Saturday, July 20, 2013

Was Israel’s Latest ‘Air’ Attack on Syria from a Submarine? This would be a game changer

Was Israel’s Latest ‘Air’ Attack on Syria from a Submarine?
"An attack two weeks ago that destroyed an advanced Russian missile shipment delivered to Syria’s Assad regime should also serve as a warning to Iran – and to those complacent Western diplomats who have (dangerously in my view) reconciled themselves to the idea of allowing Iran to go nuclear and then trying to contain it. For it seems that the July 5 attack on an arms depot near the Syrian naval base of Latakia, which has been attributed to Israel, came not from the air (as CNN and the New York Times reported last weekend) but from under the water."

"Many Western officials who have apparently concluded that Israel could only destroy Iran’s nuclear program from the air – and that Israel does not have the capability to carry out such long-range air strikes in a decisive way – should take note. In recent years, Israel has greatly advanced its sea-based capabilities, and the geographical range of operations that Israel can mount from the sea, I am reliably told, now spans the entire globe. Israeli submarines are no longer confining themselves to the Mediterranean."

Hmmm. If that is true, then look at this.

Iran's nuclear program has several locations as seen on the map below. I added Qom to the map below. Since the map below was formulated in 2009, it has been discovered that an underground secret facility exists in Qom. Bushehr is a main facility. Look where it is. Easily reachable by sea, if Israel can get a sub around the Strait of Hormuz. Bushehr is ON the sea.


 You see how Bushehr is right ON the water. Click to enlarge.

Bushehr to Qom is 700 miles, reachable by sub missile. Every Submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) has intercontinental range. The Russian Navy patrols the Black sea by sub and surface ships but I suppose if Israel wanted to they may be able to get a sub in the Black Sea and attack Iran from the North. The Black Sea is the body of water yo see on the above map north of Tehran.

Either way, it was a big AHA! moment when the news reported that the Syrian attack on the Russian missile cache was performed by sea. Stay tuned...


  1. If Israel did attack by Sea, they almost certainly used a Submarine-launched cruise missle (SLCM) vs SLBM. The SLCM's fly to their target at low altitude, fifty feet above the waves for example, and cannot be tracked by radar until seconds away unless the target country has a 24/7 dedicated airborne monitoring system (AWACS). In contrast, a SLBM launch can instantly be seen and tracked by ground and satellite based radars. Even if AWACS is used there is only a couple minutes of warning before the SLCM hits its target.

    During the cold war US engineers and scientists developed the SLCM but found that the Russian cities and military bases that they had hoped to destroy in a WWIII scenario were too far away from any Sea or Ocean for the SLCM to be used. The max range is around 200mi to 1500mi on the latest Tomahawk variants. Ironically, the KGB stole the designs and put them in Soviet submarines and the SLCM is now the single greatest threat the US faces from a first strike nuclear weapon platform. Roughly 70% of the US population lives in coastal areas, and these cities could be pre-emptively obliterated by any navy that could sneak its submarines within several hundred miles of the US coast using SLCM technology. Since SLCMs cannot be tracked, our leadership would be decimated as the generals/civilian leaders would not be rushed to safety. They would die in the fireball, and the United States would be finished as a world power in under an hour.

    I am glad to live in Wisconsin.

    1. thanks for the great information. I really appreciate it.

      Wisconsin is not out of range of an EMP, easy shoulder launch from Norfolk...Beaufort...Delaware Bay...

      Personally I believe the way you described it is the way it'll play out

  2. In such a surprise SLCM attack, the United States as an economic world power would be finished but it would retain much of its military might in the short-term. The US has hundreds of fully stocked and armed bases all over the world, eleven aircraft carriers, eight or nine smaller WASP ships that each host a Marine Expeditionary Unit, and thousands of nuclear weapons. The leadership might suffer a decapitation, it is possible a charismatic General serving overseas would step into the power vacuum and legally or more likely in a de facto manner create a military dictatorship. All remaining resources would be directed to the new war effort.

    I can imagine that the US would wreak havoc for a short period of time across the globe. In the beginning very few countries could stop a weakened US military. Russia, China, Great Britain, France, Israel and other nuclear powers that have ICBM delivery systems would be the most protected as they could retaliate with an unstoppable nuclear attack like in the MAD days of the 1960s. India and Pakistan would still remain vulnerable to the General's wrath as they use F-16s to deliver nuclear bombs. The military would overestimate its ability to stop enemy warplanes and would not think of these types of countries as possessing a legitimate deterrent. Hundreds of millions of people living in other, mostly Islamic countries, will likely be slaughtered.

    1. Very interesting! I had not thought of the charismatic general in the least. But i am old enough to remember Alexander Haig..."I'm in charge here" of course. It makes total sense as a distinct possibility. America has left enticing bread crumbs all around the world so the hawks will be mightily attracted to them


    Starting next year Washington DC might have these blimps. The purpose is to give a few minutes warning to evacuate generals and the President in case of a SLCM nuclear attack.


"Letter to a disappointed graduate"

Graduating from college is a wonderful accomplishment and a high point in a young person's life. It's a rite of passage. It also is ...