Israel vs. Iran in an all-out war

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Israel vs. Iran in an all-out war
jaythehistorian 8/3/2006 12:24:39 PM

WHY ISRAEL WILL decisively defeat IRAN if there is an all-out war. 1.Israel has more than 200 atomic devices vs Iran which may have 1 soon.Even if Iran bought nuclear devices from other rogue states, the retaliation from Israel would be the equivalent of 2,000 plus hiroshimas. 2.The 200 plus Israeli atomic devices are unstoppable by Iran i.e. up to 80 can be launched by submarines and the rest by ICBM or F-15s or F-16s 3.Israel has the world’s most advanced anti-ICBM missle umbrella which may be impenetrable by Iranian Shahib missles . Iran can only deliver their 1-2 atomic warheads by ICBMs with no other delivery capabilities. 4.Israel has a satellite system with multiple types of spy satellites which have reached the limit of possible resolution (defraction limit) generally thought to be about 10 centimeters and their satellite system is all weather. Together with their advanced UAV capabilities , this allows Israel to possess the most detailed photos and real-time imaging of all Iranian military installations . 5.The military technologic difference between Israel and Iran is wide. Israel has about 10% of the world-wide arms export market which based solely on merit and immensely competitive. IF anything, it is nothing short of a miracle and a tremendous tribute to Israel (jewish ) expertise that they sell to so many countries which never take the side of Israel in any dispute. There are those ,who imply much of Israel’s technological edge is due to massive American aid. However, that aid also has restrained the development of Israeli military technology. American military contractors regularly and understandably, attempt to undermine Israeli sale of military technology when it is in direct competition with American contractors’ efforts to sell abroad. Israel might have double the foreign military technologic sales if the US had never blanketly prohibited Israel selling directly to PRC. This is understandable. Iran sells nothing in world wide arms market. Their highly publicized Shahib 3 missle is nothing but a supped up version of the the 63 year old V2 Nazi ballistic missle. Israel supplies Israeli-developed military technology to most of the world’s top militaries including the USA, India, and China. China's J10 fighter is thought to be modeled on Israel’s Lavi.,the Israeli developed Jet fight. In terms of MBTs, Israel possesses 1500 consisting entirely of the modern highly regarded Merkava. Iran has approx. 500 all obsolete models including the T 72. In front-line aircraft Israel has approximately 800 with more than 500 being upgraded F15s and F16s. Israel also possesses in air refueling capabilities. Iran has about 250 front-line combat aircraft consisting mostly of obsolete older US and Russian fighters. It has no known in air refueling capability. Israel also is way ahead in production and use of UAVs and sells various models to many countries including Great Britain. There are other areas of military technology Israel is far more advanced than Iran.

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Hamilcar 12/19/2009 9:14:55 AM

gandolf 12/19/2009 7:31:13 AM

Hello.

If Israel goes it alone it could be rough, but when the bombs fall in Iran and the phone and power don?t work and everyone is looking for someone to take charge that creates chaos. Do it during the working day when everyone is at work people running around trying to get their kids from school more chaos cell phones don?t work and overload of the basic systems.

Most civilian casualties during modern bombing campaigns occur during daylight hours. There is a better time to destroy to destroy power plants and telephone exchanges. Also munitions, especially air launched guided or self-piloted ones, can go wild. Lot fewer casualties, if the stupid bomb hits an empty school.

Iran will strike out using everything she has and Iran will attack USA bases as they are closer to Israel and they have more short range rockets than long range rockets: most of their rockets are liquid-fueled and have to be filled before firing. The fuel is like jp-5 even a spark can set it off, so it must be stored in tanks and constantly circulated. Iran has less then a handful of solid rockets.

That makes psychotic sense I suppose, but why commit national suicide? Those US bases are in SUNNI territory. Won?t be the first or last Moslem civil war I?ve personally seen started over some stupid superstition or psychotic?s delusion that he is the Mahdi.

So it makes more sense to attack USA bases and ships than Israel. Iran can only hope that Syria or Lebanon will help them.

Again, why national suicide? The only place the Iranians can attack the US is in Iraq, Afghanistan or the GCC states from Iran?s national territory. That doesn?t make a whole lot of sense. We can expect a gigantic Middle East war with HEAVY NATO involvement, if they try that. Europe has to keep that oil flowing. The US can operate off North American stocks, but regime change becomes automatic once the SLOCs to the US armies are threatened. More logical to support an intense terrorist campaign like the Iranians do now in Somalia, Eritrea, Yemen, and Lebanon.

That?s not likely with Syria but Hizbollah might try something

See above remark.

I think Israel has 12 to 48 hours to do its worst to Iran before the Chinese and Russians and the muslim world demand Israel/USA stop. I would not be surprised if the Europeans would not be on board as they have to worry about their large and growing muslim communities. Israel should take out Iran?s oil fields so Iran can be turned into a poor country not just for 10 years but maybe 100. Can?t build an army selling pistachio nuts.

Once central war starts, it will be very hard to stop. Too much escalation and secondary and tertiary conflict events built into the scenario. Israeli air attack means Iranian terror missile launch. After that, it is off to the races. Iran?s first secondary move is attack tanker traffic in the Persian Gulf. That brings the US into the war immediately.

By taking out Iran?s oil fields China will hurt big time and Europe being no friend with Israel will feel the pain as well.

EU embargo against Israel: that is a tertiary war effect. China will do, as it does now, live off coal.

Just my thoughts while smoking a J : )) shalom

Peace.

Quote Reply

Shirrush Israel vs. Iran in an all-out war 12/19/2009 9:44:40 AM

To begin, I'd like to summarize a short reminder of both sides' rather complex strategic interests.

Iran's primary interest is the survival of its increasingly unpopular regime. To achieve this, the theocracy tries, rather successfully, to leverage traditional Persian and Muslim antisemitism while bolstering Persian imperialism, which, while being secondary in importance to the Mullahs, is nevertheless a permanent, unchangeable and factual Iranian interest. Persia's destiny is to be an empire, and both history and common sense vindicate this.

Islamic Iran has been attacking Israel, through its covert operation squads and a variety of Arab proxies, since its inception in 1979. This has been hugely popular with the crowds in the 1.5 G-strong Muslim world, and has provided Khomeinist Iran with most of its international support. Persia's imperial plan includes subduing the Arabs and their oil fields. The anti-Israel rethoric has been providential to the Mullahs, and it has, up till now, managed to trump even the historical Persian-Arab animus, thereby helping Iran make tangible advances in the Arab world.

Israel's interest is of course, to survive as a national entity on its national land. While Persian 25 centuries-old antisemitism is reminded to the Jews once a year only, the many centuries of shared history and the wide cultural commonalities make the prospect of a war with Iran singularly unpalatable to both the Israeli public and its democratically-elected government. There is no contention whatsoever, no pending territorial claims nor anything that could possibly justify a state of war between the two countries, except for the religiously-motivated enmity of the Mullahcracy.

In Israel's view, a victorious outcome would be a mutually profitable partnership with a post-Islamic Iran, that would also serve the strategic purpose of keeping the hopelessly barbaric Arabs and the ferocious Turks at bay. Call this a vassalship in the new Persian Empire if you want, but this has worked before and probably can in the near future.

From a military standpoint, it appears that while Iran has been playing chess, carefully positioning its pawns to surround the adversary for three decades, Israel has been playing peek-a-boo, or nothing at all.

All of Israel's minuscule territory, including its air force bases and strategic assets, is now within artillery range of Iran's Arab proxies, while Israel's ties with Caucasus countries and Gulf Arabs are commercial successes at best.

The United States, which have the only military capable of inflicting sufficient damage to the Iranian WMD and nuclear infrastructure to set it back for a couple of years and/or enable a regime change, is too broke and too dispirited to be expected to enter yet another war in the Middle East for the foreseeable future. Tiny Israel does not have the means to conduct an effective air campaign against a country as distant and as large as Iran, by conventional means. The only rational military option would be a preemptive nuclear strike, for which there is absolutely no proof that the capability exists (Thank you FS for coming up with the numbers).

The only hope, therefore, appears to rest on the frail shoulders of the Iranian opposition, and, of course, on G. Almighty if there is such a thing. What is at stake, simply put, is the prevention of the nuclear annihilation of two of the Worlds most ancient civilizations, but hey, who cares as long as the oil still flows?

Quote Reply

WarNerd 12/21/2009 3:49:35 PM

In an all-out war Israel cannot win, but Iran might not lose.

Iran cannot get any appreciable conventional forces near Israel without major regime changes in either Egypt, Jordan or Lebanon. Egypt and Jordan are both big majority Sunni nations who have learned that peace is better than war the hard way, so this is a near impossibility. Lebanon is possible by claiming first that their troops are volunteers for Hezbollah, then more open reenforcement after a successful coup, but Israeli intervention in support of the opposition is guaranteed if the revolution lasts more than a few days or an outright invasion before Iran can reinforce if not. Syria is a non-starter because the geography and economy do not support a major attack.

That leaves Iran with weapons of mass destruction. Not just nukes, but chemical and possibly biological weapons as well. Israel is too small to sustain major destruction and lose of population and survive because, while the surrounding nations will not allow Iran to use them as a base of operations, they would swarm over a badly injured Israel like a pack of jackals and allow passage for those without direct access (Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc) to help out if needed. Israel knows this and has based the nuclear retaliation on the principal of Samson in the temple, i.e. a final retaliatory strike taking as much of the Muslim world with them as possible. Israeli missiles are probably targeted on every Muslim capital, holy site, and major population center.

Odds are that the largest survivor groups in their Persian Gulf will be Shiite, not Sunni because of demographics. Iran may consider this a 'win' on the assumption that they will rule the Shiites (Not likely, they are Persian, not Arab, and to many people will blame them for the destruction.) The Arab governments knows this, that is why they privately are pushing for foreign intervention to stop Iran from getting deploying nuclear weapons.

While the political will for foreign military intervention appears to be lacking, there will be a window of opportunity between when Iran tests it's first nuclear weapon and has enough deployed to break Israel. What can happen in that window is anyone's guess, but an Israeli-Arab military alliance for a strike against Iran would not be impossible if the Arabs feel desperate enough. A more likely scenario is an Arab enforced economic embargo combined with a coalition of western forces holding the Strait of Hormuz open until Iran collapses.

Quote Reply

jaythehistorian Israel would win. 12/26/2009 1:23:09 AM

Everyone continues to accept the fallacy Israel due to it's size would suffer more destruction than Iran in any nuclear exchange.

This is totally inaccurate for several reasons. Israel's arsenal of nuclear weapons contains thermonuclear weapons despite what French Strategy believes. The father of the H bomb Edward Teller, actually spent time in Israel assisting them with the beginning of their nuclear weapons program including the goal of having thermonuclear weapons. While Israel is the only nation to have a nationwide anti-ballistic missle defense system, it is true that , as of now , it is definitely possible Iran could still have some of their missiles land in Israel. However, according to Anthony Cordesman 's review of the results of a possible nuclear exchange , Iran would definitely suffer much more damage. The yield of Israel's arsenal is much ,much greater than anything Iran could develop in the near future. Israel could also expand it's arsenal at the same rate or even at a greater rate than Iran. Israel is a world leader in high technology. It has the most companies on NASDAQ , the listing of the top high tech companies in the world , except for the US. It is also a world leader in the computer field. Those who believe Israel's high tech sector is just due to the yearly military aid from the US couldn't be more wrong. Although Iran is much larger than Israel the majority of Iran's industry is concentrated in Tehran. Tehran is located in a bowl. It is almost perfected situated to suffer maximum damage from a nuclear strike. Israel also has a second strike capability with their 5 Dolphin submarines. This would not only be a second strike which Iran would have immense difficulty defending against. It also guarantees , if other neighboring countries attempt to attack Israel, they would also suffer nuclear strikes.

Quote Reply

JTR~~ jaythehistorian 2/24/2010 3:59:43 PM

WHY ISRAEL WILL decisively defeat IRAN if there is an all-out war.
1.Israel has more than 200 atomic devices vs Iran which may have 1 soon.Even if Iran bought nuclear devices from other rogue states, the retaliation from Israel would be the equivalent of 2,000 plus hiroshimas.
2.The 200 plus Israeli atomic devices are unstoppable by Iran i.e. up to 80 can be launched by submarines and the rest by ICBM or F-15s or F-16s
3.Israel has the world?s most advanced anti-ICBM missle umbrella which may be impenetrable by Iranian Shahib missles . Iran can only deliver their 1-2 atomic warheads by ICBMs with no other delivery capabilities.
4.Israel has a satellite system with multiple types of spy satellites which have reached the limit of possible resolution (defraction limit) generally thought to be about 10 centimeters and their satellite system is all weather. Together with their advanced UAV capabilities , this allows Israel to possess the most detailed photos and real-time imaging of all Iranian military installations .
5.The military technologic difference between Israel and Iran is wide.
Israel has about 10% of the world-wide arms export market which based solely on merit and immensely competitive. IF anything, it is nothing short of a miracle and a tremendous tribute to Israel (jewish ) expertise that they sell to so many countries which never take the side of Israel in any dispute. There are those ,who imply much of Israel?s technological edge is due to massive American aid. However, that aid also has restrained the development of Israeli military technology. American military contractors regularly and understandably, attempt to undermine Israeli sale of military technology when it is in direct competition with American contractors? efforts to sell abroad.
Israel might have double the foreign military technologic sales if the US had never blanketly prohibited Israel selling directly to PRC. This is understandable.
Iran sells nothing in world wide arms market. Their highly publicized Shahib 3 missle is nothing but a supped up version of the the 63 year old V2 Nazi ballistic missle. Israel supplies Israeli-developed military technology to most of the world?s top militaries including the USA, India, and China. China's J10 fighter is thought to be modeled on Israel?s Lavi.,the Israeli developed Jet fight.
In terms of MBTs, Israel possesses 1500 consisting entirely of the modern highly regarded Merkava. Iran has approx. 500 all obsolete models including the T 72. In front-line aircraft Israel has approximately 800 with more than 500 being upgraded F15s and F16s. Israel also possesses in air refueling capabilities. Iran has about 250 front-line combat aircraft consisting mostly of obsolete older US and Russian fighters. It has no known in air refueling capability.
Israel also is way ahead in production and use of UAVs and sells various models to many countries including Great Britain. There are other areas of military technology Israel is far more advanced than Iran.

you underestimate the iranians my friend.

it is true that the israeli army is very professional, and very combat experienced in urban warfare and defence tactics. they do have excellent equipment, deffinatly up to the standard of many european armies. they have an airforce of some considerable size with some good planes, but...

iran could out recruit israel to the point were even with all the compuslory conscripts israel could manage they would still be outnumbered by over 20 to 1 (or somewhere along those lines)

despite lacking an airforce they have many, many anti aircraft defences many of them very advanced such as the British rapier system.

the iranian army also boasts a considerably larger and more varied arsenal of weapons than those of the other enemies of israel.

on this point israels army is not particularly suited to all out open warfare, urban warfare and protecting its own borders are more of israels cup of tea, although in saying this it has carried out several succesful ofensive operations on the past.

but again in saying this in recent years israel has become used to fighting more insurgent based wars, not all out convetional warfare which is what it would be faced with when opposing the iranian army. on the subject of the israeli tanks, although very good, it again i believe is not really suited to open war, more again like urban combat.

irans military ties with other countries such as russia may prove a decisive factor as israel is not as self sufficient as it needs to be, and rely

Quote Reply

JTR~~ in terms of nukes 2/24/2010 4:12:19 PM

well, if iran gets nukes israel would be bombed into next week, the size of the country would amplify a nuclear attack by iran ten fold. if israel nuked first it could expect a short, sharp visit from ,oh lets say the entire muslim world! that would be demanding the heads of every israeli citizen in justice

also i really do not think the USA would want to get involved in a war that it may not win, and a war with the possibility of them getting involved that would world war 3.

its too big a risk for the US, and to be honest Israel has very little to offer the US, so that may further sway their decision to not get involved.

on a final note America has no desire for another Vietnam either which is what would happen to them if they got involved

i think Israel relys far to much on the US, and there seems to be an expectancy by the Israelis that america will come to their aid, if its as big as a war with iran i very much doubt US involvement, the risk is just too big with very little to gain for them.

Quote Reply

cwDeici 2/24/2010 9:26:54 PM

WHY ISRAEL WILL decisively defeat IRAN if there is an all-out war.

Except using nukes Israel has no means to inflict sufficient damages to Iran.

They can not use more than a small fraction of their air power against Iran while Iran has means to bomb them with ICBM and using terrorism and Hezbollah.

Now it is granted that Isreal has much more advanced military means.

1.Israel has more than 200 atomic devices vs Iran which may have 1 soon.Even if Iran bought nuclear devices from other rogue states, the retaliation from Israel would be the equivalent of 2,000 plus hiroshimas.

So its means with your calculation that Israel has nukes with an average power of each nukes equivalent to 10 hiroshimas!

It means that each nuke would have an average power of 450 kt.

Hiroshimas was 15 kt but you need rougly a 30 time more powerfull warhead to achieve 10 time more ground effect (proportional to exponent 2/3 of warhead power).

Which is ridiculous considering Israel means and budget, and the fact they have never tested a thermonuclear device.

Considering Dimona capabilities, and Israel budget, Israel has mainly small fissions warhead Hiroshima sized, plus some bigger boosted fission warheads on its IRBM so an equivalent probably of 400 or 500 hiroshimas, which is still remarkable.

To just give a comparison France has roughly 1500 Hiroshima capability now while spending 5 billions US $ a year on its deterrent (which is half of Israel total defense budget by comparison)

Sure, Israel has an enormous advantage for now.

But the concern is that Iran is building a nuke production infrastructure much bigger than Israel has and in 15 years Iran may have more.And 200 Hiroshimas for example on Israel is end of Israel but not end of Iran even they would need 30 years to recover.

2.The 200 plus Israeli atomic devices are unstoppable by Iran i.e. up to 80 can be launched by submarines and the rest by ICBM or F-15s or F-16s

Israel has no ICBM but IRBM. 80 launched by submarine is a little bit optimistic (LOL)

3.Israel has the world?s most advanced anti-ICBM missle umbrella which may be impenetrable by Iranian Shahib missles . Iran can only deliver their 1-2 atomic warheads by ICBMs with no other delivery capabilities.

Are you laughing?Israel anti missile umbrella is not anti ICBM but anti IRBM and is far away and below of what US have and less advanced.No DSP satellites for Israel for example.Moreover Israeli system can be quite easily outnumbered by installing decoys on IRBM.

4.Israel has a satellite system with multiple types of spy satellites which have reached the limit of possible resolution (defraction limit) generally thought to be about 10 centimeters and their satellite system is all weather. Together with their advanced UAV capabilities , this allows Israel to possess the most detailed photos and real-time imaging of all Iranian military installations .

By no way possible: Israel don't have 10 centimeters resolution satellite or all weather radar satellite capabilities.Do you have any idea of weight of high resolution satellites and the cost of such an infrastructure? Obviously not.Israel hads probably 1 m visible resolution satellites of few hundred kg at most.Which is very good for such a country.

5.The military technologic difference between Israel and Iran is wide.

Yes for now and the coming decade.

Israel has about 10% of the world-wide arms export market which based solely on merit and immensely competitive.

And a huge leverage on US help in technology and funding.And not many moral consideration when selling weapons.I understand them however.

IF anything, it is nothing short of a miracle and a tremendous tribute to Israel (jewish ) expertise that they sell to so many countries which never take the side of Israel in any dispute. There are those ,who imply much of Israel?s technological edge is due to massive American aid.

Of course it is.Do you know engineering manpower of Israel and funding?

USA spend more than 7 billions $ annually only for defense basic technology.Do you think Israel has the budget might to fu

Quote Reply

cwDeici 2/24/2010 9:30:12 PM

also i really do not think the USA would want to get involved in a war that it may not win, and a war with the possibility of them getting involved that would world war 3.

its too big a risk for the US, and to be honest Israel has very little to offer the US, so that may further sway their decision to not get involved.

on a final note America has no desire for another Vietnam either which is what would happen to them if they got involved

The Muslim world has tried to kill off Israel on occasions, but I accede such an effort would be greater.

Israel offers what it is to the US, a western, humanist democracy in the Middle East.

Your scenario makes a lot of common sense, except that you're far too serious about Israel starting an all-out war. That would undoubtedly be Iran's doing. Israel is after all a humanist democracy, while Iran is an Islamic theocracy.

Quote Reply

cwDeici 2/24/2010 9:31:14 PM

Even looking back into Israel's recent history they were only a fraction as aggressive at their most belligerrant as conventional wisdom describes them as.

Quote Reply

cwDeici 2/24/2010 9:35:38 PM

However Stratege, I believe you are overestimating Iran's capabilities and especially development somewhat. They've managed to further their missile and nuclear technology and irregular doctrine somewhat, but are otherwise falling behind. Comparatively speaking they may be catching up with Israel in power because Israel is such a small country, but compared to any enemy of size they're just falling further behind.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT