CaptainF
The Professional Poster
Hawks and doves: do you agree or disagree with the assesment of how a war with Iran might go?
Considering it comes from the U.S. Government, I couldn't disagree more.
Hawks and doves: do you agree or disagree with the assesment of how a war with Iran might go?
No, no , no and no. My plan for Iran will be visiting them at the end of the year. Will be bringing photos back.
Why are China and Russia "more concerned about the prospect of the U.S. bombing Iran than of Iran getting a nuclear bomb"? What agenda and interests do they have?
Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?
They are fairly decent arent they?Fëanor;6178095 said:if i recall correctly last January Russia delivered an estimated 29 Tor-M1 (SA-15 Gauntlet) missile systems to Iran for an estimated 700.000.000 USD, a couple of months ago Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the Vice Chairman of Russia's State Duma, declared that he hoped that Russia would sell Iran the S-400 Triumf (SA-21 Growler) missile system as soon as possible but this seems very unlikely to happen anytime soon.
They are fairly decent arent they?
TOR/SA-15 said:Kill probabilities for later versions are quoted as:
- 0.92-0.95 against aircraft
- 0.80-0.96 against helicopters
- 0.60-0.90 against cruise missiles (with an effective range of around 5 km/3 miles)
- 0.70-0.90 against precision munitions (LGBs, glide bombs, etc.)
- 0.90 against UAVs
Fëanor;6178246 said:Its one of the best low to medium-altitude, short range SAM system there is.
So if we bomb Iran, it's their fault, right?
Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?
Sounds like more than a speedbump then
I have no doubt America will win militarily. But any country fighting the US only needs to inflict roughly 1/200th of the casualties the US has to and they can claim victory.
DO you think the US public would like to lose an aircraft carrier or 2? (I don't think they would!) I would how the president would tell us that an aircraft carrier was sunk and i wonder if he would say something like "I'm sorry but we had to attack iran before they nuked israel!"ran will bleed us badly, but in the end we will overpowe there defenses and once we take don there radars etc. the missilesd will be useless. America's victory is assured, but we will be bled pretty badly in a war.
So if we do attack what would stop iraq from slipping into chaos?Sounds like more than a speedbump then
And they did sell iran some anti-ship missiles. I wonder how the american public would react to 3k-10k less sailors?Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?
Victory how? By having cruise missiles hit "suspected nuclear sites?" No offense but that would make mostly all the Iranian people support their president (Which they don't do now).
DO you think the US public would like to lose an aircraft carrier or 2? (I don't think they would!) I would how the president would tell us that an aircraft carrier was sunk and i wonder if he would say something like "I'm sorry but we had to attack iran before they nuked israel!"
So if we do attack what would stop iraq from slipping into chaos?
And they did sell iran some anti-ship missiles. I wonder how the american public would react to 3k-10k less sailors?
What would be the military objections? Destory all nuclear sites? I really doubt that they could destory all of them without using nucear weapons (Even if they do know where all of them are, which i know they don't know!)Oh definitely. but the objectives, stricly miltary ones they set for themselves will be achieved.
That the president would turn 3k+ dead soldiers into a they died for the good of israelNot rally sure what point youre making. you drunk?
I think your meaning that iran would not sunk any carriers or any other ship. I wonder how you would felt in 1987 if i would of said that an anti-tank misslie could sink/cripple a military ship. (I'm sure you would of said "HAHA right, and after you get back to planet earth we need to talk!")I wish I had your faith![]()