Josh

Actually I could much more easily see Russia using a nuke than China engaging in a protracted conventional ASAT campaign. China would be pissing in its own orbits destroying US satellites, and it would take a huge effort that might trigger an equivalent US response or worse, an asymmetrical one. Russia is an also ran in space; it has already lost that industry and technological advantage to the U.S. and China. They have an order of magnitude fewer military satellites than either and practically no commercial LEO networks of importance. I could see them trashing all of LEO with a few nukes, PRC stuff included, if they were losing a war with NATO. It would be a huge leveling of the playing field, though obviously with huge political consequences.

The ASAT still is going up faster on its own stack after the fact, and in a hurry. Perhaps China has ~$20 million ground to orbit ASATs, but I would think it more expensive. And yes, I do think both sides will be concerned with the conditions post war LEO, and also concerned that initiating such a fight simply forces the other side to do the same. At a minimum, your ASAT efforts better be very effective and you better win that war, because the whole world will be black listing you, not just your opponent. It better not be for nothing. That said I do not have faith in there being an operational ATMI system with near continuous coverage inside a decade, no matter how many satellites are orbited. I am not convinced the technology is mature yet.

Seahawk is mostly a parody. confirmation from Iran on the chief of staff, the head of the IRGC, I think the previous head of staff, head of the airforce, head of air defense, head of drones, and six nuclear scientists so far. I suspect that list keeps growing; it looks like the initial strikes were 20+ bunkers and private residences targeting individuals.

The U.S. is going to try; Iran might force Trumps hand.

Typically you are not so reserved…

The U.S. is not directly involved but it is giving Israel intelligence (again I think Trump absolutely green lit this when it looked like negotiations were go to end in JCPOA Lite). The U.S. ISR satellite infrastructure at this point is absolutely vast. Israel also likely has a long list of fixed infrastructure/production sites, revisits to deeply buried targets, and plenty of TELs to hunt. I think if anything their campaign stretches longer than they anticipate.

Nothing Iran could do about it anyway.

Trump desperately wants to stay out of this. I am not sure what his comfort level is targeting Iran if they close the gulf. Personally I think he green lighted this strike just as a negotiation tactic that kept US hands clean. Speaking of green lights, where is Glenn? I have not seen any posts predicting Israel’s doom since this kicked off…

Speculation on your part. It is hard for me to imagine any expense has be spared in that category. In any case, Israel can only delay, not prevent, Iran from building a nuclear weapon. If Iran does build one inside the next year as a result of this strike, would you agree that JCPOA was probably the better preventative option, even if all it did was kick the can a little further down the road?

It is too early for an accurate assessment, and strikes will be ongoing for two weeks ish. But one thing we do know is that it will not physically prevent Iran from building a bomb - that is beyond Israel’s capabilities. Whether Iran can be convinced to stop is questionable.

Any pause is operational not strategic. Ie, you need to refuel and rearm and rest pilots at some point. If there is no U.S. involvement (tankers) then the IAF is operating at the ragged edge of its range envelope. Israel has already indicated the campaign will take roughly two weeks.

When you throw in guidance, maneuvering and launch vehicle, that grenade gets expensive. Satellites can be deployed 20 at a time (for roughly 20 million each including launch cost) and slowly migrate to their final orbits over months using ion engines; ASAT does not have that option unless you are co orbiting a large ASAT force with your opponent’s satellites as they are deployed. And quite honestly China does not have the lift for that yet; the U.S. launches an order of magnitude more satellites to orbit and DoD has functionally infinite throw weight: anything it can afford to pay for the industry can provide. The NRO orbited ~180 satellites on nine launches in the past year just counting the proliferated LEO constellation alone, independent of Spaceforce, SDA, or other NRO projects. SDA has a similar number of launches and satellites that start goo up roughly once a month starting this summer. Both SDA and NRO intend to repeat this pattern roughly every two years, with the next SDA batch already scheduled for 2026-2027 (first batch is behind schedule). ETA: and wholesale kinetic engagement also creates a long term collision problem for all other LEO satellites, and China is as dependent on space as the U.S. is at this point, and its space industry dwarfs everyone outside the U.S. they would poisoning LEO for their own mega constellations; they plan to orbit thousands of satellites by decade end.

JCPOA was widely criticized for kicking the can down the road ironically in favor of a military strike that does the same thing for a shorter period of time… Presumably the hope is this, and follow strikes if needed, force a policy change (or regime change) in Tehran. I am doubtful.

You think the strike would have happened when all uranium purification was under 20%? I doubt Bibi could justify it and IMO the main enabler was the destruction of Hezbollah. Perhaps the strikes still happen, but they do not happen earlier, else why has Israel waited this long already?

If JCPOA had been retained, all of what is about to happen likely would have been avoided.