Skip to comments.Experts: Only the US can destroy Iran's nuclear program
Posted on 09/19/2012 2:50:55 AM PDT by lbryce
DC-based security think tank says Israel lacks the capability to "do more than delay Irans efforts for a year or two," says military option should only be used "if all peaceful options have been exhausted." US Air Force F-15E releases a GBU-28 Bunker Buster Photo: REUTERS/Handout
The United States is the only country that can carry out a successful, preventative military strike against Iran's nuclear program, according to a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a well-regarded Washington-based think tank.
According to the study published in September, only the United States has the capacity to both deliver the explosive payloads needed in the initial strike and effectively carry out follow-up strikes based on continued near-real-time intelligence.
"The US would be the only country that has the air power, support capability, and mix of sea‐air forces in the Gulf to continue a sustained campaign over a period of time and restrike after an initial battle damage assessment [if] it is found that further strike sorties are required," the report said.
"Israel does not have the capability to carry out preventive strikes that could do more than delay Irans efforts for a year or two," the report said, adding, "a strike by Israel on Iran will give rise to regional instability and conflict as well as terrorism. The regional security consequences will be catastrophic."
The initial strike, CSIS said, would aim to take out Iran's heavily-fortified uranium enrichment and research facilities and ballistic missile sites.
Iran would not be impotent in the face of such a strike, the report said, targeting Israel and US financial and security interests in the Gulf States.
"Iran most probably will accuse Israel [of being] part of the strike and will try to retaliate, either by launching a Ballistic Missile on Israel carrying conventional or WMD (chemical, biological, radiological) and activating Hezbollah to launch cross border attacks against Israel," the report said.
In an apparent reference to the possibility that Israel will act against Iran without American consent, the report also stated that, "The US should alone determine what the timeline could be if Iran does pursue the path to develop nuclear weapons."
In recent weeks, the Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has engaged in a public back-and-forth with US officials over establishing "red lines" for Iran on its nuclear developments, a step the US has refused to take. US President Barack Obama, however, said in March that "in the end, Israel's leaders will make determinations based on what they believe is best for the security of Israel, and that is entirely appropriate."
CSIS emphasized that the military option should only be used "if all peaceful options have been exhausted and Iran has left no other means to convince it to stop or change its course in pursuing Nuclear Weapons."
Because Iran's facilities are spread out and well-fortified, the report said, the ultimate effect of a US-led strike on Irans nuclear facilities remains uncertain.
That's Obama biting his nose to spite his face, after all, the US, civilized world, the Great Satan is almost as much a target that Israel is, yet he hates Israel too much to intervene along with Israel. So, if we pass the point of no return, that is the US does not act to stop Iran and they acquire nuclear capacity, and the worst case scenario comes to fruition, nuclear war, Obama not taking the lead in being the only military capable of destroying Iran's capacity for nuclear weapons, will have it on his hands, but perhaps that's exactly what he wants.
The yawning gap between U.S. capabilities and intentions regarding a preemptive strike will persist so long as BHO is in office.
I’m now beginning to see much more clearly than I did a few days ago the logic of Israeli preemption before the election. If they wait until after the election, Obama might actively interfere with such a strike by feeding intelligence or otherwise enhancing the military capability of U.S. aviation assets now controlled by Iraq, which is now increasingly becoming a puppet of Iran. This is something I think that even Obama would not dare do prior to the election as the potential blowback might deep-6 his chances for a second term.
Thus an Israeli attack on September 26 buys them another year or two. If they’re lucky, Obama will be deposed and they’ve given Romney a 1-2 year window in which to decide how to proceed—ample time to plan a follow-on strike that Iraq will know is coming, hence maximum incentives for them to voluntarily disarm. Even if Obama is re-elected, a successful attack greatly ups the odds that the Iranian people will take matters into their own hands and toss out their overlords.
We could probably unwind 1400 years of epoch brutality in the matter of hours.
Peace through strength. Not the Obama doctrine.
Don't know who this so called authoritative and "well regarded" think tanks nor do I CAIR.
The above statement was all I needed to know about them and as it is Israel's neck on the line, this disingenuous and foolish assertion does not even rise to the level of moronic.
If left to the Islamic appeasing/defending/supporting Community Agitator in Chief, he will do nothing unless and until a nuke is detonated over Tel Aviv!
Assuming they act in a restrained manner.If they don't then that "delay" might be longer.
"a strike by Israel on Iran will give rise to regional instability and conflict as well as terrorism. The regional security consequences will be catastrophic."
You would think Israel would be more aware of this than most and would be factoring it in with whatever they decide to do.
Whatever happens,it won't be pretty.It isn't pretty now and the talk from Iran makes it grow uglier by the day.For all we know,there may well be some,in the Israeli leadership,that are asking God's forgiveness for what they are about to do.
Suspect a neutron bomb burst over Iran will slow them up some.
I suspect we will shortly see the mother of all work accidents.
Operation Samson... and yes... they can do it alone.
Why all the big bomb theorists? Fill in all the entrances and airways, maintaining refresh of the same every time there is any effort to uncover them.
A neutron bomb is useful for disinfecting surface targets but I'm not certain it has an explosive yield sufficient for an airburst to destroy deeply buried facilities.
I suspect detonating a neutron bomb on, or below surface would negate the enhanced radiation effect. So, you might be best to go at buried facilities with kiloton range tactical nukes.
Yes, if only conventional bunker buster bombs are used. That is why I believe that if Israel acts, they will use Nuclear tipped bunker buster bombs and not just one.
What about an EMP strike. I believe that’s what Iran is planning. Send them back to the century they love.
Israel can not do it alone and Israel and the US know it...
With all due respect, wrong. Israel has nukes and can easily seal off the entries of those deeply buried facilities. Iran can maybe get back to them in a hundred years or so...
Whether Israel has the political will to do what must be done is another topic, but the capability is not in doubt.
Would EMP or Neutron bomb be at all workable for US and/or Israel?
Note to self - read thread first!
“What about an EMP strike.”
Note to self - read thread first.
An EMP will damage consumer grade electronics on the surface but will have less effect against military systems and likely be even less effective against deeply buried facilities.
Furthermore, an EMP won't directly kill any skilled workers and at this late stage, destruction of material is not enough, the knowledge base must be severely degraded.
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.