Israel plans using mini nukes to blow up Iran nuclea facilities

[GePap]

KH, were the heck do you get the "double" figure?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2067.html

This has Canada's 2003 budget as 9.8 Billion while Israel's FY06 budget is 9.4B.

I doubt Harper has doubled the military budget.

[Drake Tungsten]

Did GePap just pwn Kitty? Please god, say it ain't so...

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
So what? If a single Canuck sub with say ten warheads survived, they could nuke the financial and political centers of the US, killing a few million. That would be sufficient to maintain nuclear deterence. As for developing sub-launched nukes, the system does not even need to use ballistic missiles, it could do with cruise missiles, given how close most major US cities are to the coast.

Using cruise missiles would significant reduce the amount of area the USN would need to cover to find them before taking them out as part of the first strike.

I'm pretty sure by the time they got a nuclear program up we'd be able to track the nukes coming out of it. They just couldn't start it in secret.

[Seeker]

We must nuke every American rebel city while there is still time. We're close enough to hit 'em without warning!

If we just spread out across the arctic with some supplies and NCB warfare gear for a few years we can wait out the counterattack and reduce their otherwise useless surplus population.

Soon, BNA will be reunited under our benevolent rule.

That ***** Trudeau should never have given away our nukes.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


The problem is that any country with which a nuclear exchange ever makes sense is the US (and that doesn't really either) and I doubt Canada would first strike. If you did start developing a nuclear stockpile we would probably know and might even be able to figure out where you put them, which means we would easily knock them out before they could be launched, since we're so close.

a) You underestimate the difficulty in spotting nukes
b) You overestimate the time to launch
c) We've got a ****load of space to put the ****ers up north...where flight times aren't that short
d) The reason I'd want a nuclear stockpile in a world where using limited nukes was acceptable against non-nuclear powers would be for deterrence against such limited nuclear attacks, not against an all-out exchange. The US would not be able to credibly knock out 50 warheads without some serious danger to themselves. Given that small tac nukes are useful, but not essential, it would easily deter such an attack. Also, it raises the bar for the lowest level of possible attack. All of a sudden, it's not an option to send two or three tac nukes. You have to send dozens and dozens. With no guarantee of success (and as far as I know, probable failure).

Also, I note that even if a nuke attack on Iran was accepted by the world community I wouldn't feel the need to have them today. I would build them today so that we'd have them if ever we got on somebody's bad side in the future. The most precarious position you can put yourself in is Iran's: they don't have nukes, they're threatening to get them and they're on everybody's **** list anyway.

I'm being quite serious here, and don't think that the leadership of every non-nuclear developed country hasn't performed the same calculation. Once a nuclear power cracks the seal by attacking a non-nuclear power with nukes you will see 30 nuclear powers within a couple of decades. Including places like Canada, Italy, the Netherlands etc.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by GePap


They would chose subs as the rational delivery system.

No, we wouldn't. Subs are expensive. To play the sub game you need dozens of them. The USN could (and probably does) track every sub we have.

I'd space them out far away from the US and coastlines. I'd get launch times down as far as possible and install early warning radar on a perimeter. If and when a crisis situation arose I would have them ready to go on a moment's notice, along with a promise that no non-CNB attack against non-nuclear targets would be met with a nuclear response.

No sane power would use tac nukes in such a situation. The US would still be able to "win" an all-out exchange (losing maybe a couple of cities in the process), but such a stockpile wouldn't be meant to deter that.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by GePap
KH, were the heck do you get the "double" figure?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2067.html

This has Canada's 2003 budget as 9.8 Billion while Israel's FY06 budget is 9.4B.

I doubt Harper has doubled the military budget.

I had Canada's military expenditures as ~15 billion and Israel's as ~8 billion. I was operating off memory, however.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Did GePap just pwn Kitty? Please god, say it ain't so...

Eh. I was going from something I thought I'd read a year ago. It's quite possible I was wrong.

EDIT: yup. I was wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

this one has CAN 10.6 B
ISR 9.6 B

in 2005

Anyhow, the point stands: we have more than enough money to run a significant military nuke program without drastically increasing the military budget.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I'm pretty sure by the time they got a nuclear program up we'd be able to track the nukes coming out of it. They just couldn't start it in secret.

Not to mention that human intel would be like shooting fish and a barrel when you're dealing with another English-speaking country with fluid borders.

[KrazyHorse]

I would have no problem with the US knowing where every single one of our nukes was. Try hitting them all without going all out on us before we can launch even a single one.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Helicopters are cheap, too.

The helicopter acquisition program which was cancelled and forced the manned missiles to fly a little longer cost more than the nuke program I'm talking about would...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Really? Where the hell is the money going, then?

An air force and army that would walk all over Israel if it needed to?

[DinoDoc]

Air Force? Do you still have the suicide bomber force codenamed Sea King?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I would have no problem with the US knowing where every single one of our nukes was. Try hitting them all without going all out on us before we can launch even a single one.

Yah, well at least wed get to round up all the enemy agents living down here and send em away to the secret prisons

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


An air force and army that would walk all over Israel if it needed to?

Ah, more useless speculation comparing one first world army to another.

BTW, does Israels defense budget reflect that its army is mainly conscripts, who dont get paid market wages?