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.
#1, pakistan is not threatening anyone other than India right now,...
Now you're claiming to be the head of ISI?
How do you know what Pakistan are thinking?
Obviously, you're clueless about diplomatic rhetoric or military doctrine.
If you examine a number of States, like Israel, like the Soviets/Russia, you'll find that whenever they threaten to do something, it means they have absolutely no intention of doing it.
It's when they're quiet that you have to look closely.
But that should come as no shock, since both States have surprise, speed and deception as the foundation of their strategic and tactical doctrines.
You lose the advantage of surprise when you telegraph your intentions to the world, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
- it is quite possible the US might have to go in an capture its warheads -
Other than proving you're clueless, what would be the point?
You have no idea how Pakistan stores its nuclear weapons.
Because, if you did --- have any idea --- you wouldn't be saying something so stupid.
Of course, you don't understand the meaning of "system."
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
-- it is not currently selling the tech to others, ---
Um, the technology Pakistan has is available for free on the internet...if you're lazy.
If you're not lazy, you can go to most any university library and get it.
Who was Clinton's Secretary of Energy? Hazel someone. She put more than a million pages of documents for declassification review, and the bulk were declassified. That was "Drawing Back the [Something] of Secrecy" around 1996 or so.
India has technology; Pakistan does not.
If you can't understand why that is so, that's because you can't even answer a simple question like "What kind of nukes?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
the way n korea is,
North Korea isn't selling its technology either.
Neither Pakistan nor Iran have any use for North Korea's technology.
If you don't understand why, that's because you can't even answer a simple question like "What kind of nukes?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
Second, how do you know exactly what missile delivery capabilities iran has?
For the same reason I know what a nuclear weapons infrastructure looks like, and you don't.
Why would Iran need missiles to deliver warheads?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
Third, they have tested ICBMs that can extend well past Europe,....
That was an IRBM -- Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile.
Same class as the Pershing, Pershing IA, Pershing II and SS-20.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
The consequences of iran testing a nuclear device would be horrific to contemplate; there is no greater threat to the world than that.
Iran does not need to test a nuclear device.
I'd explain why, but you wouldn't understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quizster
I think Mircea asked you that same question and you accused him of trolling.
He thinks that just because you can fly an F-16 from Haifa to Tehran in a video game, you can do it in real life.
He doesn't understand that in reality, that is a one-way suicide mission and Israel won't be able to reach 75% of the alleged targets.
Uhm, they are the defacto rulers (with occupying troops) in lebanon, iraq, syria and have overthrown the government of yemen - how come far leftists whine about what the US did in 1953, but are silent with iran's takeover of 4 mideast countries? Agenda, have we?
Umm... Is this where we talk about just how and why those thousands of American soldiers were in Iraq to get maimed and murdered?
Are you going to take the lunatic position that because US troops were in iraq, then iran has a right to attack them? Is that the "argument" you're going to present here?
He doesn't understand that in reality, that is a one-way suicide mission and Israel won't be able to reach 75% of the alleged targets.
It's just physics.
Doctrinally...
Mircea
Or maybe you missed the reality that Israel has recently gotten some mid air refeuling capabilities, and recently have done exercises using this new capability?
Seems they get physics too. To be 100% fair to you this has been a recent development.
Or maybe you missed the reality that Israel has recently gotten some mid air refeuling capabilities, and recently have done exercises using this new capability? Seems they get physics too. To be 100% fair to you this has been a recent development.
That poster is under the hilarious impression that they can intimidate other posters with their attitude and bluster to make up for a total lack of facts, knowledge or an ability to argue. I put them on ignore a long time ago, as did many others.
Third, they have tested ICBMs that can extend well past Europe,...
Lying A fallacy of reasoning that depends on intentionally saying something that is known to be false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadisonR
That poster is on ignore, and justifiably so. Given the garbage you've posted here, you might be joining them.
As for the adults, here is some additional information on iran's ICBM capabilities:
I'll correct your lies....using your own link....
Iran is continuing work on a long-range ballistic missile that could be flight-tested by next year despite the latest Pentagon report to Congress on Tehran’s military that omitted earlier references to the looming ICBM threat.
Misrepresentation If the misrepresentation occurs on purpose, then it is an example of lying.
Two lies, actually.
First, Iran has not tested an ICBM platform as you claimed.
Second, you misrepresented an inflammatory article by claiming that IRBMs are ICBMs.
Missile-based nuclear weapons systems are well-defined by international protocols.
Or maybe you missed the reality that Israel has recently gotten some mid air refeuling capabilities, and recently have done exercises using this new capability?
Seems they get physics too. To be 100% fair to you this has been a recent development.
09-16-2012, 09:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
When you grow up, you can go ROTC or enlist, and then work your way up to operations. And then you can do fun things like plot fall-out charts, chemical dispersal patterns, plan training, plan combat operations, plan air support and air strikes, artillery support, logistics, and lots of other fun things.
And then, you would be able to see.
You could see that no Israeli combat aircraft have the combat radius to strike targets in Iran. And you would know that Israel would need at the bare minimum, at least 14 aircraft per target. Some targets would require 20 aircraft. While planning your operation, the issue of fuel is going to come up. You will have refuel aircraft in-flight and then also refuel aircraft as the come out-bound from Iran -- being chased no doubt.
How many aerial tankers does Israel have? 5 to 8 (depending on the source). Assuming for a moment that Israel really does have 8 tankers, and that all 8 tankers have an operational readiness of 100%, that means Israel could refuel 48 aircraft.
Oooops.
And then what about out-bound? Those aerial tankers will never be able to fly from the Persian Gulf back to Israel, refuel, reload with fuel, then take off and return to the Persian Gulf in time to re-fuel aircraft coming out.
By the way, what are you using for Psub(k)?
I generally bracket 0.41 to 0.55 for PGMs.
You do know what I'm talking about right?
When I was in S-3 Air Ops planning operations with the naval liaison and the FAC, we don't just guess at how many aircraft we need. It's not like Dungeons & Dragons were we roll two 8-sided die and a 10-sided die.
We have very precise mathematical formulas that we use. Even if I'm calling up air cav to strike ground targets, I still have to calculate the number of sorties so I can inform the commander how many air cav platoons he'll need to have ready. PGMs are "Precision-Guided Munitions." Yeah, and even though they're laser-guided or GPS guided, they still have a fail rate and they only hit their target 41% to 55% of the time.
An F-16 can carry 2 2,000 lb bombs and 2 AGM-158s. Suppose I need 4 AGMs and 4 2,000 lb bombs to destroy the target. That means I actually need four F-16s each loaded with 2 AGM-158s and 2 2,000 lb pounds to ensure that target is destroyed. For troops in the open an other crap, I can play fast and loose, but for point targets there isn't a lot of leeway.
Your n and Psub(d), will be difficult here too. 'n' is the number of missile shots from air or ground-based defenses.
You do understand that unlike the Iraqi retards, Iranian air defense are mobile, meaning they shoot-n-scoot. And you are aware that there are at least 52 if not as many as 61 F-14 Tomcats prowling the Iranian skies, right? And all of them have Phoenix missiles (back-engineered by Russians and Chinese) with a range of at least 90 nm, right?
I mention that, because Israel would need about 78 aircraft at the very, very least, and they'll be in Iranian skies with no command and control.
You know I'm talking about EW aircraft, right, like AWACs, Hawkeyes and such? The Israeli pilots would be totally blind. They wouldn't see missiles coming at them unless the missiles are close enough to trigger the radar warning receiver. And then they wouldn't see aircraft coming at them either. The Iranian F-4s and F-5s have a small profile and you're not going to see them until their up in your face firing. That's where an AWACs would be helpful.
And if an F-16 gets locked, you realize the only defense it has is to jettison its ordnance and bug-out. An F-15 could deal with it, but not an F-16, and certainly not with a strike load-out. An F-16 is like a pig on a bowling ball.
Anyway, those are (some of) the reasons Israel has never attacked Iran....and never will.
Why are we the world police? Why must WE deal with it? Maybe china should step up if they want to be a world power, and deal with this country thats in their backyard.
The Chinese would love nothing better than to see the US exit the world stage and let them take over as the world's sheriff. That would give them unfettered access and control over the world's oil, gas, copper, rare earths, oceans and canals, railroads, people, you name it.
They are already crushing us on infrastructure, manufacturing and education. They also own a huge chunk of our debt. Are we ready to give them the whole shooting match?
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.
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.
