| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| U.S. Military Options Against Iran? |
| 2006-03-12 |
| When it comes to dealing with Iran's nuclear program, Pentagon planners and outside experts say there are no attractive options, but there are options. "There is a broad and widely dispersed program infrastructure that could be targeted," said National Defense University professor Richard Russell, a former CIA analyst. "It's not an easy target package to target but you could do it in a sustained aerial bombardment campaign." With U.S. forces tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials are reluctant to even speculate about military action against Iran. The current U.S. strategy is to apply diplomatic pressure on Iran through the U.S. Security Council, which is expected to take up the Iranian issue next week. But the question is: What if diplomacy fails? "I think there is a very real probability the first choice of diplomacy is going to be shown to be a dead end," said John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org. "And then everybody is going to have to confront what your second choice is — is it atomic ayatollahs or is it the military option?" There are significant obstacles to military action. For one, not all the targets are known. U.S. officials believe there are secret Iranian nuclear facilities that are not known by U.S. intelligence. And even the known sites are well-fortified and spread out across the country, making them difficult to destroy with air power alone. But privately, senior Pentagon planners believe U.S. airstrikes could significantly disrupt and delay the Iranian nuclear program, setting it back years. It's a view shared by many military analysts. There are about a dozen known high-value targets, including uranium mines, research and development facilities and, most importantly, the Natanz uranium enrichment plant. Natanz is considered the crown jewel of the Iranian nuclear program. Experts believe it is big enough to produce enough weapons-grade uranium to fuel 20 nuclear bombs a year.But Natanz is also heavily fortified. It's buried at least 30 feet underground and perhaps much deeper. Natanz is also believed to be protected by concrete walls that are nearly 10 feet thick. It's unclear whether it can be penetrated by even the biggest "bunker-buster" bombs in the U.S. arsenal. If airstrikes can't destroy Natanz, however, they could severely damage it. "You might not be able to get the deep bunker if it's sufficiently deep but you can certainly create a lot of rubble on top of it," said Russell. "And make it very difficult to dig out the material underneath it. "You can delay, disrupt and kick the can down the road," he said. "You are not going to solve it. Ultimately, you need to have a political resolution in some shape or form, but the military instrument can help you achieve that diplomatic resolution and it can also buy you time." |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #20 *just shakes head* I'm predicting nationalist sentiment and swinging behind the regime more than anti-regime revolution, regardless of how secular the people may be... |
| Posted by: Edward Yee 2006-03-12 23:28 |
| #19 #7 is right about regime change. It is the most important aspect. And targeting the people who make up the Islamofascist regime is as important as taking out the WMD. The leaders should be relentlessly hunted during the sustained air campaign and organizations like the Revolutionary guards and Basij militia should be hit hard. A regime hating population could be most useful in spotting and reporting the whereabouts of these forces. |
| Posted by: VRWconspiracy 2006-03-12 22:32 |
| #18 America is a kill or be killed, fight or die, win or be slave, etc. situation - Americans should not be so concerned about any successful destruction of America cities becuz, to use the Chicom defense white paper as example, ALL AMERICANS, LEFT OR RIGHT OR CENTER, etc. WILL END UP BEING EXTERMINATED/GENOCIDED ANYWAYS, EVEN MANY IFF NOT ALL OF THE US LEFT AND ANTI-AMER AMERICANS. "Accept Socialism-OWG, or Die" > Commie and Socialist way of saying we die either quickly or by delayed slaughter. The Chicoms > Amer-specific holocaust is good for everyone, including those Milyuhns and Zilyuhns of Americans whom will be slaughtered. CLINTONISM > Americans demand to be slaughtered. As for Iran , many Conservative-Rightist Media are in favor of Bush going after Iran's specific mil capabilities/assets without necessarily inducing "regime change" - they, like the Mullahs and MadMoud, know the risk of mil intervention and geopol confrontation amongst the major nuclear states is high. In a world dominated by HYPER-POWER+ AMERICA, DEMOCAPITALISM, the ANGLOSPERE, PROSPEROUS OR WORLD-VITAL WESTERN DEMOCRACIES, and JUDEOCHRISTIANITY, the status quo is unacceptable to Radicals, Leftists-Socialists and Lefty Utopians, etc whose anti-democratic nations face premanent, ever-lasting regressions, geopol weakness and future, inevitable oblivion-irrelevancy like the USSR. FOR WEAK NATIONS > MANIFEST DESTINY, ETC. IS NOW OR NEVER, BY FORCE IF NECESSARY. AMERICA EITHER CONCEDES OR SURRENDERS, OR AMER'S ENEMIES WILL TAKE THE WHOLE WORLD WITH THEM TO HELL. Iran = North Korea > their state's bellicosities is as much ags Russia-China's ambition for hegemony as it is ags the USA-West and political democracy. Someone affirms that these failed minor Rogue States are "great powers", or these same will wilfully destroy themselves getting both and all sides destroyed. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-03-12 21:52 |
| #17 how about one Iranian bribed to sabotage a key nuclear facility the day a key Mullah is there or how about 10 democracy advocates trained to plant time lapse igniters in the house of prayer leaders or... |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-03-12 18:28 |
| #16 When considering the cost of war, many things have to be entered into the equation. One of those tings is how much might it cost us NOT to go to war. While a total war against Iran may run into the hundreds of billions of dollars, the PERMANENT loss of Manhattan, Chicago, Baltimore, Savannah, Miami, New Orleans, One thing that is abundantly clear: the shortsightedness of scrapping almost half our military after the collapse of the Soviet Union is now coming back to haunt us. We need AT LEAST ten additional divisions to fight the "war on terror", and we needed them two years ago. We can make up part of the shortfall by calling up the retired reserves and former military that might want to return, but they still need equipment, logistics, and housing. Our economy needs to make at least a pretense of going on a war footing. If Congress acted immediately, we could POSSIBLY have everything we need within two or three years - but the Ayatollahs may have the bomb by then, inf not sooner. Any way you look at it, we're going to have to do something serious, and it's going to cost - money, equipment, and lives. The sooner we get started, the lower the cost. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-03-12 16:15 |
| #15 Lone Ranger I don't think Iran HAS 50 port facilities in the entire country. Al |
| Posted by: Frozen Al 2006-03-12 15:35 |
| #14 lotp, do you realize that if the JDAM price is $20,000 per copy, then we can actually make them for about $1,000 per copy ? Ummm .... no. ;-) |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-03-12 15:12 |
| #13 Typical MSM: "there are no attractive options" "not an easy target package to target" "With U.S. forces tied down" "U.S. officials are reluctant to even speculate" "significant obstacles to military action" "difficult to destroy with air power alone" Hard to believe we're a superpower. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-03-12 14:58 |
| #12 MOABs are propaganda bombs - somewhat like the Tsar bomb. Better many perfectly guided 1 ton friends of peace. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-03-12 14:56 |
| #11 I'm ok with JDAMs - even better with nbunker busters. But I wanna see a MOAB or two - we were promised MOABs in Tora Bora and never got our MOABs :-) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-03-12 14:43 |
| #10 lotp, do you realize that if the JDAM price is $20,000 per copy, then we can actually make them for about $1,000 per copy ? First, we'll teach a few Mexicans how to solder. Then... |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-03-12 14:08 |
| #9 lotp, you've sold me. Crank up the 52s and carpet bomb Tehran. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-12 13:44 |
| #8 yep. And while JDAMs and other smart munitions are powerful and accurate, I hope all those who advocate a massive bombing campaign ALSO remember that they are expensive. Okay by me, but don't carp about Bush's spending levels if we throw those at Iran. By 'expensive' I mean 'lots and lots and lots of $$ per'. Don't know the current prices, but at the start of OIF JDAMs were estimated to run $20,000 per, for instance. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-03-12 13:04 |
| #7 Regime change is the important issue here. The strikes must destroy their capability to produce Nukes, cripple their economic base, and set the grounds for regime change. It must also be rebuildable, at an affordable price. We and the rest of the world would have to go in and support the new regime and repair the infrastructure. Historically, the idea of just walking away is a bad idea. We just walked from Afghanistan when the Russians left and now "we" are fighting those who took over. When we plan for war we must also plan for actions after war, or our kids will end up fighting them again. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-03-12 12:55 |
| #6 Lone Ranger: There have been reports that Iran moves their mobile missiles every couple of days. Probably untrue, but they hold enough to do serious damage to Persian Gulf oil fields, and can't all be neutralized. I have doubts that many missiles would be launched. Iran is leveraged in the sense that they have to import processed fuel, and have hostile populations - Kurds, Azerizis, etc - within their borders. Ahmadenejad was a squeak-in candidate, having dubious experience as a doltish Mayor of Teheran, and his national policies are unpopular even in the largest city. He has had to order mass arrests against women, students, striking drivers, and Sufis. In order to maintain Basiji (Mullah-version of the Muttawa Storm Troopers) support he has to blow off rhetorical steam, in annoying memory of the "Karbala" memory circus. The real concern is proliferation, in context of his mistaken impression of US weakness and lack of resolve. When the bombing begins, the public will turn against their little tyrant, and only a handful of fanatics would "martyr" for that weasel. I suspect that regime change would come quickly, followed by a secular revolution. Almost 3 decades of stagnation and massive population explosion - inherent to lowering the age of marriage of females, to 9 - have put Iran into near social collapse. Strategic bombing will do to the Mullah-dictatorship what the Bam earthquake did to that rural basketcase. |
| Posted by: Listen To Dogs 2006-03-12 08:19 |
| #5 Couldn't agree more Lone Ranger. Limited war just postpones judgment day. |
| Posted by: HV 2006-03-12 07:57 |
| #4 Shermanize Iran. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-12 07:56 |
| #3 wasn't there a 'gay bomb' the USAF created? now that would be a long term population buster! |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-03-12 05:46 |
| #2 That's a serious action plan, Lone Ranger - I'd like to see the regime and its henchmen extra-dead, stakes through the heart or vaporized dead, and the nuke facilities rubbleized or entombed forever - but I can certainly get behind your sentiments... It all depends on the available resources, I guess. How many GPS munitions will we have by (insert your MM DoomsDay guess here)? |
| Posted by: Cloth Snatch4013 2006-03-12 05:45 |
| #1 I have a thought. Why bother with the direct uranium enrichment infrastructure? Leave that for the period after the survivors sign an UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER. How do we get there? Well, here's a start: 1) Take out every electrical generating plant in the country. 2) Tale out every radar dish and jet-capable runway in the country. 3) Take out every river dam in the country. 4) Take out every railroad bridge, and the top 20 railway marshalling yards in the country. 5) Take out the top 50 ocean port facilities. 6) Drop a big paint bomb on every municipal waterworks, along with leaflets in Farsi saying that these plants are going down next. Pause the military campaign for a breather, and to let the diplomats see what they can do. Screw the "surgical strike" - let's go back to the "total war" that this really needs to be. Show the rest of the Islamic world some "shock and awe" to help them think a little straighter. The Ayatollahs want to be back in the Seventh Century anyway. Be my guests, assholes. |
| Posted by: Lone Ranger 2006-03-12 01:20 |