AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-08-26, 03:38   Link #8781
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356 View Post
This is wrong on so many levels. Iran is quite far behind the US. In terms of somewhat modern aircraft, they have 20 F-14s, 40 Mig-29s, and 24 Mirage F1s. Rounding out their force, 65 F-4s, 60 F-5s, 17 Chinese knockoffs of Mig-21s, and between 5 and 24 of their domestic Saeqehs. Their army is a mix of western and Soviet era equipment, which is not a good thing. All it does is complicate their supply situation. They'd be far better off with one or the other. Sure, they'd put up a much better fight than Iraq, and probably be able to sink a carrier if they catch one in the Gulf, but when it comes down to it though, they have no chance of winning, just making winning costly for the US.
Aircraft aside, they have plenty of heavy rocketry unlike Iraq, which is nothing more than a few Scuds here and there. Their missile and rocket inventory are already enough to cover the Strait of Hormuz. I doubt they would hestitate to use nuclear warheads for the missiles.

Supply-wise, they don't really have much of a problem. A large number of their forces are either using Norinco CQs or G3 remakes chambered for the 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm rounds respectively, so supply wise they are no different from their NATO enemies. For close support they have AH-1 ripoffs, and they supposedly reversed-engineered US's TOW with plenty of recoilless weapons and such, so their anti-armour and support capability is pretty substantial.

Besides, they have proper parachute brigades, light infantry and commandos unlike the other ME countries. Defence and offense wouldn't be a problem : if they can make it difficult for Iraq to win the Iran-Iraq war, they can do the same for US today.

The only thing they have problem with is air defence. With the S300 I doubt even the B2 is able to pass through them during night raids.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 03:45   Link #8782
Seitsuki
Onee!
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Auckland, NZ
Overall the situation you guys are pondering is if the political equation has to be factored in. If America was hypothetically to strike but also had to please the audience back home and abroad, then yes there will be a crapload of problems. But should it turn into a war of survival, which would probably end up happening if Iran did end up acquiring nukes, then Iran stands no chance full stop. It would still be a pretty hard fight though now.
__________________
thanks to Patchy ♥
Seitsuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 04:42   Link #8783
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
The only thing they have problem with is air defence. With the S300 I doubt even the B2 is able to pass through them during night raids.
don't worry about the S300 - its already got a counter weapon system.
if need be, it can be removed with relative ease and without losses to the air force attacking them.
provided, of course, that the one doing the removing was committed to an all out war and not a single on shot strike against specific targets (which is the only reason why its a concern right now).


Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Besides, they have proper parachute brigades, light infantry and commandos unlike the other ME countries. Defence and offense wouldn't be a problem : if they can make it difficult for Iraq to win the Iran-Iraq war, they can do the same for US today.
they were up against Iraq last time.
not a modern western army like the US army.
desert storm showed just how poorly trained, equipped, and demoralized Iraq's army was, and that war between Iran and Iraq lasted for years. (albiet, with western support for Iraq)
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 04:59   Link #8784
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seitsuki View Post
Overall the situation you guys are pondering is if the political equation has to be factored in. If America was hypothetically to strike but also had to please the audience back home and abroad, then yes there will be a crapload of problems. But should it turn into a war of survival, which would probably end up happening if Iran did end up acquiring nukes, then Iran stands no chance full stop. It would still be a pretty hard fight though now.
Supposedly they have been trying to trying to acquire F-5 Tiger II engines (according to a number of intelligence agencies) from Malaysia. I don't know if this is another blame game or demonising, but if that is true, it pretty much spells trouble for us.

They have been supplying Hezbollah for years with rocketry and artillery. Their denial is pathetic as the modern CIA's when Israeli naval commandos captured tons of explosives on board a cargo frieghter bound for Palestine : the boxes still have "Ministry of Sepah" (the Iranian Ministry of Defence) labels on them.

Though one of the arms raised suspicions on whether this is a PR operation by Mossad / Shin Bet - 106mm AP shells. These are meant for recoilless rifles like the US M40, and it is not known if Iran is supplied with such arms during the Shah era.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
don't worry about the S300 - its already got a counter weapon system.
if need be, it can be removed with relative ease and without losses to the air force attacking them.
provided, of course, that the one doing the removing was committed to an all out war and not a single on shot strike against specific targets (which is the only reason why its a concern right now).
Countering AA battery strategies are always a job for light infantry and commando teams. AA walls are usually neutralised by fast moving light infantry inserted rapidly around the flanks of the site then quickly taken with decisive losses. Hidden AA emplacements are taken out by S&D commando teams, similar to the Scud hunting teams like Bravo Two Zero in Gulf War 1. Iranian soldiers aren't badly trained like Iraqi or Afghan soldiers, they can fight hard enough to incur heavy losses on the assaulting light infantry force that they are unable to mount a successful defence until reinforcements arrive, or get enough time to blow all the AA defences.

I am not exactly sure if Shrike missiles work against the search radars of the SAM launchers - I seriously doubt they did since it is a rather modern piece of AA equipment.

Quote:
they were up against Iraq last time.
not a modern western army like the US army.
desert storm showed just how poorly trained, equipped, and demoralized Iraq's army was, and that war between Iran and Iraq lasted for years. (albiet, with western support for Iraq)
The two major military powers in ME are Israel and Iran. Iran has a larger fighting force inclusive of paramilitary like the Basij and IRGC. Israel has better intelligence, however it is no match for sheer military force should the other Muslim states around it allow free access to invade Israel.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Last edited by SaintessHeart; 2010-08-26 at 05:10.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 05:31   Link #8785
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Countering AA battery strategies are always a job for light infantry and commando teams. AA walls are usually neutralised by fast moving light infantry inserted rapidly around the flanks of the site then quickly taken with decisive losses. Hidden AA emplacements are taken out by S&D commando teams, similar to the Scud hunting teams like Bravo Two Zero in Gulf War 1.

I am not exactly sure if Shrike missiles work against the search radars of the SAM launchers - I seriously doubt they did since it is a rather modern piece of AA equipment.
Neither ground forces nor Shrikes are required for it.
look up something called a Harop UAV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_Harop
its a mini drone that can loiter around the battle field for hours on end and pick up radar emission.
once it picks it up, it kamikaze's the radar system, rendering it useless.
its got a range of about 1000 Km, and can spend hours over a target area, and even be guided remotely at the target.
its also has a radar signature that is too small to be effectively targeted by the missile system which means that the only way to prevent it from destroying the radar, is to switch it off. (which defeats the point of having radar).

Quote:
The two major military powers in ME are Israel and Iran. Iran has a larger fighting force inclusive of paramilitary like the Basij and IRGC. Israel has better intelligence, however it is no match for sheer military force should the other Muslim states around it allow free access to invade Israel.
the Sunni Muslim countries fear Iran considerably more then they fear Israel, and aren't likely to line up with them.
the Irony is that Iran might actually promoting peace in the middle east (the enemy of my enemy...)

i also wouldn't consider the size of Iran's paramilitary force to be a factor, given that Israel and Iran share no boarders, and aren't capable of land invasion of each other.
Air force wise, there's no competition at all (since Iran doesn't even have planes that are capable of reaching Israel)

and the only other way is via missiles systems (both countries having very advance programs of).
the Missile war is actually rather interesting in regards to contrast.
Israel has possibly the best anti missile defense options in the world, given the small size of the country
since every building has a bomb shelter, and there are considerable anti ballistic missile capabilities, its capable of limiting loss of life considerably
but at the same time, it has a small population, and has low tolerance for casualties.

Iran has very poor anti missile abilities (no active, and very few passive abilities).
but at the same time, its a very large country, with a lot of population, and the government couldn't care less about civilian casualties (Iran is the country that invented the "human wave minefield clearing method")

on the whole, i'd say that in a missile shoot out, iran has an advantage overall, simply because they don't care about the damage they suffer.
of course, there is no reason to believe that it would be limited to just missile attacks, since the Israel air force is perfectly capable of reaching Iran, and targeting missile silo's.

on the whole, it would be a messy war.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 05:47   Link #8786
TinyRedLeaf
. . .
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
Jackie Chan's tweets on Manila bus deaths draw ire
Quote:
Hong Kong (Aug 26, Thu): Jackie Chan's Tweets about the Manila bus hijacking have drawn a barrage of Internet attacks in his native Hong Kong, which lost eight residents in the tragedy.

An armed former police officer seeking reinstatement commandeered a bus carrying a Hong Kong tour guide and 20 tourists in the Philippine capital on Monday. He killed eight before being shot by a police sniper.

Outraged Hong Kongers have criticised the Philippine government for acting too slowly. But Chan, Hong Kong's most famous celebrity, has taken a more diplomatic tack, suggesting in comments through his Twitter account that the Philippine police faced a tough dilemma.

"If they killed the guy sooner, they will say why not negotiate first? If they negotiate first, they ask why not kill the guy sooner? So sad," the veteran action star wrote on Wednesday.

He also urged Hong Kongers not to direct their anger at Filipinos living in Hong Kong. Tens of thousands of Filipinos work as live-in domestic helpers for Hong Kong families.

The comments did not go down well with his compatriots. Facebook users quickly set up three groups called "Jackie Chan doesn't represent me" and drew a slew of sharply worded attacks.

"Shut up! Hong Kong people don't need you. You side with outsiders and not your own. You will face karmic retribution for your disrespect for the victims," Ms Iris Yau wrote.

Chan has a history of making controversial comments. He caused an uproar last year by saying at a business forum it may not be good for authoritarian China to become a free society, saying freedoms in democratic Taiwan and Hong Kong — which enjoys some free elections — made those societies "chaotic".

AP
TinyRedLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 05:55   Link #8787
MeoTwister5
Komrades of Kitamura Kou
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Where I can learn to be lonely.
Age: 29
And so diplomatic moderation gets attacked for not being spiteful and generalizing enough.

Let the hatred begin.
MeoTwister5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 06:05   Link #8788
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post
thats... insane
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 07:08   Link #8789
AnimeTheme
MJ - Forever King of Pop
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
thats... insane
Seriously, Jackie Chan isn't what he was, and doesn't "represent" Hong Kong anymore.
__________________
Make your own 3D Anime desktop!
ANIMATE your Windows desktop with cute Anime stuff!

Check out my Windows gadget gallery!


AnimeTheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 07:17   Link #8790
MrTerrorist
Takao Tsundere Cruiser
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Classified
Wow. Jackie was trying to be moderate and Hong Kong calls him a traitor.

That's harsh.
__________________
MrTerrorist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 07:34   Link #8791
Kamui4356
Aria Company
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Aircraft aside, they have plenty of heavy rocketry unlike Iraq, which is nothing more than a few Scuds here and there. Their missile and rocket inventory are already enough to cover the Strait of Hormuz. I doubt they would hestitate to use nuclear warheads for the missiles.
They don't have nukes yet, and even if they did, they couldn't mount them on their short range weapons. Most nukes tend to be large. Not to mention, using nukes is pretty much a statement that you no longer wish your nation to exist when your opponent has a thousand for every one you have. Further, they'd be using most of their anti-shipping missiles in a pr strike on whatever US carrier is in the gulf to saturate the fleet's defense. They'd succeed, but they're not going to have enough left to repeat that performance.

Quote:
Supply-wise, they don't really have much of a problem. A large number of their forces are either using Norinco CQs or G3 remakes chambered for the 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm rounds respectively, so supply wise they are no different from their NATO enemies. For close support they have AH-1 ripoffs, and they supposedly reversed-engineered US's TOW with plenty of recoilless weapons and such, so their anti-armour and support capability is pretty substantial.
And when their M-60 equipped armored units get 125mm ammo meant for t-72s, and their T-72 equipped units get 105mm ammo? Thing like that happen in war a lot. If they were all using M-60s or all using t-72s though? It isn't going to happen. Not to mention, having to produce and store the different types of ammo, and needing different repair kits for western and soviet tanks. There was a reason Germany gave away all its Mig-29s after reunification. They needed to have two complete supply trains for their NATO fighters and their Soviet fighters. Iran has that problem to an even greater extent.

Quote:
Besides, they have proper parachute brigades, light infantry and commandos unlike the other ME countries. Defence and offense wouldn't be a problem : if they can make it difficult for Iraq to win the Iran-Iraq war, they can do the same for US today.
That's like saying if you can give a good fight to a house cat you can give a good fight to a lion. The Iraqis didn't put up much of a fight against the US in either desert storm or Iraqi freedom. Using Iraq's performance against Iran as a baseline for US performance against Iran isn't going to work.

Quote:
The only thing they have problem with is air defence. With the S300 I doubt even the B2 is able to pass through them during night raids.
That's why you have standoff cruise missiles, anti-radiation missiles and electronic warfare aircraft. If your SAM sites are being attacked whenever they try to light up their radar, they're not going to light up their radar as often. When all they see is interference from ECM, there's no point at all. Note: ECM has been proven to work against modern AESA radar in wargames so saying the radar system is too modern won't work. Besides, there are a lot of variants of S-300s. Not all of them are as capable as others.
__________________
Kamui4356 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 09:42   Link #8792
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post
I propose that the every Filipino slaughter the nearest Hongkie to them, and vice versa, then hang their bodies outside each others' embassies.

He tries to be a moderate, and retards bombard him? Brilliant.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 11:33   Link #8793
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
He tries to be a moderate, and retards bombard him? Brilliant.
What do you expected from retards ? Approval?
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 11:43   Link #8794
sa547
Senior Member
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philippines
Age: 38
All right, I'm stepping in.

I feel real humiliated about the damned hostage crisis.

Personally I'm damn sick of watching one part of the world turn into /b/, all because of one ex-cop who thought hijacking a bus was a great idea, to make the whole world pay attention and to force the government (especially the controversial Ombudsman) to bring back his job (even though he had only months left before retirement).

Why the late Mendoza (the ex-cop/hijacker in question) simply don't let go of his cop career and live? Because, frankly and sadly, this country sometimes breeds a few desperadoes who will go to great lengths to get or fight or kill for what they desire or keep... and in Mendoza's case, losing his career means losing his retirement benefits.

So from that night onward, I (and millions) will have to live with yet another pockmark of humiliation... and we as a nation, whether for good or bad, will be paying dearly for one man's extreme act of desperation.

"Everyone's responsible for everything he does."
__________________
sa547 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 11:53   Link #8795
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post
HK version of 2ch citizens.
__________________
Xellos-_^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 12:00   Link #8796
Xion Valkyrie
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Iran is the world No. 3 supplier of oil, and their biggest cilent is China. In short, both of them have a mutual interest in starting destroying US influence on the European and ME continent.
Yes, China would LIKE to have the US taken out of the picture, but considering their economic growth and how much money they're lending to us, it'd be much easier for them to just wait until they naturally own us, rather than do something stupid like side with Iran if they decided to go gun-ho against he western world.

Not to mention, if Iran did decide to rally the ME to start World War III, China would gain far more benefit by allying with the West and helping take them down. Then they can go in and claim part of the oil for themselves, as well as establish their influence over the region, as the US/Europe would have too much political backlash from their public to do much of the cleanup afterwards.

Also, using a nuke would be suicide on Iran's part, as it'd make it 'okay' for the west to nuke all their cities out of existence. I'm sure the US is more than willing to sacrifice Israel if it gives them the excuse they can use to wipe most of the ME off the planet.
Xion Valkyrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 12:36   Link #8797
TCman
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTerrorist View Post
Wow. Jackie was trying to be moderate and Hong Kong calls him a traitor.

That's harsh.
The thing is that Jackie Chan is not a talker, but an doer, especially with his fortune and the donations he made in time of floods and disasters. Sometimes, I think he shouldn't talk about a matter without knowing enough info because I think he's easily misunderstood because the poor wording he used etc..

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa547 View Post
All right, I'm stepping in.

I feel real humiliated about the damned hostage crisis.

Personally I'm damn sick of watching one part of the world turn into /b/, all because of one ex-cop who thought hijacking a bus was a great idea, to make the whole world pay attention and to force the government (especially the controversial Ombudsman) to bring back his job (even though he had only months left before retirement).

Why the late Mendoza (the ex-cop/hijacker in question) simply don't let go of his cop career and live? Because, frankly and sadly, this country sometimes breeds a few desperadoes who will go to great lengths to get or fight or kill for what they desire or keep... and in Mendoza's case, losing his career means losing his retirement benefits.

So from that night onward, I (and millions) will have to live with yet another pockmark of humiliation... and we as a nation, whether for good or bad, will be paying dearly for one man's extreme act of desperation.

"Everyone's responsible for everything he does."
Well, you should not feel ashamed because of the hostage taking and the result of it, since you have nothing to do with it. There's no relativity and causality at all! The government and police of the Philippines have made miscalculations/mistakes which could have been avoided by proper planning. What were they thinking, sending police officers who didn't have any determination to save the hostages (when they retreated because the hostage taker began to shoot and after a long time the police began to act again and went for a second try, a large part of the hostages would be dead by then; did the police know this is not an exercise)? And killing the hostage-taker Mendoza does not help a thing at all, it's better to catch him alive and bring him to justice. Perhaps there's something behind it that this Mendoza had to die?
TCman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 12:39   Link #8798
Jinto
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
Neither ground forces nor Shrikes are required for it.
look up something called a Harop UAV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_Harop
its a mini drone that can loiter around the battle field for hours on end and pick up radar emission.
once it picks it up, it kamikaze's the radar system, rendering it useless.
its got a range of about 1000 Km, and can spend hours over a target area, and even be guided remotely at the target.
its also has a radar signature that is too small to be effectively targeted by the missile system which means that the only way to prevent it from destroying the radar, is to switch it off. (which defeats the point of having radar).
That is why systems like goalkeeper or skyshield exist. Targets become more visible for radars the closer they get. Therefore you have (at least in future western setups) a long range, medium range and short range defense - each targeting different attack crafts/amunition.

Last edited by Jinto; 2010-08-26 at 12:54.
Jinto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 12:42   Link #8799
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xion Valkyrie View Post
Also, using a nuke would be suicide on Iran's part, as it'd make it 'okay' for the west to nuke all their cities out of existence. I'm sure the US is more than willing to sacrifice Israel if it gives them the excuse they can use to wipe most of the ME off the planet.
"wipe most the ME off the planet"
a bit extreme don't you think ?

the middle east is an area you CONTROL, not DESTROY.
it contains too many valuable resources to just wipe it off the planet altogether.
it contains much of the world's deposits of oil, jews, natural gas, phosphate, and a considerable amount of religious places (tourist bait).
the goal is to take control over the area so it serves your benefit, not destroy it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinto View Post
That is why systems like goalkeeper or sky shield exist. Targets become more visible for radars the closer they get. Therefore you have (at least in future western setups) a long range, medium range and short range defense - each targeting different attack crafts/amunition.
this is the future CWIS set up (at which point, a newer drone would be developed to counter that), but its not yet ready in Iran.
also, keep in mind that the drone is VERY small in terms of aircraft (its 2x2.5 meters), so actually spotting it is much harder by day, and virtually impossible at night.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-26, 13:09   Link #8800
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTerrorist View Post
Wow. Jackie was trying to be moderate and Hong Kong calls him a traitor.

That's harsh.
Well, you know what they say. If you don't have something batshit crazy to say, don't say anything.
Anh_Minh is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:19.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.