TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Breaking Mews › Israeli air force training for possible strike
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Israeli air force training for possible strike

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
The Israeli air force has been conducting long-range mission training, with in-flight refueling. It's thought by some that these exercises are in preparation for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Jerusalem Post article
post #2 of 22
I like this quote at the end of the article:
Quote:
Iran on Saturday also criticized the IDF drill. The official IRNA news agency quoted a government spokesman as saying that the exercises demonstrate that Israel "jeopardizes global peace and security."
Iran having a nuclear program doesn't? If that's not a case of the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.
post #3 of 22
Israel will not let Iran get a nuke. I fully expect to get up one morning and hear the news that Iran is no more.
post #4 of 22
Thread Starter 
And the next news you here is that the US Navy in the Persain Gulf has ceased to exist.

Israel might be able to knock out their nuclear installations, but an air strike will barely touch their military. However, Iran will assume we're behind it and act accordingly.
post #5 of 22
This sort of stuff scares the crap out of me. Bombing a nuclear facility would surely be a bad bad bad bad idea for so many reasons!!!!
post #6 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Israel will not let Iran get a nuke. I fully expect to get up one morning and hear the news that Iran is no more.
They can keep them from developing them, but my worry is that they will someday find someone willing to sell one (or more). With the decommissioning of the Soviet Fleet, large numbers of Oscars, Kilos, Charlies, and the infamous Typhoon class submarines meant the removal of hundreds, if not thousands, of nuclear warheads. A single Typhoon could carry 200.

I wonder where all those warheads are now, and who is guarding them.
post #7 of 22
Thread Starter 
I think I saw one in a local flea market the other day.

Seriously, what with the state of the Russian armed forces in the post-Soviet era, it's more believable that some are missing than that none are. The only consolation is that the technology is so old, and they weren't maintained, that they're no longer operable. The primary danger is of a dirty bomb, not of a nuclear bomb.
post #8 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by coaster View Post
And the next news you here is that the US Navy in the Persain Gulf has ceased to exist.

Israel might be able to knock out their nuclear installations, but an air strike will barely touch their military. However, Iran will assume we're behind it and act accordingly.
Don't underestimate the Israeli's or us.
No way will Israel be destroyed.
post #9 of 22
Thread Starter 
I'm not underestimating anybody, and that includes Iran, who has a relatively strong and modern military equipped with cruise missles. The fastest of these missles could cross the entire Persian Gulf in five minutes. And it's capable of evading our Aegis anti-missle system. I have no doubt that if Iran chose to do so, they could sink most of our ships in the Persian Gulf. I hope Israel gives us a few days' notice so we can get them out of there first.

I already am confident Israel won't be destroyed, but it won't be due to their military.....or ours.
post #10 of 22
I totally agree with your last sentence Coaster. Right back at you.
post #11 of 22
Thread Starter 
Things seem to be lining up for the big battle. I find it curious that the US doesn't seem to play a part. I wonder what will happen?
post #12 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by coaster View Post
I'm not underestimating anybody, and that includes Iran, who has a relatively strong and modern military equipped with cruise missles. The fastest of these missles could cross the entire Persian Gulf in five minutes. And it's capable of evading our Aegis anti-missle system. I have no doubt that if Iran chose to do so, they could sink most of our ships in the Persian Gulf. I hope Israel gives us a few days' notice so we can get them out of there first.

I already am confident Israel won't be destroyed, but it won't be due to their military.....or ours.
I'm personally more worried about the Strait of Hormuz. Any fleet passing through there is clustered up like fish in a barrel. It's a shooting gallery.
post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by coaster View Post
I think I saw one in a local flea market the other day.

Seriously, what with the state of the Russian armed forces in the post-Soviet era, it's more believable that some are missing than that none are. The only consolation is that the technology is so old, and they weren't maintained, that they're no longer operable. The primary danger is of a dirty bomb, not of a nuclear bomb.
I wouldn't bet the entire ranch on that. If the Soviets used a fission design, then the actual explosive content of the warhead would be notoriously simple. Simply an chemical explosive generator to slam two sub critical masses into a single super critical mass. It's shielding and casing would be starting to break down by now, but if you're going to use a homicide bomber as a detonator and put it in a truck or use it to turn a section of ocean into foam (which ships won't float on), then there isn't any reason to worry about shielding.
post #14 of 22
Thread Starter 
Notoriously simple? In theory perhaps, but not in actual production. We didn't spend billions on the Manhattan project to build something a couple guys in a rusty Toyota pickup could put together. A nuke is still a threat, but it's not going to be made from stuff off a Soviet-era rust bucket. A suitcase nuke -- modern in design and recent production stolen or sold to the highest bidder -- that's the most likely scenario. The missing radioactive material could just be used for dirty bombs; or for poisoning your political opponents.
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by coaster View Post
Notoriously simple? In theory perhaps, but not in actual production. We didn't spend billions on the Manhattan project to build something a couple guys in a rusty Toyota pickup could put together. A nuke is still a threat, but it's not going to be made from stuff off a Soviet-era rust bucket. A suitcase nuke -- modern in design and recent production stolen or sold to the highest bidder -- that's the most likely scenario. The missing radioactive material could just be used for dirty bombs; or for poisoning your political opponents.
I'm not talking about building one, I'm talking about deliver vehicle nuclear warheads with a service life of 20-30 years, that were carried on those submarines. For all we know of the Soviet nuclear program, some of them may have been made a mere year or two prior to decommissioning.
post #16 of 22
I think you overestimate the Russians Skippy.
post #17 of 22
Thread Starter 
OK, Skip, true, but re-reading your post it still reads as if you're talking about building one. The human bomber as "detonator" could never set off the nuclear explosion, because it requires shaped charges that all need to be ignited within micro-seconds of each other to produce the required implosion. Otherwise the fissile material, sub-critical, just gets blasted out into the surrounding area. Which is a dirty bomb -- messy, but over a limited area.

I didn't understand the remark about foam.
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by coaster View Post
OK, Skip, true, but re-reading your post it still reads as if you're talking about building one. The human bomber as "detonator" could never set off the nuclear explosion, because it requires shaped charges that all need to be ignited within micro-seconds of each other to produce the required implosion. Otherwise the fissile material, sub-critical, just gets blasted out into the surrounding area. Which is a dirty bomb -- messy, but over a limited area.

I didn't understand the remark about foam.
I'm keeping it non-technical because 90% of the people reading these posts may have an opinion as well, if they know what is being discussed. And there are people here that may not understand things such as initiators and induced fission.

I'm simply talking about removing one of the triggers, such as the barometric trigger switch, and replacing it with a push button. A brainwashed terrorist pushing that button is a human bomber.
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I think you overestimate the Russians Skippy.
That may be true, but I really think that a healthy dose of overestimation is a good thing. If our government hadn't written them off as has beens, perhaps they wouldn't have been so surprised when they discovered Badger and Blackjack bombers patrolling the Russian coasts again.
post #20 of 22
Thread Starter 
If I recall correctly, the Russians and the Iranians are friendly. In a conflict between Israel and Iran or between the US and Iran, we might see Russia coming down on the side of Iran.
post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
That may be true, but I really think that a healthy dose of overestimation is a good thing. If our government hadn't written them off as has beens, perhaps they wouldn't have been so surprised when they discovered Badger and Blackjack bombers patrolling the Russian coasts again.
You have a point there. I stand corrected.
post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Israel will not let Iran get a nuke. I fully expect to get up one morning and hear the news that Iran is no more.
DW (my Iranian wife) and her three Iranian sisters and Iranian brother and I are all planning to go to Iran in Spring. I'll check with you before leaving.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Breaking Mews
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Breaking Mews › Israeli air force training for possible strike