4 ms·

It's really unlikely a nuke on TLV will be reciprocated with one nuke of the same exact magnitute on Iran; it's more likely Israel will use everything it has to

It's really unlikely a nuke on TLV will be reciprocated with one nuke of the same exact magnitute on Iran; it's more likely Israel will use everything it has to destroy Iran. Tehran's larger metro area is 15 million people with most of the economy and jobs there. What do you think a few hydrogen bombs (which Israel is known to have) will do to Iran's economy or regime survival? It's mutually assured destruction, period. No side is gonna win a nuclear war.

dogma1138 5y ago
It’s really unclear if Israel has thermonuclear warheads, or even how many warheads they have in general. Their delivery systems are quite limited. Their submarines wouldn’t be able to deliver anything larger than a tactical implosion warhead since even the enlarged torpedo tubes that are capable of launching cruise missiles like the Popeye can’t launch ballistic missiles. Their ballistic missiles based on the Shavit launcher would be possibly capable of carrying about half a ton which is arguably too small for thermonuclear warheads too, especially ones that Israel would be able to produce since it’s unlikely they would be able to produce something as compact as the W88.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  > It’s really unclear if Israel has thermonuclear warheads, or even how many warheads they have in general. Israel has had nukes (reportedly) since 1967. Thats a 52 years (and counting) before Iran. Anything from delivery to the weapons force will be much better on the Israeli side. Trying to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon hoping somehow Israel has no way to retaliate is simply suicide. This whole scenario was researched btw and anyone with half a brain could see it would be devastating to both countries, which to me at least sounds unsurprising. https://conflictandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1752-1505-7-10 https://conflictandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186...

dogma1138 5y ago

It’s really unclear if Israel has thermonuclear warheads, or even how many warheads they have in general. Their delivery systems are quite limited. Their submarines wouldn’t be able to deliver anything larger than a tactical implosion warhead since even the enlarged torpedo tubes that are capable of launching cruise missiles like the Popeye can’t launch ballistic missiles. Their ballistic missiles based on the Shavit launcher would be possibly capable of carrying about half a ton which is arguably too small for thermonuclear warheads too, especially ones that Israel would be able to produce since it’s unlikely they would be able to produce something as compact as the W88.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
joelbluminator 5y ago
> It’s really unclear if Israel has thermonuclear warheads, or even how many warheads they have in general. Israel has had nukes (reportedly) since 1967. Thats a 52 years (and counting) before Iran. Anything from delivery to the weapons force will be much better on the Israeli side. Trying to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon hoping somehow Israel has no way to retaliate is simply suicide. This whole scenario was researched btw and anyone with half a brain could see it would be devastating to both countries, which to me at least sounds unsurprising. https://conflictandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1752-1505-7-10 https://conflictandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186...