Posted on 10/05/2012 1:15:36 PM PDT by drewh
The Ayatollah’s Nuclear Gamble written by Khosrow B. Semnani, and published by the Hinckley Institute of Politics, University of Utah has concluded a strike would include four sites and irradiate up to 100,000 Iranian citizens and soldiers.
The four locations include:
Isfahan: The Nuclear Technology/Research Center in Esfahan (ENTC) is supposed to be the main location of the Iranian nuclear weapons program. Semnani predicts 1,000 workers here will be killed, and up to 70,000 casualties in the surrounding areas from toxic plumes: 71,000
Natanz: One-hundred miles north of Isfhahan, this location has been in use for about 12 years and is said to be responsible for production of plutonium and enriched uranium. With a high probability of attack, Semnani projects 1,000 worker casualties and up to 7,000 collateral injuries within the surrounding area: 7,100 Arak: A heavy water production plant in existence since 2006, Semnani projects 500 workers here will be killed in the first instants of a strike. If the heavy water is actually in production the author goes on to project an additional 3,600 causalities from radiation exposure: 4,100
Bushehr: Iran's first operational nuclear power plant has been online since November 2011 following a string of delays. Built to Russian designed specifications at a cost of nearly $1 billion, Bushehr is southeast of a city with a population of 240,000 that enjoys a strong wind blowing Northwest from the power plant. Semnani projects 3,000 instant deaths at the site and up to 12,000 deaths in the city if only 1 to 5 percent of the population is exposed: 15,000
Semnani estimates up to 97,000 Iranian casualties would result from attacks on the four locations.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
And if they don’t take them out, I wonder what would be the estimate of civilian casualties.
Look for it when the poll results start reflecting the “Revelation of the True Obama” that happened Wed night.
The civilian casualties of an airstrike on Iran’s nuke facilities will be high in large part because, being Muslims, the Iranians will ship in plenty of civilians to act as human shields.
a mere tens of thousands is inadequate. The total needs to be measured in hundreds of thousands.
There has been enough politically correct screwing around
Iranians better get together and see hat it doesn’t happen, by replacing their current regime.
Other wise they are the cause of their own fate.
Lie down with dogs and get up irradiated.
I’m confused.
Is the author worried there won’t be enough virgins?
“And if they don’t take them out, I wonder what would be the estimate of civilian casualties.”
This is a damned-if-you-do damned-if-you-don’t situation. To neutralize Iran’s impact on the region may require killing Iranians on the scale of the Dresden bombings. But, allowing them to go nuclear will let them place bombs in any city anywhere and set them off at leisure. Remember, Iran has a hostage taking culture going back to Darius. They won’t use nukes the way others use them. They’ll go for forward deterrence; pre-placing them in countries around the world. Even if we do go to war with them then, we will lose millions of people even if we level the entire country. (Which, we won’t, as the Iranian people have nothing to do with the nukes. It’s just a hand full of nutjobs running the place. And, those are in power thanks to Jimmy Carter. Elections DO have consequences.)
When you attempt to eradicate cancer some good cells will get killed. So be it. If they will not do the job and clean up their own mess someone will have to do it for them.
islam is a curse on the world. The goal is the destruction of western civilization. If it is not stopped millions will die. This is war. War is hell and many many will die. The choice is they die in a fight to save the world or they die as victims who did not fight for their own freedom and lives
I'm sure the Ayatollahs wouldn't give us that much consideration.
you’re saying that like it’s a bad thing......
Yes, and it could be even more than that, but
you have to ask yourself, what do I want, Iranian
casualties, or AMERICAN casualties?
Point #2.
You cannot hit just these four sites, all power generation
and transmission, communication,command and control
and defensive positions must be hit at the same time!
Add another hundred thousand or more.
the iranians had plenty of warning. If you want to play high stakes poker, you risk big losses
And what are the casualties incurred when Iran sets off a nuke?
100,000 is just the initial downpayment.
You still have to destroy the IIRG, the armed forces of Iran, and the high technology sector. Oh, and obliterate/burn out the civil communications grid as well.
The author talks about creating resentment. A proper campaign (multiple attacks) will create resentment alright; resentment at the self-deluded government that exposed them to all the resulting destruction of property and lives.
Either go big or don’t go at all.
Well then, that settles it.
We must sit idly by and let them enslave/murder us all.
That's probably not a concern.
We don't support Israeli attack, US tells Iran (9/3/2012)
0bama sent a letter to Tehran assuring them that the U.S. will do nothing to help Israel. That takes that off of the table removing a big worry for them that might have made them think twice. Iran is good to go now with 0bama's blessing.
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.