Posted on 01/25/2006 6:56:43 AM PST by Dark Skies
More....
Plus the Israeli jets would require tanker support. Where would the large, lumbering tanker be orbiting (over Jordan, over Iraq, over Iran, over the Persian Gulf)?
bump
Masada practice.
Now there you go being logical.
Those who mindlessly follow Democrat politicians and the Leftist agenda seem to be doing their best to perpetuate this "view".
I don't think that's true. I believe there were some tests that "fizzled" in Nevada back in the '50's. Failed to destroy even the tower.
Worth repeating ping!
If the west does nothing, Israel will strike as best they can. Odds are... it won't 'finish the matter' and Iran will rabidly attack any target within range... our troops in Iraq come to mind.
We are living very quickly now...
Yes, very...
Getting to Iran would require a flight across Jordan plus across US-controlled Iraq (would the US permit this?), or a long flight across the northern frontier of Saudi Arabia . . .
Not necessarily. Much depends on the status of the 1998 military pact between Israel and Turkey, which, IINM, permits Israel to train Turkish airspace and use bases in Turkey. Turkey shares a border with Iran . . . .
es
I would be floored if the Turks allowed the transit of Israeli jets. The Turks wouldn't allow the US Army's 4th Infantry Division to cross its turf in spring 2003 for the invasion of Iraq. I can't imagine they'd allow Israeli jets to transit on their way to bombing nuclear facilities in Iran (though I'd be quite pleased if they did).
To answer your post #18. Do you think that President Bush would order American forces to SHOOT DOWN Israeli aircraft en route to Iran? I don't.
Distance between Tel Aviv, Israel and Tehran, Iran, as the crow flies: 988 miles (1590 km) (858 nautical miles)
Initial heading from Tel Aviv to Tehran: east-northeast (70.4 degrees)
Massada must not fall again. - Tom
No, I don't think he would. But he'd have some "splainin" to do thereafter. He would have two choices:
(1) Say that our air defense radar in Iraq didn't detect the Israeli jets (bringing cries from the Dems about the billions spent on a military that can't detect univited warplanes over territory we control), or (2) Admit to the vaunted UN, Eurotrash peaceniks, the head-in-the-sand EU, and the Arab street (yes I know Persians are not Arabs) why we turned a blind-eye to the flyover. If he opts for number two, he might as well use US forces to do the bombing.
"would the US permit this?"
---
Yep.
" Cindy Sheehan and the Hollywood peace crowd planning a demonstration/"
If they demonstrate on this, it will be cheerleading. Finally, a check on untrammelled US power and aggression!
"We shall see how dedicated to the Masada vow of, "Never again", the Israelis really are."
If they haven't proved it to you by now, they never will.
Militarily, I have no doubt of their capabilities. However, politically, they leave something to be desired and the final decision to use the nules will be political.
"He would have two choices:"
How about admitting the planes were detected and saying we were "taken by surprise" and "not sure what to do"? No one expects us to shoot down Israeli planes on their way to Iran.
"There was a point during the Yom Kippur War of October 1973 when it appeared that the Egyptians had broken though Israeli lines in the Sinai at the same time the Syrians were about to drive across the Golan. Although never verified, it’s been reported on some authority that Moshe Dayan placed the Israeli nuclear strike force on full alert, the planes at the ends of the runways with their engines hot, their weapons armed, ready to head for their targets."
This partially correlates with the analysis of Walter J. Boyne in the book, The Yom Kippur War, and the Airlift that saved Israel, pub. 2002. As he explains it, though, there was no Egyptian side to the threat, which also correlates with other things I've read. Though the Egyptians broke through very strong in the Sinai, they then halted and dug in.
The Syrians on the other hand, did seem poised to break through with their tanks in the Golan. The generally accepted story is that extremely heroic actions by a small group of Israeli tanks stopped the Syrian advance at a crucial point.
Boyne, however, a retired U. S. Air Force colonel, has carefully analyzed the battle and come up with the conclusion that this storyline is, in fact, impossible. He simply believes the number of Israeli tanks in the area was way too small to stop the strong Syrian advance that was in progress. He has come to the conclusion that the Syrian advance was stopped by an explicit, albeit discrete, threat from the Israeli government to obliterate Damascus with nuclear weapons. All his evidence for this however is indirect, as I have stated above. He simply cannot conceive of any other explanation for what happened.
I can say that the book appears to be well researched, well-written, and intelligently expressed. However, I don't have any other information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.