| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran | |
| To Destroy Iran's Nuclear Bomb Program, 350 Targets Must Be Hit | |
| 2004-11-19 | |
| DEBKA, add salt, EFL: On Wednesday, November 17, outgoing US secretary of state Colin Powell said to reporters during a South American tour: US has intelligence that Iran is working to adapt missiles for the delivery of nuclear weapons. "I have seen information that they not only have the missiles but are working hard to put the two together." The highly classified, unverified information Powell referred to was described in more detail by the Washington Post the next day: According to one official with access to the material, a "walk-in" source approached US intelligence earlier this month with more than 1,000 pages purported to be Iranian drawings and technical documents, including a nuclear warhead design and modifications to enable Iranian ballistic missiles to delivery an atomic strike.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly 182 just out on Friday, November 19, was the first publication to name the Nour garden suburb of Lavizan in northeast Tehran as yet another covert site Iran has concealed from the IAEA. There, not only is enrichment going forward but also tests on lethal gases and weaponized biological agents. According to DEBKAfile's Washington sources, the Pentagon's most recent game model on military measures to dispose of Iran's nuclear threat concludes it will be necessary to topple the Islamic republic's regime at the same time. | |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #27 We and our true allies have Iran surrounded on 3 fronts. The northern front is only good for a mullah escape route, if that. This is not only a nuke question by ending Tehran's exporting oil for terrorism. The current Islamic terrorism in Iraq will be greatly reduced without Iranian 'assistance'. |
| Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-11-19 9:10:05 PM |
| #26 Martin Luther King once said something to the effect: "Never hesitate to take up pursuit of a goal, just because it will take a long time to achieve results - the time will pass anyway." Amen. Let's get started on defanging Iran without further delay. It will be hard, it will take a long time, it will be expensive, it will cause backlash, it will cause seething, it will irritate our European "firends" etc. etc. Yeah, yeah, yeah - OK, let's get on with it. Iran's strength and potency is increasng every day. They are downright evil mother-fuckers. They've had it coming since 1979. So, lets get started returning them to the stone age. Start with a clear message: To all good Iranians: A wise man once said: "All that it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing." Your time has come. You good Iranians have 96 hours to rise up and clean house, and get the extremists out of power. After that, you will become collateral damage. 'Sorry about this, but if you don't handle this job on your own - immediately - we are going to handle it for you - and it won't be pretty. So shall the Persian War of 2005-2006 unfold. Maybe use NORKland for bombing practice. |
| Posted by: Lone Ranger 2004-11-19 8:15:39 PM |
| #25 I agree Frank. Realistically just take out the Revolutionary Guards, air defense and as many of the known WMD sites and let the house of cards collapse. |
| Posted by: BillH 2004-11-19 7:28:37 PM |
| #24 I say up the internal pressure first with a naval blockade of all Iranian oil shipments. Once things start stewing on the streets, pick off Natanz or Busheir and their largest naval, air force and Revolutionary Guards bases. That's the kind of canoe tipping that may get this deal done. |
| Posted by: Tibor 2004-11-19 7:25:25 PM |
| #23 not all 350 have to be hit - that's hyperbole. Tip the canoe and let the mullahs slide over the side |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-11-19 6:59:53 PM |
| #22 ... 350 Targets Must Be Hit 350 bombs or one REALLY big one |
| Posted by: A Jackson 2004-11-19 6:54:43 PM |
| #21 Shipman, What about Israel? What I meant is that Israel can't even afford to take one of these nuke warhead hits. Israel must take out the Iranian nuke threat. ABM is not going to cut it for Israel. But, protection for the U.S. is probably sufficient with massive rollouts of ABM's. |
| Posted by: Poison Reverse 2004-11-19 6:37:24 PM |
| #20 PR, my theory is to build enough of a safe guard against piss ant nuclear states to force them to either bankrupt themselves or give up the game. Yes, there's a hell of a risk, life is a risky damn business. Israel is an ally. So is Great Britain. What's the question? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-11-19 6:18:52 PM |
| #19 MJH- The lethal fragment zone for a Mk84 is one mile - that means that it is possible to be killed by a fragment of the bomb at that distance. I'm assuming the USAF has some sort of data to back it up, but that is what it said in the technical data. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2004-11-19 6:08:02 PM |
| #18 Good grief, "Josh" - do you On second thought, of course you do. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2004-11-19 6:06:13 PM |
| #17 troll cleanup aisle 8 |
| Posted by: lex 2004-11-19 5:53:39 PM |
| #16 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Josh TROLL 2004-11-19 5:53:07 PM |
| #15 Blogger NEMESIS on possible alternative to bombs - hypervelocity projectiles: http://nemesisonerousdolorous.blogspot.com/2004/09/here-they-go-again.html The US military knows. I don’t, you don’t, and Henry Solkoski is certainly no longer current. But every day and in every way very smart people here are thinking up dastardly things to do to those who are trying to kill us. And that means that the Iranians could be in for what is colloquially known as a big fucking surprise. At least that is my sincerest hope. |
| Posted by: Bernie 2004-11-19 5:51:51 PM |
| #14 Cruisers in the Gulf could provide some protection for Israel. No amount of ABM would stop the Iranians from trying to smuggle something out. If they were caught in the act, it might well be considered an act of war, but I'm not sure the mullahs are sane enough to think that one through. |
| Posted by: Dishman 2004-11-19 5:45:09 PM |
| #13 Shipman, Please explain your thoughts a little further. Do your really want to depend on an ABM concerning a nuke warhead? What about Israel? |
| Posted by: Poison Reverse 2004-11-19 5:12:33 PM |
| #12 Sounds like a rehash of the Atlantic article. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-11-19 4:58:43 PM |
| #11 Forget it. None of the above. Build like hell on the ABM system and render a small ICBM threat irrelevant and way too costly to maintain. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-11-19 4:54:51 PM |
| #10 This is no time for the usual 500lb or 2000lb laser guided bombs, unless it is a air defense target. The newer 500lb and 2000lb bunker busters must be used on every sortie in the initial phase. In my opinion, acquiring air bases is not a problem. Air bases in Afganishtan, Quatar, Baharin, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, and Israel is available. The new long range F16's can be launched from SOME these bases. |
| Posted by: Poison Reverse 2004-11-19 4:51:02 PM |
| #9 Why not just use an Iraqi airbase for the air campaign? |
| Posted by: Justrand 2004-11-19 4:46:51 PM |
| #8 hmmm...interesting question Lex. Of course...if they are B-2's I'm not sure anyone would know, would they? The other question is from whom would you expect the backlash? We flank Iran on two sides (AFG and Iraq) and as I understand it have implemented CASPIAN SHIELD to contain Iran from the North. I doubt Egypt and Jordan would do anything other than seethe...and Syria knows they are in our crosshairs. As for the Iraqis, I imagine a majority have very little love for the mullahs. Although, there may be some problems with their coreligionist Shi'a in the south. |
| Posted by: mjh 2004-11-19 4:42:55 PM |
| #7 hmm...I would have thought Syria would be next. I guess I was wrong. |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-11-19 4:41:07 PM |
| #6 Do you think we can overfly Iraq without a backlash against Allawi? |
| Posted by: lex 2004-11-19 4:39:54 PM |
| #5 BTW...this from a forwarded email: "The bombs are two 500lb laser guided bombs. Anyone standing unprotected within a quarter mile of their impact is killed instantly. The total casualty count from this tne strike was 48." Is that 1/4 mile figure accurate? If so...can the kill zone for a 2000 lb. be estimated at 1 mile? I find that hard to believe. Probably a non-linear relationship, yes? |
| Posted by: mjh 2004-11-19 4:39:02 PM |
| #4 First take out the accessible air defense sites with cruise missiles. Then a sortie by multiple B-2's over Iran would not be too difficult, considering that it was done over Afghanistan and that we could enable aerial refueling enroute over Iraq...Assuming the same mission capable rate as during Enduring Freedom (55%) that would be approximately 10 B-2's which can each drop 16 separately targeted 2000lb. MK-84's. That's 160 separate targets. Carrier-based US or Israeli aircraft could pick up the slack thereafter. |
| Posted by: mjh 2004-11-19 4:37:09 PM |
| #3 Hitting three hundred and fifty sites is not out of the question. At least not for the U.S. Air Force. At present, there are no air bases within range for carrying out stages two and three. Diego Garcia is close enough. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2004-11-19 4:33:05 PM |
| #2 apparently someone has been counting. |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-11-19 4:32:47 PM |
| #1 To paraphrase the Chinese sages, "the road to a thousand site bombing campaign begins with a single bomb!" |
| Posted by: borgboy 2004-11-19 4:28:08 PM |