Actually, it is a fellow retired from the Royal Canadian Navy (my uncle Gordie) who is paid by our Department of Foreign Affairs to fend off the Americans in the Atlantic sovereignty dispute. I expect that if the Iranians show up he’ll fend them off too.
What would those needs be, out of curiosity? Engage in an unprovoked attack that might annoy a few buildings or ships? I mean, a 165kg warhead is nasty on a single building (assuming those missiles even HAVE a land attack mode, which I actually don’t think they do unless they’re a specific variant) but it’s not like this ships are loaded like our Normandy/Arleigh Burke vessels–they aren’t carrying more than a dozen or two missiles each.
Not a lot of nukes that fit in a 165kg payload. Our own TLAM-N and B-61 nuclear bombs, the smallest ones in the inventory, are 450-500kg.
Not even counting the international response if Iran went nuclear free. Hell, we’d be racing with Russia to crater the entire country.
Actually, I am wrong about the Tomahawk, the warhead we use on those is probably small enough for a C-802. So that’s a few dozen 150kt-ish warheads (Assuming Iran’s nukes are as advanced as ours) that A) are very range-limited and B) able to be intercepted in the launch phase by the US cruisers that will be shadowing these few ships.
To put the range limit in perspective, those missiles (likely range 200km) wouldn’t be able to hit Washington D.C. from international waters.
Actually they only need to detonate a conventional nuclear weapon outside the 200 mile boundary off the East Coast. The resulting EMP would be quite the financial burden.
No. EMP is a side-effect of nukes detonated hundreds of miles high in the atmosphere, not at or near sea level. The Iranian missiles are cruise missiles that do not have the capability of producing in a region of the atmosphere that will generate EMP.
As far as I can tell, the Iranian Navy can do what it wants as long as it’s outside the 12-mile territorial waters limit, not the 200-mile exclusive economic zone. I’m pretty sure the US Navy has ships within 200 miles of Iran’s coast. And if they’re willing to nuke Washington, I don’t think they’re going to be concerned about whether they were crossing a line on a map. It’d be a guaranteed suicide mission either way.
The EMP burst “effects” are primarily dependent on the height and power of said weapon. You need to go say 400 miles to achieve maximum. And as I’ve said in other threads, putting a functioning nuclear weapon on a rocket, launching said weapon, and detonating one is much harder than dropping one from a plane.
Detonating a nuclear weapon with the intent to destroy a nation’s economy is an act of war. Iran’s interest is dominating the middle east, not getting into a full on dog fight with America.
If am Iranian nuclear weapon were to detonate over the US, Iran will cease as a nation–they will be exterminated (unless they surrender unconditionally). This isn’t hyperbole The only practical use for nuclear weapons is for defense by intimidation–if someone decides to use, you’re telling the other side all bets are off. The only choice the other nation has then, is to go down swinging. IIRC, all the war-gaming (unclassified) that I’ve read that involved the use of a single nuclear weapon eventually ended up running into a full-blown exchange.
What’s a non-conventional nuclear weapon? As I understand it, the term “conventional weapon” normally denotes a weapon which is non-nuclear type.
^^This.
The Iranians have nowhere near a naval capacity to project power to the US coast.
Could they sail some ships here and shoot? Probably. But the damage would be relatively minimal, those ships would be sunk outright and we’d have a blank check to carpet bomb Iran.
If Iran used a nuke they’d be blasted into oblivion for doing so. I doubt they have the capacity to harm more than a few cities…if that.
Love it or hate it the US navy is by far the most powerful in the world. The Iranians come nowhere close.
Could they cause damage? Sure.
They’d never dare to try though. Give the US an excuse and all bets are off.
Their threat is an empty one.
They not nuking DC. They’re detonating a nuclear weapon high over the continental US. The electromagnetic pulse generated would damage transformers, zapped cell phones, and other important stuff and send us back to the age of Liberty Valance.
The right-wing is pushing the “EMP” threat as the next big threat to the US. It’s just another (dubious-IMHO) way of justifying missile defense.
At one time, didn’t Gaddafi say he was going to send some of his navy ships to the Gulf of Mexico?
The leaders of Iran are not stupid nor crazy. The are cold, rational, and calculating. There goal is to dominate the middle-east as a super-regional power. The projection of power is strictly for regional consumption. At a minimum, it shows that Iran, as small as it is, can get America’s attention by showing up on its coast line. They see it as tweaking our noses, getting Americans all riled up, and playing themselves as the underdog that dared take on America.
Seriously, this is the kind of stuff Hollywood would love to do (and probably will do if you’ve ever seen Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World and U-571. These movies demonstrate the historic fact that if someone else wins the battle, it’s just so much better if winners onscreen are American, or at least, speak the same language. So…why not switch the Iranians to Americans and the US to the United Kingdom in the 19th Century and use the War of 1812 as the backdrop?
Let’s do lunch.)
So the US Navy submarine can take some of those old, unexploded WWII mines and tow them into the way of that Iranian fleet.
Then when they identify the serial numbers, the Iranians can try retaliating against Emperor Hirohito or Gen. Tojo!
Unless their needs are to attack a few random civilian ships, I’m thinking no.
The C-802 is more or less equivalent to a Harpoon missile - military ships have had defenses against those since the Cold War, and unless they intend to bring a SAG of 10+ ships (which they don’t have - the article says they were planning on sending 2 ships) they’re not going to be able to achieve the kind of saturation fire that would overwhelm a modern antimissile system. A single Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke carries more anti-missile missiles than the entire Iranian frigate fleet has to throw at them in total. Hell, even coast guard cutters carry R2-D2s, I mean Phalanx point defense these days.
So ixnay on touching military tubs.
Even then they’d need to plug a good 2-4 into a modern cargo ship to have a chance to sink it - 150kg is a rather tiny warhead.
As for attacking land with those, again, 150kg of explosives is really not much even if that missile could be configured to target ground (which I’m not aware it can). And Iran doesn’t have nukes, so that’s one threat crossed right off the list.
They’re not even that. 100 nm range is not a cruise, it’s a quick nip around the block.
The U.S. should send one ship, a particularly small and fast ship, to blast rock’n’roll music at the Iranians.
Oh, sure, but that requires a multimegaton weapon in the ionosphere, not a hundred-kiloton weapon at cruise missile altitudes.
Assuming it’s even more than theoretically possible, as no one’s to my knowledge tested it.
I believe someone has already suggested that it is a PR stunt. They are bearding the Great Satan in his own den, if I may mix my metaphors.
Aw come on now! I was watching the Red Green Show several days ago and Red said that the Canada’s military forces consisted of three people. If we can’t trust his information, whose can we trust?
There’s some thought that Iran has a supercavitating torpedo reverse-engineered from a Russian version. That might pose some threat to US naval vessels, because of the extreme speed of engagement, and certainly would be able to harm merchant shipping.
It’ll be interesting to see how the US responds.
Did it say when? I think next August or September would be a lovely time for it; beautiful time for sailing the North Atlantic.
Cruise missiles are designed to stay close to the surface of the earth in order to avoid detection by ground-based or shipped-based radar of the enemy. So it’s not even a theoretical argument.