Israel Too Small to Last Even One Week of War

[Yamato]

Edited March 23, 2012 by Yamato

[Yamato]

I did consider it actually. But I'm not fit enough for active service, although I am quite the sharpshooter. Both my brother, my cousin and one of my friends also want to or have considered serving in the Navy and Army (the RNZAF has nothing going for it) and my father has served in the Territorials, so, not forntline service. And even if I did, the chances of serving in Afghanistan would be slim, seeing as we're beginning the handover process in Bamiyan Province. I'd probably end up in the Solomons or East Timor.

I assumed that you assumed they had them.

It was a suggestion. Although with the type of missiles the Israelis, these would be irrelevant.

Not with electronic countermeasures.

Please. Any aircraft the IRIAF is outdated and verging on the edge of obsolecence. Hell, even the Emirati Air Force or the RSAF would have the same chances of penetrating Iranian

The systems, however, are few in number. That was my point.

As you wish. The IRIAF uses the following aircraft as air superiority fighters:

• Grumman F-14A "Tomcat": 79 aircraft received in 1976. The F-14A is the basic first model which the Iranians have not uprgaded.
  
• Dassault Mirage F1: Probably the most competent aircraft in the air superiority role the Iranians have. However, these are ex-Iraqi aircraft which were export variants.
  
• Mikoyan-Gruevich MiG-29C/UB: Probably one of the training models used in the IRIAF, which as no radar.
  

Then they have the following for fighter aircraft:

• McDonnell-Douglas F4D/E Phantom II: Basic versions which entered service in the 1960's. Not upgraded.
  
• Northrop F-5A/B/E Tiger: A mix of variants here with some trainers and some original aircraft from the 1960's. Some may have been upgraded to have radar or more modern radar systems.
  
• HESA Saeqeh: Developed from Northrop F-5 Tiger. Iran claims it is like the F/A-18 Hornet, although this claim is dubious simply due to the size and constraints of the original F-5 Tiger.
  

And those are the fighters. Iran also posesses a few outdated interceptor aircraft from China.

And now for the anti-air systems:

• MIM-23 Hawk: Basic missile MIM-23A variant operated by Iranian air defences. Not upgraded.
  
• SA-15 "Tor-M1": One of the more competent systems the Iranian air defence network fields. 29 launchers in service.
  
• SA-5/S-200: Variants operated not known. May be more basic versions.
  
• SA-2/HQ-2: Fairly basic and outdated system in use. Easily countered by more modern electronic countermeasures.
  
• SA-6: Reports of eight systems transferred in the late 1990's. Status is unknown.
  
• HQ-7: Probably capable Chinese SAM system.
  
• RBS-70: Swedish MANPADS system.
  
• SA-7: Soviet MANPADS system.
  
• SA-18: Soviet MANPADS system.
  

I did consider it actually. But I'm not fit enough for active service, although I am quite the sharpshooter. Both my brother, my cousin and one of my friends also want to or have considered serving in the Navy and Army (the RNZAF has nothing going for it) and my father has served in the Territorials, so, not forntline service. And even if I did, the chances of serving in Afghanistan would be slim, seeing as we're beginning the handover process in Bamiyan Province. I'd probably end up in the Solomons or East Timor.

Not fit enough? So get fit enough. That's what boot camp is for incidentally. Someone else making you go to war would be a refreshing change to all that agreement from you in making someone else.

I assumed that you assumed they had them.

And you should have assumed the opposite based on what you replied to.

Not with electronic countermeasures.

Now you're spinning it both ways showing you don't know what's going to happen.

Please. Any aircraft the IRIAF is outdated and verging on the edge of obsolecence.

Nonsense. The air power in these countries is dated similarly and comparable.

The systems, however, are few in number. That was my point.

Yet you've provided nothing about numbers.

That's pretty much it.

Again you make my point. A much more potent inventory (quantities?) putting an earlier claim of "SA-5s" to shame but not surprisingly you weren't interested in correcting that claim with the information you listed here. I'm sorry the logistical difficulties are too significant to take your well wishing seriously, not even considering the political obstacles to this scenario which will defend Iran all by themselves. Israeli aircraft will be extremely vulnerable to the conflagration of defenses it will have to deal with. It will be facing multiple threats at all times and will be sitting ducks in a dogfight. If Israel attacks with its submarines in advance, it could blunt the air defenses of Iran with cruise missile strikes hitting stationary targets, but this is yet another supposition thrown onto a stack of other suppositions that already collapsed.

Unfortunately, Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iranian nuclear facilities without the political, logistical, and military help from the US. Netanyahu knows this and that's why he's been desperately trying to get our war dander up for years with all his nonsensical mongering.

For instance:

Well it's 1941 now by Netanyahu's broken clock and Iran hasn't gotten its Nazi mojo on yet. The US and the rest of NATO would have been at war with Israel if countries actually took their treaties seriously. I'm not suggesting war with Israel, I'm suggesting cutting the umbilical cord of that terroristic welfare state once and for all. In fact, citizens from New Zealand ought to pony up some money for the Zionist regime for once. If you're not going to join the military then stay in school if you're even in school; there's a lot to learn. You should be humbled by what you don't know before you act so petulantly confident in what you think you do.

[Parsip]

I see absolutely no evidence that suggests F-16s or F-15s are invulnerable to Iranian air power or air defenses. If you think they're limited to SA-5s you need to do homework.

And you don't know what Israel would use nor does anyone else. But they don't think about that, they just think right over it because they're too intellectually lazy not to believe the nonsense they're told 500 times on TV.

Invulnerable? No, sir, I didn't say it would be a piece of cake; just doable. Israel isn't very militarily powerful, but their air force is powerful enough for such an operation.

[MichaelW]

Not fit enough? So get fit enough. That's what boot camp is for incidentally. Someone else making you go to war would be a refreshing change to all that agreement from you in making someone else.

Why? I don't want to go to Afghanistan because someone thinks it would be fun to continue the war there.

Now you're spinning it both ways showing you don't know what's going to happen.

So you've magically become a psychic? Maybe you should spread that pixy dust of yours over your favourite politicians like Ahmadinejad to try and bring the regime to reason. But we all know miracles don't happen.

Nonsense. The air power in these countries is dated similarly and comparable.

No it is not comparable. This is where your argument falls. Israel operates aircraft with modern avionics, electronic countermeasures and other such equipment which make the aircraft much more capable. Israel has the wealth to modernise its aircraft with the latest avionics and fire systems in order to make their aircraft perform as good as if not better than the latest fighter/multi-role aircraft entering service.

Iran doesn't have the allies nor the wealth to upgrade it's aircraft with the systems required to bring them inline with modern combat aircraft. All aircraft operated by Iran are outmoded because they don't have the same equipment as those operated by Israel or even the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

If you think that the aircraft Israel fields and the aircraft Iran fields are similar, you don't have a leg to stand on. Anyone can tell you that the Iranian airforce may have more aircraft but, in this case, quantity does not make up for quality. Israel has the technological edge over Iran. This is not hard to understand.

Yet you've provided nothing about numbers.

I put a link to the inventory in my last post. Have a look at the numbers of aircraft.

Again you make my point. A much more potent inventory (quantities?) putting an earlier claim of "SA-5s" to shame but not surprisingly you weren't interested in correcting that claim with the information you listed here. I'm sorry the logistical difficulties are too significant to take your well wishing seriously, not even considering the political obstacles to this scenario which will defend Iran all by themselves. Israeli aircraft will be extremely vulnerable to the conflagration of defenses it will have to deal with. It will be facing multiple threats at all times and will be sitting ducks in a dogfight. If Israel attacks with its submarines in advance, it could blunt the air defenses of Iran with cruise missile strikes hitting stationary targets, but this is yet another supposition thrown onto a stack of other suppositions that already collapsed.

You severely overestimate the aerial defences of Iran. Again, these systems are basic and are fooled by most modern electronic countermeasures fitted to all but the most basic aircraft.

Unfortunately, Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iranian nuclear facilities without the political, logistical, and military help from the US. Netanyahu knows this and that's why he's been desperately trying to get our war dander up for years with all his nonsensical mongering.

The only thing that defeats Israel's wishes is the political ramifications it will face if it undergoes any military action against Iran. That's it.

For instance:

Well it's 1941 now by Netanyahu's broken clock and Iran hasn't gotten its Nazi mojo on yet. The US and the rest of NATO would have been at war with Israel if countries actually took their treaties seriously. I'm not suggesting war with Israel, I'm suggesting cutting the umbilical cord of that terroristic welfare state once and for all. In fact, citizens from New Zealand ought to pony up some money for the Zionist regime for once. If you're not going to join the military then stay in school if you're even in school; there's a lot to learn. You should be humbled by what you don't know before you act so petulantly confident in what you think you do.

I'm sorry but your propoganda hasn't worn off on me. I've never taken anything you said seriously because I know it's complete and utter crap. And you've proven this by claiming that Israeli operated aircraft and Iranian operated aircraft are comparable. They are not. That is a fact.

Mate, I know what I'm talking about. You seem to think you do but you have made it embarassingly clear you don't.

[jbondo]

Aside from the USA, Israel is the finest air attack country on the planet. Their pilots are the best in the world and they operate with equipment that is on par or not far off US technology.

Once the sorties began, Israel wouldn't stop until they were completely satisfied or until we stopped them. Ready or not, Iran knows they would be hard pressed to fend off an attack.

Think I'm dreaming? I'd bank on it.

Now, the political aspect of it changes everything. However, Israel is hot tempered and they tend to act without warning. Do I see it happening, no. Could it happen? You bet.

The US has always pledged to back Israel up...at least until Obama came to power. That said, I can't see Obama going against one of our closest allies as it would be political suicide for his reelection bid.

[MichaelW]

Syria should be at war with Israel right now due to Israel starting a war on them.

They are. Syria never signed a peace agreement.

Syria is unpatriotic, pacifist, cowardly, and treasonous not to counterattack Israel for its aggression.

This is the funniest thing you have said yet. You want to say that to the face of one of our Syrian members? Do you want to create more bloodshed and suffering in the Middle East? The peace they have is the best thing for them.

Do try to keep some form of credibilty here Yam. You're loosing it, fast.

[simplybill]

There is another side to the Israel/Iran situation that isn't being talked about: Israel is currently in the position of being the Peacekeeper of the Middle East.

Neither the Saudi Arabian Salafists nor the Hashemite Arab Sunni Jordanians want a nuclear-armed Persian Shi'a Iran muscling in on their territory. Recall that during the Iran-Iraq War, the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia initially bankrolled Saddam Hussein.

Iran and Ahmadinejad have been rattling their sabers, but until now there has been a sort of military equilibrium, or standoff, keeping everyone in line. With the Allied withdrawal from Iraq, Saudi Arabia is again vulnerable to pressure from a radicalized Iran taking advantage of a weakened Iraqi military.

Israel's commitment to defending itself at all costs (including the possibilty of nuclear retaliation) has helped to keep a lid on things for a few decades now. An Israeli preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear capabilities would likely cause the majority of the Middle East to breathe a sigh of relief, while letting them maintain the facade of Islamic solidarity without getting their hands dirty.

Edited March 24, 2012 by simplybill

[spud the mackem]

and then, you say you believe in the Bible prophecies. Well, according to Dan 11: 40-43 Israel (the land of Decoration?) is invaded and 'stumbled' in the 'last days'. Edom, Moab and Ammon (Jodan, Lebanon) and the lands around (Iraq, Iran, Libya and Ethiopia and Egypt) escape and/or survive. Then in the last chaper, Daniel 12, there is no mentin whatsoever that literal Israel is 'saved' along with a disturbing joined faction of Christian Zionists (forbid if the present Israeli government and so called 'Christian' countries represent the 'meek' that will inherit the earth, IMO).

No, it is those who love their fellow man who do not get involved with politics and wars who are meek. meek is not weakness. It is far harder not to tow the line into destruction than refuse to kill another human or become filled with patriotic intoxication. Earthly government/s do not become rulers after WWIII according to the bible and anyone who does believe in the prophecies within. ALL human governments are taken away by Michael, I thought you recognised this, not by Israel or any human organisation or government.

It never ceases to amaze me how anyone can say Israel still has God's favour if they read the book of Hosea and accept that the Nation of Israel caused only grief and anger to God, and still does, IMO. That also in the book of Daniel there is no mention of Israel ruling supreme at the end of the last days or anywhere else in the Bible.

Christians for some unknown reason to me keep on about the coming of the Messiah but still look to human governments for leadership . That they are sent by God when all these governments do is control or kill or both. God did not want Israel to be lead by a King in the first place and has vowed to remove such leader/s on his day of anger. So the Jews against Zionism have it right when they say voting for a leader for Israel is againt God . Hosea 13:11. They accept the Jewish people rebelled and were taken into perminant exile till their 'Messiah' returns, of which he has not. Till then NO land belongs to any Jew and definitely no government of Israel is to be set up or kept in place. Hosea makes it very clear that any continued disloyalty toward God will result in God disowning Israel totally. And those who were not his people (anyone meek and obedient) will become his people.

Show me the scriptures relating to the last days where Israel rules and annihalates all the countries surrounding it. There isn't any.

It could be said that according to the Bible, the Jew's own God is using the nations to eventually kill Israel's 'King' and bring judgement on a nation that has only bucked against their God, Hosea 13: 11 due to unfaithfullness. Again, the last chapter of the book as in Daniel.

Whats the bible got to do with the current events ?,lets leave the bible out eh ! The Iranians love sabre rattling to stir up the population who rush out into the streets shouting and jumping about screaming jihad,they dont realise how ridiculous they look to civilised people but it keeps them happy,they re full of crap and wont attack Israel because they know Israel packs a superior punch,as has been proved...

[odas]

I did consider it actually. But I'm not fit enough for active service, although I am quite the sharpshooter. Both my brother, my cousin and one of my friends also want to or have considered serving in the Navy and Army (the RNZAF has nothing going for it) and my father has served in the Territorials, so, not forntline service. And even if I did, the chances of serving in Afghanistan would be slim, seeing as we're beginning the handover process in Bamiyan Province. I'd probably end up in the Solomons or East Timor.

Not fit enough? So get fit enough. That's what boot camp is for incidentally. Someone else making you go to war would be a refreshing change to all that agreement from you in making someone else.

I assumed that you assumed they had them.

And you should have assumed the opposite based on what you replied to.

Not with electronic countermeasures.

Now you're spinning it both ways showing you don't know what's going to happen.

Please. Any aircraft the IRIAF is outdated and verging on the edge of obsolecence.

Nonsense. The air power in these countries is dated similarly and comparable.

The systems, however, are few in number. That was my point.

Yet you've provided nothing about numbers.

That's pretty much it.

Again you make my point. A much more potent inventory (quantities?) putting an earlier claim of "SA-5s" to shame but not surprisingly you weren't interested in correcting that claim with the information you listed here. I'm sorry the logistical difficulties are too significant to take your well wishing seriously, not even considering the political obstacles to this scenario which will defend Iran all by themselves. Israeli aircraft will be extremely vulnerable to the conflagration of defenses it will have to deal with. It will be facing multiple threats at all times and will be sitting ducks in a dogfight. If Israel attacks with its submarines in advance, it could blunt the air defenses of Iran with cruise missile strikes hitting stationary targets, but this is yet another supposition thrown onto a stack of other suppositions that already collapsed.

Unfortunately, Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iranian nuclear facilities without the political, logistical, and military help from the US. Netanyahu knows this and that's why he's been desperately trying to get our war dander up for years with all his nonsensical mongering.

For instance:

Well it's 1941 now by Netanyahu's broken clock and Iran hasn't gotten its Nazi mojo on yet. The US and the rest of NATO would have been at war with Israel if countries actually took their treaties seriously. I'm not suggesting war with Israel, I'm suggesting cutting the umbilical cord of that terroristic welfare state once and for all. In fact, citizens from New Zealand ought to pony up some money for the Zionist regime for once. If you're not going to join the military then stay in school if you're even in school; there's a lot to learn. You should be humbled by what you don't know before you act so petulantly confident in what you think you do.

Yam, I remember a war not so long ago, when people, just like some of the members here, were warmonging, speculating, wasted big words, pretending they are generals, thinking they are tough......

And, when the war started they hide like mice in their holes and those who did not want the war in the first place fought and died.

After it was done the mice came cralling out of their holes and started bragging abot fictional battles they fought. Same here, same people.

War is no fun, man.

[bouncer]

Yam, I remember a war not so long ago, when people, just like some of the members here, were warmonging, speculating, wasted big words, pretending they are generals, thinking they are tough......

And, when the war started they hide like mice in their holes and those who did not want the war in the first place fought and died.

After it was done the mice came cralling out of their holes and started bragging abot fictional battles they fought. Same here, same people.

War is no fun, man.

Ever wondered..what would happen, if every soldier in any war just laid down the guns and went back to base? Realising they're just pawns in a big chess game played out in govt offices?

What would happen then? And what would happen if no-one wanted to join the forces?

Would we be forced into it, like conscription in the old wars?

Like Muhammad Ali refusing to go Vietnam, saying, "I ain't got no quarrel with those Vietcong" and "no Vietcong ever called me (slang version of negro)." And: "Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go 10,000 miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on brown people while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs?"

regardless of race, he makes a very, very valid point

Edited March 25, 2012 by bouncer

[+and-then]

Yam, I remember a war not so long ago, when people, just like some of the members here, were warmonging, speculating, wasted big words, pretending they are generals, thinking they are tough......

And, when the war started they hide like mice in their holes and those who did not want the war in the first place fought and died.

After it was done the mice came cralling out of their holes and started bragging abot fictional battles they fought. Same here, same people.

War is no fun, man.

Odas, in your mind does simply discussing the current events and possibilities of a war equate to warmongering? You seem to take a certain smug pleasure in accusing those who discuss what may well happen as somehow being instigators in the fight among nations. Your observation about the horror of war is hardly profound. But wars happen, don't they? Whether people on forums discuss them or not people sometimes just feel the need to slaughter. Always have...

When this next one comes around I won't (hopefully) be anywhere near it but I still have a right to an opinion about it. If that makes me a coward in someone's eyes then I'm okay with that. I have to respect a person before their opinion matters to me.

[Parsip]

I don't think people are malicious when they call for a war on Iran. War is horrifying but still necessary at times. The city I live in would possibly be a target of Iranian retaliatory attacks, but I don't take it personally when people say they'd support war. The "Arab Spring" was horrifying too, and caused more damage than an Iran war would, but you don't see anyone criticized for supporting it, do you?

[+and-then]

I don't think people are malicious when they call for a war on Iran. War is horrifying but still necessary at times. The city I live in would possibly be a target of Iranian retaliatory attacks, but I don't take it personally when people say they'd support war. The "Arab Spring" was horrifying too, and caused more damage than an Iran war would, but you don't see anyone criticized for supporting it, do you?

Parsip I think that's probably because Israel can't be blamed for instigating it....yet...

[ninjadude]

Odas, in your mind does simply discussing the current events and possibilities of a war equate to warmongering?

I realize you didn't address this to me, but in the classic definition - yes.

But wars happen, don't they? Whether people on forums discuss them or not people sometimes just feel the need to slaughter. Always have...

Not in a vacuum they don't. They are not inevitable. We are not powerless to affect.

[wittyusernamefailed]

I would argue that wars start due to a LACK of discussion. After all we may not be facing an Israeli-Irani-American conflict if for we had been working through issues, instead of spending the last 30ish years in a siege mentality.

[spud the mackem]

If it wasnt for the oil,the Iranians would be totally ignored,I've been through "The Straits of Hormuz" a few dozen times and from what you can see the whole place is a mess,nothing but rock and sand,so one day when the oil runs out,they will again become ignored,couldnt happen to nicer people,I dont think !..just a bunch of Camel Jockeys sabre rattling,until some mad muller presses the button then the fertilizer will hit the windmill,and they will all be turned into glass.....

[Yamato]

Invulnerable? No, sir, I didn't say it would be a piece of cake; just doable. Israel isn't very militarily powerful, but their air force is powerful enough for such an operation.

And in no way invulnerable not to take enormous losses which makes the idea imprudent and impotent. It wouldn't just be a mistake on Israel's part, it would be a catastrophic mistake.

[Yamato]

Aside from the USA, Israel is the finest air attack country on the planet. Their pilots are the best in the world and they operate with equipment that is on par or not far off US technology.

Once the sorties began, Israel wouldn't stop until they were completely satisfied or until we stopped them. Ready or not, Iran knows they would be hard pressed to fend off an attack.

Think I'm dreaming? I'd bank on it.

Now, the political aspect of it changes everything. However, Israel is hot tempered and they tend to act without warning. Do I see it happening, no. Could it happen? You bet.

The US has always pledged to back Israel up...at least until Obama came to power. That said, I can't see Obama going against one of our closest allies as it would be political suicide for his reelection bid.

They don't even have a strategic bomber for this strategic bombing mission. The "finest air attack country on the planet" my nut. Having the aircraft to get the job done would be the first requirement and Israel can't even qualify with that.

If the stupid mistake does happen (it won't without the US getting dragged into it on some level), it'll be ineffectual and good for nothing but perma-blowback that will spell disaster for Israel, disaster for Israel's slave, the US, who has to kiss Israel's feet for every sin they commit in the world, and bad for the world economy.

[MichaelW]

And in no way invulnerable not to take enormous losses which makes the idea imprudent and impotent. It wouldn't just be a mistake on Israel's part, it would be a catastrophic mistake.

It would be a mistake because of the political ramifications. Israel knows Iran poses a threat, although the reactions of some of its neighbours, save Syria, will most likely try something out themselves. You never know who might act against Iran. For all we know, Saudi Arabia might do something idiotic.

But a mistake militarily? No. As I have already told you, Israeli aircraft are superior. They managed to penetrate Syrian air defences, which are similar in equipment and age to those of Iran, and destroy a nuclear facility. It isn't difficult to fool older SAM systems with modern countermeasures and even defences such as chaff and flares.

[Yamato]

Why? I don't want to go to Afghanistan because someone thinks it would be fun to continue the war there.

So you've magically become a psychic? Maybe you should spread that pixy dust of yours over your favourite politicians like Ahmadinejad to try and bring the regime to reason. But we all know miracles don't happen.

No it is not comparable. This is where your argument falls. Israel operates aircraft with modern avionics, electronic countermeasures and other such equipment which make the aircraft much more capable. Israel has the wealth to modernise its aircraft with the latest avionics and fire systems in order to make their aircraft perform as good as if not better than the latest fighter/multi-role aircraft entering service.

Iran doesn't have the allies nor the wealth to upgrade it's aircraft with the systems required to bring them inline with modern combat aircraft. All aircraft operated by Iran are outmoded because they don't have the same equipment as those operated by Israel or even the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

If you think that the aircraft Israel fields and the aircraft Iran fields are similar, you don't have a leg to stand on. Anyone can tell you that the Iranian airforce may have more aircraft but, in this case, quantity does not make up for quality. Israel has the technological edge over Iran. This is not hard to understand.

I put a link to the inventory in my last post. Have a look at the numbers of aircraft.

You severely overestimate the aerial defences of Iran. Again, these systems are basic and are fooled by most modern electronic countermeasures fitted to all but the most basic aircraft.

The only thing that defeats Israel's wishes is the political ramifications it will face if it undergoes any military action against Iran. That's it.

I'm sorry but your propoganda hasn't worn off on me. I've never taken anything you said seriously because I know it's complete and utter crap. And you've proven this by claiming that Israeli operated aircraft and Iranian operated aircraft are comparable. They are not. That is a fact.

Mate, I know what I'm talking about. You seem to think you do but you have made it embarassingly clear you don't.

But I don't know what makes you think you know what you're talking about. Is this a personal interest of yours you like to Google search sometimes? You're an overly-repeated self-proclaimed military expert with zero qualifications but your own tooted horn, and I have absolutely no idea why I should consider you as someone who has any special knowledge about anything to do with military that anyone else on this website doesn't.

You don't face the facts because the facts defy you. Israel has no bombers, their aircraft are out of range, they can't deliver the weapons they would need to destroy underground nuclear sites, they don't have the political cooperation from Iraq or Afghanistan to use their bases, it's a stretch to presume they even know where the targets are at, even if they could destroy them. Iran has had years to dig in and spread out their program with multiple redundancies. I wouldn't be surprised if the most important sites of all aren't even known about.

Why? I don't want to go to Afghanistan because someone thinks it would be fun to continue the war there.

A poor excuse even if I've heard them all. Who thinks it would be fun to continue the war there, exactly? You won't complain when someone thinks its a good idea to send American boys just like yourself into another warzone for Israel's behalf. That's precisely why your opinion doesn't matter.

So you've magically become a psychic? Maybe you should spread that pixy dust of yours over your favourite politicians like Ahmadinejad to try and bring the regime to reason. But we all know miracles don't happen.

There you go again in the sheltered bubble thinking the world police force you take for granted is always going to be there for you. It's not my responsibility to worry about foreign regimes half the world away. If you care about it so much, why don't you do it? Put your boots on, grab your helmet, and go use your alleged sharpshooting talents and risk your own life if it matters so much to you.

No it is not comparable. This is where your argument falls. Israel operates aircraft with modern avionics, electronic countermeasures and other such equipment which make the aircraft much more capable. Israel has the wealth to modernise its aircraft with the latest avionics and fire systems in order to make their aircraft perform as good as if not better than the latest fighter/multi-role aircraft entering service.

But there is no reason for me to believe that Israeli jets can't be shot down by Iranian jets, in this case over Iranian airspace. You're not even broaching my "argument" because it has nothing to do with avionics. Israel's aircraft are vulnerable; they're not invisible to radar and they're going to face down multiple threats simultaneously. They have the avionics to put the fantasy payloads on the target, they just don't have the range to get them there and back again and be able to fight their way in and out. But that's quite a Zionist sales pitch claiming baselessly that they're better than the latest out there.

Iran doesn't have the allies nor the wealth to upgrade it's aircraft with the systems required to bring them inline with modern combat aircraft. All aircraft operated by Iran are outmoded because they don't have the same equipment as those operated by Israel or even the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

LOL Now if it's not Israeli, it's crap? Sorry, not having the same equipment as that operated by Israel doesn't mean it's outmoded.

What would make this blind faith of an Israeli attack a reality? Putting the predictable blowback aside, if Israel gets basing rights in Iraq or Afghanistan and uses its entire missile arsenal to make what hits it can on Iranian air defenses in a surprise attack, it would have a reasonable chance of doing light to moderate damage. Otherwise it needs help from the US. And doesn't it always.

[Yamato]

It would be a mistake because of the political ramifications. Israel knows Iran poses a threat, although the reactions of some of its neighbours, save Syria, will most likely try something out themselves. You never know who might act against Iran. For all we know, Saudi Arabia might do something idiotic.

But a mistake militarily? No. As I have already told you, Israeli aircraft are superior. They managed to penetrate Syrian air defences, which are similar in equipment and age to those of Iran, and destroy a nuclear facility. It isn't difficult to fool older SAM systems with modern countermeasures and even defences such as chaff and flares.

Syria was in range, it was one target, they had surprise, that mission faced none of the difficulties of this kool aid you can't stop believing in. Hiding from radar and fighting enemy aircraft with bingo fuel is actually relevant to the point I made. Your usual Zionist cheerleading can change the subject but it can't accept reality.

[MichaelW]

But I don't know what makes you think you know what you're talking about.

That's because you don't know anything military related.

Is this a personal interest of yours you like to Google search sometimes?

The military stuff? One of many. But it isn't all on the internet. I have many read many books to do with things military, watched many documentaires and have family members who have served in the military and who share a similar interest to mine.

You're an overly-repeated self-proclaimed military expert with zero qualifications but your own tooted horn, and I have absolutely no idea why I should consider you as someone who has any special knowledge about anything to do with military that anyone else on this website doesn't.

Because no one has as comprehensive knowledge. We all specialise in certain fields of knowledge. You'll find yours soon.

Israel has no bombers.

Sort of. Israel does not possess bombers in the traditional sense, as in strategic bombers like the B-52 or the Tupolev Tu-95. However, Israel has what as known as "fighter-bombers" which have ground attack capabilities as well as air-to-air capabilities of a fighter.

Their aircraft are out of range.

Only if they relied on ground based refuelling methods and without external fuel tanks. However, Israel has airborne refuelling tankers which can refuel aircraft in-flight.

They can't deliver the weapons they would need to destroy underground nuclear sites.

I have already proven to you (with sources) that they can. It's not my fault you didn't read them.

They don't have the political cooperation from Iraq or Afghanistan to use their bases.

With aerial refuelling, they don't need it.

It's a stretch to presume they even know where the targets are at, even if they could destroy them. Iran has had years to dig in and spread out their program with multiple redundancies. I wouldn't be surprised if the most important sites of all aren't even known about.

Which is why any modern military will gather as much information from drones or satellites as possible to ascertain where these sites are and how well they are defended before they launch any form of operations. Israel has the capabilities and the allies with the technology to do this.

A poor excuse even if I've heard them all. Who thinks it would be fun to continue the war there, exactly? You won't complain when someone thinks its a good idea to send American boys just like yourself into another warzone for Israel's behalf. That's precisely why your opinion doesn't matter.

And your opinion does? Also, I am not American. Yet another false assumption.

But there is no reason for me to believe that Israeli jets can't be shot down by Iranian jets, in this case over Iranian airspace.

It would be extremely difficult for the Iranians to do so. The Israelis have had much more experience in terms of combat operations than the Iranians have and would therefore will have the edge over the Iranians.

You're not even broaching my "argument" because it has nothing to do with avionics.

And that's where your argument begins to falter. Because you over-look such vital things such as technology, avionics, combat systems etc. which the ones fitted to Israeli aircraft are superior to those fitted in Iranian aircraft.

Israel's aircraft are vulnerable; they're not invisible to radar and they're going to face down multiple threats simultaneously.

The IAF has proven that it can deal with simoultaneous threats when it led a strike against targets in Syria.

They have the avionics to put the fantasy payloads on the target, they just don't have the range to get them there and back again and be able to fight their way in and out. But that's quite a Zionist sales pitch claiming baselessly that they're better than the latest out there.

It's not a sales pitch. It is fact.

LOL Now if it's not Israeli, it's crap? Sorry, not having the same equipment as that operated by Israel doesn't mean it's outmoded.

If it's neither updated nor modernised, it's crap. Not having the same or comparable technical and electronic upgrades fitted to aircraft the Israelis or any other Westernised airforce can field does mean that it is outmoded.

Syria was in range, it was one target, they had surprise, that mission faced none of the difficulties of this kool aid you can't stop believing in. Hiding from radar and fighting enemy aircraft with bingo fuel is actually relevant to the point I made. Your usual Zionist cheerleading can change the subject but it can't accept reality.

Yet another failed attempt at calling me a neocon and a Zionist. Syria is basically armed with the same equipment as Iran and they could get through Syrian air defences with ease. But go ahead and live in your own little world, where reality and logic is indeed a foreign concept.

[+and-then]

Bottom line for Israel is that if they feel the need to attack Iran, they will do so. Such a mission, unassisted, will probably be costly for them. They will degrade Iran's nuclear weapon program capabilities but bolster Iran's political situation in the world IF Iran declines to massively respond and rather, appeals to the world community to drop the sanctions. But if Iran responds by attacking Israel or the US overtly then the Ayatollahs and the IRGC will be facing B-2 and possibly B-52 strikes along with cruise missile barrages against more than just nuclear program infrastructure. Why risk that? Just start rebuilding and crying to the UN and voila` the sanctions collapse.

Edited March 27, 2012 by and then

[Yamato]

That's because you don't know anything military related.

The military stuff? One of many. But it isn't all on the internet. I have many read many books to do with things military, watched many documentaires and have family members who have served in the military and who share a similar interest to mine.

Because no one has as comprehensive knowledge. We all specialise in certain fields of knowledge. You'll find yours soon.

Sort of. Israel does not possess bombers in the traditional sense, as in strategic bombers like the B-52 or the Tupolev Tu-95. However, Israel has what as known as "fighter-bombers" which have ground attack capabilities as well as air-to-air capabilities of a fighter.

Only if they relied on ground based refuelling methods and without external fuel tanks. However, Israel has airborne refuelling tankers which can refuel aircraft in-flight.

I have already proven to you (with sources) that they can. It's not my fault you didn't read them.

With aerial refuelling, they don't need it.

Which is why any modern military will gather as much information from drones or satellites as possible to ascertain where these sites are and how well they are defended before they launch any form of operations. Israel has the capabilities and the allies with the technology to do this.

And your opinion does? Also, I am not American. Yet another false assumption.

It would be extremely difficult for the Iranians to do so. The Israelis have had much more experience in terms of combat operations than the Iranians have and would therefore will have the edge over the Iranians.

And that's where your argument begins to falter. Because you over-look such vital things such as technology, avionics, combat systems etc. which the ones fitted to Israeli aircraft are superior to those fitted in Iranian aircraft.

The IAF has proven that it can deal with simoultaneous threats when it led a strike against targets in Syria.

It's not a sales pitch. It is fact.

If it's neither updated nor modernised, it's crap. Not having the same or comparable technical and electronic upgrades fitted to aircraft the Israelis or any other Westernised airforce can field does mean that it is outmoded.

Yet another failed attempt at calling me a neocon and a Zionist. Syria is basically armed with the same equipment as Iran and they could get through Syrian air defences with ease. But go ahead and live in your own little world, where reality and logic is indeed a foreign concept.

That's because you don't know anything military related.

Neither do you, and you haven't even grown up yet.

The military stuff? One of many. But it isn't all on the internet. I have many read many books to do with things military, watched many documentaires and have family members who have served in the military and who share a similar interest to mine.

So you have no formal education or personal experience with the military at all. So it's just as I said. You know nothing more than the average person here can easily acquire on their own. You might be more interested to pursue information. That doesn't make you an expert. Try joining the service or majoring in aerospace engineering.

Because no one has as comprehensive knowledge. We all specialise in certain fields of knowledge. You'll find yours soon.

There's nothing relevant here that you've specialized in. You're a high school kid who hasn't grown up yet. You have a lot to learn because you will continue to learn the rest of your life if you live right.

Sort of. Israel does not possess bombers in the traditional sense, as in strategic bombers like the B-52 or the Tupolev Tu-95. However, Israel has what as known as "fighter-bombers" which have ground attack capabilities as well as air-to-air capabilities of a fighter.

B-52s are what I'm talking about. I've already mentioned Israel's lack of strategic bombers.

Only if they relied on ground based refuelling methods and without external fuel tanks. However, Israel has airborne refuelling tankers which can refuel aircraft in-flight.

The number of planes that Israeli tankers can handle on this fantasy mission you can't stop believing in makes the idea even more impotent if that were even possible.

I have already proven to you (with sources) that they can. It's not my fault you didn't read them.

You proved they have no ability to accomplish the mission. They don't have weapons capable of destroying facilities under mountains. They can't even deliver 2,000lb bombs which would be ridiculous to rely upon to do meaningful damage.

Which is why any modern military will gather as much information from drones or satellites as possible to ascertain where these sites are and how well they are defended before they launch any form of operations. Israel has the capabilities and the allies with the technology to do this.

Israel needs the US because it can't attack Iran by itself and accomplish anything but blowback on the US and itself. These sites are underground. Israeli drones over Iran that can find underground facilities. Is there anything your wild imagination can't fantasize concerning Israel?

And your opinion does? Also, I am not American. Yet another false assumption.

Of course my opinion does. I'm the one paying for that world police force. You're an advocate for spending my money who can't put his own skin in the game because you're not fit for service, whatever that means. I didn't assume you were an American, you misunderstand almost everything.

It would be extremely difficult for the Iranians to do so. The Israelis have had much more experience in terms of combat operations than the Iranians have and would therefore will have the edge over the Iranians.

Unfortunately fighting on fumes isn't possible. Countermeasures can't stop bullets and Israeli aircraft that can't maneuver, use afterburners, or persist over enemy airspace and dogfight because they don't have the fuel are at a terrible disadvantage. If you want to bet on the Zionists I'll be on the other side of that bet for what would be obvious reasons if you were capable of strategic thinking on military tactics.

And that's where your argument begins to falter. Because you over-look such vital things such as technology, avionics, combat systems etc. which the ones fitted to Israeli aircraft are superior to those fitted in Iranian aircraft.

None of that puts fuel in the tank. Changes of subject don't make dreams come true.

The IAF has proven that it can deal with simoultaneous threats when it led a strike against targets in Syria.

Israel is capable of destroying one target in Iran if it uses airborne refueling.

It's not a sales pitch. It is fact.

Listening to you hanging onto a dream, it's becoming a laughable Zionist fantasy fooling the dupes who can't understand the difficulties of the mission not to believe it. Israel doesn't want to appear impotent when they're war mongering against Iran because if they did, getting the help from the US that they need would be far less likely to happen. If they had the capability to strike Iran and do meaningful damage, they would have done so already judging by the doomsday rhetoric coming out of their bureaucrats' mouths.

If it's neither updated nor modernised, it's crap. Not having the same or comparable technical and electronic upgrades fitted to aircraft the Israelis or any other Westernised airforce can field does mean that it is outmoded.

That doesn't put fuel in the tank either. You have to change the subject in order to keep flapping.

Yet another failed attempt at calling me a neocon and a Zionist. Syria is basically armed with the same equipment as Iran and they could get through Syrian air defences with ease. But go ahead and live in your own little world, where reality and logic is indeed a foreign concept.

I didn't call you a neocon. I wouldn't expect anyone in New Zealand to be a neocon. But you can sure swallow their BS easily enough when it comes to asinine Zionist propaganda from Israel. I'd love to hear what book you read or what TV show you think you watched that told you that Iranian aircraft and air defenses aren't capable of shooting down your magical Israeli jets with their fantasy payloads.

[Yamato]

Bottom line for Israel is that if they feel the need to attack Iran, they will do so. Such a mission, unassisted, will probably be costly for them. They will degrade Iran's nuclear weapon program capabilities but bolster Iran's political situation in the world IF Iran declines to massively respond and rather, appeals to the world community to drop the sanctions. But if Iran responds by attacking Israel or the US overtly then the Ayatollahs and the IRGC will be facing B-2 and possibly B-52 strikes along with cruise missile barrages against more than just nuclear program infrastructure. Why risk that? Just start rebuilding and crying to the UN and voila` the sanctions collapse.

They've had the need to attack Iran for years and they haven't done it because they can't do it in a worthwhile way.

Why risk that?

Exactly. Someone tell the clueless Israeli bureaucrats that. Iran will be obliterated if it attacks Israel. People hear the Zionist lies in the media and from the bureaucrats and they morph into cowards over it. If someone in the US is scared of Iran they need to get a life. If someone is scared for their favorite little welfare recipient Israel they should write their own check or put their helmet on and go fight for Israel with their own blood, time, and money.