Safe Mode: On
War With Iran A Terrible Idea - Here's Why

"Should Israel decide to launch a strike on Iran, its pilots would have
to fly more than 1,000 miles across unfriendly airspace, refuel in the
air en route, fight off Iran's air defenses, attack multiple underground
sites simultaneously — and use at least 100 planes.That is the
assessment of American defense officials and military analysts close to
the Pentagon, who say that an Israeli attack meant to set back Iran's
nuclear program would be a huge and highly complex operation...".* The
Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down, including the over-hyped
nuclear capability of Iran and why it would be a bad idea for the US to
get involved in another war.


Added: Feb-22-2012 Occurred On: Feb-22-2012
By: Surfsock
In:
World News, Iran, Other Middle East
Tags: Israel, Iran, Zionist, USA, jews, war mongering,
Location: Israel (load item map)
Views: 5562 | Comments: 113 | Votes: 6 | Favorites: 2 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
'
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • As an American, I say let Iran have nuclear energy for power! Israel, fight your own battles.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (8) | Report

  • the Young Turks, lol

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • I LOVE Cenk, my favorite lib D-Bag.

    His arrogance and smugness has drawn me in from day one. I only wish he still had a network show on MSNBC so I had some evening entertainment again.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • I dont take serious anything this young Turd has to say.
    We have missiles too besides planes.

    He never talks about the precedent if Iran got nukes.....every other Arab Islamic nation will follow suit!

    It might not be a good idea to attack Iran....It would be an even worse idea to let them get nukes.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • I would love to Israel go down. Too many reasons to list.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • you don't fight off defense air forces, you attack them! The day that whole area is a glowing pit will be a bad day for the world but a great day for humanity.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Just wrap it up by next week. I payed $4.25 a gal. At $5.00 Gallon I will steal someone's bike to go to work.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • what an idiot.. This guy is using Norway as an example for who Irael would attack and the U.S would stand by Israel side. I don´t think so. This is a small country , but Norway has been mentioned as the nr 1 ally of the u.s during ww2 - along side with greatbritain. The role Norway has as a peacekeeping nation - Humanitarian nation. If all the countries Norway has helped would forget our position in the world? I don´t think so. This guy talks to much without thinking first.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Young Turks = Armenian Genocide!

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • whatever AIPAC decides, US go with it.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Israel Nukes Iran, USA first strikes China and Russia, Russia second strikes any survivors

    NWO takes over and makes slaves of the remaining humans.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Comment of user 'Rastafelix' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @Rastafelix hmm i think they'd be cutting it close especially with the bomb load.

      Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @febreze

      Mid air/flight refuel, its been around for decades............

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @Rastafelix The f-16 block 60 with CFT's has an unrefuelled combat radius(6000lbs ordinance) of 450mi. The 4 main targets in Iran are between 700 and 1100 miles. Which reans that arial refuelling has to take place over the Meditterranian, Jordan, Iraq or Saudi Arabia. The Med is still too far away from the targets to be of much benifit. The other options are very dubious diplomatically. Therefore without US assistance its beyond the capibilities of the F-16. The f-15e may be able to reach the t More..

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @dankmofo obviously i thought the issue here was getting a sufficient number of the air refueling planes in the air........ .... .....

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @febreze The IAF actually has 8 KC-707s. Thats more than enough refuelling capacity. The real problem is refuelling close enough to the targets so that the warplanes can deliver an adequate ordinance load. The only feasible place seems to be Saudi Arabia, which may be diplomatically difficult to secure refueling rights.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Love the sub titles

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Y'all have probably already done the homework on this because I don't know.

    What countries has Iran attacked in the past? I know they were at war with Iraq, but I don't know the details of that war, if they initiated it or not. If you've got a link to some site I could read, I'd appreciate it.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'haji killer' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • I am not supportive of a war with Iran. That said, Israel pilots wouldn't have to fly over Iraq or Syria, they could simply launch from carriers in the Arabian Sea. That is of course, if Israel actually does anything or simply forces the US to fight their battle. Again.

    Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

    • @radiofreak Israel dosn,t have carriers and the Arabian sea isn't that much closer to the 4 main targets than Israel is!

      Posted Feb-22-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • Comment of user 'MB-UK' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @radiofreak Israeli planes taking off US carriers? lol Won't happen take my word for it.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @MB-UK They cant because f-16s and f-15s aren't carrier capable aircraft. They cant even get refueling from carrier tankers because they use "boom" refueling, not "probe and drogue" like Navy aircraft.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • What in the fuck is this shit? If israel uses nukes, they could save of those planes.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • *Closed captioning brought to you by retarded monkeys high on crack

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Well, a potential war between Israel and Iran would be a bit more complicated than that...

    It doesn't mean a war either. Israel's intelligence agencies and commandos are some of the best in the world and all it would require is a simple sabotage of any nuclear facility and Iran would have to start back from square one.

    A war may follow, but Israel is strong and backed by the United States (I kind of wish that would stop) and Iran would be crushed. They can't take Isreal.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • As usual I enjoy the stupid comments from keyboard warriors,and the funny thing I didn't even see this video, aswipes you don't know anything about naval warfare. Just guess and shoot your best moronic comments.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

    • @Doyle1 Video had nothing to do with naval warfare.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @mikedelta12 Iran has a wide coastline. Nato fleet would paralyzed the whole region forever if they wanted to.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • Comment of user 'ajang' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @Davaeron No doubt. In fact the USN would be much more able than the IAF to neutralize Irans nuclear program. The USN would have none of the range, refueling or diplomatic Issues that may be insurmountable to the Israelis. Thats the real value of the Aircraft Carrier. The CVN gives the USN the capability to do anywhere on the planet what the IAF cant do 1000 miles away! In fact the USN can do it with the benefit of local air superiority which Israel can't.

      nonetheless the vid had nothing to do More..

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ajang The problem is range. The 4 main targets are 700-1000miles away. The F-16 has a combat radius of 350-450, the f-15e 750mi, therefore none of the warplanes can reach the targets. They can extend the range with aerial refueling but there is no ideal area to refuel unless the Saudis or Iraqis allow the Israelis to use their airspace which is diplomatically doubtful.

      Reminds me of Operation ElDorado Canyon in '86. When the French denied the USAF overflight rights and f-111s had to aerial ref More..

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • how about syria taken over by al qaeda?

    iran is not a worry. al qaeda is more of a worry.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • its on man, the corporations have the itch

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • "...The
    Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down, including the over-hyped
    nuclear capability of Iran ..."

    Young Turks......enough said. I will not be watching the video.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • "War With Iran A Terrible Idea - Here's Why"

    So russia having another nuclear powered friend with terrorist cells armed with nukes is a great idea???

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

    • @JihadKiller1s1k no, its not a "great idea" but it may be better then the US initiating or even participating in a war with Iran. IMHO.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @mikedelta12

      this same argument was used before WWII about hitler..... Then hitler was allowed to build his war machine. Sadly, history repeats itself.

      Russia is building an alliance to dominate the world. If we allow it, it won't end well for America.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @JihadKiller1s1k

      anyone who believes the world would be better off with mullahs and terrorist cells scattered around the world armed with 200 nuclear bombs is ok...well they are simply retarded.

      people said ww3 would happen if we took out saddam....... didn't happen.

      Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Most of you people have the situation all wrong.
    Even if we bomb the shit outta Iran, it won't be a war.
    We'll be bombing nuclear facilities only.

    No one wants a war with Iran, mainly because it's evident that the western-culture loving people will eventually oust the government, so no one wants to piss them off. Chances are, if we DO bomb their facilities, it will be combined with a strong campaign to bolster the MEK and democracy resistance.

    Posted Feb-23-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

    • Comment of user 'whodat' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!