I would also like to point out that Mearsheimer wrote a very brave, very insightful book on the Israel Lobby in 2007. His first published book on conventional deterrence (1983) is still relevant today. He is not wrong in all things. He is just wrong on Ukraine, and he doesn't stay particularly current on military matters. For instance, while he agrees that (unlike Ukraine) defending Taiwan is essential to U.S. national security, he doesn't think we have anything to worry about because amphibious operations are too hard. His thinking is lamentably outdated as if China and the U.S. are frozen in 1996.
Yeah, I'd rather not unless Iran gives us no choice. Right now, it's just Iran and Israel, like it was just Austria-Hungary and Serbia there for a moment in 1914. Once other countries start tipping in for advantage, who knows where that could lead? Israel seems to have this. Iran has not attacked our bases ... yet. For the moment, let's be the country that offers Iran a way out of this.
Yep... Considering where we're at now no way those two facilities can continue to be operative. We can just wait until Iran attacks us again, then we can take out the two bunkers. Or, just give Israel what they need to do it.
May as well destroy their drone making factories and supply if possible. That would hurt Iran and Russia. Attacking and setting their oil fields on fire would cause serious economic and environmental damage. There’s also the smoke from the fires that blind certain munitions if it’s blowing where you want to attack. Iran needs to be hurt to where those that support them get the memo that it could happen to them also. I think the Houthis are in a better position, at this time, to cause problems for Israel. Not long term though. If Iran has a navy now is a good time to eliminated that too. Wild card in this is China. My 2 cents
If it was a non-borderline nuclear state I’d agree. That’s not what we’re dealing with and we know Israel’s weapons are inadequate to handle the underground facilities.
Well, can’t say you didn’t warn them. Looks like the grace period for the temper tantrum is over, and Israel is going to start pulling Iran’s economy apart like warm bread. But, hey, Iran might hit a few more abandoned buildings in return. That will show those filthy Zionists who holds sway in the Middle East! At least 7 killed in Iran’s attacks on Israel; Tehran oil depot on fire
No, but if the report is true then Israel asking for help is pretty big indicator. Plus, the supposed reason for their attack was the destruction of these facilities so obliterating them should give Israel no further reason for hostilities except for retaliatory actions. On one of the cable news stations they were talking about how great it would be for Israel to knock out all the ancillary equipment/buildings for these nuclear facilities (electrical, hvac, etc) which I thought was preposterous. Those are easily rebuilt.
Enrichment/fabrication facilities will have multiple components that (1) cost millions, (2) take a year or more to manufacture, and (3) if they get over about -160 C for even a moment fail permanently.
We do know that Iran supplies weapons to all of the terrorist organizations in the middle east. That should be enough to put them on the Naughty List.
Iran's economy is already in terrible shape. It's barely better than Russia's, I suspect. And I think they may have been dealing with a drought as well.
Some of those facilities might be deep in the mountains but if the tunnels leading into them are collapsed, how do you get to them, or out of them?
Iran has millions as an oil state and a year or more setback isn’t that meaningful in trying to set them back in their quest for nuclear weapons. They already have enough enriched uranium for 9 or 10 bombs depending on who you ask. IMO burying it isn’t enough.
I guess my point was a year delay and a non-trivial expense is at least a "bloody nose", not just a mild annoyance. There's a concept in non-proliferation called "breakout time" -- how long would a country (or, I guess, a terrorist group) take to develop a nuke given their expertise, technology, facilities, etc.? For example: Dutch breakout time is maybe a year (18 months at most), but the international community is OK with that, because The Netherlands deciding to impose Tulips and Windmills unto the world under force is a joke without a punchline, not a real threat. Iran reportedly has a bunch of 60% enriched uranium. Not enough to make bombs, but... kinda like a coiled up snake? Ready to break out quickly if the opportunity presents itself. If their opponent knocks out their confirmatory capabilities that they have indeed gone to 85%+ enriched, would kick the breakout time down the road.
Imagine @gatormonk 's post was the Ayatollah and his family pissing off to Russia to hang out with Putin in affluence until they die, leaving Iran to be accepted into the international community as a non-nuclear-weaponed state after free, fair, and UN-proctored elections in 9-12 months. And that their nuclear weapons program would be shut down with no further loss of human life, on either side. (That's probably not what's happening... but, wasn't that a pleasant thought for a moment?)
