The World According to Nick
Politics, News, Photography, and Triathlons... What don't I talk about?
Friday, April 20, 2007
<< This Internet Isn't Good Enough... Hard to Listen To >>
Would Bombing Iran Solve the Problem?

Iran is still rattling it's sabers, and quietly building up some kind of arsenal for God knows what.  John McCain is joking about bombing Iran.  I wrote this about Iran previously:

I'm hearing how terrible the Iranians are, and how they have to be stopped.  I'm hearing the same worries about how the Iranians would put up a strong fight if we invaded, and also how we'd be seen as liberators because of how terrible that government is.  It all sounds too familiar.  I have no doubt that we'd kick ass... but then what?  We're already occupying two countries, and a lot of people don't want to accept the reality that this limits our options.  I don't think we have the resources to occupy a third.  We might be able to invade, but then what?  Would going in for a short time and the pulling out do any good?  After all, we're contemplating war here, not high school sex.

Some people think we don't have to occupy.  A lot of people are arguing that it would be enough to simply go in, and bomb the crap out of their weapons installations.  I see this as a plausible option.  But here's the catch.  I'm not sure it would actually work.

The Iranians aren't stupid.  They've gone to a lot of effort to fortify their weapons installations and hide them.  Many are heavily defended by anti-aircraft installations, and more still are buried deep underground.  This poses a problem.  We do have "bunker buster" bombs, but a lot of people don't think they will cut it.  In fact, there is talk about developing a tactical nuclear bunker buster.  The mere fact that people think that's necessary seems to point to the fact that conventional bunker busters may not be sufficient.

For one, we have to know where all the installations are in order to bomb them.  Secondly, we have to have a high degree of certainty that we'd actually destroy them in a raid.  I don't think we have either.  If we did, one of two things would have already happened.  Either we would have already bombed them, or the Israeli's would have.

The first foreign sale of the GBU-28 was the acquisition of 100 units by Israel, authorized in April 2005. Delivery of the weapons was accelerated at the request of Israel in July 2006. According to Israeli military sources, Iran or Syria are possible targets for the weapons.

My feeling is that if there was better than a 60% chance of success, we would have already done it.  And if we bomb Iran, and we don't destroy their facilities, we'd be in a worse position than we already are.

# Posted at 9:28 AM by Nick  |  Comment Feed Link 3 Comments  |  No Trackbacks

 Add to del.icio.us |  Digg this Post | Filed Under: Misc

Friday, April 20, 2007 11:32:19 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I have this feeling we know exactly where those facilities are.
Friday, April 20, 2007 1:20:13 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
You have more faith in the current government intelligence operations than I Casper. Knowing they exist, and knowing exactly where they are, are two completely different beasts. And despite the arguments for and against the Iraq war... the number and location of specific WMD caches didn't exactly meet expectations, despite best intelligence efforts.
Saturday, April 21, 2007 9:15:25 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
It depends on how many megatons we are willing to expend...
Comments are closed.


© Copyright 2012 Nick Schweitzer
Powered By newtelligence dasBlog 1.9.7067.0
Theme Based on Design By maystar