Will Israel attack Iran in 2012?

[Loppan Torkel]

Spoiler :

...
Successive Israeli governments have made it clear they will not "allow" Tehran to develop and possess a nuclear weapon.

In anticipation of the latest report from the IAEA, the Israeli media was full of rhetoric and opinion about whether or not Israel, and its allies, should bomb the Iranian sites.

Israel, of course, is widely believed to have its own nuclear arsenal but says that a nuclear device in the hands of the Tehran regime would destabilise the entire region and cannot be tolerated.
...
In a radio interview about the military "option", Mr Barak acknowledged there would be Israeli casualties.

"There is no way to prevent some damage. It will not be pleasant," said the defence minister.

But, he added: "There is no scenario for 50,000 dead, or 5,000 killed and if everyone stays in their homes, maybe not even 500 dead."

Israel says it supports the idea of an even tougher regime of economic and political sanctions against Iran but suspects that would not stop Tehran's by now advanced nuclear programme.

Any military response would, ideally, be a united attack by the United States and other Western countries against Iran.

Failing that, Israeli leaders say they are prepared to go it alone if they have to.

It is a stance that opinion polls suggest is supported by a large number of Israelis, even though it could be constituted as an "act of war".

Recent sabre-rattling statements by Israeli officials could just be rhetoric, but they are alarming - the idea of a new conflict in the Middle East between two regional powers, even more so.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15662122

Spoiler :

Seventeen soldiers have been killed in an explosion at a military base near Iran's capital Tehran, officials say.

The blast occurred when weapons were being moved inside a Revolutionary Guards depot, a spokesman for the elite unit told state TV.

Windows in nearby buildings were shattered and the blast was heard in central Tehran, 40 km (25 miles) away.

Two hours after the explosion a fire still raged and there were traffic jams on nearby roads, a local reporter said.

The death toll was revised down from an earlier figure released by the Revolutionary Guards of 27.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15705948

Could there be an attack on Iran next year? How would you see the following events play out in such case?
What's your current opinion on a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

 

[Winner]

There clearly are signs that Israel is getting ready. It's pilots are practising long range bombing runs, the military tested a ballistic missile recently (I assume they're trying to reduce its CEP so that it can be used as a conventional precision bombing weapon), and the Israeli cabinet has allegedly agreed to strike against Iran.

Now, I assume Israel is at this point just trying to pressure the West into doing this. However, if the US drags its feet, then maybe Israel will do it itself. It has already done it twice (once in Iraq and a few years back in Syria), and Iran poses by far the greatest threat to Israel.

I don't know whether it will strike next year or later, but I think the probability of it is rising.

---

What will happen? Well, assuming the strike is successful, Iran will be POed and it will retaliate by any means available it it. That is, ballistic missiles strikes against Israeli cities (so IDF better boost their ABM defences), Hezbollah will be ordered to start shelling northern Israel again, and Hamás will likely follow suit. If Iran wants to risk a greater war, it will attempt to stop oil supplies from the Persian Gulf, possibly by attacking oil tankers, mining the Straits of Hormuz, or some such mischief. It will surely be interesting.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

From what I've heard, Israeli missiles won't reach very far into Iranian territory and that they'd have to bomb them to do some damage. So there's a situation where Iran could lob missiles at Israel, while Israel would have to fight for air superiority in the Middle East.

Edit: what's known about the ballistic missile tests?

edit2:

On 17 January 2008 Israel test fired a multi-stage ballistic missile believed to be of the Jericho III type reportedly capable of carrying "conventional or non conventional warheads."[9] On 2 November 2011, Israel reportedly test fired successfully a missile believed to be an upgraded version of the Jericho 3 in Palmachim, central Israel. The long trail of smoke was seen throughout central Israel [10]

 

[amadeus]

Well, if they fly over Iraqi airspace, then the Iraqis have the right to shoot them down. I say Iraq because of the U.S.-installed government there, and if the Iraqis fail to protect their airspace then the U.S. could be seen as complicit in the attacks, and we don't need or want another Middle East war.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

You're on your way out now, though. By New Year's Eve Iraq should be free from American troops.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Triggering a revolution so that the Mollah's regime falls in Iran would be smarter IMHO.

 

[Imrahil91]

It seems like the two countries are on a collision course. IMO Iran has clear intentions on getting nuclear weapons, and it is also definitely in their interest to have them. If Israel is as sure on not allowing Iran to have nuclear weapons as Winner says, and they also have a large part of the Israeli population supporting stopping Iran with force - we must assume there will be some kind of armed conflict.
The question is if they can come to some compromise. It's also interesting to see what the US, Europe, Turkey, the Saudis, Russia and Pakistan will do if things do escalate. Hopefully Chávez will say something funny, as Gadaffi has said his last crazy remark on international affairs.

Triggering a revolution so that the Mollah's regime falls in Iran would be smarter IMHO.

Yeah, that would be a smoother solution from a USraeli perspective.

 

[NickyJ]

You're on your way out now, though. By New Year's Eve Iraq should be free from American troops.

Originally, I would have said that I really don't know when Israel would attack, but after reading the above, I now guess that, barring the U.S. leaving Iraq later than scheduled, Israel will attack anytime between now and New Years Eve. I say this because I'm sure Israel realizes that the U.S., when pressed, will help Israel defend itself. Because of that, the U.S. will let Israeli bombers fly through Iraqi airspace. To wait later would be to risk the Iraqis shooting down Israeli bombers.

Then again, Iraq probably isn't all that fond of Iran, so they may just let Israeli bombers fly through anyway. I guess only time will tell...

 

[ATC1983]

Iraq will not be able to hinder Israeli use of its airspace as it is known that it has neither an airforce nor any anti-aircraft capability. It's ground force can barely contain sectarian terrorism in its cities. It would therefore be child's play for Israel to fly over Iraq and strike Iran. The US has already supplied Israel with several dozen bunker-busting HE bombs earlier this year which is obviously with such an attack in mind.

I would wager an attack will take place by April at the latest; any delay will be designed to test how de-stabilising sanctions will be both to the regime and its nuclear programme.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

Imagine the embarrassment for Ahmedinajad if he loses a war with Israel.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

That's pretty much a battle against time.
If Israel can find and reach the main sites where Iran is developing the bomb they'll most likely attack, if Iran manages to finish the bomb there probably won't be an attack.

 

[keli]

In the middle of a second Great Depression we really need to bomb a huge oil exporter just to make sure that the world economy collapses.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Iraq will not be able to hinder Israeli use of its airspace as it is known that it has neither an airforce nor any anti-aircraft capability. It's ground force can barely contain sectarian terrorism in its cities. It would therefore be child's play for Israel to fly over Iraq and strike Iran. The US has already supplied Israel with several dozen bunker-busting HE bombs earlier this year which is obviously with such an attack in mind.

I would wager an attack will take place by April at the latest; any delay will be designed to test how de-stabilising sanctions will be both to the regime and its nuclear programme.

Flying over Iraq might not be difficult, but bombing Iran - would it be "child's play"? The Iranian air force doesn't seem to be total crap and they probably have prepared for this the last decade. I'm not sure it will be a success for the Israelis. Definitely not a child's play.

 

[civver_764]

I say this because I'm sure Israel realizes that the U.S., when pressed, will help Israel defend itself.

Israel starting a clear war of aggression is defending itself?

 

[Winner]

Well, if they fly over Iraqi airspace, then the Iraqis have the right to shoot them down. I say Iraq because of the U.S.-installed government there, and if the Iraqis fail to protect their airspace then the U.S. could be seen as complicit in the attacks, and we don't need or want another Middle East war.

How convenient the US is getting out of Iraq now, so that nothing stands inthe Israeli airforce's way. As for Iraqis actually managing to shoot down an Israeli aircraft, yeah right

Triggering a revolution so that the Mollah's regime falls in Iran would be smarter IMHO.

Hasn't that been tried already? Presently there is not much chance it would succeed, the regime is far stronger than the one Syria, and you can see what's happening there.

That's pretty much a battle against time.
If Israel can find and reach the main sites where Iran is developing the bomb they'll most likely attack, if Iran manages to finish the bomb there probably won't be an attack.

Not really. Iran is close to producing highly enriched uranium and perhaps plutonium so that it can start trying to manufacture a warhead. It will take some time, mainly because their missiles can't carry much weight if they are to have any chance of reaching Israel - therefore the warheads need to be small and relatively light. Although Iran probably has Chinese and other blueprints for that, I'd be surprised if they mastered the technology in a year or two, and without any testing.

And even if they had a usable nuke or two, would they use it against Israel in retaliation for a strike against their nuclear enrichment facilities? Only if they were utterly suicidal, since the Israeli nuclear counterstrike would pretty much knock Iran back into the middle ages.

If Israel successfuly destroys all their enrichment facilities, it will delay their programme by many years. It's not really that easy or cheap to rebuild them.

Israel starting a clear war of aggression is defending itself?

Of course he is defending the Israeli right to protect its existence. All sane people do...

 

[Thedrin]

Imagine the embarrassment for Ahmedinajad if he loses a war with Israel.

Ahmedinajad isnt' the commander of the Iranian forces.

Also, assuming Israel doesn't launch a ground invasion (pretty reasonable assumption), how would you be able to define Iran losing a war against Israel?

 

[ATC1983]

Flying over Iraq might not be difficult, but bombing Iran - would it be "child's play"? The Iranian air force doesn't seem to be total crap and they probably has prepared for this the last decade. I'm not sure it will be a success for the Israelis. Definitely not a child's play.

You're forgetting that Israel is kitted out with the best equipment the US and EU can supply. Its airforce would be only marginally behind that of a west European country. The Arab states, on the other hand, are using last generation equipment; can't source equipment and raw materials due to sanctions; and, as owing to the cold war, they became dependent on imports of equipment, have little developed infrastructure for developing, producing and maintaining in field condition a large supply of complex tactical armaments.

With the exception of Saudia Arabia, every Arab state suffers this problem. It comes from having backed the losing side in the cold war which, after 1990, ceased to exist and continue greasing the palms of its dependents with cash, equipment and materials.

It's striking that despite the Iranian 'threat' it only recently produced a rocket capable of hitting Israel: The Israelis were using this technology in the 1970s. If they attack Iran, there will be little contest.

 

[NickyJ]

Iraq will not be able to hinder Israeli use of its airspace as it is known that it has neither an airforce nor any anti-aircraft capability. It's ground force can barely contain sectarian terrorism in its cities. It would therefore be child's play for Israel to fly over Iraq and strike Iran.

Yeah, your right. Still, I think Israel would want to do it while we're in Iraq anyway, just so that if a pilot has to eject, he can still have a chance of making it to a friendly border.

Flying over Iraq might not be difficult, but bombing Iran - would it be "child's play"? The Iranian air force doesn't seem to be total crap and they probably has prepared for this the last decade. I'm not sure it will be a success for the Israelis. Definitely not a child's play.

I think he's saying that it would be child's play to fly over Iraq. Period. Actually bombing Iran is another matter.

Israel starting a clear war of aggression is defending itself?

Of course he is defending the Israeli right to protect its existence. All sane people do...

Precisely.

 

[Winner]

You're forgetting that Israel is kitted out with the best equipment the US and EU can supply. Its airforce would be only marginally behind that of a west European country.

I'd say the Israeli air force is ahead of most of its Western European counterparts. Especially in terms of training and experience.

The problem with hitting Iran is the distance. Aerial refuelling would be needed, and that's not done easily over hostile territory. (Ideally, the US would help with this.) Also, it would very much depend on catching the Iranians off guard, since Israel doesn't have stealth aircraft. I am sure the air defences around key nuclear sites are very heavy. It will be very risky for Israeli pilots.

 

[NickyJ]

I'd say the Israeli air force is ahead of most of its Western European counterparts. Especially in terms of training and experience.

The problem with hitting Iran is the distance. Aerial refuelling would be needed, and that's not done easily over hostile territory. (Ideally, the US would help with this.) Also, it would very much depend on catching the Iranians off guard, since Israel doesn't have stealth aircraft. I am sure the air defences around the key nuclear sites are the strongest in Iran. It will be very risky for Israeli pilots.

Which is why I think they will want to do the bombing mission while we're still in Iraq. We can help out, and provide a safe haven for downed pilots.