Will Israel attack Iran???

imported_guy

who what when wrote: »

A lot of people here seem to think that America/Israel will never attack Iran. So let me ask you this;
Why are america in such a hurry to leave afganistan and iraq?

The americans are know they cant attack Iran whilst occupying other mid-eastern countries so theyre bulling to pull out so they can get their hands on iran. And obviously it wouldnt be a ground invasion, just airstrikes.

they are sending an additional 30k troops to afghanistan, i see no rush, they want to target practice on live targets some more.

Manic Moran

imported_guy wrote: »

are you actully that naive to believe iran doesnt have sophisticated anti aircraft/anti missile defense systems?

Not at all. Well, at least, somewhat sophisticated. Their current inventory is actually pretty old, they've got a bunch on order, not yet delivered. Plus I seem to recall that their one and only AWACS aircraft crashed last year. Are you naive enough to believe that even when upgraded, the Iranian air defence network is going to be good enough to deal with two of the most cutting-edge air forces in the world? USAF and USN is set to be capable of dealing with Russian and Chinese air defence, I doubt Iran's to that level.

OR they might already even have nukes, the nuclear programme is aeons old. also point to note if america/israel attacks iran they wont be fighting bunch of dumb extreemists in turbans, they will be fighting smart extreemists in uniform, and what happened in 2006 vs hezbollah just showed how weak israel is, they had a hard time against hezbollah, what makes you think they can fight iranians?

Easy. A fair fight is much easier for a Western military to deal with, it's what they're geared for. There's a reason it took the US military a single division just two weeks to defeat the Iraqi military, while it took several divisions six years to get the country to fairly settle down again afterwards. If an Iranian F-14A wants to go up and meet an Israeli F-15I in mano-a-mano combat, I'm sure the Israelis will be more than happy to oblige.

But thats what would have to happen if they fully open the borders to Iraqi, afgani and pakistani insurgents, train them, arm them and send them on their way.
That is the least they would do after any air offensive against them,

They are apparently already doing this to an extent anyway (Particularly vs Israel), so it's not something which is that much an escalation. But even if they did decide to increase their level of support (and become a little more overt as a result) again, who will they send them against? Iraq? The vast majority of security in Iraq is now done by Iraqis. You'll have external meddling in internal Iraqi problems, that probably won't sit well with the Arab League. Afghanistan is even worse, as that operation has broader international support. Iran would not be doing itself any favours in that direction either.

NTM

imported_guy

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not at all. Well, at least, somewhat sophisticated. Their current inventory is actually pretty old, they've got a bunch on order, not yet delivered. Plus I seem to recall that their one and only AWACS aircraft crashed last year. Are you naive enough to believe that even when upgraded, the Iranian air defence network is going to be good enough to deal with two of the most cutting-edge air forces in the world? USAF and USN is set to be capable of dealing with Russian and Chinese air defence, I doubt Iran's to that level.



Easy. A fair fight is much easier for a Western military to deal with, it's what they're geared for. There's a reason it took the US military a single division just two weeks to defeat the Iraqi military, while it took several divisions six years to get the country to fairly settle down again afterwards. If an Iranian F-14A wants to go up and meet an Israeli F-15I in mano-a-mano combat, I'm sure the Israelis will be more than happy to oblige.



They are apparently already doing this to an extent anyway (Particularly vs Israel), so it's not something which is that much an escalation. But even if they did decide to increase their level of support (and become a little more overt as a result) again, who will they send them against? Iraq? The vast majority of security in Iraq is now done by Iraqis. You'll have external meddling in internal Iraqi problems, that probably won't sit well with the Arab League. Afghanistan is even worse, as that operation has broader international support. Iran would not be doing itself any favours in that direction either.

NTM

total number of troops iran = 12,285,000

total number of troops israel = 629,150

total number of troops USA = 3,385,400

taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_troops

persians dont care if "this is sparta" they will steam roll any ground offensive

Manic Moran

Since when does a number of troops have anything to do with it?

Conflicts such as the Six-Day-War, the Falklands, or even the invasions of Iraq and Kuwait should be plenty of indication that raw numbers are simply a factor in how much ammunition you need to bring. Quality over quantity.

And God knows where you're getting the 12m from for Iran, unless you're counting the Baji force which hardly counts as a modern combat entity.

However, it's all a bit of a red herring since nobody is talking about a ground war with Iran.

NTM

Buffy the bitch

Mr. SS wrote: »

wow! you've got some serious tunnel vision there buddy. I know its hard when Ireland is overwhealmingly pro-palestinian to get any kind of credible news but jeez, you should at least try calm down those crazy wide sweeping statements!

am i wrong or did they go into the sinai without even telling america??? Israel will attack her enemies regardless of what america thinks and I hope she does, she's the only sliver of civilisation in that whole region...

Seems to me from your posts your just against Islam to be honest.

Manic you said yourself more than likely Israel would have to attack Iran, Syria and Hezbollah but they couldn't even beat Hezbollah never mind trying to beat the three of them.

Israel won't attack Iran and the reason is simple. They can only beat people like the Palestinians who hardly have weapons.

Manic Moran

Manic you said yourself more than likely Israel would have to attack Iran, Syria and Hezbollah but they couldn't even beat Hezbollah never mind trying to beat the three of them.

I did?

I seem to recall that Israel already attacked Syria in late 2007. Not a peep out of the Syrians in response, and they share a border.

Israel won't attack Iran and the reason is simple. They can only beat people like the Palestinians who hardly have weapons.

Don't let your mild dislike of the Israeli policies blind you to the fact that Israel is one of the best-equipped militaries on the planet, designed around a conventional war with multiple Arab states (Not as if there's not precedent for that) and not that badly trained at it either.

But again I repeat, it's a bit of a red herring, since all we're talking about is a strike or raid, which (As far as we know) the Israelis have a 100% success rate in in the past.

NTM

fuelinjection

The idea of Israel as a 1st world superpower is a joke. Ok we all know that they have "secret" nuclear weapons.

First let me say that Israel exists now, so other countries need to accept that and respect Israel as a country.

Second their Zionists have acted like the twisted Germans that killed them in their many thousands.

The solution is with middle-ground (non-american) Jews that can live with their neighbours. The nasty fact is that handheld battleground nukes will exist and the current bigotry will result in endless war, or the end of an easily killed Jewish polulation. Take a leaf from the New Testament and don't take your enemies eye for an eye.

Manic Moran

fuelinjection wrote: »

The idea of Israel as a 1st world superpower is a joke.

I don't think anyone is claiming 'superpower' status for Israel. It lacks the economic clout to begin with. It has limited political clout. Militarily, it is not designed to be a world power, it's only designed to be able to deal with the threats in the region. For example, it has very little (read: "No") power projection capability beyond the air force. Inasfar as what the Israeli military is designed to do, it is very good at it. If you want to compare it to the US, UK or France, then, no, it's a little lacking.

NTM

fuelinjection

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don't think anyone is claiming 'superpower' status for Israel. It lacks the economic clout to begin with. It has limited political clout. Militarily, it is not designed to be a world power, it's only designed to be able to deal with the threats in the region. For example, it has very little (read: "No") power projection capability beyond the air force. Inasfar as what the Israeli military is designed to do, it is very good at it. If you want to compare it to the US, UK or France, then, no, it's a little lacking.

NTM

But will you admit that Israel has Nuclear weapons ?
A lot of people will not for some reason, and being nuclear means that you attract a different type of "terrorist".

imported_guy

this pretty much sums up israeli mentality for me

FunkBlaster87

Yes, yes boo Israel.

Wasn't there talk of some of the Iranian nuclear installation being buried very deep underground? Not sure if an F16 could carry enough conventional ordanance to defeat these installations. At any rate im sure an Israeli strike would retard the Iranian nuclear programme for years, which would be the objective

I doubt the Israeli's would lose any aircraft. I really doubt how air-worthy their F-14's or Mirages are. Maybe they make a few token flights a year for a show of strength.

One thing is for sure, the Israeli's wouldn't conduct a strike unless certain of success.

fuelinjection

FunkBlaster87 wrote: »

I doubt the Israeli's would lose any aircraft. I really doubt how air-worthy their F-14's or Mirages are. Maybe they make a few token flights a year for a show of strength.

One thing is for sure, the Israeli's wouldn't conduct a strike unless certain of success.

It's never been about an American backed miltary against any country in the middle east - they will win any conventional war as they as years ahead of anything that will be fired at them. However they will lose the long term war in the minds of kids being born in the people they attack and defeat.
For me that is the real tragedy of Israel, so strong now but so weak in the future.

FunkBlaster87

Well im no supporter of Israel, quite the opposite really.

I don't think Israel really gives a damn about Arabic and wider Muslim hearts and minds as they have demonstrated throughout their history. But hey, thats why they have nuclear weapons. No state would really try anything, in my opinion.

Mad ftw

wobzilla

FunkBlaster87 wrote: »

I don't think Israel really gives a damn about Arabic and wider Muslim hearts and minds

The word Arabic refers to a language not a people. I think you mean Arab

Son Of A Vidic

Israel might eventually attack Iran, when they sense a viable nuclear weapon is close to completion. Of course there is no demand for U.N. inspections of Israel's Nuclear sites/arsenal. Despite the American loan guarantees and their U.S. military technology, they will pay a severe price for such intervention against Iran. Hezbollah taught them a series lesson in the 2006 war, well equipped and well organised they severely embarrassed the Israeli army. Iran might not posses the sophisticated military technology that the Israeli army is equipped with but they would be fearless in battle. As the Iraqi's learned during the Iran-Iraqi War, superiority in hardware counts for nothing against a fearless and determined enemy. Many Iraqi armor units were decimated by wave after wave of RPG and Molotov cocktails attacks. Throw in the lethality of Iranian IED'S and any conventional ground action becomes highly unlikely.

Manic Moran

medicman2009 wrote: »

Iran might not posses the sophisticated military technology that the Israeli army is equipped with but they would be fearless in battle.

Grass-skirted African Warriors were also fearless in battle. That only got them so far against gatling guns and cartridge rifles. It's not as if the Israelis ever broke and ran in Lebanon at any point that I can recall. But generally speaking, all we're talking about here are a few fighter pilots and missile operators, not rows of infantry charging to the attack. Maybe some elite infantry raids, hardly the sort of people who get bowed by someone who shoots back on occasion.

As the Iraqi's learned during the Iran-Iraqi War, superiority in hardware counts for nothing against a fearless and determined enemy.

I don't seem to recall much materiel advantage to the Iraqis in the Iran/Iraq war.

Many Iraqi armor units were decimated by wave after wave of RPG and Molotov cocktails attacks.

The Israeli Air Force and Armoured Corps were both rather thoroughly bloodied in the first couple of days of 1973 by wave after wave of missiles. The result, two and a half weeks later, seems to have not cared much for this fact.

Throw in the lethality of Iranian IED'S and any conventional ground action becomes highly unlikely.

I think a conventional ground action between Israel and Iran is unlikely because there are a couple of countries in the way. Plus, there is no need for it to begin with, so it's all quite academic.

NTM

Son Of A Vidic

I think I need to clarify here, if Israel attack Iran anyone who thinks it won’t become a conflagration is at best naive. America is no longer a superpower, it can’t get out of Iraq quick enough and Afghanistan is another disaster. America’s enemies have seen this, American military might has lost its aura. Iran has clearly seen it’s suffering and can willfully defy it. SO with this in mind any Israeli attack on Iran would be met with a strong Iranian response. The U.S. had to virtually bribe militias in Iraq to stay out of the combat. The Shia Militias with close Iranian ties have used copper tipped shaped directional charge IED's. These are very impossible to defend against and are particularly lethal.

During the Iran Iraq war, the battle of Korramshahr illustrates my point I was making in my earlier post. The Iraq’s took the city after a month of intense fighting, during which time they suffered 15,000 causalities and lost 100 tanks. These loses were incurred against small, loosely formed units of Iranians using RPG's and Molotov cocktails. Jordan is not a geographical barrier to any planned Israeli intent against Iran. Then of course Iraq with its U.S. presence, is virtually a forward operating base for any action against Iran. So we end up with no geographical boundary for any planned Israeli/American action.

Israel was humiliated in southern Lebanon in the 2006 war, Hezbollah demonstrated its lethal effect. The Israeli Merkava main battle tank became a virtual coffin. Compared this to the Israeli incursion into Gaza where Hamas got it’s ass kicked. Hezbollah is certainly no Hamas, as the Israeli Army and the Former SLA can testify to. So take Iran, add some fierce national fervour, sprinkle in some religious extremism. Mix some simple weaponry like RPG’s and Shaped charges and take a leaf out of the Hezbollah’s, Taliban’s and Iraqi militias book. You end up with something you really don’t want to mess with. Grass skirted African warriors they certainly wouldn’t be.

FunnyStuff

Your assuming here that Israel has not learned lessons from its battle with Hezbollah in 2006, the lessons learned were shown with its incursion into Gaza in 2008. Any Israeli ground assault on Iran would simply be fought on Israeli terms, as per its military doctrine of fighting on the offensive. But it still is a mute point as it will not happen. Any Israeli attack on Iran will simply constitute precision strikes as Manic keeps stressing. And constant reference to Hezbollah or Hamas with their IED's and shaped charges are totally out of the way, do you really think that in a modern warfare environment where they do not have to pick their house by house to try single out the bad guys, that the IDF will not have plans to deal with these teams to HK's. It was the same in 73, hit very hard by Saggers and SAM-6 batteries, they got to grips with them after taking an initial bloody nose. The Israeli military is quiet adept at adapting to complicated stituations. Yes they had to cope with unexpected situations in Lebanon, no-one is denying that, but that kind of situation has proven to be a very sore point for every military power put in that predicament. Unless you are willing to carpet bomb and slaughter every civilian in the area, it is practically a no win situation.

Manic Moran

Of course, there are always other, less direct methods of interfering with the Iranian nuclear process.

I'm not accusing anyone of anything (Iran does have its own internal problems), but it does point out a possible other route.

[url]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/6972265/Iranian-nuclear-scientist-killed-by-bomb.html[/url]

Massoud Ali-Mohammadi, a leading Iranian nuclear scientist, has been killed in a bomb blast in Tehran.

Dr Ali-Mohammadi was a professor at Tehran University, teaching courses in nuclear energy and writing on quantum physics.
It was not immediately clear whether he was attached in any way to the country's controversial nuclear programme, which has brought it into conflict with the West.

A scientist attached to the programme, Shahram Amiri, a physicist for the Iranian Atomic Energy Organisation, went missing while performing a pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia last year. The Iranian authorities say he was kidnapped by the Saudi authorities and handed over to the Americans, though this is denied by Riyadh.

Tuesday's attack in Tehran could have been the work of a number of terrorist organisations which have been active in Iran, though if there is a political motive Tehran is also likely to blame agents of the West, particularly the United States and Britain, the "Great and Little Satans".
On the other hand, Dr Ali-Mohammadi was an Iranian representative to a Middle East wide nuclear co-operation programme run under the auspices of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency.
The IAEA is the forum through which UN Security Council members are putting their demands to Iran to hand over the enriched uranium at the centre of the nuclear row.

NTM

Son Of A Vidic

I don't think you can use the Israeli ground incursion into Gaza, as an example of lessons learned from the 2006 war with Hezbollah. Hamas are a relatively incompetent organisation, their strength is gained from the social support they provide throughout the community. Not through any military competency. The ground incursion into Gaza was a 'turkey shoot', any properly trained military sniper could have had a field day with IDF targets.

I think any attack on Iran could trigger a Hezbollah response in Southern Lebanon. I think there is too much reference to 1973 here, Hezbollah did not use SAM's in the 2006 war, rather the Russian made Kornet anti-tank missile. A truly fierce weapon system, with an Armour penetration capability between 1000mm to 1200mm or 39 to 48 inches. All the precision air strikes and heavy artillery softening up counted for nothing when ground troops had to go in. Many Israeli army accounts described Hezbollah as like ghosts, emerging from behind forward units, hitting hard and disappearing. I've no doubt Iran would have learned from this 2006 war also.

Western style Military thinking hasn't the stomach for casualties, recent war zones have clearly demonstrated this. During the first gulf war, the amazing footage of laser guided bombs in action hinted at the possibility of clean, quick, surgical combat. This sadly has not been the case, enemies have learned and adapted. I will acknowledge that I'm am looking at at a worst case scenario situation, that will most likely never happen. The assassination of the Iranian Physicist yesterday might have been a Mossad operation, who knows. If so, as awful as it sounds, it might be a wiser route to take, as opposed to direct confrontation

FunnyStuff

With reference to the SAM's, the point i was gettin at was Israel's ability to adapt to a potentially lethal situation. Israel had developed a sense of invincibility after its success in '67, believing that any Arab attack on it would be easily repulsed and crushed. Thus they were unprepared for the ferocity and skill of the attack which commenced on October 6th. This is also the case i feel with the war in 06, they were'nt prepared for the level of intensity which Hezbollah offered, and yes i agree suffered because of it. But to be honest i dont think they would make the same mistake again.

Also fighting guerilla warfare is not something western militaries are designed for, probably no military is designed for it. Its always going to incur heavy casualties and tough choices. But as for the question on Iran, Israel would have no intention of invading Iran and getting engaged in the kind of attritional battles it would involve.

I agree yesterdays death of the Iranian professor could be a route the Israeli's have opted for. Granted there is no proof of involvement, but the fingerprint of Mossad could well be there.

Selah_Nova

Why would someone start such a serious debate and then not post even a single comment into it???
So my question is this, Do Purveyors of 'Forum Porn' have an agenda?

Manic Moran

medicman2009 wrote: »

I don't think you can use the Israeli ground incursion into Gaza, as an example of lessons learned from the 2006 war with Hezbollah. Hamas are a relatively incompetent organisation, their strength is gained from the social support they provide throughout the community. Not through any military competency. The ground incursion into Gaza was a 'turkey shoot', any properly trained military sniper could have had a field day with IDF targets.

I think any attack on Iran could trigger a Hezbollah response in Southern Lebanon. I think there is too much reference to 1973 here, Hezbollah did not use SAM's in the 2006 war, rather the Russian made Kornet anti-tank missile. A truly fierce weapon system, with an Armour penetration capability between 1000mm to 1200mm or 39 to 48 inches. All the precision air strikes and heavy artillery softening up counted for nothing when ground troops had to go in. Many Israeli army accounts described Hezbollah as like ghosts, emerging from behind forward units, hitting hard and disappearing. I've no doubt Iran would have learned from this 2006 war also.

The single biggest problem with the Israeli incursion into Lebanon wasn't Hezbullah's greatness, per se. It was the fact that Israel went in not expecting anything like a semi-competent, moderately well equipped conventional defence. They expected another insurgency-like event, just as they've been dealing with in Palestine for the previous few years. They simply didn't come expecting a proper fight, and it took them a couple of days to adjust. (You'll note that most of the Israeli casualties occurred near the beginning of the incursion). Once they realised the problem, they did start adjusting. I don't think they would go to Iran with the same 'walkover' mindset.

Incidently, Kornet is going to be a bit less of a problem now for the Israelis, now they've started fitting their vehicles with active protection systems such as Iron Fist and Trophy.

NTM

Selah_Nova

Two things here are fairly annoying here. One is the fact that I cannot get any post into this bar a couple of sentences before my Dial up cuts and will have to write this in many sections

Selah_Nova

And the second is all the armchair generals thinking they are able to predict the beginning of the final peice warfare on planet earh as if they were musing over old battle maps of El Alamain or normandy

Selah_Nova

How many nuclear missiles could Isreal lauch in a 20 minute period? cos if it will be anything thats all it will be, and if the Russians or Chinese feel fit to give the Iranians a bit of satalite aided warning How would they respond?

Selah_Nova

With almost everything they have at every oil and natural gass installation/rig in sourthern Iraq,Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE. A slightly negative day on the markets that one.

Selah_Nova

Also hundreds of Shia squads around the globe erupting with whatever the1990's russian black market ould deliver and people are talking about anti-tank rockets and infantry? I have seen and met men who ran at Iraqi armoured coloums with Kalashnikovs and the ones who wernt wandering around the cities, still in fatigues gibbering and mumbling as any lost soul who has seen hell would, they wernt too intrested in discussing the various tactics of Any countries military and I doubt they are typing like us, into some forum swapping info about Isreali intentions.

Selah_Nova

My point is pointless, cos if it goes, we're all going along for the ride and its a one way ticket. And would Isreal be even bother to construct a well crafted media, think-tank finger pointing exersize before doing something like that anyway? Well, a Manhatten block is seemingly nothing to some people just as I doubt a small mid western US city is to others. Live our days as best we can and hope and pray this doesnt happen. apologies for the multi posts. Peace

Manic Moran

Suggestion:

Next time, type out your email in a notepad document. Select all, copy.

Come to the board, open up the reply window, hit 'paste' (Ctrl-V). Then submit. Very quick.

NTM