WI: Israel bombed Iranian nuclear facilities in September 2012?

[Deblano]

From what I know, US-Iran tensions and Israel-Iran tensions were pretty high during the 2012 Presidential Elections, particularly around February and September 2012. This was fueled most notably by Israel's threats constant threats to "stand alone" and bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, as it feared that the hawkish Ahmadinejad was racing towards it's first nuclear weapon. However, from what I have also heard, a solely Israeli mission to attack Iran would cause much less damage to Iran's nuclear program that what is frequently assumed.

Considering this, and also considering how US-Iran tensions have eased in light of the ongoing nuclear negotiations I was wondering...

What would have happened in the Middle East if Israel bombed Iran's nuclear facilities?

How would Obama have responded to an Israeli attack, considering how he was already running for re-election as President?

How would it have affected the US Presidential Election?

Say that the Israel attack occurs sometime between September 1 and September 30, 2012.

 

[RousseauX]

Does Israel even have the capacity to do this?

My impression was that only America really do.

 

[Deblano]

Does Israel even have the capacity to do this?

My impression was that only America really do.

Israel had made many threats to bomb Iran, but maybe you are right about they don't have the capacity to do so.

Wouldn't they at least try?

 

[brovane]

Does Israel even have the capacity to do this?

My impression was that only America really do.

In theory F-15I might be able to do it. It would be right on the edge of the range for the F-15I even with CFT's but possible. Remember when Israeli used F-16's to bomb the reactor in Iraqi during the early 80's? Everyone thought this was beyond the F-16's range but Israeli was still able to do it.

 

[Coiler]

With the right support (either flying over wartorn Syria and air-forceless Iraq or making a backroom deal with the Saudis to conveniently miss them) Israeli aircraft can reach Iran. However, they can't do enough damage to do more than give the program a small setback followed by a fevered ramp-up, which is why they haven't.

 

[Glenn239]

What would have happened in the Middle East if Israel bombed Iran's nuclear facilities?

Gaza would now have anti-radiation missiles (to neutralize Iron Dome) in its current war with Israel, would be my first guess.

 

[brovane]

With the right support (either flying over wartorn Syria and air-forceless Iraq or making a backroom deal with the Saudis to conveniently miss them) Israeli aircraft can reach Iran. However, they can't do enough damage to do more than give the program a small setback followed by a fevered ramp-up, which is why they haven't.

I think it would depend on where the weapons hit. Israeli has GBU-28's and the F-15I can drop them. A GBU-28 can do serious damage to even heavily reinforced structures.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

see also
http://theaviationist.com/2012/03/23/israeli-f-15i-aar/

for buddy tank refueling, which would make the operation less of a suicide mission.

 

[Riain]

Israel has access to an airfield owned by Eritrea in the southern Red Sea that they could use as a staging post for bombing Iranian nuclear facilities, without the need for overflights. However the problem is that Iran's nuclear eggs aren't in one basket like Iraq's were in 1980, Israel would have to make heavy attacks on multiple, dispersed targets many of which are only vaguely known. 24 F15I, with heavy tanker support, just isn't enough to put a real dent in Iran's programme.

However I think that if Israel and Iran came to actual blows the F15Is would be very useful in the missile hunting role in western Iran's missile launching areas.

 

[Herzen's love-child]

Don't forget that Israel also has cruise missiles that can be launched from their sub fleet (which has the capability of operating in the Persian Gulf or Indian Ocean).

 

[DG Valdron]

Most likely outcome would be a failure to make any real impact, given that the Iranian nuclear facilities are dispersed.

What you'd see is some superficial damage, followed by a serious crash program to build a functioning nuclear weapon within 18 months.

In that time, you'd probably see the whole region destabilize, a concerted program to overthrow the corrupt monarchies of the Persian gulf. A clear tilt into the Iranian orbit.

Economic dislocation resulting from interruptions in oil supply and speculation driven surges.

Not a lot of good.

 

[brovane]

Most likely outcome would be a failure to make any real impact, given that the Iranian nuclear facilities are dispersed.

What you'd see is some superficial damage, followed by a serious crash program to build a functioning nuclear weapon within 18 months.

.

From what I understand Nuclear Weapon programs are not something that tends to easy dispersal. For example there is only so much you can disperse a nuclear reactor. If Israeli attacked a key chain of the nuclear weapon program, like the enrichment sites. Wouldn't that have a significant impact? Not saying that it is a good idea but nuclear weapon production depends on multiple key processes that if you damage the production ability in one area I would think you can impact the production as a whole.

 

[Deblano]

From what I understand Nuclear Weapon programs are not something that tends to easy dispersal. For example there is only so much you can disperse a nuclear reactor. If Israeli attacked a key chain of the nuclear weapon program, like the enrichment sites. Wouldn't that have a significant impact? Not saying that it is a good idea but nuclear weapon production depends on multiple key processes that if you damage the production ability in one area I would think you can impact the production as a whole.

You can at least delay it for a few years IMO.

 

[Riain]

Don't forget that Israel also has cruise missiles that can be launched from their sub fleet (which has the capability of operating in the Persian Gulf or Indian Ocean).

I think that might be a pretty feeble addition to the F15I option. The dolphin class carries 16 weapons, none of which have the throw weight of much over 600lb or so, so wouldn't be much chop against buried or hardened targets. In addition Eliat is a bad submarine base so the subs would have to transit the suez canal and red sea before getting into range of iran.

Iran has perhaps a dozen nuclear sites which indicates a good level of redundancy, especially if parts are hardened and buried. An iraq style crippling strike is not a practical option.

 

[DG Valdron]

From what I understand Nuclear Weapon programs are not something that tends to easy dispersal. For example there is only so much you can disperse a nuclear reactor. If Israeli attacked a key chain of the nuclear weapon program, like the enrichment sites. Wouldn't that have a significant impact? Not saying that it is a good idea but nuclear weapon production depends on multiple key processes that if you damage the production ability in one area I would think you can impact the production as a whole.

Built in redundancy, a number of hardened targets, intelligence issues. It's a morons quest.

 

[Herzen's love-child]

I think that might be a pretty feeble addition to the F15I option. The dolphin class carries 16 weapons, none of which have the throw weight of much over 600lb or so, so wouldn't be much chop against buried or hardened targets. In addition Eliat is a bad submarine base so the subs would have to transit the suez canal and red sea before getting into range of iran.

Iran has perhaps a dozen nuclear sites which indicates a good level of redundancy, especially if parts are hardened and buried. An iraq style crippling strike is not a practical option.

The Popeye Turbo SLCM which has a longer range (perhaps 1500 km) and an unspecified but possibly larger warhead than the short-range version, would probably be Israel's cruise missile of choice. It almost is definitely a supplement to any plan of attack that Israel would (hopefully not) launch. There would be more than just hardened nuclear related targets in such an action. There would be Air Defense and C&C targets as well. The IDF has also already trial ran Dolphin Subs to the Indian Ocean in the past.
I think that Israel from a technical perspective could hit and take out the majority of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Which is how I'm addressing this issue -- on the technical/tactical merits. It wouldn't be wise for Israel to engage in such an attack for all sorts of political reasons and would almost certainly cause a geopolitical shitstorm. But Israel could pull off an attack.

 

[brovane]

Built in redundancy, a number of hardened targets, intelligence issues. It's a morons quest.

Realistically how many Enrichment sites could Iran have considering the requirements in machinery that is required for the processing?

 

[Riain]

The Popeye Turbo SLCM which has a longer range (perhaps 1500 km) and an unspecified but possibly larger warhead than the short-range version, would probably be Israel's cruise missile of choice. It almost is definitely a supplement to any plan of attack that Israel would (hopefully not) launch. There would be more than just hardened nuclear related targets in such an action. There would be Air Defense and C&C targets as well. The IDF has also already trial ran Dolphin Subs to the Indian Ocean in the past.
I think that Israel from a technical perspective could hit and take out the majority of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Which is how I'm addressing this issue -- on the technical/tactical merits. It wouldn't be wise for Israel to engage in such an attack for all sorts of political reasons and would almost certainly cause a geopolitical shitstorm. But Israel could pull off an attack.

As I understand it the 1500 km popeye slcm can only be fired from the 4 x 650mm torpedo tubes rather than the 6 x 533mm torpedo tubes. This will reduce the firepower available to the israelis.

I don't disagree that a strike is technically possible, the F15Is and SLCMs will hit the targets they're aimed at. My beef is that there are too many targets for the amount of striking power available, targets will be scratched not destroyed.

 

[The Kiat]

With the right support (either flying over wartorn Syria and air-forceless Iraq or making a backroom deal with the Saudis to conveniently miss them) Israeli aircraft can reach Iran. However, they can't do enough damage to do more than give the program a small setback followed by a fevered ramp-up, which is why they haven't.

If they had the means to take it out, they would have done so. I never thought the Israelis a people who mess posturing when they can simply eliminate a threat. Then again, I don't live there so I can't say either way for certain.

 

[redlightning]

Any Israeli bombers going into Iran will be noticed and could be intercepted. Even if they hit their target, not all of the aircraft will make it home. Iran will retaliate with air and missile strikes of.its own and will fund Hamas and Hezbollah like never before to attack. A drawn out
air battle with ensue between Iran and Israel until it ends in ceasefire. Syria really can't intervene much because of the widening civil war. I can see a few naval skirmishes as well in neighboring waters between submarines and destroyer units.