A new military report reveals the United States will need to launch a combined strike force larger than the combined size of the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan to strike Iran.
The new military report follows detailed research issued from a DC think thank which explored the possible scenarios needed to launch a successful military strike.
That report revealed a massive force would be needed to prevent the retaliation and all-out war from spreading into neighboring states.
The think tank’s analysis also revealed something the talking heads on TV pushing for the strike refuse to tell the public.
In order to take out Iran’s underground facilities low-yield nuclear warheads are needed.
Now the official report from the US military reveals the think tank’s report severely underestimated the size of the military force needed to conduct the attack.
In order to be successful a long-term occupation would also be needed.
More on the need for a nuclear strike against Iran:
Think Tank: Israel Must Strike Iran With Nuclear Weapons to Destroy Underground Facilities
A DC think tank report suggests nuclear strikes are required to take out Iran’s underground facilities because conventional weapons are incapable of doing so.
Yesterday Business Insider alerted us to a detailed researched report released by Washington D.C. foreign policy think tank the Center For Strategic & International Studies.
The report examines the various military strike scenarios for taking out Iran’s civilian nuclear power program.
The report addresses 3 scenarios in detail: an Israeli airstrike, an Israeli nuclear strike and a US military strike launched in cooperation with Gulf States.
The scenario where Israel launches an airstrike on its own is described as a high risk operation with very low probability of success with numerous difficulties that must be overcome.
That scenario is ruled out as it ends in disaster with US and numerous other gulf states suffering high levels of damage as a result of an Iranian counter strike and leads to a protracted long-term war in the gulf.
With that scenario being ruled out the think tank focuses bluntly states the US the only country capable of launching a military strike capable of crippling Iran’s defenses and preventing an Iranian counter attack.
The think tank makes it clear Iran’s defenses are no match for US technology and military assets, bluntly stating the US is the only nation capable of conducting the the strike.
RT has more on the new military report:
Iran Strike Must Be Bigger Than Afghan And Iraqi Ops Combined – Military Report
RT – Only a US operation bigger than the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan combined can stop Iran from its alleged pursuit of a nuclear bomb, a new military report said. Such action, however, risks igniting all-out war in the Middle East.
Amid escalating rhetoric from Israel and the US over military action against Iran, more than 30 former US diplomats, retired admirals and generals have assembled a report on the consequences of military action against Tehran. The study will be released on Thursday.
The AP received an advance copy of the document, set to be released on Thursday, and reported that the analysis assessed the risks of a possible invasion of Iran, but provided no overall conclusion or recommended course of action.
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Frank Kearney, who endorsed the report, claimed that it was intended to “stimulate thinking in the US about the objectives of a military attack on Iran beyond the obvious goal of hitting key components of Iran’s nuclear program.”
The report said that a US military attack would harm the current regime’s political standing and damage its ability to launch counterattacks, but Tehran would almost certainly retaliate,“directly and through surrogates, in ways that risked igniting all-out war in the Middle East.”
US strikes could destroy Iran’s most important nuclear facilities and damage its military forces but would only delay – not fully stop – the Islamic republic’s alleged pursuit of a nuclear weapon.
“Clearly there is some [US] ability to do destruction, which will cause some delay, but what occurs after that?” Kearney said.“You can’t kill intellectual power.”
In assessing the costs and benefits of a possible strike, the review said that Iran could be stopped only by a military invasion and occupation “more taxing than the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.”
“Given Iran’s large size and population, and the strength of Iranian nationalism, we estimate that the occupation of Iran would require a commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the US has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined,” the report said.
In the wake of recent anti-US protests across the Middle East, including violent clashes in Egypt and Yemen, the document also warned that such a strike “would add to a perception of the US as anti-Muslim – a perception linked to the US-led invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and hardened by Internet-based video excerpts of an anti-Muslim film that may have fueled Tuesday’s deadly attack on a US diplomatic office in Libya.”