• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

IAF -- cleared for takeoff

Hutch said:
Simple. We let them go.

And the Iranians have radar and intelligence agents...they'll know. And the Shi'a in Iraq will be clued in that the US Military allowed the infidel Israel to bomb and murder fellow Shi'a (propoganda included free of charge).

Which could make for interesting times...that old Chinese curse again.

That said, I really can't see us shooting down IAF jets enroute or informing the Iranians of an attack headed their way, do you?

And I think we'd better think this out again...
Click to expand...

...and for what? If they are spectacularly successful they'll set Iran's nuke program back 3 years. Then what?

Airstrikes are great for breaking stuff, but what is really needed is to affect Iranian nuke policy. Airplanes are crappy policy makers.

The mullahs have a lot of internal dissention to deal with now...but after being hit by Israeli jets they'll be united behind their crazy leaders. Is that something we or Israel really want?

-z
 
rikzilla said:
...and for what? If they are spectacularly successful they'll set Iran's nuke program back 3 years. Then what?

Airstrikes are great for breaking stuff, but what is really needed is to affect Iranian nuke policy. Airplanes are crappy policy makers.

The mullahs have a lot of internal dissention to deal with now...but after being hit by Israeli jets they'll be united behind their crazy leaders. Is that something we or Israel really want?

-z
Click to expand...
Absolutely not! The Israeli leadership is not half as crazy as Dick Cheney, and they know there's no upside to this hypothetical operation.
 
webfusion said:
Nairobi?
Of course I'm aware the IAF landed and refueled there while on the return leg of the 1976 Entebbe raid. However, those were lumbering Hercules propeller-aircraft. No such aircraft would have any part in a mission to Natanz.
You keep saying 'fighter escorts' but F-16 and F-15 are fighter-bombers and can be equipped with a mix of weapons as needed for a dual-purpose strategy. The biggest threat they face is the newly-acquired mobile TOR-M1 anti-aircraft batteries that the Russians have delivered.
http://www.trumpetamerica.org/070117ta1532.html

Personally, I would tend to think that the American Aircraft Carrier Task Force that's on-station in the Gulf now would be assigned to the task of dealing with the AA (targeting them as soon as they 'light up'), and providing cover against Iranian fighter interceptors. If asked, the USA could say that their planes on patrol came under fire, and they only responded in self-defense --- right now under the conditions that prevail in the Gulf, that would all seem very plausible.

What you are asking is to have someone here disclose the operational details of a raid to Natanz. The IAF plan itself is classified, and will remain so, even after the centrifuges are demolished. Iran's fanatical leaders will be screaming bloody murder, and everyone will be looking around to try and determine what exactly happened, with fingers pointed in every direction. It is entirely possible that Israel will even deny being behind the "mysterious explosions underground at Natanz" -- perhaps they will just explain it away as an unfortunate "work accident" that happened as a result of careless handling of materials at the site!




And so it goes...
Click to expand...
Hey, I'm just trying to figure out why you posted a map of Operation Entebbe in response to my no effing way when the circumstances for Entebbe (refueling on the ground mid-mission) do not apply in the situation that I'm saying is impossible. The substitution of F-15s or F-16s for C-130s doesn't improve the situation any. You still have a distance to cover far greater than the operational range of either of those aircraft. Even a mission straight across Jordan and Iraq to the targets in Iran is a stretch (or beyond) for a round trip for those planes, considering the fuel needed to fight dogfights.

You brought up the problem of the SAMs, and rightly so. Israel would have to provide radar jamming as well. Other than with ballistic missiles, I don't see how Israel does this without forward bases.
 
Who amongst us will bell the cat?

I guess the only mouse with access to a stealth bomber and more guts than brains.

-z
 
rikzilla said:
Who amongst us will bell the cat?

I guess the only mouse with access to a stealth bomber and more guts than brains.

-z
Click to expand...
You're on to something - 2 key components. Capability and known lunatics in charge.
 
Here's where we part ways. It simply isn't going to happen. This is because (your BDS aside) there are no "lunatics" in charge of anything more lethal than a non-binding resolution.

-z
 
rikzilla said:
Here's where we part ways. It simply isn't going to happen. This is because (your BDS aside) there are no "lunatics" in charge of anything more lethal than a non-binding resolution.

-z
Click to expand...
From your lips to god's ears. Now rik, if and when the Iran operation commences, you come around here having bought into whatever justification has been promulgated, I'm going to be very disappointed in you. I will surely link back to this thread.
 
Airstrikes are great for breaking stuff, but what is really needed is to affect Iranian nuke policy.
Click to expand...

and
The Israeli leadership is not half as crazy as Dick Cheney, and they know there's no upside to this hypothetical operation.
Click to expand...

Airstrikes would be good for Avigdor Leiberman's policy. Leiberman is probably twice as crazy as Cheney. He is trying to instigate a fanatical & violent response from the Islamic Bloc which will then result in the Palestinian extremists moving ahead to destroy the fragile 'unity plan' ----- Israel is not going to strike Natanz centrifuges to eliminate Iranian nuclear ambitions. Israel is going to strike Natanz because it will inflame the Palestinians and thus allow the IDF to move against Gaza, and try to eliminate HAMAS. The road to Gaza goes through Tehran.
That is Leiberman's goal. Read the last paragraph of my OP again.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


hgc, this distance can be achieved by using mid-air refueling using the IAF's 5 KC-707 Saknayee (Pelican) tankers. These aircraft are operated by Wing 134 Tayeset at Lod.

The Israeli F-15i Ra'am (Thunder) is capable of carrying 4½ tons of fuel in its internal tanks, conformal tanks, and detachable tanks. The armaments it carries (all in all, the plane can carry 11 tons of munitions) are positioned so that there is almost no disruption of the plane's aerodynamic shape - and no impeding of its performance. These factors combine with others to enable the Ra'am to fly to an unprecedented distance, one which was previously attained only by much larger bombers: about 4,450 km. With midair refueling, the range can be extended further.
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/aircraft/f-15i/F-15I.html
 
webfusion said:
Israel is not going to strike Natanz centrifuges to eliminate Iranian nuclear ambitions. Israel is going to strike Natanz because it will inflame the Palestinians and thus allow the IDF to move against Gaza, and try to eliminate HAMAS. The road to Gaza goes through Tehran.
That is Leiberman's goal. Read the last paragraph of my OP again.
Click to expand...
That's Liberman's goal? That guy is more batsh!t crazy than I had imagined in my worst nightmares. That is the craziest thing I've ever heard in my life or will hear in my next life. If Israel wants to destroy Hamas (another laughable idea) then they just better commence operations in Gaza tomorrow. There's no advantage to starting a war with Iran in order just to achieve that goal.

I'm reminded of a book of 40's era Batman comic strips I used to have. Bruce Wayne is in an insane asylum, and there are a bunch of crazy people who are portrayed as thinking they're someone important, like Napoleon or Batman. I picture a nuthouse of the future, where the crazies all run around in business suits and jowls claiming that they're Joe Liberman - the grand strategic thinker plotting strategy on a chess board where all the pieces are household objects like keychains and combs.
 
hgc said:
I picture a nuthouse of the future, where the crazies all run around in business suits and jowls claiming that they're Joe Liberman - the grand strategic thinker plotting strategy on a chess board where all the pieces are household objects like keychains and combs.
Click to expand...

Ummm... Avigdor Lieberman is a different person than Joe Lieberman.
 
Ziggurat said:
Ummm... Avigdor Lieberman is a different person than Joe Lieberman.
Click to expand...
Oops. Well, my rant about Joe Lieberman still stands. :D

As for what Avigdor Lieberman is planning, I don't have much faith right now in webfusion's claim about his Iran attack goals. I'd welcome some evidence or further explanation/argument on that point.

Btw, point well taken, web, on the mid-air refueling capabilities. But does that cover the distance around the Arabian gulf? Either all the way around, or cutting across Oman and UAE?
 
Indeed, Avigdor Lieberman (yes, I've been spelling it wrong) is currently showing in the polls to have more support than any other politician except for Netanyahu to be the next Prime Minister of Israel.

His "Yisrael Beitenu" party was just granted another Ministry (Minister of Tourism) which has many Israelis outraged. Yariv Oppenheimer, of Peace Now, said of
Esterina Tartman: "Israel should be ashamed of the appointment of a person who openly advocates such racist positions." (Tartman had criticized the appointment of Ralel Majadle as Israel's first Arab cabinet minister.)

She holds the record for most parachute drops by a woman in the IDF, from which she was released at the rank of Major.
19820.jpg


Meanwhile, Avigdor Lieberman, who is the Minister for Strategic Threats, has voiced his opinions on Israel Radio:
"We will have to face the Iranians alone. Israel cannot remain with its arms folded, waiting patiently for Iran to develop non-conventional weapons."
 
Last edited:
What exactly are you folks smoking, and why are you Bogarting it??? Gimme some so that I can see the blu fairies, chupacabras, and evil jooz too!
Awwww c'mon!!!!

-z
 
Well you must admit...you guys all getting your Liebermans confused makes this thread read like a drug induced hallucination.

Your take on all this is rather interesting and fanciful web. Please pardon me if I'm a tad skeptical...but that's my thing.... When I read predictions of impending doom it tends to peg my BS detection circuitry and prompt a snarky comment.

-z
 
hgc said:
Oops. Well, my rant about Joe Lieberman still stands. :D

As for what Avigdor Lieberman is planning, I don't have much faith right now in webfusion's claim about his Iran attack goals. I'd welcome some evidence or further explanation/argument on that point.

Btw, point well taken, web, on the mid-air refueling capabilities. But does that cover the distance around the Arabian gulf? Either all the way around, or cutting across Oman and UAE?
Click to expand...

Also you will note that IAF fighters would have to transit US controlled airspace which would mean tactical coordination with US Air Force and/or Navy air assets. It would make us de-facto responsible for the attack. Simply put...it's not going to happen!

-z

Edited to add: Like Garrett I'm only an amateur...but I consider it highly unlikely that the US would find it in our interests to abet such a strike. Perhaps when we finally do pull out of Iraq...or if Iran was proven to have a working nuke on a proven missile pointed at Tel Aviv. Absent that I don't see us wanting to unite the Iranian people behind their mad mullahs. Right now their rule is shaky...why attack them when they may implode on their own??
 
Last edited:
webfusion said:
Meanwhile, Avigdor Lieberman, who is the Minister for Strategic Threats, has voiced his opinions on Israel Radio:
"We will have to face the Iranians alone. Israel cannot remain with its arms folded, waiting patiently for Iran to develop non-conventional weapons."
Click to expand...
I was more concerned with the idea that A. Lieberman would want to launch against Iran so as to get Hamas in a violent huff so as to have an excuse to go get 'em.

The posturing you quote is to be expected, and doesn't necessarily reflect intent. Not that I doubt that Israel views a nuclear Iran as a grave danger.
 
I consider it highly unlikely that the US would find it in our interests to abet such a strike.
Click to expand...

As did Darth Rotor, in an earlier thread about this same subject.

However, Israel often does things without considering the consequences to the USA. If this operation goes ahead, it will be done without prior notice to the US forces, and the IAF pilots can just squawk their way through, and hope for the best.
Hutch answered this very point in Post # 15.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2381218&postcount=15
 
Well, they (IAF) did the world (and themselves) a big favor by wiping out Osiraq. However Iran's nuke programs are spread over multiple sites and some are hardened bunkers. It would not be as simple a thing as knocking out one reactor. The IAF will need quite a few more Ilan Ramons.

-z
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom