If you look at the current attitudes of the Arabs to the Iranians, you could see them giving clearence to Israel with a under the table type deal. Also they don't need to go over Iraq or Sirya.

It's been sooooooo long since i've been on here!!! Been away. Anyway, what do you think the US would do if Israel were to attack iran?

 

Do you think they would publicly condemn the action but secretly be happy that something is being done about it or do you think they would openly stand by the attack?

 

I'm curious to find out opinions of US posters in here.

 

Cheers,

 

Neo.

 

Typical American reaction:

 

Hoody-hoo!  Get some!

 

The general perception is that President Bush would not exactly condemn them over it nor would the President prevent them flying over Iraq to hit Iran.  This perception fuels the notion that if Israel is going to strike Iran then it will do so before President Obama is sworn in.  They'll fly over Jordan, Syria, or Saudi and then through Iraq to get to Iran.  In 1981 they flew over Saudi to hit Iraq.

 

There's also been talk of using some airbases somewhere in the Indian Ocean.

 

What was extremely interesting during the recent exercises was the reported use of search and rescue helo's to a distance of 900 miles with tanker support.  It would indicate a serious commitment to supporting the strike and a possible use of special forces on the ground.

 

It's not an unreasonable bet that the US or Israel strike Iran before the end of the Bush administration.  Love him or hate him Bush has shown a willingness to do what he perceives as right and public opinion be damned.  He can easily view his decision on the Surge to be correct against the will of Congress and most Americans.  Israel might not view a President Obama as someone they can deal with vis a vis Iran given his stated views.  On the other hand if there's an even an outside chance getting a President McCain they might wait given the perception that McCain will be very tough on Iran and is even more likely than Bush to engage in military action.  Some might argue that this perception is exactly why there's little chance he'll become President.

 

 

You can safely bet the US will provide all kinds of back channel assistance but there is a major problem allowing Israel overflight of Iraq.  Of course, the US actually controls that airspace but  the US want's to promote the image that it has created a sovereign Iraq.  That would imply the elected government there would have granted the permission placing Iraq in a precarious diplomatic situation with respect to its neighbor. Or, even worse, confirming to the world that the US is really running the show there.

 

Somehow, notwithstanding fear Iran is creating in the region, no one would want to admit collusion in the matter. Now if Israel overflew Jordan and Saudi Arabia to get there, the US could publicly contend it had nothing to do with the raid and allow Israel sort out the consequences.

 

I couldn't begin to imagine how Israel would manage the logistics of such a large scale enterprise.  The two way distance would most likely require refuling to complete the return trip, especially if they fly the long way out over the water where tankers could operate over international waters. Isreal doesn't do one way missions.

 

That's my analysis.

 

---  CHAS

 

 

 

 

I guess eventually, if the US doesn't do it first. 

 

For the time being though, Arab fears about Iran's nuclear aspirations can be exploited quite nicely in Israel's favor with respect to their fight against Hamas and Hezbollah. (Two of Iranian's proxies)

 

 

 

 

 

It is interesting but I don't recall anything about the detail of the Helo operations being discussed. In fact I find it highly unlikely that a CSAR operation would be conducted using Helo's from 900 miles away with a total round trip distance being ~1800 miles! That is a 12 hour total flight not counting contingencies such as looking for the downed pilot. What is interesting about it is that it suggest definite U.S., Turkish or Saudi cooperation at some level since the helo would need to refuel over airspace controlled by one of those nations. That means political fallout for them. If they were going to accept that then why not base the Helos out of one of those countries and cut the flight time by half or more and reduce the chance of losing the CSAR to maintenance issue or crew fatigue. In this case, since the USA is going to probably take heat for allowing Israel to violate Iraqi Sovernty, why not just have the USA/Coalition conduct the strike since it is much better equipped and geographically positioned for the task? GLORIOUS SPARTAN appears to be an Israeli psyop to a casual observer but a careful analysis reveals that it is much larger in scope and participants. Unless the Israeli's are going to do something like set up a FARP in Iran or on a ship in the Gulf I don't see how it can be interpreted any other way.

 

Ultimately, I think any such strike aimed at the Iranian Nuclear program would fail in the long run unless the only intent was to temporarily delay the inevitable. The problem is not the nuclear material or equipment, it's the knowledge. That knowledge is inside the brains of Iranian scientist who should be the real primary targets IMHO. Only through their deaths and destruction of the data they have collected can have a meaningful effect on the Iranians. Them and the regime directing them to do the research. We have learned this over the last 30 years of various US, Coalition and Israeli efforts to stop the Iraqis who never lost their knowledge or nuclear program until G.I.'s occupied the capital. Airpower cannot do this unless we are ready to use atomic weapons.

 

I'm not suggesting an invasion of Iran. We have far too much on our plate for that and frankly more pressing issues IMHO. But with todays ISR capabilities, it should be possible to locate key players in the Iranian program.  We could then use intelligence officers, special operations forces and precision air power to kill them along with the nuclear facilities. We also need to be prepared to send in rapid reaction direct action forces to some of the hardened targets if we need assurance of destruction. Follow that up with complete destruction of the Iranian air force, navy, air defenses, any WMD delivery systems and IRGC(especially leadership). Extreme care must be taken not to cause excessive casualties to the population. Because after the credibility of the Iranian military is gone, so will the their ability to intimidate the people. Then the Iranian leaders will have to change(Lybia) or risk losing power to the masses. We have to be prepared to patrol Iranian airspace, protect gulf shipping and wage a protracted FID campaign. This will not be a bloodless solution. If I had to estimate I'd say similar to losses in Operation Desert Storm in terms of lives lost. I'd estimate it to take about 1 year. It's an effects based operation and would not require the massed logistics, air power or significant deployment of ground forces.  Not pretty but it is the way. Unless you want to do it the quick way and unleash the B61-11 or just accept that Iran is going to go nuclear in which case the Israelis will have to do it and that could get quickly out of control.

 

 -DA

 

There are public reports stating rescue helo's were involved and/or were involved to a distance of 900 miles in the Wall Street Journal (June 21), AFP (no date), CSM (June 21), The Scotsman (June 21), and JPost (June 22) that I found on the first page or so of a google search.  I believe the information was widely reported.

 

As I mentioned I believe this shows a serious case of resolve to include rescue helo's in the package over the reported range.  It's been suggested that while a US strike might include 1,000 aim points an Israeli strike would be limited to around 100.  Further reports indicate that the IAF exercised with the Greek Air Force which is rather interesing given how close the military cooperation is between Israel and Turkey.

Are you sure? Personally I stopped reading main stream media and opinion pieces about the training shortly after it was leaked because as usual it was misinterpreted and full of factual errors. I'm aware of the distance from Israel to Greece which of course is the distance from Israel to the Natanz vicinity in the opposite direction. I'm aware it involved logistics operations and helicopters some in the CSAR role. But I'm unaware of any official source or specific reference to helicopters flying 900 miles, refueling and performing CSAR. Even if it exist, most likely it is trivial to the point of the operation and I do not think the Israeli's are going to run CSAR operations from 900 miles.

 

What is important about the mention of helo's is it suggest possible involvement of the United States and Iraqi territory. That is significant. The United States just recently offered Iran an invitation for official diplomatic relations immediately following the very publically announced training which was leaked through the United States. In otherwords, the United States is telling the Iranians to choose between negotiated settlement with the United States or Israeli bombardment which we will endorse. Another message is look at this mess Ahmadinijad and the hardliners have brought about. Do someting about it soon or we may have to. The actual nature of any strike may not look anything like GLORIUS SPARTAN however if it comes to that.

 

 Politics aside I just don't think a 900 mile CSAR a lot of it in alerted hostile airspace is a good idea. That sounds very Eagle Clawish IMHO. Iran doesn't have a terribly effective IADS but it is not trivial either. With surprise or speed I can see the Iranians missing a helo lurking about in that terrain. But following a strike the Iranian Air Force is going to be up looking for blood. Especially if they have downed a few of the attackers. The CSAR bird it seems would need some kind of air cover. If a IDF/AF pilot was shot down in the area of Natanz for example, thats a 2 to 3 hour trip by helo after you enter Iran from any direction. Israeli fighters supporting the CSAR would not be able to loiter for 2 to 3 hours and fight after travelling such a distance. UNLESS, they refueled over Iraq, Turkey or the Gulf the later being a very dangerous place to do so IMV. So from this logic says that Iraq or Turkey would be used. I don't know if the Turks would openly support an Israeli strike on a Muslim nation. But the United States could probably compell the Iraqis to do so. Even if done without their knowledge. They have no means to independently monitor something like this. No matter, the political fallout from this would be substantial. About what it would be if the USA did the strike itself. The only thing is the man responsible for ordering U.S. Military involvement isn't particularly vulnerable to politics and neither is his party after November. Moreover, this is just the kind of Operation the USAF and USN dream of. If Iran doesn't show a little flexibility and skill here it may get a bit more than an Israeli raid to deal with.

 

-DA