Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Israel threatens to bomb Iran

Israel Iran Bomb Osirak Nuclear Complex

  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#61 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 26 September 2004 - 08:17 PM

Quote

Sparky: Death by allied bombing was quick and humane by comparison and it had the added advantage of taking those [expletive deleted] with them.
That assumes the Allied bombers could actually managed to hit the furnaces and chambers.  As I noted earlier World War II bombers were not precision instruments but rather fairly inaccurate sledgehammers.  They could best affect large areas that were vulnerable to damage in any given location rather than pinpoint targets. Actually managing to level the crematoriums in an attack would have been a pretty amazing feat.  Even in massed attacks against factory complexes the results were mixed and here you were hitting areas with hundred of bombers.  The best result of the Allied bombing campaign came from hitting large vulnerable targets like petroleum plants.  Now these petroleum plants were concentrated in the area of Auschwitz along with the remainder of the Luftwaffe defending them.  US bombers had struck at Monowitz with these oil facilities and did little damage to the compound but did manage to accidentally drop bombs on the concentration camp over 2 Ĺ miles away.  That was the accuracy of bombing in World War II.    

The crematoriums and gas chambers in comparison to factories were a smaller target that was made stoutly enough that a direct hit would have been required to take them out.  With Allied bombers hitting their targets only a small percentage of the time such an attempt would have required large numbers of aircraft hitting the target multiple times before they had a chance to take it out and even then getting bombs close enough to take it out is doubtful in my mind.  Even in the Jewish population many people were split on the idea with groups like the Jewish Agency in Palestine voting against pressuring the Allies to bomb the target.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#62 Mr.Calgary

Mr.Calgary

    Has left.

  • Islander
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 26 September 2004 - 08:30 PM

From the Boston Globe :blink:

http://www.boston.co...tism_in_europe/

Yes, Israel has had the bomb for quite a while....and as we've seen, no rabib Rabbi's have caused a mushroom cloud over any city in the region.  Haven't the mad mullahs in Iran indicated they won't be as serene with the same power??

Stopping Iran is the right thing to do.  

Of course, all the usual suspects around the world will scream when it happens.  

and to them.... :barf:
Favourite Coda thread quotes.....

(1)  Yes. Bad Trance! Wicked, Evil Trance!

(2)  Stayed purple.   (3)  Bad, bad Trance!

(4)  Love and Blowing Things Up continue forever. The universe wins

#63 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 26 September 2004 - 08:40 PM

Mr.Calgary, on Sep 27 2004, 01:30 AM, said:

Stopping Iran is the right thing to do. 

Of course, all the usual suspects around the world will scream when it happens. 

and to them.... :barf:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Okay, then.  How are you going to stop them?  That's the problem with tough talk.  You actually have to back it up, when none of the options available to the US or its allies are good.  There's no guarantee that air strikes would do anything more than delay Iran by a year or two at best, and the US doesn't have the available capacity to invade and occupy Iran, when we're barely hanging on by our fingernails in Iraq, with 1/3 the population and much better terrain for us.

It's yet another negative consequence of the Iraq invasion-- rather than be cowed by US military might, the rest of the world has seen the limitations of US military power.
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#64 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 26 September 2004 - 09:43 PM

CJ AEGIS, on Sep 26 2004, 09:17 PM, said:

Quote

Sparky: Death by allied bombing was quick and humane by comparison and it had the added advantage of taking those [expletive deleted] with them.
That assumes the Allied bombers could actually managed to hit the furnaces and chambers.  As I noted earlier World War II bombers were not precision instruments but rather fairly inaccurate sledgehammers.  They could best affect large areas that were vulnerable to damage in any given location rather than pinpoint targets. Actually managing to level the crematoriums in an attack would have been a pretty amazing feat.  Even in massed attacks against factory complexes the results were mixed and here you were hitting areas with hundred of bombers.  The best result of the Allied bombing campaign came from hitting large vulnerable targets like petroleum plants.  Now these petroleum plants were concentrated in the area of Auschwitz along with the remainder of the Luftwaffe defending them.  US bombers had struck at Monowitz with these oil facilities and did little damage to the compound but did manage to accidentally drop bombs on the concentration camp over 2 Ĺ miles away.  That was the accuracy of bombing in World War II.    

The crematoriums and gas chambers in comparison to factories were a smaller target that was made stoutly enough that a direct hit would have been required to take them out.  With Allied bombers hitting their targets only a small percentage of the time such an attempt would have required large numbers of aircraft hitting the target multiple times before they had a chance to take it out and even then getting bombs close enough to take it out is doubtful in my mind.  Even in the Jewish population many people were split on the idea with groups like the Jewish Agency in Palestine voting against pressuring the Allies to bomb the target.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Some have reported that it took a thousand bombs to hit a given target. Yet in World War two single bombs took out special targets, on special missions, particularly famous was the RAF Mosquito bombing of the first floor, at a downtown SS headquarters in Holland, and a wall and guard barrack of a prison in France. But you know that, you also know that aside from the Navigation problems, B24ís did a fine job of low level bombing at Ploiesti. US AAF or RAF Mosquitoes could make the run on a shuttle mission, to and from Russian territory.

I have been trying to find a layout of the Birkenau camp, the crematoriums and gas chambers where in one building each, well apart from the rest of the camp. The Gas chambers where in the basement with the crematoriums on the first floor with a system of lifts, the buildings themselves where the size of small schoolhouses, or small factories. The US, British, and presumably the Russians who where also doing air raids in the area, had aerial photos identifying the gas chambers.

The Germans kept the crematoriums / gas chambers, apart from the camp so as to better conceal what they where doing, in order that they could better control the new arrivals. If an inmate was caught telling a new arrival of their fate, that inmate was immediately put to death by being burned alive.

We were using radio-controlled bombers filled with explosives to hit missile site targets in France.

As a matter of fact the older Kennedy Brother died on such a mission. We were also using television-guided bombs on Japanese ship in the pacific. Not many but we had the technology and it did work.

While I donít know of a US equivalent, the British maintained precision bombing squadrons.  Squadron 617, known as the dam busters, flying four engine Lancasterís, and 6 squadrons of Mosquitoes. See: http://www.guardian......76807,00.html

The Squadron 617 could have used the "tall boy" bomb. The bomb and Squadron that finally sank the Tirpitz. See: http://www.raf.mod.u...drons/h617.html

In short the chambers where apart from the camp, and could have been surgically hit with the technology of the day.

I never knew that the Jewish Agency was against such raids, I do know that the World Jewish Congress was for the raids. The World Jewish Congress (WJC), encompassing the United States, and Europe was the larger of the two organizations. The Jewish Agency had a Jewish brigade as part of the British army in Italy, and not much else, While the WJC had agents in many of the camps, and partisan fighters in the east.

Sparky::

Edited by emsparks, 26 September 2004 - 10:00 PM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#65 Mr.Calgary

Mr.Calgary

    Has left.

  • Islander
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 26 September 2004 - 10:15 PM

MuseZack, on Sep 26 2004, 06:40 PM, said:

Okay, then.  How are you going to stop them?  That's the problem with tough talk.  You actually have to back it up, when none of the options available to the US or its allies are good. 


I read a George Will column on Thursday, he closed with:

George Will, on National Post, Thursday, Sept. 23rd, said:

U.S. policy is that the "international community," whatever that is, "cannot allow the Iranians to develop a nuclear weapon" (Condoleeza Rice, Aug. 8).  It is surreal to cast this as a question of what anyone will "allow" Iran to do.

I'm trusting that there are organizations (on our side) in the world that have and are pinpointing where the Iranians are doing what.

You're right, whether it's saving a million people in Africa, preventing the Iranians from getting the bomb, or overthrowing a thuggish dictator, ya gotta back it up.

I'm not going to treat it as a walk in the park, but I'm also not going to view the Iranians as supermen who will stop any series of coordinated airstrikes against their nuclear facilities.

A demonstration that rises above perceived limitations.

Edited by Mr.Calgary, 26 September 2004 - 10:16 PM.

Favourite Coda thread quotes.....

(1)  Yes. Bad Trance! Wicked, Evil Trance!

(2)  Stayed purple.   (3)  Bad, bad Trance!

(4)  Love and Blowing Things Up continue forever. The universe wins

#66 Guest-Silent E The Transmuter-Guest

Guest-Silent E The Transmuter-Guest
  • Guest

Posted 26 September 2004 - 10:51 PM

Raw aggression against another nation to further one's own interests is wrong.  Period.

Israel has no business bombing Iran in order to continue its monopoly of nuclear arms in the Middle East.

If Israel would approach the bargaining talbe like peaceful individuals, as they claim to be, then perhaps they wouldn't have the problems they do, IMHO.

#67 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 27 September 2004 - 06:25 AM

Silent E The Transmuter, on Sep 26 2004, 11:51 PM, said:

Raw aggression against another nation to further one's own interests is wrong.  Period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quite true however:
Raw aggression against another nation to protect one's survival is all too often necessary.  Period.

Silent E The Transmuter, on Sep 26 2004, 11:51 PM, said:

Israel has no business bombing Iran in order to continue its monopoly of nuclear arms in the Middle East.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The unannounced possession of a nuclear capability by Israel is the only thing that has protected Israel from being over run by her neighbors.

Silent E The Transmuter, on Sep 26 2004, 11:51 PM, said:

If Israel would approach the bargaining talbe like peaceful individuals, as they claim to be, then perhaps they wouldn't have the problems they do, IMHO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr. Arafat took a Nobel Prize for an agreement he refused to honor. The world well knows who has broken the agreements so nothing I say here is of any consequence. You see the Iranians know that with the sleeping dragon of China continuing to awaken, the world demand for oil will very soon out strip the supply. With that the Arab world will lose its influence and its source of hard currency for military hardware. In part the Iranians are truthful, they do need alternative energy, but they also want the big stick.

Mr. Arafat could have had it all, land, open negotiations about Jerusalem, and nuclear driven electric power and desalinization plants to feed his people, and fuel their economy. Israelis would not have given him the plants, but it is in Israelís interest to make the Palestinian desert bloom, so they would have been built with dual control. No Mr. Arafat wants to be a latter-day Saladin, ruling over a new Caliphate, the world will never permit. The Palestinian Authority is fooling no one. Since the end of the Saddam regime how many demonstrations have there been in support of the Palestinian Authority, very few.

The time will come when Mr. Arafat will  lose control and the moderates in the Palestinian Authority will slowly gain control, and a peace treaty will be signed. The Palestinians, are after all pragmatic. The only question is how many innocents will die on both sides before then.

Sparky::

Edited by emsparks, 27 September 2004 - 07:10 AM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#68 Fire_Storm20

Fire_Storm20

    I love the smell of napalm in the moring...

  • Islander
  • 187 posts

Posted 27 September 2004 - 08:35 AM

Can we get this back on topic please?   :cool:

#69 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 27 September 2004 - 10:11 AM

Quote

Sparky: Some have reported that it took a thousand bombs to hit a given target.
Iíve seen anywhere from 3% hit ratios on the high end to less than 1%.  So a conventional raid is a no start.  

Quote

Sparky: Yet in World War two single bombs took out special targets, on special missions, particularly famous was the RAF Mosquito bombing of the first floor, at a downtown SS headquarters in Holland, and a wall and guard barrack of a prison in France.
Iím aware of that and a had a professor a few years back who witnessed as similar Mosquito raid in Norway.  The problem I see is if the Mosquito has the range to do it with a payload.  Sure they ran photo recon over the area but that is at high speed with a light load onboard.  Try the same thing with bombs onboard at lower speed and low altitude where you are guzzling gas.  I have serious doubts that the Mosquito could have made it on a low altitude raid from Allied territory.  This matter is hotly debated by many historians.    


Quote

Sparky: But you know that, you also know that aside from the Navigation problems, B24ís did a fine job of low level bombing at Ploiesti.
If you call 54 planes lost and 30+% losses a fine job then Iíd agree with you.  And again Ploiesti is the perfect example of the problems of such a raid against Auschwitz.  Here they were hitting a massive spread out area where damage to just about any part of it would hinder German efforts and the B-24s did just that.  The problem is the B-24 was not designed for low level attack, did not have the structural strength to take damage, and did not have the weapons to operate at low level without fighter cover.

Meanwhile around Auschwitz you have the Luftwaffe in high concentration still with their attempts to defend refineries nearby.  High level bombing raids were suffering casualties from fighters so B-24s at low level would have been suicide.  The B-24 had neither the speed, the strength nor the weapons to fight off fighters.  Ploesti is really the perfect example why you donít use the B-24 against targets at low level especially at target like this that would have had fighters still defending it.  

Either way once you attempted a raid you would have had a one shot opening.  My bet is the Germans would have allocated resources to protect the camp more heavily the next time.  

Quote

Sparky: US AAF or RAF Mosquitoes could make the run on a shuttle mission, to and from Russian territory.
That assumes that the Russians would allow such a mission which I find rather unlikely.  

Quote

Sparky: The US, British, and presumably the Russians who where also doing air raids in the area, had aerial photos identifying the gas chambers.
Yes but even historians who think the raids should have been done generally think they would have needed more Intel.  

Quote

Sparky: We were also using television-guided bombs on Japanese ship in the pacific. Not many but we had the technology and it did work.
None of these weapons were really that good and there is a reason why they didnít takeoff into widespread production.  The televisions guided bombs lacked good enough reception to focus in on targets and never showed much accuracy in that 1944 period. Radio controlled bombs suffered from an inability to steer themselves side to side and would create an imbalance in their flight path from the lack of rolling as they dropped.

Quote

Sparky: I never knew that the Jewish Agency was against such raids, I do know that the World Jewish Congress was for the raids.
Even then it was debated hotly within the WJC with some believing such a raid would not have succeeded other than being a propaganda victory for the Germans.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#70 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 27 September 2004 - 10:30 AM

Quote

Zack:  There's no guarantee that air strikes would do anything more than delay Iran by a year or two at best,
There is no guarantee of anything in this world so we might as well stop doing anything.  I would rather buy a year or two than deal with a nuclear Iran right now.  I also tend to think you are vastly underestimating the capability of air strikes to do some damage to Iranís nuclear capabilities if they were carried out with good intelligence, which Israel could probably get their hands on.  I would also suggest knocking off the top people associated with Iranís nuclear program and doing everything possible to stall Iran a few years until Iraq stabilizes.    

Quote

Zack:  the US doesn't have the available capacity to invade and occupy Iran, when we're barely hanging on by our fingernails in Iraq, with 1/3 the population and much better terrain for us.
If Iranís nuclear program can be delayed 4 or 5 years by air strikes the US will be much more capable of dealing with Iran.  At least that will give time for ABM technologies to mature sufficiently enough for them to defend against an Iranian attack.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#71 Fire_Storm20

Fire_Storm20

    I love the smell of napalm in the moring...

  • Islander
  • 187 posts

Posted 28 September 2004 - 10:03 AM

Looks like the US may support actions against Iran soon, with Bush saying that, "...they won't have a nuclear weapon."  Link to CNN
Coming soon to the middle east:  Green Glass Parking Lots :ermm:

#72 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 28 September 2004 - 10:43 AM

Dear CJ;
First of all the World Jewish Congress, representing 16 millions Jews at that time, 6 million of whom, where later killed, had set a policy, that the death chambers where to be destroyed. It doesnít matter how hotly it was debated in the meetings, it was democratically decided on policy. The WJC was not an organization in name only; it was in fact an organization of hundreds of Jewish local organizations that did in fact vote for the establishment of the WJC. Some have called the organization a government with out a country that is until the establishment of the state of Israel. By the way the Jewish agency was one of those organizations under the WJC umbrella. The WJC wanted help in destroying the gas chambers, they didnít care how that help was given. They asked for in order, a troop of paratroopers, or arms and ammunition for local Jewish resistance groups, or an air strike as a last resort. They were refused on all three counts. So we are not just talking about air strikes.

It should be noted that a Jewish resistance group on their own working with Russian prisoners of war, took over and cause the destruction of another death camp, Sobibůr. But the allies couldnít be bothered to help in the destruction of the ovens at Auschwitz. As to intelligence there were active Jewish agents in all three thousand camps, and active polish home army agents in the camps on polish soil and some in Germany itís self. All the intelligence was complete and up to date. The labor and death camp systems where extremely well infiltrated. What is more a group of Jews, steeling back some of the gold the Nazis stole from them, bride the guards imported explosives and blew up gas chamber number three at Auschwitz. All the Jews forced to work in the gas chamber, and property sheds, when it was blown, where either shot or burnt to death, by the Germans in reprisal.

It seems that you donít know what when on during what the Germans called a transport. To make it short a train of some one thousand Jews of all ages, and both sexes, would arrive at the Auschwitz railway station. After a cursory selection process where maybe one hundred would be selected to replace the dead slave labors. The remaining 900 or so would be taken directly to the Gas chambers, made to strip naked and then gassed. Six trains a day would be processed this way. A lot more then just gassing the new arrivals went on in support of the killings, but that is a much more gruesome story.

So with respect tell me how many lives were save by not bombing the gas chambers. While your contemplating that question chew on this.

When the Germanís retook the Sobibůr camp, which the Jews did not try to hold. The camp was blown up bulldozed and covered with trees, by the Germans to hide the evidence. Near the end of the war, with Russian troops approaching Auschwitz, the SS blew up the gas chambers-crematoria and marched some 60,000 inmates south in order to hide the evidence. On the Death March tens of thousands died, in the SS effort to hide the evidence. If the Allies had bombed the camp and publicized the camps existence, a clear message would have been sent to the Germans that they where found out and attempts to hide the evidence would not help. Maybe saving thousands from death on the numerous death marches that the SS embarked on to again hide the evidence. And Yes: there was an embargo on news stories about the death camps, so World War Two ďwouldnít look like a war to save the Jew,Ē (FDRís words.)

Polish History of Auschwitz, which by the way doesnít mention the Jews themselves blowing up gas chamber three. BUT thatís another story.
http://www.auschwitz.org.pl/

Oh and by the way I had a friend who flew against Ploiesti in a B24, and spent time in a luftstalag. Itís not the crewís fault that weird luck took out the lead navigator over the med. That the intelligence on the extent, and depth of the air defenses was piss poor. That German radar tracked them all the way in, and there was a sizable amount of German flown fighters. Over the target under some horrific circumstances those B24 crews, did some outstanding low level flying, so well in fact, that the Germans thought, that the precision crossing of the bomber streams was how it was planned, and timed.

Sparky::
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#73 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 28 September 2004 - 11:51 AM

CJ AEGIS, on Sep 27 2004, 03:30 PM, said:

Quote

Zack:† There's no guarantee that air strikes would do anything more than delay Iran by a year or two at best,
There is no guarantee of anything in this world so we might as well stop doing anything.  I would rather buy a year or two than deal with a nuclear Iran right now.  I also tend to think you are vastly underestimating the capability of air strikes to do some damage to Iranís nuclear capabilities if they were carried out with good intelligence, which Israel could probably get their hands on.  I would also suggest knocking off the top people associated with Iranís nuclear program and doing everything possible to stall Iran a few years until Iraq stabilizes.    

Quote

Zack:† the US doesn't have the available capacity to invade and occupy Iran, when we're barely hanging on by our fingernails in Iraq, with 1/3 the population and much better terrain for us.
If Iranís nuclear program can be delayed 4 or 5 years by air strikes the US will be much more capable of dealing with Iran.  At least that will give time for ABM technologies to mature sufficiently enough for them to defend against an Iranian attack.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


CJ, I think you're overstating the capability of airstrikes in this case, especially against hardened and/or dispersed targets.  And you're also discounting Iran's serious capability to retaliate against us in kind, either through conventional or unconventional means.  Israel's success against Osirak I think gave people an unrealistic view of how easy it is to dismantle a nuclear program through air power alone.  Our recent history in Iraq has certainly shown how difficult it is to assess a country's WMD capacity without the presence of inspectors on the ground with unfettered access to suspect sites.

Update:  a decent Newsweek story on the issue can be found here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.../site/newsweek/

Edited by MuseZack, 28 September 2004 - 04:12 PM.

"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Israel, Iran, Bomb, Osirak Nuclear Complex

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users