Strategic Questions Surround the Coming Iran Strike

by Infidelesto on October 22, 2009 · Comments

Ed Timperlake at the Washington Times points out some interesting strategic questions surrounding the 72 hours following Israel’s strike on Iran. We know the response from Iran will come quickly, but in what capacity? Also how will N.Korea, China and Russia react?

When the IAF attacks, Iranian leaders have promised to unleash their missile force. Some intermediate-range ballistic missiles have a high probability of getting through anti-missile defenses and hitting Israeli population centers.

The 620-mile-range Iranian Shahab-3, a derivative of the North Korean No-dong series, is a powerful and dangerous missile. Like the V-2 barrage on London during World War II, innocent people will suffer but the nation will survive, and once an intermediate-range ballistic missile inventory is depleted, that threat is over and unless replenished, it ends.

In an attack against hardened Iranian ground targets, the IAF will first have to neutralize Iranian air defenses, including Iran’s air force. Iran’s current air order of battle includes a mix of Russian, French, Chinese and U.S. design systems, though the actual number of combat-effective aircraft is a guess because of the lack of spare parts and limited insight into the training and tactics of Iranian fighter pilots. However, even older Iranian F-4s, F-14s, MiGs and Sukhois can make a nasty hash of Persian Gulf targets.

So the big unanswered question is: What do Russia, China and North Korea do to help their client? Does an IAF attack lead them to race in and provide arms to help Iran?

The great untold story of the Yom Kippur War of 1973 was President Nixon turning on the spigot of U.S. military aid to make sure Israel survived, including the stripping of U.S. squadrons of jets and sending them to Israel, almost overnight. So there is a very real potential that the Russians, Chinese and North Koreans will take a page from history and re-equip Iran.

With an IAF strike, the United States will have a huge military role independent of any involvement in the initial attack because America will immediately be blamed by Iran and also vilified in the “Arab street.”

The U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor, the world’s best fighter, will be needed and can make a huge difference. Hopefully, F-22s can be immediately on station over Iraq, Afghanistan and every other high value Middle East target. Do we have enough?

Naval air power from aircraft carrier strikes groups will have their hands full protecting sea lines of communication. Mine warfare will be a huge challenge because insurance companies may shut down their tanker clients until mines are swept. Allied navies and the U.S. Navy also will have to neutralize a significant Iranian cruise missile threat, many of which were supplied by China.

Do the United States and our NATO allies have enough troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to beat back an Iranian-instigated ground attack using whatever fanatical forces they can mobilize? The number of these forces is anyone’s guess because Iran can pull the trigger on a lot of fanatics, including mobilizing its terrorist clients, Hezbollah and Hamas.

So the day after an IAF strike there is the potential need for enough U.S. military forces to engage the fight simultaneously both with conventional and unconventional forces. How long this will go on is a great unknown.

Related posts:

  1. Russia to sell 250 fighter jets to Iran
  2. John Bolton: Iran strike not likely
  3. Iran conducting war games; tests most advanced missiles
  4. Iran: We Should Build Army to Defend all of Islam
  5. Inching closer to war: Iran tests missiles that can reach Israel
  6. AsiaTimes: Iran strike planned before August?
  7. Iran Begins War Game With Warning to U.S., Israel
  8. Officials: Israeli jets flying over Iraqi territory in preparation for strike on Iran
  9. Iran threatens to launch 600 missiles to Israel if attacked
  10. Israeli Air Force buying up the new F-35
Want automatic updates?
4 choices: Twitter, Facebook, RSS feed or get daily email updates
  • psudrozz
    "The great untold story of the Yom Kippur War of 1973 was President Nixon turning on the spigot of U.S. military aid to make sure Israel survived, including the stripping of U.S. squadrons of jets and sending them to Israel, almost overnight. So there is a very real potential that the Russians, Chinese and North Koreans will take a page from history and re-equip Iran."

    i just don't see obama doing anything. not a thing.

    because russia and the u.n. will tell him to stay out of it.
  • Agreed. The only way I think Obama does anything is if the pressure both at home and internationally becomes so great, that he ends up aiding Israel "in some capacity" out of political expedience.
  • Tonto
    If Russia does re-equip Iran it will come with a big fat price tag that the Iranians will not be able to afford. Russia always wants "Cash, no checks". If Israel does the job right, they'll take out oil reserves, gas reserves, the one and only refinery in Iran, the nuke installations and put Iran in a very nasty position of near bankruptcy. Iran talks boocoo smack, but Saddam fought them to a standstill for 8 years....and the US whipped Saddam in HOURS....I think the Israelis best just get to it and let the chips fall....the muz are MUCH more talk than ass. The Iranians have been spending money like sailors on liberty trying to finance all the terror groups all around, buying half the gas they use and buying nuke -making equipment. They're closer to broke that most people think....and basically windbags. Secretly the rest of the M/E will be breathing a sigh of relief....all the while screaming bloody murder and calling Israel nasty names. Well, if I was Israeli, I'd just haul off and try to give a shit.
  • JEWHAWK
    "The great untold story of the Yom Kippur War of 1973 was President Nixon turning on the spigot of U.S. military aid to make sure Israel survived"

    Sure. That's why Nixon/Kissinger duo did NOT warn Israel in time to call its reservists...
    Israel was caught off guard because of that "little" detail.

    The ONLY American that we, Jews and Israelis should thank for Israel's ultimate victory in
    1973, was General ALEXANDER HAIG, who provided the TOW anti-tank missiles for Israel,
    WITHOUT Nixon/Kissinger's knowledge and approval.

    It was a GAME-CHANGING weapon.

    AERIAL WARFARE:

    The Israeli A-4 Skyhawks and F-4 Phantoms were shot down
    like flies by the latest Soviet SAM (Surface-Air Missiles) and ZSU-23 Shilka Self propelled Anti-Aircraft Guns, installed AND operated by Soviet
    crews.
    Only when those Anti-Aircraft weapons were out of range, Israeli aircraft could strike the enemy's
    positions on the ground.

    In other words, both Nixon and self-hating Jew Kissinger were trying to see Israel defeated, if not
    militarly at least morally.Their whim rendered thousands of lives in Israel.


    "The U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor, the world’s best fighter, will be needed and can make a huge difference."

    The F-15E's already could do the job.


    SEA WARFARE:

    What would make a HUGE difference is America to deliver FOUR Virginia Class
    submarines to Israel AND, of course, its TOMAHAWAK missiles that are VETOED to be sold to Israel.
    Each submarine costs about 2 Billion Dollars.

    Are they expensive?
    Hell yes.
    But they'd be DECISIVE weapons.

    In the long run, maybe it'd be cheaper than purchasing more aircraft.
  • joesix_pack
    I have to agree in that President Obama would not take an active part on Israel's side. In fact, I would expect him to be opposed in almost every way. He is no friend of Israel. I would not put it past him to order Israeli aircraft shot down if they were in Iraqi airspace.
  • Top Dog
    Because Obama is not only non-supportive of Israel, but seemingly actively anti-Semetic, any defensive preemptive strike by Israel will have to be absolutely decisive. IMHO, there is only one way to achieve this:

    Nuke Iran.
blog comments powered by Disqus