility nothing more, the rest (like AA and radar installations are another matter, but.... the nuke seems attractive.

[USArmyMan]

how many pounds dos a nuke weigh? im not sayng israel has one im just asking :)


about the nuke, there is ones small enough to be delivered by just 2 Navy Seals, swimming, not as powerful as a regular size but more than enough to do the job, also in my country (US) there are nuclear penetrators (bunker busting) bombs that literally drill into the ground that can be of immense usefulness.

[*titanium*]

There is no single size for nukes, as said above. There are huge 10 megatons nukes (which means its equivilent to 10,000,000 tons of TNT) they are very big and can not be carried by fighter bombers. You would need at least a medium sized bomber.

Nukes can be any size, the USA not only has the nuke that can be operated by 2 navy seals as mentioned above but even has over the shoulder rocket launchers with nucler warheads.

Israels nuclear weapons are beleived to be up to about 200 kilotons. It would not use those against Iran, it will use bunker busters with a low yeild nuclear war head. Its a big missile, i rekin they could only take 1 on each wing but thats not because of the nuke, thats because its a bunker buster.

[USArmyMan]

thanks titanium for for the reafirming info, lol, i did not know we had those man-portable, rocket launchers, but ill inquiry around about them... and about Israeli's nuke force (which they dont like to talk much about) do they have the more advance warheads- by that i mean "clean" bombs? and have you heard of a neutron bomb?

[*titanium*]

thanks titanium for for the reafirming info, lol, i did not know we had those man-portable, rocket launchers, but ill inquiry around about them... and about Israeli's nuke force (which they dont like to talk much about) do they have the more advance warheads- by that i mean "clean" bombs? and have you heard of a neutron bomb?

Well a clean bombs would be one with minimal radiactive fall out. If this is made to zero some how, then it would be good in a war since the explosion may only cover an area of 100 meters diameter, but the intense heat and radiation spreads further. The ones that could be used against Iran are low yeild, but their is still radiation, however since they are bunk buster weapons, this would be confined underground with no real fall out above the surface. Neutron bombs are quite the opposite, minimal explosion, little harm to buildings but a muvh wider sphere of deaths due to radiation. I dont know how it works, but it is designed to stop an army.

[Joshua Crick]

They should just send in a Special Forces team to disable radar and any defensive weaponry, and turn on some laser guiding signals for the bombers. Then they have all the time in the world to play around with the nuclear facilities.

[*titanium*]

They should just send in a Special Forces team to disable radar and any defensive weaponry, and turn on some laser guiding signals for the bombers. Then they have all the time in the world to play around with the nuclear facilities.

Is that a joke? have you even thought about how un fesabale that is? why not just sprinkle pixxie dust over the radars.

[USArmyMan]

Is that a joke? have you even thought about how un fesabale that is? why not just sprinkle pixxie dust over the radars.


hmmm, pixie dust on radars..... That just might work!!, it would kill the signals and they cant remove the dust because it is invisible, just joking guys, but the Special Forces idea would be rather hard since your in a territory where everyone is brainwashed to hate all all people that is none muslim,- means no support, but it could be done on the radar station, you'd have to have support on the way though,, how about just using stealth aircraft to just go and destroy or disable the radar installation? Naa, i dont know of Israel having any stealth aircraft, and also if i was Iran, i'd periodically switch my radars installations off and on to make it harder to be detected, (we the in US military can still find u) from all of this im just thinking off the top of my head, plz correct me if im wrong or incomplete on any of the above.

[*titanium*]

Israel dont have any stealth aicraft, however they have something even more ingenious. Its a UAV I cant remember what its called, but it is fired in to the air, with a range of 200 km and it basicaly flys around for up to a few hours searching for radar. If there is any radar switched on, it locks on, and then homes in on it, it has a rocket motor and explosives on board and uses itself to take out the radar instalation.

Irans anti aircraft weapons are shorter range, so theoreticaly it can be used ahead of the planes, but there will be problems. There are many other ways to get past Radars that can and are built on to the F16's, firstly there are Radar jammers, secondly putanti radar air to surface missiles on the planes. The difficulty being that by this time the anti aircraft battery would have fired at the plane.

BUT the plane has ways of doging missiles. Firstly there is flack and flares, secondly they can carry a decoy on a cable behind the plane that uses an electronic signle to divert the missile. Thirdly is to out manovour the missile. If the missile is comming head on towards the plane and the pilot waits till the last second and then push the joystick down, the missile will fly straight past since its tiny wings are not enough to match the F16's steering.

Israel and the USA have been developing laser weapons for sevral years now, one of the uses is to take out missiles. The USA is building this system on to a boeing 747 (the power source is very bulky and heavy) so that it can fly along side fighters and take out anti aircraft missiles.

[*titanium*]

UPDATE: the name of the UAV is Harpy, it actualy has a 500km range, as aposed to the 200km I quoted.

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/aircraft/uav/harpy/HARPY.html

[Bert]

This article assumes that only F-15s are used for the strike - there are also F-16Is for strike and F-16s with CFTs for SEAD and force protection.

[Topmaul]

I don't know the egg heads at MIT but as a military man I can say a raid like that is no piece of cake, and is far more dangerous than many arm chair generals believe. Personally I doubt it can be done, we are just going to have to get used to a Nuclear armed Iran there is nothing we can do about it.

Please don't underestimant the enemy!

Talking about how simple it would be to bomb the Iranians to oblivian, is like the morons on Iran Denfense telling us how easy it is to sink a US Navy Carrier! Neather is easy.

One more thing when we invaded Haiti a few years back the Haitians had a heads up because they staked out Fort Bragg, and when the 82nd took off they knew we were on our way.

I would bet that when your aircraft take off the Iranian defense would go on alert. If I was them I'd begin fueling my surface to surface missiles, and get the air defense up along with a CAP at the border. The Idea would be to make the IAF fight it's way to the target then back. Also time the surface to surface missile strike to hit at the time the air strike returns to base.

Also you would have to fool Russian Intellignece or they will tip off the Iranians that your coming.

By the way are some of you suggesting or advocating a thurmal nuclear suprise attack on Iran? Are you out of your minds?
I know this is unpopular but I am not a troll

[*titanium*]

Topmual, Iranians army is hugely over estimated as it is. Their navy, airforce and infantry/armed divisions are so much weaker than people think, that they relie on stocking up on missiles to form any sort of military force. Egypt is stronger than Iran, look how easily Iraq was beaten by the USA, yet the Iran Iraq war was a huge loss for both sides involved. Irans airforce hasnt changed much since those days.

So whats to say that the USA does not simply bombard Iran with cruise missilses from the sea?

[Topmaul]

If your right Irsael better go bomb them.

[dzone]

Come on guy's Peretz is not Moshe Dayan.I mean, You are talking about Israel to attack Iran,and Peretz who didn't have any military experience before Second Lebanon war didn't menage to stop Hezballah. In one way this war was good for Israel at least they found out who is "leading" there country.Don't take me wrong titanium (guys) i am for Israel it's just i don't fancy Olmert,Peretz,Livni,Barak and Natanyahu.In my opinion Israelis have to find stronger leader like Ben-Gurion if they won't to attack Iran, these guys i mention are not to lead Israel. Cruse missiles are easy to shut down they are too slow and stupid(at least Tomahawk is) we lost count how many missiles we shut down over Serbia during 1999 bombing. Sorry, criticize too much but someone has to do it to make Israel better place. NEVER UNDERESTIMATE YOUR ENEMIES!!

P.S. I hope you won't banned me!:rolleyes:

[*titanium*]

Naturaly all conflicts can result in casulties, but the main thing stopping them is the world reaction. See people seem to save reactions untill after something happens, it doesnt matter how many nukes Iran gets and points at Israel, Israel would still be demonised for attacking. Europe has always apeased people and never acted, and so try and force this on other countries now.

[Topmaul]

A country who launches offensive war, is always going to be the bad guy in world public opinion, that is the way it is.

Offensive warfare is considered bad. Look at the bashing we are taking in the media for disposing of Sadam

[dzone]

Come on guy's Peretz is not Moshe Dayan.I mean, You are talking about Israel to attack Iran,and Peretz who didn't have any military experience before Second Lebanon war didn't menage to stop Hezballah. In one way this war was good for Israel at least they found out who is "leading" there country.Don't take me wrong titanium (guys) i am for Israel it's just i don't fancy Olmert,Peretz,Livni,Barak and Natanyahu.In my opinion Israelis have to find stronger leader like Ben-Gurion if they won't to attack Iran, these guys i mention are not to lead Israel against Iran.Titanium mention cruse missiles,well, cruse missiles are not good option,they are easy to shut down too slow and kind a stupid(at least Tomahawk is), we lost count how many missiles we shut down over Serbia during 1999 bombing. Sorry,maybe i criticize too much but someone has to do it to,to make Israel better place.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE YOUR ENEMIES!!

P.S. I hope you won't banned me!:rolleyes:

[*titanium*]

There isnt going to be another Ben Gurion. Do any of you remember what Gandolf said in lord of the rings? “we cannot choose the time we live in. We can only choose what we do with the time we are given.”

Well when those times are really bad, and you choose to do what is best with them, you are a great leader, like David Ben Gurion or Churchill. At a time like today there is a limit to what leaders can do. Its not that there is no dier need, it is simply that in times like these the media and liberals have their eyes on you like hawks and it leaves any leader efectivly castrated.

[ya2]

how about getting all the iranian AA soldiers hospitalizied just before an attack ?

[USArmyMan]

Naturaly all conflicts can result in casulties, but the main thing stopping them is the world reaction. See people seem to save reactions untill after something happens, it doesnt matter how many nukes Iran gets and points at Israel, Israel would still be demonised for attacking. Europe has always apeased people and never acted, and so try and force this on other countries now.


that there me friend is absolutely correct(about Israel will be demonised for the attk) and the fact that Europe(they like to be known as the European Union) will try and kiss the "outraged" Muslims ass. They know that we know that they know and the Muslims know(i hope u wont get confused) the Euros are scared of a take over by the muslims so they willl try to appease them by standing on the muslims side but the fact stands that the muslims stated that they wanted to take over Europe no matter how long it takes, all i can say is that we need stop playing the game of "politically correct" and bomb them to oblivion (besides it gives us (US) a chance to test some things that have been sitting gathering dust and just crying to be unveiled.

[dzone]

the media and liberals have their eyes on you like hawks and it leaves any leader efectivly castrated.

That is right but look, while Siniora visited Europe and while he was crying there, Olmert was sitting in his chaer in Jerusalem doing nothing .
Israel didn't have anti propaganda at all , what i sow on BBC, it was like terrorists are good and IDF is bad, you didn't fought against lies, only Mark Regev spoke and vice presidnet Shimon Peres, and few pictures of wounded Israelis and maybe two hoses demaged by Katysha more pictures more resolts and Lebanese were good at this . If you answer me that the EU,BBC,and the rest of the World is anti Semitic i will agree ,but next time you should prepaire better media campaign !!:smile: mazal tov

[*titanium*]

I dont know how they could have done things better, but its true. The BBC used the fact that Israel had occupied southern Lebanon untill 2000 to try and say Israel is bad, no mension of the fact that Hezbollah had made dozens of attacks over those 6 years. This is why I hate Politicians, they always comment where they shouldnt. Matters of history, when they have no knowledge, matters of the ecnomey instead of leaving it up to the economists. Imagine how much bettter offwe would be if Politicans wherent such bastards. The only primeminster whom any sort of positive light cna be put on, since churchill is margeret thatcher.