| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| McInerney: Israel capable of air strike on Iran |
| 2006-07-18 |
| By Rowan Scarborough Israel is in the best position militarily in its history to mount air strikes against Iran, after a decade of buying U.S.-produced long-range aircraft, penetrating bombs and aerial refueling tankers. Tel Aviv has ratcheted up the volume in attacking the hard-line Islamic regime as it fights the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. In the past, Israeli politicians have talked openly of attacking Iranian nuclear sites to prevent the U.S.-designated terror state from building atomic warheads. Israel has purchased 25 $84 million F-15I (I for Israel) Ra'am, a special version of the U.S. F-15E long-range interdiction bomber. It also is buying 102 of another long-range tactical jet, the $45 million F-16I Sufa. About 60 have been delivered. The Jewish state also is buying 500 U.S. BLU-109 "bunker buster" bombs that could penetrate the concrete protection around some of Iran's underground facilities, such as the uranium enrichment site at Natanz. The final piece of the enterprise is a fleet of B-707 air-to-air refuelers that could nurse strike aircraft as they made the 900-mile-plus trip inside Iran, dropped their bombs and returned to Israel. "They have the capability to strike Iran," said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney, a former fighter pilot who has trained with Israelis. "It would be limited, though. They could do 30 to 40 'aim points' in the array. I'm not worried about them hitting the targets. They will suffer losses, but they are capable of doing it." He said Israeli fighter pilots are "the best in the world. I've flown against them. They train better. They get more flying time." Perhaps just as important as weapon systems is airspace. The most direct route would be through Jordanian and Iraqi airspace. Two Israeli pilots showed that they could navigate both without being shot down in 1981, when they flew the 600 miles to the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad, dropped their bombs and returned over Jordan to an air base in southern Israel. Today, the United States, not Saddam Hussein, controls Iraq's vast airspace. Military analysts suggest the United States might approve the mission passively by letting the jets fly both ways unencumbered. Gen. McInerney said the United States must grant airspace rights. "They really can't do this without us," he said. "I wouldn't have them do it. We can do it much more aggressively and more decisively. We shouldn't force the Israelis to do it when we should do it." The retired pilot called Iran's air defenses "1960s vintage" and not as good as the Iraqi defenses that Israeli pilots avoided in 1981. Vice President Dick Cheney last year revealed Bush administration suspicions that Israel may take pre-emptive action. "One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked, that if, in fact, the Israelis became convinced the Iranians had significant nuclear capability, given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," he said on the "Imus in the Morning" radio show. In the Osirak strike, both F-16s made the round trip without aerial refueling, but targets in Iran are at least 300 miles farther away. Although the F-15Is and F-16Is have a combat radius of more than 1,000 miles, the numbers would indicate that the mission might require aerial refueling, thus complicating an already daunting operation. However, the Web site GlobalSecurity.org says the F-15Is and F-16Is "extended flight range reportedly allows Israeli forces to attack targets well within Iran without having to refuel." [link to above] Israeli political leaders have pressed the Bush administration to halt Iran's nuclear weapons program. At the same time, some have publicly stated that Israel will take unilateral action to destroy Iranian facilities if Washington fails to stop it. |
| Posted by:Sholuth Flotch4186 |
| #11 "But it's commonly known that DOD has been working on hardened systems since the 80s." One of those rather obscure reasons that some of the military's gear, compared to off the shelf stuff, is so damned expensive. Anginens Threreng8133 - I believe Bush when he says he's not telling Israel what to do militarily, but that doesn't mean he's not making clear what actions he'll back or not. Given today's Senate vote, I believe many of the questions about the political costs he'd face have been answered - and given him very public ammunition to support Israel. I believe we have a green light for almost everything short of nukes regarding Syria and Iran, for very heavily supporting any resistance within Iran that's showing promise, for pushing the obvious conclusion that this will never end without decisive actions. Stop-gap and half measures lead to more "cycles of violence" (an LGF joke, LOL) - it's got to stop... and the only solution is to go after the sources. I hope I'm reading the political tea leaves correctly, anyway. BTW, I have really enjoyed your posts, please keep it up! |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-07-18 21:59 |
| #10 The IAF will not do anything without US support. For the sake of the next generation of Western Civilization, I hope they get it. |
| Posted by: Anginens Threreng8133 2006-07-18 21:38 |
| #9 That's classified. But it's commonly known that DOD has been working on hardened systems since the 80s. I would venture to say that our civilian infrastructure is quite vulnerable but our military capabilities rather less so. How MUCH less so is unknown, to me at least. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-07-18 18:42 |
| #8 Agreed. This is reserved for US flyboys, many of whom are salivating of the possibility. Where is the US in terms of EMP? |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-07-18 18:29 |
| #7 Hey Rory, who said Israel? |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2006-07-18 18:00 |
| #6 ^^^ But there's no way Israel could generate enough sorties for that. As McInerney says: "They could do 30 to 40 'aim points' in the array." |
| Posted by: Rory B. Bellows 2006-07-18 17:49 |
| #5 One thing we're seeing now in Lebanon (and seen in Serbia), you don't have to hit specific sites. Just wipe out the infrastructure. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2006-07-18 17:24 |
| #4 Iranian AD sucks. The only medium/long range AA missiles are the ancient I-Hawks and SA-5s (60's and 70's tech). The SA-15s they are receiving from Russia are short range (20,000 ft). Israel or the US will come in at high altitude and the Iranians won't be able to do much but watch. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-07-18 13:18 |
| #3 Russia's selling Iran about thirty phased array radars. Once those are in place and active only the US' stealthed missiles and aircraft could get in unseen/safely. Of course, there are also HARM's for taking out those phased array radars. Personally, this stuff about getting in without being seen seems silly. Let 'em see the armada coming. They'll light up their stuff, and see it all get flattened before the MMs have time to get away with the loot. HARMs for the radars and AA sites, JDAMs and bunker busters, cruise missiles and tacnukes for everything else. |
| Posted by: FOTSGreg 2006-07-18 12:47 |
| #2 buying up those "barely used" Russian GPS jammers from Baathists? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-07-18 10:31 |
| #1 Unfortunately Iran is upgrading its air defenses thanks to the Russians. There is a window of opportunity that will close. |
| Posted by: JAB 2006-07-18 09:47 |