Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and other Related Conflicts in the Middle East (read the rules in the first post)

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
I believe that the main message is really the potential for nuclear attacks or attacks on critical infrastructure. If Iran can get so many hits on an airbase, what can they do to Israeli high tech industry? And if Iran gets a nuke, everyone will know that they can deliver it to Israel and defeat Israeli air defence. The first Chinese nuclear device only weighed 1550 kg. The ghadr 110 can apparently carry up to 1000kg of warhead. With modern technological knowledge and data from Korea, the first device Iran builds can probably fit into a missile without further miniaturisation needed. If Israel attacks the nuclear program, Iran might finally have the excuse to go nuclear

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
If Iran needs to, could they detonate nuke testing in Korea instead?
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
What if Ireland or Poland call Article 5 as core NATO allies?
Ireland is not part of NATO. It is a neutral country. As a former British colony they did not want to be part of NATO.

For what it's worth, UN peacekeepers are typically assigned to maintain isolation across a contact line. But if either of the opposing forces on either side of the contact line infringe it to do a war, they are usually expected to withdraw. Since the UN peacekeepers need to have the consent of both warring parties to operate there.
 

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
If Iran needs to, could they detonate nuke testing in Korea instead?
If the point of Iran having nuclear weapons is deterrence, what is the point of doing it in Korea?

With the level of infiltration within the Iranian government, its not unlikely that the transport carrying said device will get hijacked and diverted.
 

SlothmanAllen

Junior Member
Registered Member
I am not sure why anyone would want Iran to detonate a nuclear bomb in the current environment? There is a big difference between detonating a test device and having actual warheads on missiles. Israel has the later and I am almost certain they would launch a nuclear strike against Iran if they detonated a test device.

In fact, I think Iran detonating a test device is probably what some of Israeli politicians and military leaders hope for. Since that would give them the opening to destroy Iran they have been looking for.
 

Minm

Junior Member
Registered Member
There is a big difference between detonating a test device and having actual warheads on missiles.
It might be risky, but the missiles Iran used to strike Israel can already carry warheads weighing close to 1000kg. It's not going to require a lot of warhead miniaturisation to turn them nuclear. And Iran has already carried out experiments on that.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The points you raise are probably a big reason for why Iran hasn't gone nuclear yet, to avoid an Israeli nuclear attack. But that's why this missile attack is so important. If these missiles can get through and strike well defended targets, then so can nuclear missiles. It proves again that the only thing missing is the enrichment of the uranium, all the other steps have already been taken.
 

RottenPanzer

Junior Member
Registered Member
The Iranians could redesign their cruise missiles with stealth airframes to make them more survivable. Someone in Iran clearly is working on stealth airframes, otherwise how would they have got that stealth fighter prototype? It is kind of surprising to me they did not make a stealth cruise missile yet. It is a low bar.
The F-313 Qaher was never a serious project. It was merely a pr stunt by the Ahmadinejad administration from what i know.
 
Top