Sun Nov 4, 2012, 02:59 PM
Purveyor (21,216 posts)
Simulation: The First 48 Hours After An Iran Strike
The Institute for National Security Studies held a war game recently in which players representing regional actors simulated the first 48 hours after an IDF strike on the Islamic Republic.
The simulation was based on the scenario of a unilateral Israeli strike without US participation, after midnight on November 9.
The Tel Aviv University-based institute began the game with the following “announcement”: “Al Jazeera reported that Israeli planes attacked nuclear sites in Iran in three assault waves. Following the reports, Israel officially announced it attacked nuclear sites in Iran, since it had no other choice.”
In this scenario, the strike successfully destroyed nuclear sites and set Iran’s nuclear weapons program back by three years.
As part of the exercise, Iran responded with full force, firing some 200 Shihab missiles at Israel in two waves, and calling on its proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas and other radical organizations, to attack Israel. At first, Iran refrained from striking US targets in the Persian Gulf region in the war game.
4 replies, 1170 views
Simulation: The First 48 Hours After An Iran Strike (Original post)
Response to cbrer (Reply #1)
Sun Nov 4, 2012, 04:52 PM
AverageJoe90 (9,848 posts)
2. WWIII as we knew it in the Reagan era just isn't gonna happen.....
Barring a truly insane combination of massive nuclear terrorism over the U.S. and Russia, totalitarian military regimes arising in both countries(or at least Russia), and an incident or two resembling the Petrov incident in 1983, that particular scenario just won't happen.
A major regional war, however, may not be out of the question.
Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #2)
Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:25 PM
cbrer (1,831 posts)
3. Lend me your crystal ball
IMHO, there are way too many variables to make statements like that. You may plot trends, but all it takes is one politician looking for an election that doesn't want to appear "weak" in the face of another terrorist attack, or an unstable dictator to destroy a major city, or...
I have been amazed many times by the vagaries of human actions, and reactions. Apparently clear decisions ignored in favor of a more short sighted, violent option.
But you were definitely right about 1 thing. It would indeed be insane!
Response to cbrer (Reply #3)
Mon Nov 5, 2012, 05:50 PM
AverageJoe90 (9,848 posts)
4. I'll grant you one thing.
If the next Republican president decides that he'd like to start a new Cold War then that will definitely change the game, and not for the better, as we can both surely agree. As of right now, though, '80s style WWIII is practically in the history books.