Quote:
Originally Posted by JU_88
I dont know what your happy about, do you seriously belive the buck would stop there? You might want to read up on where Russia and China stand on an Isreali or US lead attack on Iran.
The only way the conflict could stay localised within the region is if Iran made the first move.
anything pre-emtive on our part could actually have consquenses far more dire than just letting iran do their thing.
|
Both China and Russia have an interest to hurt the US via the ME card, and to form their own close ties with Iran. But that interest is not such that they would start lobbying nukes onto American cities. In fact, fi a local nuclear exchnage - unilateral or bilateral - starts going in the Iranian region, both will take a hell of a care to get out of the firing lines.
It is my argument since years that the destruction of several key components and storage sites vital to the Iranian nuke weapon program most likely can only be acchieved by having infiltrating troops at location destroying them from within, which is unlikely to acchieve since a ground war can be ruled out I think, or by nuking said facilities by using socalled ini-nukes. I do not like using mini-nukes.
Problem is that at least 3 years ago we did not have precise object coordinate. Knowing where a perimeter of 10x15 km is, is one thing. Knowing where inside that perimeter the precise entry tunnel is - for example, is something different, and the Iranian installations are known to be buried ddep inside mouintains or in hardened bunkers below the ground. I severly doubt you can get them with FAE bombs or some conventionel MOABs, because you would need to cliuster-bumb the whole perimeter.
Of which there are several dozens.
It would also be helpful to intoxicate the whole region of a destroyed fcility so that it cannot - be accessed easily to try saving some partrs of the installations or material in case they survived.
Posasibly mini.-nuking such installations is easier for the civilian population than a long-lasting conventional air campaign. We know how the losses are climbing even with laser-guidance and GPS missiles. However, the ground effected by mini-nukes would be lost for the Iranians. Which is part of the effect we must hope to acchieve.
We do not talk about intentionally nuking Iranian cities and civilian settlements - as long as the Iranians haven't built their critical installation right below or inside them. If they would need to live with the coming generations avoiding several radiating hotspots in their country, like they need to do in Japan now at Fukushima, then this is just a mild price for them having allowed the political developements in their county over the past 20 years. Everybody has the right to be held responsible for what he does and does not, supports and supports not, reaches for, or not.
However. I would support a war against Iran only when the clear operation goal is the undisputed and complete destruction of the Iranian weapon pogram - no matter what that costs. If it is only about delaying the program by causing damage, then I am against it, since it would cause a big show and a big ammount of destruction done over nothing. Just to find out some years later that one needs to start again. But right this iron-hard determination must be doubted in Western political leadership, as has been demonstrated in Gulf 91, Afghanistan02, Irak 03, Lebanon 06, and before that: Vietnam. Putting your money on politicians screwing things up over dubious reasons, is always a very safe bet.
Either go for it, then go for all of it. Or don't even worry to ever get started.
That we need to make this decision now, is for majpor part our own fault. We just do not learn it that appeasement and endless negotiating with enemy for whom negotiating only means to buy time, leades to an increasing of the crisis, not to a solution. What we want to acchieve now, could have been acchieved easier 10 or 15 years ago. But back then we preferred to just close our eyes before a reality we did not wish to see. And I admit, at least 10-15 years ago I was like that, too, when it came to Iran. To my defence I can say I started seeing since then.