What's new

US 'bunker-buster' not powerful enough against Iran

Well, I know repeating myself won't help, because you like to keep talking nonsense.
Yes, you keeping repeating nonsensical criticisms will not help.

Oldman1 claimed that the USA was prepared for a soviet attack, that claim can't be proved. No one is talking about any Soviet's claim right now that you say 'the Soviet's claim of being prepared against US' can't be proved. You just like to have said something for the sake of playing the role of a smart ***.
That is funny because if we go by the principle of deterrence, then eminently we proved to the Soviets that we were prepared to meet them. The ultimate proof is by an actual war and since that did not happened, the next best thing will do: Deterrence. You failed in your argument.

Fine. And you're not good enough at the moment. This one too can't be proved or disproved because you haven't launched an attack yet.
You have a poor understanding of history and presented a ridiculous argument. That is not how people operate in real life. We do not wait until an act is performed before we make a judgement. We go by historical achievements. More smarter people than you looked at Iraq and Afghanistan and worry for Iran.

The students learn military history to learn from the mistakes, not to use the same tactics now. Do you say the tactics and strategies of the Achaemenid Army is still adoptable today?
Fine, then Iranian military academies must be devoid of students.

And I told you that we needed to know how long the range of operation of those weapons are to come to a reasonable conclusion. Can US B2's drop bombs on a target from 400 kms away for example?
No. Does that mean the B-2 is worthless against Iran?
 
. .
Will Israel Attack Iran?
Ronen Zvulun/Reuters


As the Sabbath evening approached on Jan. 13, Ehud Barak paced the wide living-room floor of his home high above a street in north Tel Aviv, its walls lined with thousands of books on subjects ranging from philosophy and poetry to military strategy. Barak, the Israeli defense minister, is the most decorated soldier in the country’s history and one of its most experienced and controversial politicians. He has served as chief of the general staff for the Israel Defense Forces, interior minister, foreign minister and prime minister. He now faces, along with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and 12 other members of Israel’s inner security cabinet, the most important decision of his life — whether to launch a pre-emptive attack against Iran. We met in the late afternoon, and our conversation — the first of several over the next week — lasted for two and a half hours, long past nightfall. “This is not about some abstract concept,” Barak said as he gazed out at the lights of Tel Aviv, “but a genuine concern. The Iranians are, after all, a nation whose leaders have set themselves a strategic goal of wiping Israel off the map.”
The Nuclear Assassinations
Six key strikes against Iran thought to be made by the Mossad.

Related

Times Topics: Iran's Nuclear Program | Israel
Gilad Shalit and the Rising Price of an Israeli Life (November 13, 2011)


When I mentioned to Barak the opinion voiced by the former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and the former chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi — that the Iranian threat was not as imminent as he and Netanyahu have suggested and that a military strike would be catastrophic (and that they, Barak and Netanyahu, were cynically looking to score populist points at the expense of national security), Barak reacted with uncharacteristic anger. He and Netanyahu, he said, are responsible “in a very direct and concrete way for the existence of the State of Israel — indeed, for the future of the Jewish people.” As for the top-ranking military personnel with whom I’ve spoken who argued that an attack on Iran was either unnecessary or would be ineffective at this stage, Barak said: “It’s good to have diversity in thinking and for people to voice their opinions. But at the end of the day, when the military command looks up, it sees us — the minister of defense and the prime minister. When we look up, we see nothing but the sky above us.”

Netanyahu and Barak have both repeatedly stressed that a decision has not yet been made and that a deadline for making one has not been set. As we spoke, however, Barak laid out three categories of questions, which he characterized as “Israel’s ability to act,” “international legitimacy” and “necessity,” all of which require affirmative responses before a decision is made to attack:

1. Does Israel have the ability to cause severe damage to Iran’s nuclear sites and bring about a major delay in the Iranian nuclear project? And can the military and the Israeli people withstand the inevitable counterattack?

2. Does Israel have overt or tacit support, particularly from America, for carrying out an attack?

3. Have all other possibilities for the containment of Iran’s nuclear threat been exhausted, bringing Israel to the point of last resort? If so, is this the last opportunity for an attack?

For the first time since the Iranian nuclear threat emerged in the mid-1990s, at least some of Israel’s most powerful leaders believe that the response to all of these questions is yes.

At various points in our conversation, Barak underscored that if Israel or the rest of the world waits too long, the moment will arrive — sometime in the coming year, he says — beyond which it will no longer be possible to act. “It will not be possible to use any surgical means to bring about a significant delay,” he said. “Not for us, not for Europe and not for the United States. After that, the question will remain very important, but it will become purely theoretical and pass out of our hands — the statesmen and decision-makers — and into yours — the journalists and historians.”
 
.

The same reason that made israel, america and britain to have them!

So? All western countries have the scientific capability to create nuclear weapons. Most of them have the hardware means too.
Why haven't they obtained nuclear weapons?
 
.
Well, I know repeating myself won't help, because you like to keep talking nonsense. Oldman1 claimed that the USA was prepared for a soviet attack, that claim can't be proved. No one is talking about any Soviet's claim right now that you say 'the Soviet's claim of being prepared against US' can't be proved. You just like to have said something for the sake of playing the role of a smart ***.
USSR was becoming weaker with passage of time. In contrast, USA was becoming stronger.

And I told you that we needed to know how long the range of operation of those weapons are to come to a reasonable conclusion. Can US B2's drop bombs on a target from 400 kms away for example?
B52 bomber is designed to carry and deploy even long range cruise missiles.

Here is an example:


These cruise missiles have far greater range then 400 KM.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
So? All western countries have the scientific capability to create nuclear weapons. Most of them have the hardware means too.
Why haven't they obtained nuclear weapons?

Because their big brothers have already developed them for their little brothers' protection!
 
. .
Well, I know repeating myself won't help, because you like to keep talking nonsense. Oldman1 claimed that the USA was prepared for a soviet attack, that claim can't be proved. No one is talking about any Soviet's claim right now that you say 'the Soviet's claim of being prepared against US' can't be proved. You just like to have said something for the sake of playing the role of a smart ***.



Fine. And you're not good enough at the moment. This one too can't be proved or disproved because you haven't launched an attack yet.



The students learn military history to learn from the mistakes, not to use the same tactics now. Do you say the tactics and strategies of the Achaemenid Army is still adoptable today?
Again, because I know talking to you will lead us nowhere, I shall not exhaust myself explaining why I think it's irrelevant to talk about a war that has happened two decades ago. I prefer to discuss things with other Americans, I feel I benefit more if I discuss things from them than I repeat myself over obvious things for you, If you don't jump in though.

---------- Post added at 01:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:29 PM ----------



And I told you that we needed to know how long the range of operation of those weapons are to come to a reasonable conclusion. Can US B2's drop bombs on a target from 400 kms away for example?

Yes the B2s can drop weapons on a target from that distance and even further depending on what the weapon is.

Heres a video of a JSOW-ER at about 400 km.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z83zXB8j5ow
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom