Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're really gonna compare Entebbe to taking on Iran? Do your damn homework.
First of all, Tel Aviv to Tehran is 2500 miles, not 1000.
Secondly, transport aircraft have more range than fighter jets.
Moreover, look at the Air space that has to be traveled over from Israel to Uganda and compare that to the Air space needed to fly from Israel to Iran. Looks a hell of a lot more hostile, doesn't it?
....
fyi...
Actually the one way distance is under 1000 miles. A striped down F-16C/D can make the trip with the correct payload. The real issue, as you say, is the airspace in needs to follow to get there is around 1400 miles each way if SA allows Israel to use its airspace. So what does Israel need to leave behind in order to get 800 more miles out of a F-16?
Israel might well win the battle but lose the war.
The war being world opinion and support. They might be able to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran but I think they'd have very little sympathy world-wide in the following retaliation. And there would be one, sooner or later.
With the real bad rep of Islam in most countries that matter; probably not if Israel did take out Iran.
You are quite ignorant and just the same old tired liberal talking point.
I'm an ultra-conservative.
And a disabled combat vet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesisxx
Why would I need to watch Limbaugh and Hannity? I have spent 10+ years in the Middle East and lived in Israel for 3+ years. I was also part of the war games that the US has done with Israel over the years. I have just recently gotten out of the military. So it is you that don't have a tenth of any knowledge of the subject. Stick to your liberal corner pretending you know so much
I turned down a chance to be an advisor in Iraq during the Iraq-Iran War.
One reason is due to the fact that I was going to Egypt to train troops.
I spent six weeks breaking down the Yom Kippur War, showing the Egyptians every mistake they made (and the things they did good).
I was on Druzba '86 looking at Soviet nuclear weapons infrastructure in the field.
I was in Panama and Iraq.
Both times in S-3/S-3 Air.
If you have an initial force, call it F(0), then rF(0) are operationally ready, true or false?
Well.....we're waiting.....
Show us how experienced you are planning combat air operations.
Waiting....
Actually the one way distance is under 1000 miles. A striped down F-16C/D can make the trip with the correct payload. The real issue, as you say, is the airspace in needs to follow to get there is around 1400 miles each way if SA allows Israel to use its airspace. So what does Israel need to leave behind in order to get 800 more miles out of a F-16?
I used a distance calculator app on my phone and i came up with different. I used another distance calculator on my laptop and came up with close to what you've posted....slightly less actually.
But ok...as you say, the real distance is around 1400 miles when airspace is taken into account.
But that's only the beginning. Once over Iran, who knows what'll happen. And how will anyone verify that the program has even been set back...or even hit effectively. Verification can't be done by satellite...people will have to get on the ground to find out the extent of the damage.
Moreover, people have gotta stop thinking that Iran would take a strike and just lay down for it as if nothing happened. They'll be more determined than ever to get a nuke AND they'll retaliate against American and Israeli targets all over the world....from embassies to military bases. They're not gonna just let that slide.
That escalation will precipitate a war. It has to. We'd be obliged to cut the snake's head off to make the terrorism stop, and that head is in Tehran. And cutting that head off can't be done with airstrikes.
That's boots on Persian ground. And that's disastrous as hell....the Iranians will not be defeated on their own soil.
There are many distinct matters here. I suspects answers from various people vary.
Does Israel have the technical capability to Strike Iran successfully assuming some loss of personnel on their part is acceptable? If so what would be the ramifications security wise and diplomatically.
Strategically should Israel Perform such an operation itself or just wait around to see what the big brother (the U.S does).
Is such an operation by any country beneficial in the long term or would it be detrimental?
last but not least. Why would you strike a country with no Nuclear weapons??
Because you would definitely send a message to all countries in the region that they should go get Nuke.
because North Korea was not hit because it has some deterrence. but Lybia,Iraq, Iran do not.
It sends a pretty clear signal to all countries that they should obtain the strategic deterrence any cost (like Pakistan did)
Sounds good in theory, but the Arab Spring showed that such a strategy doesn't necessarily work.
The biggest problem Iran has had with their nuclear program to date is not sanctions or the international community. It has been sabotage..Help them sabotage it. In the Arab Spring, we aided rebels to overthrow a regime that had been relatively friendly to the US. The rebels we supported in this overthrow weren't exactly very happy with the US from the beginning. Not saying it would work, but as a alternative to US servicemen having to invade Tehran, I will go with those internal elements that are seeking to oust the current regime.
Last edited by freightshaker; 04-06-2015 at 12:35 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.