Iraq had its nuclear facility bombed by Israel before they could do anything with it, thank God.
The pilots should have bombed their own plant at back-flight.
In this way, we could've established Middle East as non-nuclear zone -- with moral authority.
Technology advances, with hi-tech of former decades becoming now reachable by mid-technology countries of today at cheaper production costs.
You can not compare Iraq bombing with anything of today. Saddam probably only had missiles with shitty CEP (radius in which detonation will happen, where mid-point of circle is target at launch) to be launched as retaliation.
Thanks to oil-price hikes after Iraq-War by Bush, Iran had enough years of significant income increases. It's policy is regime survival, and for that it has to prepare and arm as deterence. Iran did this by completely neglecting Airforce and Navy.
It's whole offensive capabilities have been invested on missiles and on equipping militias to fight guerilla style once attacked/invaded.
Once Iran is attacked, there will be flying missiles all around.
Still, a classical Airforce is better instrument in delivering bombs.
Iranian missiles can deliver maximum 2.5 tonnes of explosives while a F-16 can carry 14 tonnes. The carrier of bombs in this case is missile and aircraft. The aircraft flys back to base and re-arms. Metal, electronics of missile are "lost" forever after launch.
But it is anyway no good strategy to invest in airforce for Iran, as those planes would be shot down by USA without major problems. Intecepting missiles is a complete different story. It is also cost-intensive, just look at missile-cost of Patriot system.
