Archived material Access restricted Article

Today's Front Page   View All of Sun 03/12/2006 View Sat 03/11/2006 View Fri 03/10/2006 View Thu 03/09/2006 View Wed 03/08/2006 View Tue 03/07/2006 View Mon 03/06/2006
2006-03-12 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
U.S. Military Options Against Iran?
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Pappy 2006-03-12 00:00|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [6517 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#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||   2006-03-12 01:20|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 05:45|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 05:46|| Front Page Top

#4 Shermanize Iran.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-12 07:56||   2006-03-12 07:56|| Front Page Top

#5 Couldn't agree more Lone Ranger. Limited war just postpones judgment day.
Posted by HV 2006-03-12 07:57||   2006-03-12 07:57|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 08:19|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 12:55|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 13:04|| Front Page Top

#9 lotp, you've sold me. Crank up the 52s and carpet bomb Tehran.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-12 13:44||   2006-03-12 13:44|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 14:08|| Front Page Top

#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">Frank G  2006-03-12 14:43||   2006-03-12 14:43|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 14:56|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 14:58|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 15:12|| Front Page Top

#15 Lone Ranger
I don't think Iran HAS 50 port facilities in the entire country.

Posted by Frozen Al">Frozen Al  2006-03-12 15:35||   2006-03-12 15:35|| Front Page Top

#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, San FranciscoLos Angeles, or San Diego to a dirty nuke could easily run into the TRILLIONS of dollars. We have a good example in New Orleans: not a nuke but a hurricane, a "natural disaster". The cost of rebuilding will be tens of billions of dollars, the lost commerce will run equally as high, and there's no radioactive waste to clean up, no long-term health hazards, or PERMANENT loss of a major US port.

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">Old Patriot  2006-03-12 16:15|| http://oldpatriot.]">[http://oldpatriot.]  2006-03-12 16:15|| Front Page Top

#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

Posted by mhw 2006-03-12 18:28||   2006-03-12 18:28|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 21:52|| Front Page Top

#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||   2006-03-12 22:32|| Front Page Top

#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||]">[]  2006-03-12 23:28|| Front Page Top

14:36 Icerigger
14:28 Poitiers-Lepanto
14:31 Icerigger
00:00 Edward Yee
23:56 Edward Yee
23:52 Rafael
23:51 Edward Yee
23:50 Edward Yee
23:47 Edward Yee
23:46 Edward Yee
23:39 Edward Yee
23:37 JosephMendiola
23:34 Edward Yee
23:33 Edward Yee
23:28 Edward Yee
23:20 Edward Yee
23:17 USN Ret.
23:13 JosephMendiola
23:09 DMFD
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:41 doc
22:41 phil_b
22:32 VRWconspiracy
22:30 Desert Blondie

Search WWW Search