dogtowner, et al,
Sometimes, it is best to assess the ramifications.
(PREFACE)
If you gave Iran the amount of fissile material the US would use in one (1) - 1 Megaton devices (a 50 million degree fireball about a mile diameter, a 20+ second long radiation burst that would kill most everyone within 6 miles, and producing significant damage up to 12 miles away) how long would it take for Iran to design, test, build a guidance system, and assemble a viable delivery system?
A standard tactical warhead, say the W-88 on the Trident, is about 100 kiloton. Bomb Effects computer: http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Bombcalc?yield=100&yunit=1&range=3&runit=1&rotate=0&imsize=800
(COMMENT)
The use of a weapon by the Iranians would be the end of their civilization, and they know it. But Iran might not actually have the chance to use such a weapon. Once it is known, or believed that, Iran has such a weapon - its threats become much more credible. In having a credible threat, it has no leeway in making such threats. Once the threat is issued, the receiver of the threat might very will preemptively strike.
The US has 18 Ohio Class submarines, 14 of which are armed with up to 24 Trident IISLBMs. One Ohio Class Submarine could take out a third of the Population of Iran. Three such submarine could destroy every major city in Iran with a population of 100,000 or more. While it would not be genocide, it would be the end of Iran as it has been known since it was capture by Alexander the Great 2600 years ago.
I don't believe the Iranians have any intention of developing a tactical nuclear device. It would inhibit their ability to make sensational threats and divest themselves of a grand bargaining chip that can be used to extort more lucrative opportunities. It would place them in greater peril. They could never use the weapon; yet face the enormous costs associated with it. Yet, it would reduce the greater leverage they have without the weapon.
I don't believe the prestige of having the weapon serves Iran's purposes. But even if they opt to build such a weapon, the need for the continued presence of US Forces in the Region would on increase in the eyes of the other Persian Gulf Nations. It would result in an outcome unfavorable to Iran.
It appears that Iran is attempting to intimidate the Regional Neighborhood in the threat of pursuing a weapon. But they know that once they have the weapon, they could no longer be as vocal and threatening as they have in the past. One threat to destroy, say Israel, would be sufficient cause for a preemptive strike of a devastating nature.
(EPILOGUE)
Earlier, I stated that if we had to go to war, we would have to totally annihilate Iran. I still believe that. I believe that we would have to take them back to the capacity of the 6th Century. Anything less would afford them the opportunity to develop a retaliation within a generation. If they understand this and believe this, concluding that it would be the end of a viable Islamic state, then they will avoid that potential outcome. If they believe that the world (ie the US) will not devastate their culture, then they will proceed with the critical design process. It is imperative that we offer them a choice.
- Build the weapon and keep your mouth shut; or not build a weapon and continue your present course - mouth and all.
- But with the weapon, you cannot issue any more threats.
Most Respectfully,
R
