Home
Latest images
Register
Log inAmericans were being killed in Afghanistan for Iranian, not Russian $ & yet we only now r being told about it; we r looking for ways to leave while saving lives & face. Now that China is officially backing Iran as never before while Russia is firmly planted in Syria, it should be clear that the candle isn't worth the game US was trying to play in the ME.
+59
TMA1
Broski
T-47
SolidarityWithRussia
Krepost
headshot69
Arkanghelsk
ATLASCUB
owais.usmani
Rasisuki Nebia
x_54_u43
Regular
Mir
starman
Mindstorm
ALAMO
lancelot
mavaff
Russian_Patriot_
Arrow
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
Shadåw
Isos
elconquistador
flamming_python
par far
Kiko
magnumcromagnon
KoTeMoRe
RTN
lyle6
Tai Hai Chen
JohninMK
Tsavo Lion
Cyberspec
nero
mnrck
SeigSoloyvov
GarryB
franco
PapaDragon
ahmedfire
d_taddei2
George1
auslander
ultimatewarrior
Hole
medo
nomadski
slasher
jhelb
miketheterrible
Cheetah
geminif4ucorsair
kvs
Big_Gazza
Vann7
crod
Rodion_Romanovic
63 posters
Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5959
Points : 5911
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
- Post n°276
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
Tsavo Lion Mon Aug 31, 2020 1:51 am
JohninMK
JohninMK- Posts : 15654
Points : 15795
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
- Post n°277
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
JohninMK Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:26 am
SeigSoloyvov wrote:So I was confusing Ebril with Al-Assad. My mistake there.
I really don't consider something that only lasts for a few days or weeks "injuries" while they technically are injuries yes. So I only counted the 11. Difference of opinion here.
But hey, be my guest Bomb US forces and see the shit go that will turn into.
An actual war against Iran would be easy, the problem would be an occupation that would turn into a nightmare really fast but the conventional fight wouldn't be hard. Which is one of the reasons I am in opposition to war against Iran.
The video at the time of Ebril showed a missile doing damage.
To a non military person 'traumatic' is pretty serious. Nothing was released on what happened to the injured subsequently that I have seen.
The Iranians did bomb, OK BM, US forces and it turned into no 'shit'. Oh and I seem to remember they downed a Global Hawk too for good measure. I don't think that the Iranians are finished with their revenge attacks either, just biding their time. Mind you getting the US out of Iraq will be pretty good and I suspect that 'guerrilla' activity in both Iraq and eastern Syria is only going to increase, especially after Trump put a target on your back when saying "three years".
As I understand it, every Pentagon war game against Iran has failed. The geography and alliances are all wrong, a US type conventional war would be very hard, trapped on the coast and who knows how the Russians and Chinese would step in. What you say might have been possible a decade ago but with the US assets now in the region, especially in Bahrain and Qatar but not forgetting Afghanistan, the US death toll would be untenable due to the inability of a US first strike to eliminate enough of Iran's assets fast enough to prevent annihilation in those localities. Any move away from current force levels in those locations would just warn the Iranians. We may both be against any US action but for different reasons.
GarryB- Posts : 40553
Points : 41055
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
2. Attacking those areas would mean attacking US forces stationed in them, what you have proposed could literally start WW3 if Russian forces attack us because we will respond in kind and brutally. Garry, I did not think you where that short-sighted or insane to propose such insanity or maybe you are just clueless about the reality on the ground.
Which makes it sound exactly like the thing they need to do.
US troops illegally in Syria need to be convinced to leave, and their terrorist allies dealt with.
They did not kill anybody and only hit empty land near the base, there was no reason to attack back.
That wouldn't normally stop you...
It happened near the base yes OH btw did you forget the part where Iran themselves gave us a warning of the attack a few hours before it happened
Of course they warned you... no body wants to panic the 3 year old child playing with the bombs and missiles... they are very likely to do something stupid.... they have a track record...
To a non military person 'traumatic' is pretty serious. Nothing was released on what happened to the injured subsequently that I have seen.
Their military are probably trained to downplay words like traumatic and collateral... it makes it easier to ignore non military injuries and of course less money has to be paid out to their own troops with such problems if you can play it down...
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3919
Points : 3897
Join date : 2016-04-08
- Post n°279
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
SeigSoloyvov Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:34 pm
JohninMK wrote:SeigSoloyvov wrote:So I was confusing Ebril with Al-Assad. My mistake there.
I really don't consider something that only lasts for a few days or weeks "injuries" while they technically are injuries yes. So I only counted the 11. Difference of opinion here.
But hey, be my guest Bomb US forces and see the shit go that will turn into.
An actual war against Iran would be easy, the problem would be an occupation that would turn into a nightmare really fast but the conventional fight wouldn't be hard. Which is one of the reasons I am in opposition to war against Iran.
The video at the time of Ebril showed a missile doing damage.
To a non military person 'traumatic' is pretty serious. Nothing was released on what happened to the injured subsequently that I have seen.
The Iranians did bomb, OK BM, US forces and it turned into no 'shit'. Oh and I seem to remember they downed a Global Hawk too for good measure. I don't think that the Iranians are finished with their revenge attacks either, just biding their time. Mind you getting the US out of Iraq will be pretty good and I suspect that 'guerrilla' activity in both Iraq and eastern Syria is only going to increase, especially after Trump put a target on your back when saying "three years".
As I understand it, every Pentagon war game against Iran has failed. The geography and alliances are all wrong, a US type conventional war would be very hard, trapped on the coast and who knows how the Russians and Chinese would step in. What you say might have been possible a decade ago but with the US assets now in the region, especially in Bahrain and Qatar but not forgetting Afghanistan, the US death toll would be untenable due to the inability of a US first strike to eliminate enough of Iran's assets fast enough to prevent annihilation in those localities. Any move away from current force levels in those locations would just warn the Iranians. We may both be against any US action but for different reasons.
Are they finished? No they carry out attacks on us and we carry out attacks on them, that will not be ending anytime soon. But we kill way more of them than they ever could hope to on us.
Iran doesn't have any way to impose control, its defense assists can easily be outranged by US forces. Unless we move into the Golf which we don't need to we can literally fire at them from beyond their range. The only thing they have are those missiles and they do not have a lot of them.
The problem with a defensive doctrine is that you have very little ability to attack therefore you can just be picked apart.
A lot of Iran tech is also old and they only have a handful of decent things. It's fighter fleet is crap, it lacks good AA that could create an ideal defensive field around key areas.
We would take losses oh yes but the conventional fight would be over in short order. There is nothing Iran can do against that.
Who said we would be trapped on the coastline? we wouldn't be at all.
China would not step in, China only cares about whats going on near it. Russia also wouldn't step in, they would just make noise and that's it.
You are gravly over estimating Irans conventional capabilities, it couldn't even afford to fight a war right now.
Last edited by SeigSoloyvov on Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3919
Points : 3897
Join date : 2016-04-08
- Post n°280
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
SeigSoloyvov Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:36 pm
So you want WW3 then Garry? well then let me ask you this are you prepared to fight in it? since you are advocating sending millions to die, I would hope you at least have the decency to fight in the war you are asking for rather than let others do the dying for you.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5959
Points : 5911
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
- Post n°281
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
Tsavo Lion Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:34 pm
The only thing they have are those missiles and they do not have a lot of them.
they have 100s of B/CMs & long range artillery, just like NK.
https://missilethreat.csis.org/country/iran/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_equipment_manufactured_in_Iran#Cruise_missiles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_equipment_manufactured_in_Iran#Artillery
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Air_Defense_Force#Equipment
they have 100s of B/CMs & long range artillery, just like NK.
https://missilethreat.csis.org/country/iran/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_equipment_manufactured_in_Iran#Cruise_missiles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_equipment_manufactured_in_Iran#Artillery
they have S-300s & China can give them its own counterpart.It's fighter fleet is crap, it lacks good AA that could create an ideal defensive field around key areas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Air_Defense_Force#Equipment
w/o boots on the ground, don't expect winning a war.Who said we would be trapped on the coastline? we wouldn't be at all.
wake up! the PLAN ships & subs been operating in the Indian Ocean for years now & they use a big base in Djibouti with Marine & other forces stationed there.China would not step in, China only cares about whats going on near it.
I wouldn't bet on it- they border on Iran across the Caspian & have a base in Armenia.Russia also wouldn't step in, they would just make noise and that's it.
China & Russia may use Iran defending itself as a proxy by supporting it; the US can't afford a protracted war as well.You are gravly over estimating Irans conventional capabilities, it couldn't even afford to fight a war right now.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3919
Points : 3897
Join date : 2016-04-08
- Post n°282
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
SeigSoloyvov Mon Aug 31, 2020 4:08 pm
They do not have hundreds and all of their BCMs are fairly old and would be rendered useless when a proper AD net is setup around Iran.
They have four S-300 batteries from the 1978s which haven't been updated...hardly a threat.
of course, there would be boots on the ground you can't fight a war without that....
No China would not intervene in Iran, Russia may send material support at best but that couldn't change the outcome.
They have four S-300 batteries from the 1978s which haven't been updated...hardly a threat.
of course, there would be boots on the ground you can't fight a war without that....
No China would not intervene in Iran, Russia may send material support at best but that couldn't change the outcome.
JohninMK- Posts : 15654
Points : 15795
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
SeigSoloyvov wrote:They do not have hundreds and all of their BCMs are fairly old and would be rendered useless when a proper AD net is setup around Iran.
They have four S-300 batteries from the 1978s which haven't been updated...hardly a threat.
I think you need to update your information database.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3919
Points : 3897
Join date : 2016-04-08
- Post n°284
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
SeigSoloyvov Mon Aug 31, 2020 4:33 pm
JohninMK wrote:SeigSoloyvov wrote:They do not have hundreds and all of their BCMs are fairly old and would be rendered useless when a proper AD net is setup around Iran.
They have four S-300 batteries from the 1978s which haven't been updated...hardly a threat.
I think you need to update your information database.
I doubled checked and they have 4 S-300P and 4 S-300 PMU2, still, hardly enough batteries to be a major threat.
Simply put we could fling more missiles at the batteries then Iran could handle and over well them with ease even if they put all of their 30 TOR systems around the batteries.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5959
Points : 5911
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
- Post n°285
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
Tsavo Lion Mon Aug 31, 2020 5:39 pm
SeigSoloyvov wrote:of course, there would be boots on the ground you can't fight a war without that....- we had them in Germany, Turkey, NK, Vietnam, Laos, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq & Afghanistan, but in the long run it wasn't worth it.
No China would not intervene in Iran, Russia may send material support at best but that couldn't change the outcome.- China's SF r already in Syria fighting Uyghurs. open these:
https://www.juancole.com/2020/08/bruited-investment-beijing.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weishi_Rockets#WS-2D
https://asiatimes.com/2020/08/the-eurasian-century-has-already-begun/?mc_cid=4fcea32b9e&mc_eid=5455568640
China/NK can also deploy/sell some MRLS units to Iran with 400km range.
https://datayo.org/p/stories/8aILhAlEbecspf95/analysis-of-the-kn-25-multiple-rocket-launcher-system-after-the-9-march-2020-dprk-test
Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:25 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : add text, links)
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
Their AD mainly protect oil and nuclear facilities. And Teheran.
Iran put its hopes in ballistic missiles to counter US. And now they also have a cruise missile of 1000km. And they are launched by simple civilian truck that are harder to track/find.
They will target airports and bases directly. US would have lost probably 50% of its airforce in 1991 war if Iraq had ballistic missiles with 10m accuracy and 1500km range. Their fighter jets needs to be close the frontline. All the bases in Saudi Arabia hosting their fighter jets were in range of BM with 1000-1500km range. Only AWACS and tankers were in south Saudi Arabia.
Iran is also supplying its proxies with short range BM to destroy smaller bases.
They will also give them thousands of ATGM which US haven't really faced in Iraq or Afghanistan. We saw the difference of how it is hard to counter them than old rpg-7.
Iran put its hopes in ballistic missiles to counter US. And now they also have a cruise missile of 1000km. And they are launched by simple civilian truck that are harder to track/find.
They will target airports and bases directly. US would have lost probably 50% of its airforce in 1991 war if Iraq had ballistic missiles with 10m accuracy and 1500km range. Their fighter jets needs to be close the frontline. All the bases in Saudi Arabia hosting their fighter jets were in range of BM with 1000-1500km range. Only AWACS and tankers were in south Saudi Arabia.
Iran is also supplying its proxies with short range BM to destroy smaller bases.
They will also give them thousands of ATGM which US haven't really faced in Iraq or Afghanistan. We saw the difference of how it is hard to counter them than old rpg-7.
JohninMK- Posts : 15654
Points : 15795
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
That is double your original statement.SeigSoloyvov wrote:
I doubled checked and they have 4 S-300P and 4 S-300 PMU2, still, hardly enough batteries to be a major threat.
Simply put we could fling more missiles at the batteries then Iran could handle and over well them with ease even if they put all of their 30 TOR systems around the batteries.
You can indeed swamp Iran's defences. Your air assets are unequaled. Your cruise missile and guided bombs are without par. On paper it looks very good.
But, with their action at Deir, al Assad and sundry Houti actions, Iran has shown good missile capabilities and they continue to work on them. Is the US going to bet that it can take them out before launch?
If you don't, you, and the US public, will have to be prepared to take the thousands of casualties at unhardened Al Udeid Air Base (10,000 believed to be stationed there), at the USN in Bahrain, at al Assad etc etc etc as Iran's missiles swamp you? Are your Gulf allies prepared for the same?
Finally, if you attack Iran, both Hezbollah and Syria will attack Israel, they owe Iran too much not to. Is Israel going to allow the US to destroy it by proxy? Will Israel be able to resist using its nukes?
Welcome to WW3.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3919
Points : 3897
Join date : 2016-04-08
- Post n°288
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
SeigSoloyvov Tue Sep 01, 2020 12:10 am
Syria and Hez could not hope to defeat Isreal in a war, they would resort to hit and run tactics that would not do much.
I imagine they will get some off, you could not hope to stop them all. I am a realistic man.
There is no path for victory for Iran in a conventional, they do not have the forces or equipment, they could maybe give us a hard time for a few weeks at first if the played smart but that would be all.
@Iso
Iran's cruise missiles would do some damage but would be naturalized in the end. We have AA defense that can take care of them.
RPGs are easy to counter long as you don't drive up to buildings like a moron, they cannot penetrate the front of an Abrams, unless they get some miracle lucky short-range lower plate hit
What makes the RPG lethal is it requires very little setup time, can be fired from just about anywhere that's up high so if you are lucky and the enemy is stupid you can penetrate the roof of the tank with ease.
I imagine they will get some off, you could not hope to stop them all. I am a realistic man.
There is no path for victory for Iran in a conventional, they do not have the forces or equipment, they could maybe give us a hard time for a few weeks at first if the played smart but that would be all.
@Iso
Iran's cruise missiles would do some damage but would be naturalized in the end. We have AA defense that can take care of them.
RPGs are easy to counter long as you don't drive up to buildings like a moron, they cannot penetrate the front of an Abrams, unless they get some miracle lucky short-range lower plate hit
What makes the RPG lethal is it requires very little setup time, can be fired from just about anywhere that's up high so if you are lucky and the enemy is stupid you can penetrate the roof of the tank with ease.
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
1) Iran has probably already shiped cruise missiles the both SAA and Hazbollah. Houtis in the south of Israel also have them. Israel can't defend against them if they are launch at the same time as a rocket barage. 50 from SAA, 50 from hezbollah, 50 from houtus would already be deadly for israeli strategic targets.
They might not win but they can do lot of damages, specially if they hit Israeli nuclear facilities.
2) US have week AD there and Iran won't wait you to bring more. They will target your bases as fast as they can. Their proxies will harass your shipments with drones and the strait will be closed making it even more difficult. Patriot is an easy target if you are close to it. Just go from behind. Houtis will launch also missiles at you.
I said they would give thousand of ATGM. They have kornet copies with 6 or 7km range and can penetrate tanks easily which is different than the rpg-7 with effective range if 200m. Also most of the vehicles won't be tanks. It's more easy to use an atgm with 1000mm penetration to blow up light transport vehicles full of troops than a tank.
The small tactical drones will provide real time data making easier and deadlier the use of short range BM against frontline troops concentrations.
Such war will be bloody for US and you won't win. Inside Iran it will be hundreds of time deadlier.
I agree Iran can't win too, specially if it doesn't have a huge amount of missiles. US will target their production sites the first week. And they will also need to give a lot to their proxies.
It would be interesting to know how many missiles they have in reserve.
The difference with Iraq/Afghan wars/occupation is that Iran's proxies are very well trained and know everything about your stuff and weak points. So don't expect them to use an rpg on the front of your tank. Actually it's true for every modern guerillas because they have access to internet. Even Wikipedia provides a good estimation of how military hardwares work and their weak points and describe them quite well.
They might not win but they can do lot of damages, specially if they hit Israeli nuclear facilities.
2) US have week AD there and Iran won't wait you to bring more. They will target your bases as fast as they can. Their proxies will harass your shipments with drones and the strait will be closed making it even more difficult. Patriot is an easy target if you are close to it. Just go from behind. Houtis will launch also missiles at you.
I said they would give thousand of ATGM. They have kornet copies with 6 or 7km range and can penetrate tanks easily which is different than the rpg-7 with effective range if 200m. Also most of the vehicles won't be tanks. It's more easy to use an atgm with 1000mm penetration to blow up light transport vehicles full of troops than a tank.
The small tactical drones will provide real time data making easier and deadlier the use of short range BM against frontline troops concentrations.
Such war will be bloody for US and you won't win. Inside Iran it will be hundreds of time deadlier.
I agree Iran can't win too, specially if it doesn't have a huge amount of missiles. US will target their production sites the first week. And they will also need to give a lot to their proxies.
It would be interesting to know how many missiles they have in reserve.
The difference with Iraq/Afghan wars/occupation is that Iran's proxies are very well trained and know everything about your stuff and weak points. So don't expect them to use an rpg on the front of your tank. Actually it's true for every modern guerillas because they have access to internet. Even Wikipedia provides a good estimation of how military hardwares work and their weak points and describe them quite well.
nomadski- Posts : 3072
Points : 3080
Join date : 2017-01-02
@ SeigSoloyov
I agree on some of the points you make. About US being able to hit Iran, beyond their range. Such as long range cruise from Sub and Ship and B2, B1, B52 from Med or Diego. But I disagree that US forces will be immune from counter - Attack. Virtually everything within 2000 km radius will be dust. All the bases etc. With many dead on both sides. And I agree with you that US will suffer less casualties in short term. But war will not be short, after such loss of life. Unless US backs down major time. Meaning no bases in ME region. Or even any economic interests.
But this will not stop the military industrial complex. Working hand in glove with the Anglo-Zionist lobby to MAGA or rule the waves or establish the promised land upto the Euphrates River. Profits for some. Hubris for others. What will be killing us, are not Iranians or Russians.....
I agree on some of the points you make. About US being able to hit Iran, beyond their range. Such as long range cruise from Sub and Ship and B2, B1, B52 from Med or Diego. But I disagree that US forces will be immune from counter - Attack. Virtually everything within 2000 km radius will be dust. All the bases etc. With many dead on both sides. And I agree with you that US will suffer less casualties in short term. But war will not be short, after such loss of life. Unless US backs down major time. Meaning no bases in ME region. Or even any economic interests.
But this will not stop the military industrial complex. Working hand in glove with the Anglo-Zionist lobby to MAGA or rule the waves or establish the promised land upto the Euphrates River. Profits for some. Hubris for others. What will be killing us, are not Iranians or Russians.....
crod- Posts : 697
Points : 736
Join date : 2009-08-04
Seem to recall hezbollah causing havoc in a very scaled down confrontation in 2006 with scores of tanks destroyed.The jews slaughtered 1000 civilians under the age of 17 and destroyed civilian infrastructure to boot.
IF it was a fight to the death situation for Hez, 2006 would be a sneeze compared to the aggression; the missiles provided by Iran would fly. Israel will be destroyed, your sums just don’t add up just like your assumptions. There are no AA defences in the world that could stop a three pronged attack on a tiny land mass that is isreal.
Tbh Seig, you just don’t get this. You seem to think your supposed field experience (never proven on here either i might add even after countless requests to do so) or higher knowledge gives you better insight than other members on here...where as I just see bullshit from you.
I don’t see www3, but I do see entire nations being used as proxies and I see Russia and China providing assistance that would ultimately lead to the death of thousands, tens of thousands of American troops and those of the host nations. Real time data from either countries provided to Iran, Syria or the Hez would remove some of the advantages and something the yanks aren’t used to coming up against in a conflict. In any event, come October and beyond, Iran might not be the weakling you think it’ll be.
The conflict would be an absolute disaster for America is so many ways; financially, socially and will only continue the US on its lonely road to isolation that it currently finds itself on.
I will be the first to offer my apologies to you, were you to prove your battle experience and current presence but in my mind you just have bot on different social media orgs like Twitter etc and many different internet sites that gives you info as it’s posted...but to be fair, you’ve never really posted anything as breaking news because of the geo location of members here, we were seeing it just as quickly as you were posting it.
You can’t expect any cred when you refuse to back up your supposed situation.
I call bullshit from you and always have, though like I said, I’ll be the first to offer my sincere apologies were you to do so.
IF it was a fight to the death situation for Hez, 2006 would be a sneeze compared to the aggression; the missiles provided by Iran would fly. Israel will be destroyed, your sums just don’t add up just like your assumptions. There are no AA defences in the world that could stop a three pronged attack on a tiny land mass that is isreal.
Tbh Seig, you just don’t get this. You seem to think your supposed field experience (never proven on here either i might add even after countless requests to do so) or higher knowledge gives you better insight than other members on here...where as I just see bullshit from you.
I don’t see www3, but I do see entire nations being used as proxies and I see Russia and China providing assistance that would ultimately lead to the death of thousands, tens of thousands of American troops and those of the host nations. Real time data from either countries provided to Iran, Syria or the Hez would remove some of the advantages and something the yanks aren’t used to coming up against in a conflict. In any event, come October and beyond, Iran might not be the weakling you think it’ll be.
The conflict would be an absolute disaster for America is so many ways; financially, socially and will only continue the US on its lonely road to isolation that it currently finds itself on.
I will be the first to offer my apologies to you, were you to prove your battle experience and current presence but in my mind you just have bot on different social media orgs like Twitter etc and many different internet sites that gives you info as it’s posted...but to be fair, you’ve never really posted anything as breaking news because of the geo location of members here, we were seeing it just as quickly as you were posting it.
You can’t expect any cred when you refuse to back up your supposed situation.
I call bullshit from you and always have, though like I said, I’ll be the first to offer my sincere apologies were you to do so.
GarryB- Posts : 40553
Points : 41055
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
So you want WW3 then Garry?
What has WWIII got to do with this...
well then let me ask you this are you prepared to fight in it?
I wouldn't pass the physical.
Besides, I live in New Zealand... we are not allowed guns.
since you are advocating sending millions to die, I would hope you at least have the decency to fight in the war you are asking for rather than let others do the dying for you.
For me? I never went in to Syria and started helping terrorists and murderers try to overthrow the Syrian government.
Besides... isn't that what you do?
They have four S-300 batteries from the 1978s which haven't been updated...hardly a threat.
The only S-300s of that vintage these days would be in the Ukraine...
Simply put we could fling more missiles at the batteries then Iran could handle and over well them with ease even if they put all of their 30 TOR systems around the batteries.
You are clearly assuming they will sit back and let you do that till they run out of SAMs...
I would expect an attack like that on Iran would result in a response directed right back at you, and likely without a personal warning...
RPGs are easy to counter long as you don't drive up to buildings like a moron, they cannot penetrate the front of an Abrams, unless they get some miracle lucky short-range lower plate hit
Depends which model they are using... the RPG-28 would penetrate an Abrams from any angle....
What makes the RPG lethal is it requires very little setup time, can be fired from just about anywhere that's up high so if you are lucky and the enemy is stupid you can penetrate the roof of the tank with ease.
Most of the RPGS that are new and made in the last 30 years can pretty much penetrate most vehicles from the side and rear with ease.
The difference with Iraq/Afghan wars/occupation is that Iran's proxies are very well trained and know everything about your stuff and weak points.
Also as you mention, they have excellent ATGMs and also MANPADS in mass production...
Back on topic I am suggesting oilfields and trucks transporting illegal oil and gas in Syrian territory be targeted... US troops and Kurds wont be targeted directly unless they get in the way. The oil is Syrian so they can burn it if they want... better than letting their enemies benefit from it.
Damaging oilfields in the middle of the night when there is few people around so they can't pump or store oil, and destroy any trucks or large vehicles that might be moving stolen oil or gas... I rather doubt the US would be keen to start WWIII over that...
JohninMK- Posts : 15654
Points : 15795
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
SeigSoloyvov wrote:Syria and Hez could not hope to defeat Isreal in a war, they would resort to hit and run tactics that would not do much.
I imagine they will get some off, you could not hope to stop them all. I am a realistic man.
There is no path for victory for Iran in a conventional, they do not have the forces or equipment, they could maybe give us a hard time for a few weeks at first if the played smart but that would be all.
As Crod said, you really don't get it. You are looking at the situation at a macro level, through the eyes of, we assume, a soldier. If so you are probably in a 'be positive' bubble. It is unlikely that you will get a presentation telling you that the potential enemy has better, more effective gear that you and has a higher motivation to win. That's bad for morale. Bit like the accuracy of the strike at al Assad, I bet bang on target wasn't expected by most there. You might do some of your own homework so have an idea but that could be wrong. To underestimate a country with Tran's education system, the ability to still be flying F-14 and F-5 and the capability to put a satellite up would be foolish. Stuff might be old tech but it can still kill.
Of course these small countries would not be able the resist the attack of major military powers, I don't think anyone here is claiming that they could, I certainly ain't. We are thinking strategically, so what I am saying is that they can inflict sufficient damage in the first days to make the politicians have several thoughts as to whether it is worth the risk, after that they know from history that they will be crushed. That is the essence of an effective modern defence system for a small power, be like a skunk or porcupine. War has changed.
Do you really think that your superiors didn't respond to the missiles and the loss of the Global Hawk out of lack of suitable weapons or opportunity or even humanity or kindness? No, they knew exactly what would come down their throats and decided to take the prudent action.
If you are where you say you are, you are performing tasks that the Spanish Conquistadors and every colonial force before or since would recognise. You are just a footsoldier of an empire that's power is fading (anyone poking the US like Iran just did would have been unthinkable a few years ago) and as such disposable without thought. Don't get left behind after the last chopper out left.
nomadski- Posts : 3072
Points : 3080
Join date : 2017-01-02
@ GarryB
I agree that if any country is illegally occupied, like Syria or Iraq . And occupation forces are doing no good. Like blocking border crossings and stealing . Then any people, have the right to eject them. As you said, by making it unprofitable for them to stay. But the first step is to stop them from firing at you. By suitable and timely action. The second step is to confine them to bases. By making roads and Airways not usable for them. And finally to eject them, by blockading them from supplies. This needs to happen in ME region of Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria. To connect Asian countries together. Local people can do the work, with a little help from friends.
https://youtu.be/xOuxVDgV6CY
I agree that if any country is illegally occupied, like Syria or Iraq . And occupation forces are doing no good. Like blocking border crossings and stealing . Then any people, have the right to eject them. As you said, by making it unprofitable for them to stay. But the first step is to stop them from firing at you. By suitable and timely action. The second step is to confine them to bases. By making roads and Airways not usable for them. And finally to eject them, by blockading them from supplies. This needs to happen in ME region of Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria. To connect Asian countries together. Local people can do the work, with a little help from friends.
https://youtu.be/xOuxVDgV6CY
GarryB- Posts : 40553
Points : 41055
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I agree that if any country is illegally occupied, like Syria or Iraq . And occupation forces are doing no good. Like blocking border crossings and stealing . Then any people, have the right to eject them. As you said, by making it unprofitable for them to stay. But the first step is to stop them from firing at you.
Yeah, I think you are making the mistake of thinking these are mature sensible human beings... when you paint your enemies as being terrorists and terrorist supporters then you are never going to stop firing at them... not out of respect and certainly not out of fear...
But the first step is to stop them from firing at you. By suitable and timely action. The second step is to confine them to bases. By making roads and Airways not usable for them. And finally to eject them, by blockading them from supplies.
They wont stop firing at you, but confining them to their bases is your best bet, and you can do that with anti armour missiles and to stop air supply MANPADS... by isolating them in their bases you really only have them under siege if you target their supplies... and hitting their trucks and helicopter transports and destroying the actual vehicles is more important than destroying what they are carrying.
You don't have to hit them with 1,000 man ambush groups, though I think the people carrying out the attacks need to survive for it to be sensible too... not really my area of speciality, but looking back on the methods the Americans have taught terrorist groups around the world should give an idea of what sort of tactics might work best...
This needs to happen in ME region of Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria. To connect Asian countries together. Local people can do the work, with a little help from friends.
It wont work without the support of the local population, plus they are likely going to bear the brunt of retaliation and frustration from the Americans and their terrorist allies.
JohninMK- Posts : 15654
Points : 15795
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
Spriter
@spriter99880
·
Sep 7
Russia supports its military base at Qamishli Airport
The Russian forces brought in military reinforcements consisting of 30 military trucks and logistical support vehicles, on Sunday, coming from Aleppo to the Qamishli airport, which shares its control with the SAA in Hasaka cs
The reinforcements included infantry forces and five military tanks, and Russia had previously established a helicopter base at Qamishli airport in Hasakah governorate
it will protect it using surface-to-air missile systems transferred from the Hmeimim military base.
@spriter99880
·
Sep 7
Russia supports its military base at Qamishli Airport
The Russian forces brought in military reinforcements consisting of 30 military trucks and logistical support vehicles, on Sunday, coming from Aleppo to the Qamishli airport, which shares its control with the SAA in Hasaka cs
The reinforcements included infantry forces and five military tanks, and Russia had previously established a helicopter base at Qamishli airport in Hasakah governorate
it will protect it using surface-to-air missile systems transferred from the Hmeimim military base.
DerWolf likes this post
JohninMK- Posts : 15654
Points : 15795
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
- Post n°297
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
JohninMK Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:07 pm
Not seen this anywhere else but seems possible.
Yandex translation
Amid growing tensions between Athens and Ankara, Turkey is going to close the Bosphorus Strait for the passage of warships of all countries. The situation became even more tense after the French statement, which says that in the event of a military escalation, Paris will support Greece.
In turn, Ankara will be forced to close the passage between the Black and Mediterranean seas without warning if NATO countries try to create tension. Russian warships will also stop passing through the Bosphorus, which will leave the Russian group in Syria without supplies. Delivery of military cargo by air will not be able to meet all the needs of the Hmeimim air base and a group of Russian Navy ships in the Mediterranean sea.
At the moment, Russia categorically opposes any escalation in the Mediterranean, as this threatens to radically change the situation in the middle East. In addition, this step by Ankara will interrupt the supply of weapons and equipment to Syria, which, in the context of the accumulation of Turkish forces in Idlib, may lead to negative consequences for Damascus and the Russian contingent in the SAR.
"About six months ago, Turkey announced the closure of the Bosphorus in the event of the slightest threat to Turkish interests, and today Turkey has actually blocked the exit of Russian ships through the Bosphorus – this may happen in an hour, a day, a week or a year, but this is more than realistic," the analyst notes.
https://free-news.su/politika/48635-turciya-namerena-zakryt-bosfor-rossijskaya-gruppirovka-v-sirii-mozhet-ostatsya-bez-podderzhki?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Free-news-su+%28Free-News.su%29
Yandex translation
Amid growing tensions between Athens and Ankara, Turkey is going to close the Bosphorus Strait for the passage of warships of all countries. The situation became even more tense after the French statement, which says that in the event of a military escalation, Paris will support Greece.
In turn, Ankara will be forced to close the passage between the Black and Mediterranean seas without warning if NATO countries try to create tension. Russian warships will also stop passing through the Bosphorus, which will leave the Russian group in Syria without supplies. Delivery of military cargo by air will not be able to meet all the needs of the Hmeimim air base and a group of Russian Navy ships in the Mediterranean sea.
At the moment, Russia categorically opposes any escalation in the Mediterranean, as this threatens to radically change the situation in the middle East. In addition, this step by Ankara will interrupt the supply of weapons and equipment to Syria, which, in the context of the accumulation of Turkish forces in Idlib, may lead to negative consequences for Damascus and the Russian contingent in the SAR.
"About six months ago, Turkey announced the closure of the Bosphorus in the event of the slightest threat to Turkish interests, and today Turkey has actually blocked the exit of Russian ships through the Bosphorus – this may happen in an hour, a day, a week or a year, but this is more than realistic," the analyst notes.
https://free-news.su/politika/48635-turciya-namerena-zakryt-bosfor-rossijskaya-gruppirovka-v-sirii-mozhet-ostatsya-bez-podderzhki?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Free-news-su+%28Free-News.su%29
PapaDragon- Posts : 13474
Points : 13514
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
- Post n°298
Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14
PapaDragon Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:55 am
Turks would be very stupid to close the Bosphorus for Russian ships
They already have loads of enemies in play and last thing they need is to add Russia to that list
(Also that source looks like trash TBH...)
GarryB- Posts : 40553
Points : 41055
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
It would be more logical for them to block the straights to non Black Sea fleets... ie the rest of HATO.
Blocking Russian ships is of no advantage to them but blocking other HATO countries from putting ships in the Black Sea during potential tensions with Greece and/or France would make sense for them to limit the directs of attack perhaps...
Blocking Russian ships is of no advantage to them but blocking other HATO countries from putting ships in the Black Sea during potential tensions with Greece and/or France would make sense for them to limit the directs of attack perhaps...
Hole- Posts : 11124
Points : 11102
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 48
Location : Scholzistan
The russian contingent wouldn´t be ouf of supplies. Russia would use harbors in the Baltic or more planes.
Sponsored content