The Israeli Plan and Outcome Possibilities of Attacking Iran

If there is anything that is more true in life, is that, history often repeats itself. Whether it is a personal or family issue or event or one that is a world type event. The world, in a sense, is hearing one that we have heard before, a warning that Israel will not tolerate an Iranian nuclear threat and they may attack.

The world heard the threat back in 1967, Israel felt threatened by the Arab countries around them and warned them. Then, like lightening, Israel struck in true blitzkrieg manner and seized Arab lands that added buffers to their 1948 borders. In 1981, they warned Iraq not to continue with its nuclear adventure. It was ignored and they struck with speed annihilating the reactor. Then, in 2007, Syria tried a more covert attempt to build a nuclear site, the Israelis voiced concerned, nothing was done, and they struck-bye, bye nuclear.

So, now, 2012, we hear the same warnings and impatience with the US attempt to force Iran to change from the Israelis. Do you doubt they will not act unilaterally? Iran's response is that, " Israel is a cancerous tumor that should be cut and will be cut". Truly, folks, fighting words from a country that truly hates Jews (at least their government does).

Israel has a huge planning dilemma to pull any attack off. They do have the capability to attack Iran with its Jericho missiles. The logistics of such a mission remains difficult. Israeli aircraft have a choice of flight paths and all require flying across Muslim countries:Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria or Turkey. Because the issue is about nukes in the Middle East, former enemies or countries dealing with Israel may allow transit over their airspace, or pretend they do not know. All would fear reprisal from Iran if their collusion was made public. You see, already Iran has power and they yet to have the nuclear bomb. Even if none of the countries allowed it, Israel could without interference through use of ECM. This is one issue, the other is the 1000 mile distance and would require the aircraft to refuel in mid-air. Then, the target issue complicates it. Iran's sites are all over the place and many underground. Many of Israel's bunker buster bombs are not strong enough to penetrate some of the targets. Yet, the attack would still serve purpose by destroying and delaying Iran's attempt to make the nuclear bomb.

The cost to the world would be or could be catastrophic, which is the main card Iran could play. They would no doubt launch their Shihab 3 missiles that would fall on Israel. Iranian hezbollah and hamas sympathizers would launch some of their 200,000 short range missiles on the country. That is just starters. Iran could attack a host of Arab countries within 100 miles of them, all oil producers that the world needs. Easy pickings for Iran and everyone knows it. What if Pakistan supported Iran's attack on Israel, they do have many nuclear missiles in their silos. Pakistan and the West are in the process of a nasty divorce. Then, Iran could close the Strait of Hormuz for a short time.

The repercussions to Europe, the US, South America etc., is the price of oil. Analysts predict that such mayhem (any one of them) would spike oil per barrel to $125-30 a barrel. It is $98 now. We still have not got the worse yet. The $125 a barrel impact is predicted if Iran did NOT close the Strait of Hormuz or disrupt the Persian Gulf. If it did, analysts predict it would be $200+ per barrel of oil!

At $200 a barrel, the West (US, EU) would be plunged into economic depression or serious recession far worse than it is now. Gas would jump like it has never, reaching $5-7 a gallon or more in the US, while in the EU, it could be $12 a gallon or more.

An Israeli attack on Iran would be economic chaos for everyone, including Iran. Yet, Iran insists on pushing its agenda for the nuclear bomb. It could be something they never get.


More by this Author


Comments 5 comments

maxoxam41 profile image

maxoxam41 4 years ago from USA

And why does history repeat itself? Does it mean that we did not understand what happened and its consequences or that we don't care? The latter is more appropriate!

Did they really use "blitzkrieg", a term used by the Nazis, how interesting? The same ones who tried to annihilate them! That they take them as a model!

Have you ever been to Israel/Palestine (it takes roughly to 2 hours in train from North to South)? It will be easy to wipe out if it was the Iranian intention!


maxoxam41 profile image

maxoxam41 4 years ago from USA

I meant two hours


perrya profile image

perrya 4 years ago Author

yes, Israel is becoming more isolated from those not adjacent to it. As to blitzkrieg, prior to WW2, no military knew about. This was German and once used, nearly all countries adopted some form of it. A good thing is a good thing, just like autobahns.


maxoxam41 profile image

maxoxam41 4 years ago from USA

In what way the blitzkrieg is a good thing? It is a military strategy. Are you telling me that the Jews leant nothing from history and in particular from their past besides military strikes?


perrya profile image

perrya 4 years ago Author

Blitzkrieg revolutionized combat ops, yes, if you fight battles, it is a good method.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working