EckerNet.Com

Gotta love getting the jump on the Mainstream Media…by at least 6 months in this case. In this case it\’s regarding Israel\’s ability to strike Iran. Apparently, despite all the resources available to them, they used the same references I did. And looking at that data, drew the same conclusions.

Where is my cushy gig as an editorial writer??

However, once he gets done catching up to me, he goes on to address an issue that I purposely did not. Direct flightpath to Iran. In retrospect, I should probably have mentioned why I dismissed it as ludicrious. Maybe it might have prevented the Times from making the same mistake.

Perhaps just as important as weapon systems is airspace.

The most direct route would be through Jordanian and Iraqi airspace. Two Israeli pilots showed that they could navigate both without being shot down in 1981, when they flew the 600 miles to the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad, dropped their bombs and returned over Jordan to an air base in southern Israel.

Today, the United States, not Saddam Hussein, controls Iraq\’s vast airspace. Military analysts suggest the United States might approve the mission passively by letting the jets fly both ways unencumbered.

Ok they are correct, in that once you solve the range problem, you still have quite a problem in the flight path of the strike force.

If you look at a map of the Middle East, all roads to Tehran go through Iraq. Now they did it once in 1981…but that was to hit a target in Iraq. Who asks for permission to use the airspace of the country they are hitting?? That\’s bogus reasoning.

And to somehow imply the US would or even should grant airspace rights to Israel is a pretty dangerous statement. First of all Iraq has it\’s own government. Now while that government may currently rely on us to enforce their airspace, that doesn\’t mean it\’s our airspace. The US granting rights to that airspace undermines the very fledgling government we\’re trying to prop up. Not to mention that it would piss off every ally we have in Iraq, as well as give further justification to those who claim we\’re occupiers, not liberators.

Secondly, even if we were in a position to grant Iraqi airspace rights to Israel, should we?? Internationally allowing Israel to conduct such a strike will be interpreted as having done the strike ourselves. As a result, we can pretty much guarantee a World War III, or at the very least heavy retaliation by Iran and Syria.

Now that doesn\’t necessarily put the option off the table, but if a strike on Iran is necessary let\’s consider our options. And keep in mind that aerial refueling is probably not an option. This mission would already be in hostile territory, and refueling tankers are not exactly difficult targets.

Plan A – Grant Israel the rights to Iraqi airspace. Have them fly the few planes they have that can make a flight of that distance over to Iran. Hit the limited number of targets (parts of Iran\’s nuclear program) they have the aircraft to hit, assuming no losses. Have those aircraft fly back across the entire Middle East.

Plan B – Carrier aircraft from various US carriers, after a relatively short (and less detectable) flight, hit not only Iran\’s nuclear program, but also targets whose loss would make a retalitory strike by Iran difficult. Aircraft return to carriers. Carriers then move to a more defensible location. Israel still has their entire Air Force ready to respond to any retaliation by Syria.

All things considered I like Plan B alot better. Especially since the two will likely be seen as equivalent by the rest of the world.

So let\’s get this out of our systems. Is Israel capable of striking Iran?? Yes. Is it a realistic option? No. Are these perfect options? No. But what over there is?