Article

2007-04-28 Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Israel PM : Iran could be severly disabled by firing 1000 cruise missiles in a 10-day attack

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Oztralian 2007-04-28 07:56|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Yeah, particularly if most of them were nuke-tipped.

Posted by Mac 2007-04-28 08:12|| 2007-04-28 08:12|| Front Page Top

#2 More of this "asymmetric warfare". bullshit. The way to deal with Iran---and to sent a message to the rest of Dar el Sociopath---is to take out their infrastructure.

Posted by gromgoru 2007-04-28 08:26|| 2007-04-28 08:26|| Front Page Top

#3 Not to mention the bombs from the aircraft too.

And the B-52 arclight strikes.

And the special forces raids.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-04-28 08:42|| 2007-04-28 08:42|| Front Page Top

#4 Iran would face further sanctions if it has not stopped enrichment by a new Security Council deadline of May 24.

Is that May 24, 2006? Or May 24, 3510?

Posted by Bobby 2007-04-28 09:25|| 2007-04-28 09:25|| Front Page Top

#5 Come on Darth! B-52s good but I prefer a little dose of B-2 Stealth lovin'.

Posted by Crurt Lumplump3873 2007-04-28 09:38|| 2007-04-28 09:38|| Front Page Top

#6 Iran says it is developing nuclear technology for power generation ~~the West fears it is trying to~~ but it is really building a bomb since it is sitting on some of the world's largest oil reserves

There, that's fixed.

Posted by JohnQC 2007-04-28 10:09|| 2007-04-28 10:09|| Front Page Top

#7 And we will set back their nuclear program by 10 years, which they will redouble their efforts to rebuild.

The problem here is that we need to not only destroy their nuclear infrastructure, their military and IRG, but we need to take away those resources they use to both pay for their nuclear program, and menace Persian Gulf oil shipping.

This means they must lose both Khuzestan and Iranian Kurdistan.

After some serious pounding from the air to their military, one or two US divisions do a rapid slicing movement from North to South, slicing off both Kurdistan and Khuzestan.

The Iraqi army and the Kurdish Peshmurga then occupy those areas to both "purify" them of any remaining Persian presence, and defend them against what little remains of the Iranian army and IRG.

The Persians man on the street will probably let it go, because we won't have invaded Persia proper, and they don't care for squat about either Kurds or Arabs.

Since the Iranian military will have been so thoroughly pounded, we also might persuade Perv to take over Iranian Baluchistan, which would be the icing on the cake. It would make Perv far more powerful, giving Pakistan lots more mineral resources, and giving him enough juice to really put the blocks to his own radical Islamists.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-04-28 10:19|| 2007-04-28 10:19|| Front Page Top

#8 I agree fully with Anonymouse. It would more important to eliminate Iran's capability to produce nuclear weapons entirely. I don't want to see the U.S. or it's allies including Israel having to deal with this nonsense again 10 years from now. Iraq being a good example of not finishing the job.

Regime change would have also factor into this. If Iran were to succeed with the ability to launch nuclear missiles whether locally produced or bought from the Norks, there would be a chain reaction; no pun intended for all of the other nations in the Middle East to develop their own nuclear military program.

If a 1000 missiles over 10 days could set Iran back 10 years, 10 times that amount might be sufficient to permanently take out that capability or at least, provide a disincentive to try it again.

The use of conventional weaponry would be more desirable due to the risk of radioactive fallout in the region and the risk to those nations favorable to the West and Israel.

Posted by Victor Emmanuel Thearong4923 2007-04-28 11:02|| 2007-04-28 11:02|| Front Page Top

#9 I agree fully with Anonymouse. It would more important to eliminate Iran's capability to produce nuclear weapons entirely. I don't want to see the U.S. or it's allies including Israel having to deal with this nonsense again 10 years from now. Iraq being a good example of not finishing the job.

Regime change would have also factor into this. If Iran were to succeed with the ability to launch nuclear missiles whether locally produced or bought from the Norks, there would be a chain reaction; no pun intended for all of the other nations in the Middle East to develop their own nuclear military program.

If a 1000 missiles over 10 days could set Iran back 10 years, 10 times that amount might be sufficient to permanently take out that capability or at least, provide a disincentive to try it again.

The use of conventional weaponry would be more desirable due to the risk of radioactive fallout in the region and the risk to those nations favorable to the West and Israel.

Posted by Victor Emmanuel Thearong4923 2007-04-28 11:02|| 2007-04-28 11:02|| Front Page Top

#10 Sorry, y'all got it wrong.

Destroying their nuclear sites won't help.

Whacking their domestic refineries will help only a little.

The Mad Mullahs need to go. You can do it loudly or quietly; I prefer the latter so as to keep them guessing. Was that an auto accident or an assassination? Did Ayatollah Mahmoud take a 'drive into the desert'?

Get rid of the Mullahs and the traditional, conservative influences in Iran -- the shopkeepers -- will take over. Problem solved.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2007-04-28 11:06|| 2007-04-28 11:06|| Front Page Top

#11 Sorry about the Dup entry moderators, I was not sure if the first one went through.

Just a quick note, your site rocks. A good portion of the content that your Rantburger's post, don't usually appear on the general media. Especially content that runs contrary to the MSM.

Rantburger's keep up the good work!

Posted by Victor Emmanuel Thearong4923 2007-04-28 11:09|| 2007-04-28 11:09|| Front Page Top

#12 Is Israel saying they have 1000 spare or near end of life cruise missiles?

Posted by 3dc 2007-04-28 12:40|| 2007-04-28 12:40|| Front Page Top

#13 The Mad Mullahs need to go.

Been saying this from day one. Decapitation of Iran's leadership is our top priority. Yes, wreck their nuclear R&D, but it is the ideological programmers that drive this mayhem. This is why a worldwide campaign of summary execution against Islam's clerical aristocracy is so important. Without a jihadist hand on the tiller, Islam has some remote chance of being steered back into a peaceful port. I hold little hope for it, but clearing the decks of their top brass is one of the few measures that offers even a remote chance.

Consider the case of Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi's capture. A huge contributor to global jihad has been taken off line. Few, if any, successors will be able to replicate his high level connections and depth of experience. This is the bane of high context cultures. While particular individuals obtain great benefit from positions of power, their exclusive repretoire of personal skills and contacts make them irreplaceable. This is how they maintain their status. Though most definitely not beneficial for the larger population, that is of little concern to gangsters such as these.

So it is with Islam's clerical aristocracy. They too represent the very highest level of interconnection and privilege that is most definitely not shared with underlings. Their status depends making themselves invaluable and so they covet the resources that do this. Conversely, this is what also makes Islam vulnerable. The irreplaceable nature of these power players means any significant attrition to Islam's top ranks eliminates a good old boy network which took years, if not decades, to build up and will not easily be replaced.

This is radical Islam's glass jaw and we are absolute fools to address only its militant wing. The indoctrinators are every bit as important and culpable, if not more so. They must be eliminated with the same alacrity we subject al Qaeda to. This is why I have ceased to draw any significant distinction between Islam's idological and military goals. It is also why I now regard Islam as a political ideology instead of a religion. Given these two factors, Islam's clerical apparatus becomes its Joint Chiefs of Staff and therefore requires swift elimination.

Saddest of all is how we will probably have to elect an atheist to the Oval Office, as any religious president likely will be far too squeamish about executing a so-called religion's top tier of leadership. I also maintain that this is probably one factor that currently inhibits implementation of the campaign mentioned above.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-04-28 14:07|| 2007-04-28 14:07|| Front Page Top

#14 #10 - That's what the US thought about removing the Saddamite leadership in Iraq. Didn't work out that way. The Mad Mullahs are in power in Iran because a lot of Iranians like it that way, protests & objections by a minority notwithstanding. However, it would be extremely difficult for any Iranian power structure to raise hell for the rest of the world without Iranian oil refineries, import/export facilities, electricity generation, and aircraft. These can be severely impeded by a sufficient number of cruise missiles. The US seems to lack sufficient ground forces to do much more than it is now doing in Iraq & Afghanistan, few can be spared for additional adventures in any case. The drawback is that the power structure of the Mullahs is on site, dug into its own network of subway tunnels, armed with its own cruise missiles & can severely restrict the export of oil to the rest of the world, for a few months anyway. The US hasn't even bothered to top off its own Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and whatever tremendous reserves Iraq may have are out of reach for the next decade or so due to the level of violence there. Firing cruise missiles into Iran may thus cause (1) severe restrictions in oil exports to the rest of the world and (2) a worldwide economic depression. Guess who would be blamed for (2), should that happen?
I agree with Zenster that the people of the West are "absolute fools" in dealing with the Jihad, but we have only ourselves to blame. Indoctrination for Jihad is built into Islam, which few Westerners realize. I suspect the Jihadi clerical leadership is harder to touch than it seems from this distance, short of saturation nuclear bombing of jihadi-supporting regions -- which I do not advocate.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-04-28 14:25|| 2007-04-28 14:25|| Front Page Top

#15 That's what the US thought about removing the Saddamite leadership in Iraq. Didn't work out that way.

I'd wager how a significant portion of that problem was related to how Saddam's power structure was composed of a Sunni minority group. That does not apply in Iran. We have enough reconaissance resources to know when Iran's mullahs meet. If we have to wipe out the entire majlis, so be it. Just so long as we nail a large number of the mullahs, Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Kahmeini. Clerics like Bashir, Qaradawi, Krekar and their like are sufficiently public where targeted assassinations of them would be rather simple. This needs to happen yesterday.

Indoctrination for Jihad is built into Islam, which few Westerners realize.

This is a crucial point which Robert Spencer of JihadWatch has been hammering on for some time now. It is why I no longer make any great distinction between radical Islamists and Islam itself. The Koran is a military handbook and repeatedly exhorts its followers to do violence in the name of global domination. Until that changes, Islam remains a political ideology and nothing else.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-04-28 14:41|| 2007-04-28 14:41|| Front Page Top

#16 If Iran is to be dealt with, it will be by the next American President as Bush/Cheney have been effectively neutered by the US populace. Americans do not object to a solution to Muslim outrages. What they object to is sacrificing valuable American lives and bodies in support of worthless Muslims. The nest President, most likely a Democrat, must operate like FDR in the thirties. There was adequate cause and alarm to act upon the Nazis from 1936 on. The American populace wanted nothing of war as they were beaten down and bloodied by the Depression. Even though FDR was inclined to side with the British in 1940, he knew he dared not even mention it, because the American public was not in favor. Only after Pearl Harbor could direct intervention be considered. And, even then, the US did not declare war on Germany. Hitler declared war on US. Once American public mood was turned, then the hard job of fighting could begin. When one considers the Democrat candidates, can any have this same capacity ? Maybe Hillary or Richardson, none of the others. This will be our condition in two years. The public consensus must be first, the attacks come second.

Posted by Woozle Elmeter2970 2007-04-28 15:39|| 2007-04-28 15:39|| Front Page Top

#17 barring an Iranian attack or hostage-taking attempt, you could be right. NEVER put it past the MM's to overplay their hand through arrogance or ignorance (or stupidity). Having Mookie skedaddle to Tehran was just such a misplay.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-04-28 15:52|| 2007-04-28 15:52|| Front Page Top

#18 Good plan Anonymouse. Given that the majority party and press are currently advocating surrender, theres zero chance it will be executed. But good plan nevertheless.

Posted by DMFD 2007-04-28 17:34|| 2007-04-28 17:34|| Front Page Top

#19 Steve, just drop them down a well.

Posted by RWV 2007-04-28 17:57|| 2007-04-28 17:57|| Front Page Top

#20 What's the maximum range of an Israeli cruise missile?

Posted by mrp 2007-04-28 19:01|| 2007-04-28 19:01|| Front Page Top

#21 depends how close the sub or the plane is that fires it - excepting the land based ones....
Then they could just fire from Kurdistan or Armenia

Posted by 3dc 2007-04-28 21:55|| 2007-04-28 21:55|| Front Page Top

23:56 Zenster
23:45 Old Patriot
23:26 trailing wife
23:20 newc
23:14 Pappy
23:12 RWV
23:00 Pappy
23:00 trailing wife
22:36 Mike
22:32 borgboy2001
22:25 Zenster
22:25 Pappy
22:24 FOTSGreg
22:22 FOTSGreg
22:21 Zenster
22:19 FOTSGreg
22:12 Zenster
22:10 Zenster
22:01 Helmuth, Speaking for N guard
21:59 Zenster
21:55 3dc
21:44 Zenster
21:39 Zenster
21:33 gromgoru