IAEA Safeguard Inspector assess Iran

[Skybird]

5 x 10kt bombs is Iran's aim, the article says. Considering the size of Israel, that is overkill capacity, when taking fallout effects into account as well. Even just one bomb could, if wind stands badly, end Israel's existence as a functioning, inhabitable state.


Also, the resources of Israel are very limited, due to its smallness. Its military ressources as well.


And as Herman van Creveld gets not tired to point out, the nimbus of invincibility of Israel, the robustness and competence of its ground forces, the determination, are in doubt. This is not the Israel of the founding era or the past big wars with its Arab neighbours. We already saw that during the last Lebanon war. Compared to earlier times, so says Creveld, they have become soft. A mentality problem as well. In favour of Israel speaks the intellectual cleverness of its people, and engineers. They take equipment from America or Germany - and make it better. Against it speaks that the wide availability of modern technology shrinks their technological lead over hostile neighbours, and brings it into their reach nevertheless. One of the reasons why van Creveld is so much disliked in Israel is that he speaks this out quite frankly, saying that in the long term israel's strategic position is so exposed that it becomes more and more unsustainable with time going by. With an Islamophile anti-Israeli UN and nuclear wepaons spreading in the region, nothing good can come from this.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Skybird

5 x 10kt bombs is Iran's aim, the article says. Considering the size of Israel, that is overkill capacity, when taking fallout effects into account as well. Even just one bomb could, if wind stands badly, end Israel's existence as a functioning, inhabitable state.


Also, the resources of Israel are very limited, due to its smallness. Its military ressources as well.

You want significantly more than 5*10kt weapons for a dammage limitation strike.

[Skybird]

To contaminate a country that spans over roughly 360 (N-S) x 80 (W-E) km (most of that beign the empty desert in the South), and has the vast majority of its industrial and business and science and population centres concentrated in an area of just around one third of that, a single 10 kt is more than sufficient if the wind plays ball and you maybe even build a bomb such that it maximises the contamination effect by intention.


The radiation present in Fukushima is much, much less than what you expect in case of a 10 kt detonation.


Also, 5 such bombs are enough to immediately bring life in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Ashdod, Petah Tikva and Reshon Leziyyon to a lasting end, becasue the fallout at place would be such that even those not beign directly affected by blast and fire would not be able to stay and hold out in the coming years. These are the five biggest cities after Jerusalem. 1.3 million people alltogether just in these five cities. Thats roughly one seventh of the total population.


BTW, who says that once Iran got 5 x 10kt, they would not get appetite for more and bigger candy? And delivering nuke tech to terror organizations for suitcase dirty bombs?

[ikalugin]

I wasn’t talking about the counter value strikes, I was talking about damage limitation strikes.

[Skybird]

And I am talking about a Drive-the-Jews-into-the-ocean strike. Nothing else it all is about.

[ikalugin]

For reliable counter value you may also want more weapons, such as the 1 R36M2 scenario that I have provided (Russia currently has 46 of those).


For example in the recent book on the nuclear war (THE 2020 COMMISSION REPORT ON THE NORTH KOREAN NUCLEAR ATTACKS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES A SPECULATIVE NOVEL) 7 deliverable 200kt weapons were not sufficient to deter an adversary.

[Skybird]

A single 10 kt device already would make Europe pay any sum of money demanded if threatened with this device being brought to explosion in any European major city.



And what do you get if you have for example wind from north to south and you detonate a dirty 10 kt bomb over the beach in the North? Look at a map, then you know what would happen. Radioactive fallout travelling 100 km and more with the wind is nothing mysterious. This scenario would contaminate most of the vital Israeli state and economy and supply infrastructure and most of the currently inhabitated areas. The econiomical heart of Israel is in the North - where it is the smallest in West-East-spanning.



Consider nuclear contamination moving with south-bound wind when occuring durign an explosion in Haifa, travelling 100-120 km.


(map is gone)


Must not be further explained, I think. The map speaks for itself. Scale in the top left corner.




Why these academic finger exercises, ikalugin? It leads nowhere. For a small country like Israel, already a single small nuclear detonation is absolutely life-threatening.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Skybird

And I am talking about a Drive-the-Jews-into-the-ocean strike. Nothing else it all is about.

I don't think that will happen at least not with nuclear weapons. Y'all have been talking a lot about the physical applications of war and the impact that the use of nuclear weapons would have, but we are talking about an area of the world that is Holy to the Jews and to the Muslims and to the Christ followers.

If Israel were to be nuked it would keep it from being Holy for 99 years minimum and start looking like Chernobyl looks like today with no vegetation.

The Palestinians would suffer, the Jews would suffer, the entire region would suffer for decades.

With that in mind lets talk about the leaders of Israel and the leaders of Iran are the real problems. I have enough problems with spell check and their names, but you know what I mean, right?

The leader of Israel has bumping this threat to attack Iran for years and the leader of Iran has warned that if you do we will destroy you.

Iran can't afford to attack first due to the retaliation from Israel ... Iran already has a small civil war going with discontent of the younger generation complaining that too much money is being spent on the military and terrorism and basically hatred of the state of Israel.

That leaves the leader of Israel to attack first and he is already under attack by his own countrymen for bribes and payoffs and accused of being dishonest.

I don't think either side will do each other the disfavor of attacking first, but I could be wrong. Iran certainly is up to no good in Syria and inching closer and closer to a land war supplying rockets to Hamas in the Gaza strip.

Plus if there was a war what would Russia and America do? Stare at each other in disbelief and shrug.

I don't think so

We can't afford a war ... heck America can't even afford another hurricane. Russia isn't ready yet (even though they act like it) to finish off the human race with an all out nuclear war over Israel/Iran problems.

Let it slide ... we have all been here before. Wasn't there a movie where the two leaders duked it out at the end. That's what I would like to see ... get these two leaders into a ring together and let them duke it out.

Winner takes all instead of killing off 1/3 of the human race

[Skybird]

We are talking about religion, Mr. Quattro. Religion is irrational, Muhammad encouraged martyrdom, and Islam dispises Jews since Muhammad'sdays. And Palestinians - outside their lovely little piece of land they are absolutely disliked in the Arab world, since their little intermezzo in Jordan at the latest. Other Arabs instrumentalise them, but they do not like them nor want to support them.

Muhammad did want Jerusalem for just one reason: because the others also wanted it, and he wanted to deny it to them. That simple.

Anyhow, a people that has suffered the attempted genocide of the holocaust hardly will base its fate on good faith and the hope that the others will not commit any mean acts against them. And who would call them out for that? Considering the also mentioen ddnager of proliferaiton of nculear devices and tehcnology, that is another argument to deny Iran nukes. Two Pakistans and North Koreas are two bad nukie-guys enough already. We must not repeat that mistake a third time.

I am not certain that Israel can strike Iran all by itself. But I would certainly wish it could. And who onoiws, others are hostile to Iran as well and the locla reigmes have learned that said reigmes are not threatened in their exiostence by Israel at all. Israel might find unexpected allies if going for Iran.

[nikimcbee]

IAEA Safeguard Inspector assess Iran

I mis-read it and thought it said IKEA inspectors.
Weaponized Swedish meatballs maybe?

[ikalugin]

More like "Do it yourself nuclear reactor" I would say.


With the good old delivery

[Catfish]

Ikea's Köttbulllar fallout is literally breathtaking, but the half-value time is around two days.

While radioactive fallout is good to last for some hundred thousand years.

If i see Ikalugin write about "manageable fallout", "handling" and "removal" of radiocative material (sorry, not possible) i'd be interested in a description of a "limited nuclear war" as well as some hints in handling the worldwide raise of radioactivity after those glorious nuclear strikes and those atmospheric atom test days.
(Which b.t.w. make those pre WW2 ship wrecks and their steel so interesting for modern science. It is impossible to produce steel without radioactive contamination after 1945 due to radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere. Clean, non-contaminated non-radioactive steel is mandatory for certain scientific instruments.)

Anyone remembers the A10 Warthog 'fart' cannon firing uranium bullets for better tank penetration? The soil in the Kosovo region, in the middle east and in certain training facilities of the US are polluted for the next hundred thousand years, too. Or sinking nuclear ractors in the sea and lending the Novaja Semlja area to norwegian fishing trawlers.

Only a dumbhead not bothered by any physics education, or a one-sided military-mind, or a politician could think about a nuclear strike at all, let alone think about calculating a war in a densely populated area.
The fact that "reasonable" (lmao) people even think about that speaks volumes. Oh Trump, Putin, Erdoghan.. i see. I rest my case. Mankind is dumb and will most probably kill itself soon anyway.


On the other hand.. why do scientists and educated people let such sh..-heads kill people and pollute and destroy the earth? Why does mankind let just of all the idiots get in those positions and passively accept their neanderthal behaviour and ignorance? Why don't we just destroy them? Only joking. Of course.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

I mis-read it and thought it said IKEA inspectors.
Weaponized Swedish meatballs maybe?

Dammit man, I was going to make that joke!