Israelis are prepared-or not-for an Iran attack?

robert38-55robert38-55 Senior MemberPosts: 3,621 Senior Member
Israel is a country on edge.Probably no country in the world is as prepared as Israel for such an attack, with every home built in the last 21 years possessing a mandatory bomb shelter. City centers have vast public shelters with special rooms set up for non-conventional attacks. And citizens are instructed in how to protect their bomb shelters against chemical and biological warfare.Every citizen has, in theory, a gas mask. In practice, there aren't enough to go around.

Everybody asks, do you think there will be war with Iran? Nobody knows, and if you see Israel’s crowded cafes, the bustling streets, the crammed beaches, you may think that nobody cares.

Yet Israel is a country on edge. Most seem to have bought Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s line that the price to pay to stop Iran from building a nuclear bomb is much lower than the price to be paid if Iran has the bomb.

Fueling those thoughts are memories of what happened when the Nazis killed 6 million Jews. Today, there are approximately 6 million Jews in Israel. Few Israelis can argue against Netanyahu's insistence of: Never again.

And yet, I don't know anyone here who has prepared their bomb shelter. They're all a mess, used to store boxes, suitcases, footballs and wine. They are used as computer rooms, bicycle storage, play rooms. The attitude is, for the most part, we'll worry about it when the time comes.

Until then, live life

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/29/14141348-israelis-are-prepared-or-not-for-an-iran-attack
The attitude is, for the most part, we'll worry about it when the time comes.

Kind of sounds like the attitude of the US citizens doesn't it??????????????
"It is what it is":usa:

Replies

  • SideOfBaconSideOfBacon Member Posts: 111 Member
    I thought the reason Israel was waiting on the US is they simply do not have the capability of stopping Iran's nuclear enrichment. Only the US has the capability and weapons to destroy Fordow. Any attack that leaves their enrichment facilities in tact, isn't going to make any difference in the long run (except of course start a war, and solidify the Iranian people behind the government, who they currently don't like).
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/experts-irans-underground-nuclear-sites-not-immune-to-us-bunker-busters/2012/02/24/gIQAzWaghR_story.html

    An attack without the US only delays the bomb. I remember hearing in the past Israel asking if they could borrow the bunker buster and the B-10 (maybe?) to carry it. We told them no, we'll deploy it when we want to. With I'mADinnerJacket (Ahmadinejad?) stepping down, I think the sanctions are working. If we can do this without spilling a drop of American blood after Iraq and Afghanistan, that's what I want to do. If Israel wants to do this on their own, I'm OK with that as well.
  • Jim TomJim Tom Member Posts: 338 Member
    The time to stop Iran from getting the bomb is past. The political, strategic, and economic costs are now too high. They should have been bombed 8 years ago when they were just starting their program, much the same way Iraq and Syria were, but now the cost is too high for our leaders to stick their necks out.

    I do think New York and DC will go up before Tel Aviv. The mooslems will take care of Israel after the US is sidelined.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,603 Senior Member
    I have no control over it. Let the cards fall where they will.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,497 Senior Member
    You sure have a way with words....... :uhm:
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • SirGeorgeKillianSirGeorgeKillian Senior Member Posts: 5,458 Senior Member
    He has a point. Wish I could fix things, but there isn't anything I can do but vote for people who will. And the sad part is, my vote is getting canceled out by someone who is more concerned with getting a damn free cell phone with 300 free minutes on it a month.
    Unless life also hands you water and sugar, your lemonade is gonna suck!
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    I'm in love with a Glock
  • gunwalkergunwalker Member Posts: 457 Member
    What we know about Israel's military capability is what they want us to know.
    We do not view the world as it is, but as we perceive it to be.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,141 Senior Member
    One of these days the news is going to feature a large smoking hole where Tehran used to be, and the whole world will know what the Israelis are capable of doing. Until then, it's all guesswork.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    One of these days the news is going to feature a large smoking hole where Tehran used to be, and the whole world will know what the Israelis are capable of doing. Until then, it's all guesswork.
    Jerry

    I have alway kind of felt that way too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:that::agree:
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • SideOfBaconSideOfBacon Member Posts: 111 Member
    Teach wrote: »
    One of these days the news is going to feature a large smoking hole where Tehran used to be, and the whole world will know what the Israelis are capable of doing. Until then, it's all guesswork.
    Jerry

    Good point.
  • ace7644ace7644 Member Posts: 55 Member
    I think that if the Israelis ever used a WMD on Iran, even in retaliation all the other Muslim countries in the area would unite and counter attack. In which case the US would have to step in and we would most likely be hit with another oil embargo like in the 70's. If Iran's nuke facilities ever were hit, that would just give them more reason to eventually get a bomb for their own protection in the future. It's basically a lose lose not matter how you put it. The only solution really is to get the Islamic leadership out, which probably wouldn't fly with the majority of the Iranian ppl.
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    Nuke em til they glow, then shoot em in the dark.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,141 Senior Member
    ace7644 wrote: »
    The only solution really is to get the Islamic leadership out, which probably wouldn't fly with the majority of the Iranian ppl.

    The Iranian people are ready for a leadership change, as evidenced by the street protests a couple of years ago that Obummer refused to support. Those people were brutally repressed by Ahmed-I'm-a-Nutjob's troops at the direction of the radical muslim clerics who really run the country. The regular Iranians are tired of 30 years of Sharia law, but they can't get any American support to clean house on the nutcases in power.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • ace7644ace7644 Member Posts: 55 Member
    I think that if a TRUE majority were against Islamic rule in that country then they would replace it with something else. The reason it was suppressed so quickly was because there were not enough people on the side of change. Sure the media may have overstated the uprising to try to draw American support but if it were truly as big as they tried to make us believe it would have gained some ground don't you think?
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 27,100 Senior Member
    ace7644 wrote: »
    I think that if the Israelis ever used a WMD on Iran, even in retaliation all the other Muslim countries in the area would unite and counter attack. In which case the US would have to step in and we would most likely be hit with another oil embargo like in the 70's. If Iran's nuke facilities ever were hit, that would just give them more reason to eventually get a bomb for their own protection in the future. It's basically a lose lose not matter how you put it. The only solution really is to get the Islamic leadership out, which probably wouldn't fly with the majority of the Iranian ppl.

    With the current administration, slim chance of that. We'll sit that one out and Israel may go under but not without making a bloody mess of the region.

    Middle East unite? NO chance of that AT ALL. Has never hapened and never will. KSA, UAE, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain and Qatar would all quietly observe while their token revolutionary gets pummeled JUST like they did with Saddam Hussein. They wil NOT be rocking their oil laden wealthy boat for some crazy extremist.

    With a different administration? I think if they try to starve us of oil (which they can't do on their own), puclic sentiment in the USA against the extremists is the region would push us to an all out offensive agains Iran with the full support of the USA population. It would become yet another Iraq because as I said no other ME country will go in to defend Iran. They have NO friends in the region except for the poor countries like Syria and Lebanon which do not have the money or balls to go agains the US directly.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 23,323 Senior Member
    We know where they are making the higher grade stuff in the underground complex. Take one B-2 bomber loaded with a 1 to 2 megaton bunker buster and drop it there. The explosion can be explained by the workers placing the 55 gallon drums of uranium too close together causing a criticality event in which the whole load goes prompt critical (it exploded). Takes out the centrifuge complex and spreads radioactive uranium over everything in the complex(that isn't instantaneously melted). Believable since they are stupid enough to store it in 55 gallon drums.
    I may be a Deplorable, but at least I'm not a Liberal!!!



  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,141 Senior Member
    I'll bet we've got a couple of surplus Atlas 5 rockets sitting around in mothballs that would make good bunker busters when dropped from orbit, even without a warhead in place.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • ace7644ace7644 Member Posts: 55 Member
    Well to address the two comments above. 1. Iran does not have enough nuke material to make a bomb, thats what this whole issue is about, let alone enough to get a critical mass detonation through proximity 2. Nuke material can be traced back to its country of origin after the explosion. 3. Atlas rockets have crap guidance and would probably get in a 1 mile vicinity of where it should hit so that's a no go as well.
  • gunwalkergunwalker Member Posts: 457 Member
    ace7644 wrote: »
    Well to address the two comments above. 1. Iran does not have enough nuke material to make a bomb, thats what this whole issue is about, let alone enough to get a critical mass detonation through proximity 2. Nuke material can be traced back to its country of origin after the explosion. 3. Atlas rockets have crap guidance and would probably get in a 1 mile vicinity of where it should hit so that's a no go as well.

    Ace7644, can you please supply some factual data to support your point #1? Or is it supposition?
    # 2 is true. And of course #3 does not really matter due to guidance advances in other systems.
    We do not view the world as it is, but as we perceive it to be.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 23,323 Senior Member
    ace7644 wrote: »
    Well to address the two comments above. 1. Iran does not have enough nuke material to make a bomb, thats what this whole issue is about, let alone enough to get a critical mass detonation through proximity 2. Nuke material can be traced back to its country of origin after the explosion. 3. Atlas rockets have crap guidance and would probably get in a 1 mile vicinity of where it should hit so that's a no go as well.

    Your post taken one at a time:
    1. They have way more than enough nuclear material to make a bomb. They are in the process of separating the U-235 from the other isotopes to make a bomb. That is what those HUGE banks of high speed centrifuges are doing. Making TNT is similar. It first comes out as around 30% pure, and is further refined to get the pure product.

    2. E=mc2 rules that out for most countries. The whole point of a nuclear explosion is to convert the mass to energy. The explosion being underground would preclude finding any small remainder, and it would be heavily mixed with the isotopes on site. Needle in a haystack. I don't know anyone stupid enough to go digging in that radioactive soup to find it, either. I suppose the Iranians could find some, though. Maybe promise them 144 virgins instead of 72.

    Get two subcritical masses of highly enriched U-235 in close proximity and they WILL undergo a criticality event. Not enough to explode, but enough that anyone within a few meters will see a bright blue light, and have a month or less to live. The two masses will undergo rapid fissioning to the point that they will create enough heat to melt in a puddle. Look up a picture of the "Elephant's foot" at Chernobyl for a pictorial explanation. The only reason that one stopped is that it melted enough steel and other material to effectively move the uranium out of proximity in the mix to stop the uncontrolled reaction. Still gives off lethal dose of radioactivity.

    About the bomb thing. The sphere of uranium is a subcritical mass. The explosives around it compress it into a critical mass that causes the E=mc2 thing.
    I may be a Deplorable, but at least I'm not a Liberal!!!



  • AntonioAntonio Senior Member Posts: 2,231 Senior Member
    Saber-rattling to keep their people distracted and in awe against the "Sionist devil and the great Satan". Even the clerics ruling the sheep over there aren't dumb enough to know that using ANY kind of WMD against those who emerged triumphant from the 6-day and Yom Kippur wars would be their last act. Even their alleged "allies" won't dare to stand by them after the moral, political and (Most important) economical consequences of such act against a civilian population.
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    Antonio wrote: »
    Saber-rattling to keep their people distracted and in awe against the "Sionist devil and the great Satan". Even the clerics ruling the sheep over there aren't dumb enough to know that using ANY kind of WMD against those who emerged triumphant from the 6-day and Yom Kippur wars would be their last act. Even their alleged "allies" won't dare to stand by them after the moral, political and (Most important) economical consequences of such act against a civilian population.


    It's a dangerous thing to underestimate what you're opposition is willing to do.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    FiveSeven wrote: »
    It's a dangerous thing to underestimate what you're opposition is willing to do.

    That's the biggest reason why the USA has suffered continous terror attack, against us since the Hostage situation in Iran on November 4,1979. 52 Americans were held for 444 days. Strange how it ended when Jimmy Carter ( democrat) was voted out of office and Ronald Reagan( Republican) got this thing ended....

    When one underestimes their opponents and it doesn't matter if its a debate, discussion, argument,etc., passing of law, battle, war, squirmish, etc. one will not and cannot win.
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • AntonioAntonio Senior Member Posts: 2,231 Senior Member
    FiveSeven wrote: »
    It's a dangerous thing to underestimate what you're opposition is willing to do.

    Maybe when you don't have enough resources to strike back, or when you almost have same-leveled forces where the surprise element might hamper your ways to respond.

    Take the Pearl Harbor attack; Japs were underestimated by the US, but even if the operation would have rendered a complete success to the IJN (They didn't destroy the huge fuel depots or sank the aircraft carriers; many damaged or sunk ships were later recovered, repaired and took action against them), it never represented any real danger to the mainland, government, industrial complex or vital resources. After recovering of the moral shock the attack was, the payback was quick, hard and unmerciful, ending with the complete occupation of the Japanese empire, the destruction of the military establishment and the end of its theocracy.

    Even if Iran manages to wipe out Tel Aviv with a nuclear attack and cause horrendous civilian casualties along with enormous damage to their military forces, it's almost impossible to think that the other players, mainly US and NATO will stand still. Unless Arab countries force they way into Israeli land occupying it and literally driving the Jews into the ocean, sooner or later they'll recover and gather enough force to retaliate against Iran, if there's still something standing to attack.
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,085 Senior Member
    Looks like Iran's having some serious internal problems right now with their currency plummeting and unrest rising.

    http://news.yahoo.com/iran-police-watch-currency-protests-105710607--finance.html
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • blkbird305blkbird305 Member Posts: 219 Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Your post taken one at a time:
    1. They have way more than enough nuclear material to make a bomb. They are in the process of separating the U-235 from the other isotopes to make a bomb. That is what those HUGE banks of high speed centrifuges are doing. Making TNT is similar. It first comes out as around 30% pure, and is further refined to get the pure product.

    2. E=mc2 rules that out for most countries. The whole point of a nuclear explosion is to convert the mass to energy. The explosion being underground would preclude finding any small remainder, and it would be heavily mixed with the isotopes on site. Needle in a haystack. I don't know anyone stupid enough to go digging in that radioactive soup to find it, either. I suppose the Iranians could find some, though. Maybe promise them 144 virgins instead of 72.

    Get two subcritical masses of highly enriched U-235 in close proximity and they WILL undergo a criticality event. Not enough to explode, but enough that anyone within a few meters will see a bright blue light, and have a month or less to live. The two masses will undergo rapid fissioning to the point that they will create enough heat to melt in a puddle. Look up a picture of the "Elephant's foot" at Chernobyl for a pictorial explanation. The only reason that one stopped is that it melted enough steel and other material to effectively move the uranium out of proximity in the mix to stop the uncontrolled reaction. Still gives off lethal dose of radioactivity.

    About the bomb thing. The sphere of uranium is a subcritical mass. The explosives around it compress it into a critical mass that causes the E=mc2 thing.

    The Supergenius Redneck strikes again! Thanks for the lesson on nuclear physics.
Sign In or Register to comment.