PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Confirms Iran Bought SA-20 Missiles



Ironduke
23 Dec 08,, 02:55
U.S. Confirms Iran Bought SA-20 Missiles

Posted by David A. Fulghum at 12/10/2008 10:10 AM CST

“The Iranians are on contract for SA-20,” says a senior, U.S. government official. The U.S. and Israel now face a “huge set of challenges in the future that we’ve never had [before]. We’ve been lulled into a false sense of security because our operations over the last 20 years involved complete air dominance and we’ve been free to operate in all domains,” he adds.

Other senior officials independently confirm that Iran will get the Russian SA-20 strategic SAM system, irrespective of Kremlin protestations to the contrary. Tehran’s deployment of such a system would mark a step-up in capability, and considerably improve the country’s ability to defend its controversial nuclear facilities where the West remains concerned that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons capability.

The proliferation of so-called double-digit surface-to-air missile systems – such as the Almaz Antey SA-20 (S-300PMU1/S-300PMU2) – poses an increasing threat to non-stealthy aircraft, and will force changes in tactics and operational planning. The SA-20 has an engagement envelope of up to 150 kilometers; and Iran may be signed up for the S-300PMU-2 variant of the system.

Russia could use Byelorussia as the route for a sale, allowing it to deny any direct involvement, says a U.S. official. It would likely take the Iranian armed forces some time, as much as 22 months, to become proficient in the operation of the SA-20, however, any deal would almost certainly cover training support of the system in the interim. Analysts suggest ships delivering the missiles and the training, support and assembly areas could become targets.

The SA-20, and even more so the SA-21 Growler (S-400) which is now entering service, pose an increasing problem for mission planners using conventional strike aircraft. While low observable aircraft offer greater latitude for operations, they are not totally immune to air defenses.

The Lockheed Martin F-22 with its all-aspect, -40 dBsm radar cross-section signature can operate within the engagement envelope of the SA-20 and SA-21. But the Lockheed Martin F-35 with its -30 dBsm signature, which is not all-aspect stealth, is at greater risk. The rear quadrant of the F-35, particularly around the tailpipe area, is not as stealthy as the F-22.

The Northrop Grumman B-2, because of its aging stealth design, also has limitations in the amount of time it can spend within the range of double-digit systems since small signature clues can become cumulative and offer a firing solution. The U.S.’s next-generation bomber program is aimed at developing a low-observable platform capable of operating irrespective of the threat from systems of the SA-21 class.

More capable point defense systems – that would likely be used to protect SA-20 sites, for example – are also being introduced into the region. Syria is getting the SA-22 Greyhound (KBP Pantsyr), which uses a vehicle-mounted combination of cannon and missiles intended to provide defense against aircraft, helicopters, precision-guided munitions and cruise missiles.

New threats – involving advances in commercially available electronics – continue to rapidly mutate in the area of secure communications and command and control.

Recent pictures of the interior of a new Chinese surface-to-air missile command and control vehicle show two Inovo laptops and the commander of the integrated air defense system talking on a Blackberry. In the battery’s briefing vehicle, there’s a VOIP connection. These are all good, cheap commercial products.

With reporting from Douglas Barrie
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a842b973d-dcd3-40eb-ac3c-045719330a95&plckCommentSortOrder=TimeStampAscending

erik
23 Dec 08,, 18:58
I was just about to post this. With some S-300 sites going to be in Iran, looks like a cruise missile strike is becoming more favorable?

1980s
24 Dec 08,, 15:35
I was just about to post this. With some S-300 sites going to be in Iran, looks like a cruise missile strike is becoming more favorable?

Keep dreaming. I am not counting on Obama being able to make any radical changes to US foreign-policy but i am hopeful that he will initiate some meaningful changes and will be more resistant to certain lobby groups than some of his predecessors at the White House have been.

If Israelis want to go to war with Iran i hope that Obama will be wise enough not to follow their criminality.

Georgie
23 Mar 09,, 13:53
Keep dreaming. I am not counting on Obama being able to make any radical changes to US foreign-policy but i am hopeful that he will initiate some meaningful changes and will be more resistant to certain lobby groups than some of his predecessors at the White House have been.

If Israelis want to go to war with Iran i hope that Obama will be wise enough not to follow their criminality.

What makes you think Israel needs Obama's help. Israel is the only nation which is fully awake to Islamic extremism. How many wake up calls does the west need. 9/11,the attack on Australians in Bali, on Spaniards in Madrid, Russians in Belsan,on Britons in London and now in Mumbai. Israel is portrayed as the villan when it defends itself. It has every right to do so. It should be commended for it's restraint. It will not need assistance when it takes out Iran's nuke facility. It is as if a higher power is protecting Israel. There is nothing criminal about defending against a nation which has sworn to destroy it.

Grees
23 Mar 09,, 19:30
S-300 is still a defensive weapon and Iran has every right to acquire such systems to defend itself. It's not like the privilege to defend itself is appointed only to Israel, wherever you like it or not.

Dreadnought
23 Mar 09,, 19:53
Thinking the US has already proved their strategy without the F-22 or the F-35 when it comes to dealing with these missles in very much the same way simular SAM's were dealt with during the opening of the Gulf War. It proved no problem for the strategy the US employed so there is no reason to believe Israel couldnt do it either. The Iraqi's were rather shocked at the outcome.:))

Stitch
23 Mar 09,, 19:59
This is pretty much the exact reason we developed the EA-18G, isn't it?

xerxes
23 Mar 09,, 22:01
I am no expert,

But I presume the idea of SAM (or anything else) is not really to protect, but rather to make the enemy think twice and forcing to re-formulate its strategy. In short, to make it difficult. And before a new plan is formulated and counter-measured is made, another small problem appears. In the meanwhile, defense contractors are getting lucrative contracts.

Sort of like Normany, where the German raised the bets by making fortifications forcing the SHAEF (or whatever name it had back then) to
re-evaluate and rev-up it plans, and it went on and on ... until the power that had a sustainable higher industrial output in the long term prevailed.

chlensoe
23 Mar 09,, 22:02
I believe the Iranians also need the Ukrainian Kolchuga-M systems. That would increase their anti-aircraft capabilities almost up to necessary level.

Georgie
23 Mar 09,, 23:26
S-300 is still a defensive weapon and Iran has every right to acquire such systems to defend itself. It's not like the privilege to defend itself is appointed only to Israel, wherever you like it or not.

Unlike Iran, Israel has not sworn for Iran's destruction. Every nation has the right to live in peace. The right to defend itself if attacked. The ultimate weapon's of defence now being developed will be a surprise for many of us. The fact that Iran has been howling for Irael's destruction is an attack, it shows restraint on Israel's part. Oh I ain't Jewish by the way. I can't help but admire this little modern day Sparta. Those that choose to attack it in future are in for a surprise.

troung
24 Mar 09,, 05:18
What makes you think Israel needs Obama's help.

Then they should give us back our aid money.


It is as if a higher power is protecting Israel. T

My tax dollars... :rolleyes:

KRON1
24 Mar 09,, 06:55
I believe the Iranians also need the Ukrainian Kolchuga-M systems. That would increase their anti-aircraft capabilities almost up to necessary level.

Why? The Koluchaga is only an Early Warning detection measure. They can't use it to actually target planes. If you come in on EMCON it is nothing to worry about.

chakos
24 Mar 09,, 08:04
Unlike Iran, Israel has not sworn for Iran's destruction. Every nation has the right to live in peace. The right to defend itself if attacked. The ultimate weapon's of defence now being developed will be a surprise for many of us. The fact that Iran has been howling for Irael's destruction is an attack, it shows restraint on Israel's part. Oh I ain't Jewish by the way. I can't help but admire this little modern day Sparta. Those that choose to attack it in future are in for a surprise.

They both have the right to arm themselves as they see fit. By aquiring nukes i believe Israel has forfeited its right to complain against Iran aquiring its own. This whole 'do as i say not as i do' attitute is responsible for many of the problems in the Mideast. Im no fan of either country, i respect the Israeli military capacity and at the same time i respect the Iranian governments ability to develop a decent enough military industrial complex to carry it through at a time that most countries would not do business with it.

At the end of the day Iran has not directly attacked Israel once so far and in reality has no capacity or reason to do so. Say Iran attacks Israel, succesfully even... what benefit do they gain from it? You cant invade it, the rest of the Arab world may give you lip service but i cant see Iran gaining primacy over the Arab countries even if it does smack down Israel.

In reality Iran knows that the only thing it would gain by attacking Israel with nukes is nukes in return. I have had the debate many times with people on this site and i stand by my belief that funnily enough Iran does have a somewhat rational government that sees that attacking the Israel will give no benefit to them and only end in disaster. What they say for public consumption to their own people or scream to the rest of the world in media soundbites is probably not what they talk about diplomatically even to the west, nor what they discuss in their internal meetings.

I would be happier if Iran spent its money on S400 batteries as opposed to funding Hezbollah. The batteries are purelly defensive and cannot hurt any country outside its borders. Hezbollah on the other hand is the one foreign policy tool that Iran can use to effectively hurt Israel.

Also on another note... this concept of Israel being protected by a higher power has no place on a military discussion board. Believe what stories you wish but unless you can show me pictures of Gods Armored Divisions then well keep discussion to Israels earthly defences...

zraver
24 Mar 09,, 16:09
S-300 is still a defensive weapon and Iran has every right to acquire such systems to defend itself. It's not like the privilege to defend itself is appointed only to Israel, wherever you like it or not.

The S-300 is not just a defensive system. its range allows it to project power across the Persian Gulf and over that of neighboring countries.

zraver
24 Mar 09,, 16:10
I believe the Iranians also need the Ukrainian Kolchuga-M systems. That would increase their anti-aircraft capabilities almost up to necessary level.

Iran has the Kolchuga for all the good it will do them.

Traxus
24 Mar 09,, 17:00
What makes you think Israel needs Obama's help. Israel is the only nation which is fully awake to Islamic extremism. How many wake up calls does the west need. 9/11,the attack on Australians in Bali, on Spaniards in Madrid, Russians in Belsan,on Britons in London and now in Mumbai. Israel is portrayed as the villan when it defends itself. It has every right to do so. It should be commended for it's restraint. It will not need assistance when it takes out Iran's nuke facility. It is as if a higher power is protecting Israel. There is nothing criminal about defending against a nation which has sworn to destroy it.

Israel probably doesn't have the technical requirements to pull off such an attack. At the very least they'd need permission to fly over Iraq. Even then they'd be operating at the very extreme of their range, attacking spread out, well fortified and defended sites. To even take some out they'd take casualties, and its very unlikely they'd be able to hit all of them.

Plus this would start a war, and Iran would use its long range missiles to strike at Israel, blockage the Straight of Hormuz, etc. Even if Israel could pull it off on their own, they'd be creating enormous problems for the US and the Middle East as a whole. I doubt they'll do it.

Stitch
24 Mar 09,, 18:07
Israel probably doesn't have the technical requirements to pull off such an attack. At the very least they'd need permission to fly over Iraq. Even then they'd be operating at the very extreme of their range, attacking spread out, well fortified and defended sites. To even take some out they'd take casualties, and its very unlikely they'd be able to hit all of them.

Don't underestimate Israel; nobody expected Osirak, and yet Israel was able to carry out a successful surgical strike on a relatively small target at extreme range with first-generation F-15's & F-16's. Their capabilities since then have greatly increased with the addition of the F-15I Ra'am, the F-15 Baz Meshopar, and the third-gen F-16I Sufa. There is also more than one route the Israeli stike package could follow, including a route that takes them over northern Saudi Arabia, thereby avoiding overflying Iraq, and even a much more northerly route which would take the strike package through southern Turkey. However, any one of these alternate routes would stretch Israeli logistics to their limits. Go here (http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/working_papers/wp_06-1.pdf) for a good paper from MIT on the possibility of an Isaeli strike on Irans nuclear production facilities.

TTL
25 Mar 09,, 12:27
much more northerly route which would take through southern Turkey

I don't think we would give Israel permission to strike Iran from our airspace unless it is a UN mission.

Stitch
25 Mar 09,, 16:24
I don't think we would give Israel permission to strike Iran from our airspace unless it is a UN mission.

I believe all of the routes are highly unlikely, especially the route through your country; the northerly route almost doubles the distance the strike package would have to take to reach it's targets in central Iran. It would be much more likely that Iraq would allow the Israeli strike pacakage to overfly their airspace.

LetsTalk
26 Mar 09,, 04:27
They both have the right to arm themselves as they see fit. By aquiring nukes i believe Israel has forfeited its right to complain against Iran aquiring its own. This whole 'do as i say not as i do' attitute is responsible for many of the problems in the Mideast. Im no fan of either country, i respect the Israeli military capacity and at the same time i respect the Iranian governments ability to develop a decent enough military industrial complex to carry it through at a time that most countries would not do business with it.

At the end of the day Iran has not directly attacked Israel once so far and in reality has no capacity or reason to do so. Say Iran attacks Israel, succesfully even... what benefit do they gain from it? You cant invade it, the rest of the Arab world may give you lip service but i cant see Iran gaining primacy over the Arab countries even if it does smack down Israel.

In reality Iran knows that the only thing it would gain by attacking Israel with nukes is nukes in return. I have had the debate many times with people on this site and i stand by my belief that funnily enough Iran does have a somewhat rational government that sees that attacking the Israel will give no benefit to them and only end in disaster. What they say for public consumption to their own people or scream to the rest of the world in media soundbites is probably not what they talk about diplomatically even to the west, nor what they discuss in their internal meetings.

I would be happier if Iran spent its money on S400 batteries as opposed to funding Hezbollah. The batteries are purelly defensive and cannot hurt any country outside its borders. Hezbollah on the other hand is the one foreign policy tool that Iran can use to effectively hurt Israel.

Also on another note... this concept of Israel being protected by a higher power has no place on a military discussion board. Believe what stories you wish but unless you can show me pictures of Gods Armored Divisions then well keep discussion to Israels earthly defences...

I agree, while I do not like the Iranian government for supporting HAMAS, Hezbollah, their talk is talk. They know that the second they do something stupid, they will pay for it big time.

Mercenary
28 Mar 09,, 13:25
It would be much more likely that Iraq would allow the Israeli strike pacakage to overfly their airspace.

and risk a full blown war with Iran ? !..i think not..

Iran can wipe out Iraq which is barely struggling onto its knees

Yusuf
28 Mar 09,, 14:10
It would be much more likely that Iraq would allow the Israeli strike pacakage to overfly their airspace.

Means US indirectly.

Sumku
29 Mar 09,, 00:17
and risk a full blown war with Iran ? !..i think not..

Iran can wipe out Iraq which is barely struggling onto its knees

And trigger a war with US? I think they are sensible enough do see through all of this.Reckless ... they are ... fools ... they are not.

Georgie
29 Mar 09,, 03:35
While they seek to impose there ideoligy upon the rest of us, can we afford to allow this state to attain nukes.Can you imagine Iran with the military power of the U.S.A. it would be a nightmare for all freedom loving people around the globe. I wish all nations working on new defensive technology success, particularly force fields this may be the ultimate system to stop a pariah state be it Iran or North Korea.

chakos
29 Mar 09,, 03:46
While they seek to impose there ideoligy upon the rest of us, can we afford to allow this state to attain nukes.Can you imagine Iran with the military power of the U.S.A. it would be a nightmare for all freedom loving people around the globe. I wish all nations working on new defensive technology success, particularly force fields this may be the ultimate system to stop a pariah state be it Iran or North Korea.

Can you show me a link that Iran is trying to impose its ideology on 'all of us'?

Yes, like any country it will try to be as important a regional player as it can be and will obviously pursue what it considers to be its national interests. These may or may not coincide with the national interests of other countries but that really doesnt matter all that much in the real world.

As distasteful as it may seem, Iran possesing a handfull of nuclear weapons is absolutelly no guarantee that they would actually use them. I see Pakistan as much less stable than Iran yet there has been no attempt to use their nukes. Owning nukes is a double edged sword, you can talk as much shite as you like before you get them but once you do people start taking your threats very seriously and start acting on them.

Also. Iran will never have the military power of the USA. The US has a larger defence budget then the next 3 or 4 (cant remember which) largest countries defence budgets and a handfull of nukes wont make one iota of difference to that balance.

As for force field weapons... well talk about them once they are a scientific possibility.

KRON1
29 Mar 09,, 03:49
and risk a full blown war with Iran ? !..i think not..

Iran can wipe out Iraq which is barely struggling onto its knees

Not while we are there. In the near future, Iraq is going to have hundreds of M1A1s, 2000 US upgraded T-72s, and a whole fleet of F-16 Block 50s. Iran won't stand a chance trying to invade this one.

Georgie
29 Mar 09,, 04:53
The U.S.A. may have a bigger budget but China, Russia and even India get more bang for there yan,rubel,etc. Whether we like it or not we have to admit Islamic terrorism has cost the West an enormous amount of funds and disrupted our life styles ask any traveler. This is going to impact on defence spending by the West. The Obama admin is doing this already.

Officer of Engineers
29 Mar 09,, 06:09
The U.S.A. may have a bigger budget but China, Russia and even India get more bang for there yan,rubel,etc.NOWHERE CLOSE!!!

Show me a non-American NIMITZ, B-2, F-117, ABRAMs. Non-Westerm countries are 2 generations behind.


Whether we like it or not we have to admit Islamic terrorism has cost the West an enormous amount of funds and disrupted our life styles ask any traveler. This is going to impact on defence spending by the West. The Obama admin is doing this already.You know crap all.

chakos
29 Mar 09,, 06:35
Youll have to forgive him Sir.. hes a Queenslander :tongue:

I blame it on lack of electricity, education and inbreeding

Georgie
29 Mar 09,, 07:06
Youll have to forgive him Sir.. hes a Queenslander :tongue:

I blame it on lack of electricity, education and inbreeding

So you claim to be a fountain of knowledge. I happen to live in qld. as it is the most desirable state to live in Aus. some 1000+ migrate here every week. as for inbreeding I think not. Whith a Geman mother and a Belgian father.The most embarassing time in my life was on a flight over seas with a mob of footballers from N.S.W. Talk about yobo's. I think we should be a little carefull about insulting one another. A lot of expert's have viewed carriers as obselete big target needs a lot of protection. If I am out of tune why are u.s. think tanks worried about China's latest acquisitions.

Officer of Engineers
29 Mar 09,, 07:10
if i am out of tune why are u.s. Think tanks worried about china's latest acquisitions.Name One!

chakos
29 Mar 09,, 08:02
So you claim to be a fountain of knowledge. I happen to live in qld. as it is the most desirable state to live in Aus. some 1000+ migrate here every week. as for inbreeding I think not. Whith a Geman mother and a Belgian father.The most embarassing time in my life was on a flight over seas with a mob of footballers from N.S.W. Talk about yobo's. I think we should be a little carefull about insulting one another. A lot of expert's have viewed carriers as obselete big target needs a lot of protection. If I am out of tune why are u.s. think tanks worried about China's latest acquisitions.

Mate, its a good old Aussie tradition called taking the piss... feel free to shoot them back as much as i give them but please dont have a cry.

Yes carriers themselves are big targets, but they are also amazing assets and as such they are probably the most heavily protected warships sailing the seas. Used properly and protected properly carrier groups are designed to withstand multi-regimental maritime bomber strikes as well as hordes of submarines... Killing a carrier isnt impossible for countries like China and Russia but its not something thats going to be done in a pain free way. Achieving a mission kill on a carrier at the expense of wasting a goodly portion of your maritime strike and submarine force really isnt worth it especially when the US has 12 of them.

If you want to use think tanks as an example then please show me a link. You need to read between the lines when the certain groups and individuals talk up enemy capabilities. A prime example of this is Australias own Karlo Kopp. The dude has a hard on for the F22 and as such talks up advanced Flankers to be something that they currently are not in order to make his argument that Superbugs and the JSF couldnt handle them and as such Australia needs the F22. Its not good enough to just read something somewhere and parrot it, use your intelligence and find out who wrote it, what barrow he/she has to push and what way they lean politically.

Mercenary
29 Mar 09,, 16:04
Not while we are there. In the near future, Iraq is going to have hundreds of M1A1s, 2000 US upgraded T-72s, and a whole fleet of F-16 Block 50s. Iran won't stand a chance trying to invade this one.


You overlook the cultural aspect of it... Do you think the Iraqi shias would fight the Iranians when they do ? Since shias make a sizeable portion of the population in Iraq- Iran only has to star a hint of a civil war..and then move-in "in support of our shia brothers" ... there is no saddam this time to rally the troops... no able leader= a walk over..

Georgie
29 Mar 09,, 20:08
I am well aware the u.s. spends as much as the rest of the world combined for now. A large portion goes on personel. The U.S. even without it's allies has the ability to defeat any adversary but it lacks the will to do so. Currently there are 25,000 desserters, mr. Sherpard I think is causing a headache in Germany.{ seeking asylam}. I agree with mercenary once the u.s. pull out which they will. Nth. Iraq will more than likely fall to the Turks, the rest will fall to the Iranian backed Shia. Eventualy the same thing will happen in the Ghan. Support for the war is waning only about 40% support in Aus. Nth. Pakistan is vertualy Taliban controlled. Answer to officer of engineers I believe China's expanding fleet of type093 and type094 nuke attack subs.

Officer of Engineers
29 Mar 09,, 20:41
The U.S. even without it's allies has the ability to defeat any adversary but it lacks the will to do so.And yet, neither Iran nor North Korea are pushing for war.


Currently there are 25,000 desserters, mr. Sherpard I think is causing a headache in Germany.{ seeking asylam}.Source?


I agree with mercenary once the u.s. pull out which they will. Nth. Iraq will more than likely fall to the Turks, the rest will fall to the Iranian backed Shia.The US is pulling out as per their forces reduction agreement and nothing of the sort is happening.


Eventualy the same thing will happen in the Ghan.Balkanization in Afghanistan has not happenned in the past, why should it happen now?


Support for the war is waning only about 40% support in Aus.Neither here nor there.


Nth. Pakistan is vertualy Taliban controlled.And yet, the Pakistani Army has yet to be evicted and no one is trying to evict them.


Answer to officer of engineers I believe China's expanding fleet of type093 and type094 nuke attack subs.And if you did not know it, your Navy has already collected their accoustic signatures, never mind the USN.

KRON1
29 Mar 09,, 21:39
You overlook the cultural aspect of it... Do you think the Iraqi shias would fight the Iranians when they do ? Since shias make a sizeable portion of the population in Iraq- Iran only has to star a hint of a civil war..and then move-in "in support of our shia brothers" ... there is no saddam this time to rally the troops... no able leader= a walk over..

Persians hate Arabs, they speak different languages, they have different values and they fought a war killing millions only a generation ago. While the rhetoric from militias may be disconcerting, Iraq is still nationalistic and makes that known every day.

Georgie
29 Mar 09,, 22:00
Re dessertions. It depends on who you believe wwwmetafilter.com says 40,000 desserters, 25,000 say the Iraq veterans against the war. The pentagon on the other hand say 8,000. I see no reason for the vets to lie. Corey Glass in Canada and Andre Shepherd are but 2 high profile ones due to political implications in their host countries. Thanks for the news about the subs I had no idea our leaky old tubs were that capable ,never believe congress think tank again. Time will tell in Iraq. A recent documentery showed interviews in Kabul . The West and it's allies are clearly not liked. Refered to as the non muslim presence. I can't see the West staying for decades.

Officer of Engineers
30 Mar 09,, 02:21
Re dessertions. It depends on who you believe wwwmetafilter.com says 40,000 desserters, 25,000 say the Iraq veterans against the war. The pentagon on the other hand say 8,000. I see no reason for the vets to lie.Out of the three, only the Pentagon got access to the real numbers since JAG is the only one who compiled desertion charges. While the veterans may not lie, their access to the raw numbers is serverely suspect. How do they tell the difference between AWOL and Desertion.


Corey Glass in Canada and Andre Shepherd are but 2 high profile ones due to political implications in their host countries.Thus far, there are less than a handful who asked for asylum, in the low tens which does not add up to even 100, let alone 25,000. The numbers I've seen which includes those hiding (ie, not asked for asylum) are less than 200.

Those who asked are being processed to be shipped back to the US.


Thanks for the news about the subs I had no idea our leaky old tubs were that capableSubs ain't the only thing your navy has.


,never believe congress think tank again.I never trust think tanks. I trust the author and then only with in a very limited way. I trust Bill Gates and Rick Fisher in providing the raw intelligence but their conclusions are whacked out. If you believe your think tank is worthwhile, then post the study and watch it being challenged.


Time will tell in Iraq.The violence has subsided. Whether people are just buying time to dig out their guns or really want peace is to be determined. However, the political process is going full steam ahead, hardly a sign of pending civil war.


A recent documentery showed interviews in Kabul . The West and it's allies are clearly not liked.The Taliban and Al Qaeda scored even lower than us.


Refered to as the non muslim presence. I can't see the West staying for decades.Never was the plan.

Mercenary
30 Mar 09,, 05:25
Persians hate Arabs, they speak different languages, they have different values and they fought a war killing millions only a generation ago. While the rhetoric from militias may be disconcerting, Iraq is still nationalistic and makes that known every day.

Iraq is nationalistic only until the external presence in their country remains..once US pulls out.. then for the Iranians to ferment trouble(if they want to) would be like lighting a match near a fuel barrel

KRON1
30 Mar 09,, 06:57
Iraq is nationalistic only until the external presence in their country remains..once US pulls out.. then for the Iranians to ferment trouble(if they want to) would be like lighting a match near a fuel barrel

Maybe, but if Iran starts rolling tanks across the border you will see a different Iraqi attitude, even among the Shia. When united behind a common cause, they can put rivalries aside. Even the Sunnis had little trouble turning in their own when they were blowing up their loved ones.

Georgie
31 Mar 09,, 02:00
chakos you might like to check out some sites if you think they ain't a scientific reality yet.[ Force Fields] www space.com,businesstech/cold plasma.they have been working on it since 2000. Rutherford Appleton labs,are also in experimental mode. Biomolecular D.E.Shaw force field development. You can bet there further advanced than there letting on.

chakos
31 Mar 09,, 14:54
chakos you might like to check out some sites if you think they ain't a scientific reality yet.[ Force Fields] www space.com,businesstech/cold plasma.they have been working on it since 2000. Rutherford Appleton labs,are also in experimental mode. Biomolecular D.E.Shaw force field development. You can bet there further advanced than there letting on.

And the Russians are about to fly aircraft fitted with plasma stealth, and the Chinese are bout to fit anti-shipping warheads onto their DF21 IRBMs and the US is about to put up into orbit the 'Rods from God' orbital weapons system....

Not saying that the tech wont arrive in service ever but id prefer to discuss whats actually in service at the moment or at least in prototype form. Emerging tech is just that, noone for sure knows if and when it will be available for service.

Native
31 Mar 09,, 16:54
chakos you might like to check out some sites if you think they ain't a scientific reality yet.[ Force Fields] www space.com,businesstech/cold plasma.they have been working on it since 2000. Rutherford Appleton labs,are also in experimental mode. Biomolecular D.E.Shaw force field development. You can bet there further advanced than there letting on.

Force fields are a long way off. I can't regurgitate the reason why, but it was explained to me by a Scientist friend that works for a Private company and U.C.S.D.