| Author |
Message |
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:05 pm Post subject: Syria's Russian made Air Defenses-useless |
 |
|
| Quote: | | Syria has said its air defenses forced Israeli aircraft to flee and that their bombs caused no damage. Western diplomats have said Israeli jets may have simply been testing Syrian air defenses after Damascus bought new weaponry from Russia. |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070923/ts_nm/israel_syria_report_dc
Gee I wonder why the Russian Air Defenses didn't work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Subject: SILENCE IN SYRIA, PANIC IN IRAN
Wess this came to Donald from Chuck Heatherington. Donald wanted me to pass it along to you.
SILENCE IN SYRIA, PANIC IN IRAN
Wednesday, 19 September.
One of India's top ranking generals assigned to liaise with the Iranian military recently returned to New Delhi from several days in Tehran - in a state of complete amazement.
"Everyone in the government and military can only talk about one thing," he reports. "No matter who I talked to, all they could do was ask me, over and over again, 'Do you think the Americans will attack us?' 'When will the Americans attack us?' 'Will the Americans attack us in a joint operation with the Israelis?' 'How massive will the attack be?' on and on, endlessly. The Iranians are in a state of total panic."
And that was before September 6th. Since then, it's panic-squared in Tehran. The mullahs are freaking out in fear. Why? Because of the silence in Syria.
On September 6th, Israeli Air Force F-15's and F-16's conducted a devastating attack on targets deep inside Syria near the City of Dayr az-Zawr. Israel's military censors have muzzled the Israeli media, enforcing an extraordinary silence about the identity of the targets. Massive speculation in the world press has followed, such as Brett Stephens' Osirak II? in yesterday's (9/1 Wall Street journal.
Stephens and most everyone else have missed the real story. It is not Israel's silence that "speaks volumes" as he claims, but Syria's. Why would the Syrian government be to tight-lipped about an act of war perpetrated on their soil?
The first half of the answer lies in this story that appeared in the Israeli media last month (8/13): Syria's Antiaircraft System Most Advance In World. Syria has gone on a profligate buying spree, spending vast sums on Russian systems, "considered the cutting edge in aircraft interception technology."
Syria now "possesses the most crowded antiaircraft system in the world," with "more that 200 antiaircraft batteries of different types," some of which are so new that they have been installed in Syria "before being introduced into Russian operation service."
While you are digesting that, take a look at the map or Syria:
Notice how far away Dayr az-Zawr is from Israel. An F15/16 attack there is not a tiptoe across the border, but a deep, deep penetration of Syrian airspace. And guess what happened with the Russian super-hyper-sophisticated cutting edge antiaircraft missile batteries when that penetration took place on September 6th.
Nothing.
El blanko. Silence. The systems didn't even light up, gave no indication whatever of any detection of enemy aircraft invading Syrian airspace., zip, zero, nada. The Israelis (with a little techie assistance of us) blinded the Russkie antiaircraft systems so completely the Syrians didn't even know they were blinded.
Now you see why the Syrians have been scared speechless. They thought they were protected at enormous expense - only to discover they are defenseless. As in naked.
Thus the Great Iranian Freak-Out - for this means Iran is just as nakedly defenseless as Syria. I can tell you that there are a lot of folks in the Kirya (IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv) and the Pentagon right now who are really enjoying the mullahs' predicament. Let's face it: scaring the terror masters in Tehran out of their wits is fun.
It is so much fun, in fact, that an attack destroying Iran's nuclear facilities and the Revolutionary guard command/control centers has been delayed, so that France (under new management) can get in on the fun too.
On Sunday (9/16), Sarkozy's foreign minister Bernard Kouchner announced that "France should prepare for the possibility of war over Iran's nuclear program."
A sure sign of panic is to make a threat that everyone knows is a bluff. So our and Tel Aviv's response to Iranian bluster is a thank-you-for-sharing yawn and a laugh. Few things rattle the mullahs' cages more than a yawn and a laugh.
Yet no matter how much fun this sport with the mullahs is, it is also deadly serious. The pressure build-up on Iran is getting enormous. Something is going to blow and soon. The hope is that the blow-up will be internal, the the regime will implode from within.
But make no mistake: and all-out full regime take-out air assault upon Iran is coming if that hope doesn't materialize with the the next 60 to 90 days. The September 6th attack on Syria was the shot across Iran's bow.
So - what was attacked near Dayr az-Zawr? It's possible it was North Korean "nuclear material" recently shipped to Syria, i.e., stuff to make radioactively "dirty" warheads, but nothing to make a real nuke with as the Norks don't have real nukes (see Why North Korea's Nuke Test Is Such Good News (Oct. 2006).
Another possibility is it was to take out a stockpile of long-range Zilzal surface-to-surface missiles recently shipped from Iran for an attack on Israel.
A third is it was a hit on the stockpile of Saddam's chemical/bio weapons snuck out of Iraq and into Syria for safekeeping before the US invasion of April 2003.
But the identity of the target is not the story - for the primary point of the attack was not to destroy that target. It was to shut down Syria's Russian air defense system during the attack. Doing so made the attack an increadible success.
Syria is shamed and silent. Iran is freaking out in panic. Defenseless enemies are fun. |
Last edited by surfguy on Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yorbcbud
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 4903
Location: Сорренто, Британская Колумбия, Канада
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Our very own Dr Fauste posted this a long time ago. It's rather funny, but quite accurate.
| Quote: | A Short History of the US Military
1775-1783
Americans try to persuade Upper and Lower Canada to join in rebellion against Britain. When the Canadians refuse, the Americans try to force them to rebel. After a series of back-and forth minor victories (mostly won by hiding behind trees and shooting without warning), the United States claims its independence. 100,000 loyalists are cleansed out of the US without compensation. (Similar to what the Americans will later complain bitterly about when Cuba does the same to them.) The French government gets so deeply in debt supporting the American Revolution that the French populace revolts.
1812-1814
With Britain busy at war with France, the US again decides to liberate Canada. The Americans begin by capturing the ship, the Lord Nelson, 13 days prior to declaring war. Canada repulses early American probes. At the Battle of Chrysler's Farm 4000 American invaders valiantly retreat under the "heavy and galling fire" of 40 Canadian militia. Detroit (and thus Michigan) is captured by a Canadian force of 30 men and 1 cannon, against an American force of 2500 men.
The Americans then reply by attacking (and being repulsed) at Queenston and Kingston. The Americans maintain a blockade at Kingston. This results in the British retreating from Michigan.
The next American attack succeeds in capturing and burning York (now
Toronto) and Fort George, but ultimately they retreat from the Niagara Peninsula. The British respond by burning Buffalo and Washington. During the battle of Washington, British and Canadian troops burn the president's residence. This is renamed the "White House", after it was painted to hide the smoke damage.
Britain finally beats the French, and start coming back in force to North America. The US agrees to cease hostilities.
1844
The US under President Polk contemplates annexing western Canada, with the slogan "54-40 or fight", but decides that discretion is the better part of valour, and the border is fixed at the 49th parallel.
1846-1848
The US annexes Texas, which Mexico claimed as a protectorate. Mexico declares war on the US. The US captures a large portion of Mexico, which ultimately becomes California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. The US finally wins the war after capturing Mexico City. In doing so, they learn the important lesson of only taking on countries smaller than themselves. This victory also leads to the line about "the Halls of Montezuma" in the Marine Hymn.
1861-1864
Having learned that fighting larger countries is bad policy and that fighting small countries is good policy, the US decides to explore a different option, and attacks itself. It learns that this is also bad policy.
1856-1900
American national expansion allowed it to fight and achieve great victories over a wide variety of Indian nations. Each of these is much, much smaller than the United States. After defeating the Comanche, Sioux, Apache, and Cheyenne nations, Americans become great masters at fighting small nations that do not have as good weapons, but with mixed success. The most famous of these battles was "Custer's Last Stand", in which General George Custer plans on fighting a large group of Indian women and children to the death. A group of warriors shows up. Custer loses.
1867
Canada becomes a big country and the US never fights it again.
1898-1906
Returning to "this works", the US tries very small countries, and successfully attacks Guam, Cuba, the Philippines, Nicaragua, Panama, Cuba, Haiti, Cuba and Puerto Rico. Attacking very small countries is very good policy.
1917-1918
After watching on the sidelines for 3 years, the US observes that the Allies are finally starting to win against countries that are almost the same size, and sends 4,000,000 men to Europe to join the 28,000,000 Allied soldiers already there that have been grinding the Central Powers down. The American campaign covers the period between May and November 1918. They are not part of the critical battles of that period: the Second Battle of the Marne and the Amines Offensive. When the war ends, the Americans announce that they really won it by themselves. No-one else listens to them.
1941-1945
After watching on the sidelines for 2 years, the US joins the Second World War after being attacked by the Japanese. (The Japanese attack 1 1/2 hours before declaring war, failing to recognize that this is only allowed to be done by the Americans.) This time, instead of providing 1/8 of the force, the US provides 1/3, but is forced to split them between two fronts (Pacific and Europe). Ultimately, they provide about 1/6 of the troops in Europe.
Here they learn some other valuable lessons. If you can build equipment faster than the enemy can destroy it, you will be on the winning side. Also, they learn that war is more fun if you can really throw more equipment into the battle than the other side has. The ultimate example of this is the (unsuccessful) pursuit of German tanker ace, Michael Wittman, top tank commander of the Second World War. After his tank successfully destroyed an entire squadron of Shermans (by itself), the Americans located him and sent 1500 medium bombers and 2000 fighter-bombers after him. They level an entire French town. It wasn't quite enough, though, and Wittman escaped to fight a little longer. In later years they would develop precision bombs, so that they would not miss as often.
The Germans soon learn that the Americans represent the weak link in the Allied lines, and all of their major counterattacks are against American units.
When the war ends, the Americans announce that they really won it by themselves. No-one else listens to them. (The Russians lost more solders in combat than the Americans committed to the European Theatre. The Russian lost five times the personnel at Stalingrad then the total American casualties for the entire war.)
1950
The US starts the formation of NATO. This does two things for the Americans. First, they solidify their relationship with their allies, and hope that they never have to fight alone anymore (There are no countries bigger than all of the countries of NATO together.) Second, it gives them lots of places that they can send troops on "foreign service" duty, and thus give them pretty medals. The Americans thus become the only democracy where a private can have three rows of medals without ever firing at an enemy.
1950-1953
North Korea attacks South Korea (a US protectorate); the US ships in 1,800,000 men over 4 years, supplemented by 100,000 UN troops. They join 3,000,000 South Korean troops, and manage a tie (North Korea was aided by China, which really qualifies as a country bigger than the US.)
When the war ends, the Americans announce that they really won it, and did so by themselves. No-one else listens to them.
1959
Castro takes over Cuba, and seizes American-owned institutions without compensation. The US protests that they are the only ones allowed to do that anymore.
1961
America, angry at losing the playground for its wealthy, the mob, and the military, attempts to invade Cuba. Cuba is a very small country. America loses anyway. The Americans are still mad at Cuba for this.
1961-1973
North Vietnam attacks South Vietnam. The US sends in millions of men to help. Unfortunately, the North Vietnamese hide behind trees and shoot without warning. Also, the NVA is assisted by China. With their own tactics used against them, and being up against a country bigger than they, the Americans are beaten.
1983
The US invades Grenada (without declaring war). Grenada qualifies as a very small country. The US wins.
1989
The US invades Panama (without declaring war). Panama qualifies as a very small country. The US wins.
1990-1991
Iraq invades Kuwait. The US leads a coalition to free Kuwait. Iraq is not a very small country, just a small country. Because there are no trees to hide behind, the US gets to use lots and lots of precision bombs and airplanes that hide in the sky.
Using precision rockets, the Americans shoot down none of the forty Scud missiles Iraq shoots at Israel. The Americans capture half of Iraq and all of the conscripts in the Iraqi Army, and then quit before fighting the professional army. America declares victory and goes home.
The Americans realize that it is more important to fight smaller armies than smaller countries. They also learn that attacking ground troops from the air is fun.
1995
Somalia qualifies as a very small country and does not have an army or a government, but the US loses anyway.
1996
Ethiopia qualifies as a very small country and does not have an army but the US loses anyway. This reinforces the lesson that attacking troops from the ground is not fun. They decide not to do it anymore.
2002
The US invades Afghanistan. Afghanistan qualifies as a small country. The Americans return to attacking poorly organized ground troops from the air. They invite in other countries that actually know how to engage ground troops on the ground to help with the clean-up. They aren't sure who they are, so they fire on friendly troops, killing some. The coalition wins.
2003
After embargoing Iraq for 12 years, America gets the Army in Iraq to the point where it might be called "quite small." Now that Iraq is a small country with a small army America attacks again. US wins. Unfortunately, they then discover that airplanes cannot “hold” ground, and have to send in ground troops. Casualties mount.
|
I wonder how attacking Iran would work out, given the track record of America. Hmmmm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
based on opinion...unecessary false facts...and wau out of context...utter nonsense...but its to be expected from the poster...very ignorant
Last edited by surfguy on Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
It was to shut down Syria's Russian air defense system during the attack. Doing so made the attack an increadible success.
Proved them to be very defenseless |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RusskiCanadian23
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 1104
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada/Ванкувер, Британская Колумбия, Канада
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Notice how Israel attacked Syria first. In fact in most conflicts in the Middle East that Israel has been involved in, it was the original aggressor. Israel stole land that originaly belonged to the Palestinian Arabs and that the Israelis say (based on nothing except the Bible) belongs to them. Gee, I can point on a random spot on the map and say, "Oh, my God promised me this land! I am going to start my own country there!". That's ridiculous! And then, instead of relaxing and tring to get along with it's neighbours, Israel starts a war against the arabs that has been going on for I think almost 50 years now! And USA helps them with this! How many Lebanese people died in the last Israeli invasion? Hundreds of thousands. So, who is the aggressor here? Come on, do the math! And Russian missiles work alright. the Syrians just weren't trained to use those.
If those Israeli ....s ever wander into Russian airspace they'll get a TorM1 or a C300 missile up their ass, that I promise you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well It doesn't make sense that the russian systems didn't work...I just wonder if Russia was in on it and had kill switches...and shut the defenses off |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RusskiCanadian23
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 1104
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada/Ванкувер, Британская Колумбия, Канада
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| surfguy wrote: | | Well It doesn't make sense that the russian systems didn't work...I just wonder if Russia was in on it and had kill switches...and shut the defenses off |
It has more to do with the fact that people who operated those systems didn't know what they were doing. The Arabs seem to fight a lot more effectively as guerrilas and suicide bombers. They don't know, and have a hard time learning how to operate complex equipment.
| Quote: | | and shut the defenses off |
Why would they do that? Russia is the last country in the world that would help Israel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Actually Russia and Israel have strong Oil/Gas connections...lot of stuff in this world that we just do not understand |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gomer
WayToRussified
Joined: 30 Mar 2007
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| surfguy wrote: | | Well It doesn't make sense that the russian systems didn't work...I just wonder if Russia was in on it and had kill switches...and shut the defenses off |
I guess some people aren't familiar with certain government agencies surreptitiously installing 'backdoors' in computer software that operates military hardware. The government can send a signal by satellite to anywhere in the world and the signal can 'turn off, turn on' the hardware. It's called "Selective Service". The government selects when to 'service' the hardware in question. Any major arms exporting country can do it and you don't have to be the actual owner of a satellite. 'Piggybacking' works wonders these days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| precisely me point gomer...it's like we sell all these high tech air craft..certainly we wouldn't want them turned on us. So why not put lo jack on it and a kill switch...it's a great way of containment |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yorbcbud
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 4903
Location: Сорренто, Британская Колумбия, Канада
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| surfguy wrote: | | based on opinion...unecessary false facts...and wau out of context...utter nonsense...but its to be expected from the poster...very ignorant |
I don't think that Dr Fauste, aka Paul Holmes is ignorant. Why do you say that, James? And what parts are wrong? Please feel free to correct. I didn't write it, I just quoted.
The point was, that America doesn't win very many wars, that part is true. Nobody is afraid of America anymore. Iran's president didn't seem too awfully afraid of America at the UN meeting. America can't afford any more wars, financially, or otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yorbcbud
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 4903
Location: Сорренто, Британская Колумбия, Канада
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RusskiCanadian23 wrote: | Notice how Israel attacked Syria first. In fact in most conflicts in the Middle East that Israel has been involved in, it was the original aggressor. Israel stole land that originaly belonged to the Palestinian Arabs and that the Israelis say (based on nothing except the Bible) belongs to them. Gee, I can point on a random spot on the map and say, "Oh, my God promised me this land! I am going to start my own country there!". That's ridiculous! And then, instead of relaxing and tring to get along with it's neighbours, Israel starts a war against the arabs that has been going on for I think almost 50 years now! And USA helps them with this! How many Lebanese people died in the last Israeli invasion? Hundreds of thousands. So, who is the aggressor here? Come on, do the math! And Russian missiles work alright. the Syrians just weren't trained to use those.
If those Israeli ....s ever wander into Russian airspace they'll get a TorM1 or a C300 missile up their ass, that I promise you! |
It's really hard to defeat people that are willing to strap bombs to themselves and blow up everything around them. Nobody will ever defeat the Arabs, or Al Quaida. Never. They come right into the country, and destroy buildings in the heart of America. People who are willing to die for their beliefs, right, or wrong, put the fear of God into me. America, Israel, and Canada have a hell of a time fighting these people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yorbcbud wrote: | | surfguy wrote: | | based on opinion...unecessary false facts...and wau out of context...utter nonsense...but its to be expected from the poster...very ignorant |
I don't think that Dr Fauste, aka Paul Holmes is ignorant. Why do you say that, James? And what parts are wrong? Please feel free to correct. I didn't write it, I just quoted.
The point was, that America doesn't win very many wars, that part is true.
Nobody is afraid of America anymore.
Iran's president didn't seem too awfully afraid of America at the UN meeting. America can't afford any more wars, financially, or otherwise. |
Well Ken everything is subjective...when it comes to opinions. You make statements but then provide no examples...so what is the purpose of carrying on a conversation when from your end there is no intellect to support a dialogue. The fact is...what you quoted are nothing more than blanket statements taken way out of context and distorted. And they contain no credible examples.
| Quote: | 1846-1848
The US annexes Texas, which Mexico claimed as a protectorate. Mexico declares war on the US. The US captures a large portion of Mexico, which ultimately becomes California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. The US finally wins the war after capturing Mexico City. In doing so, they learn the important lesson of only taking on countries smaller than themselves. This victory also leads to the line about "the Halls of Montezuma" in the Marine Hymn. |
Mexico wasn't a country then...what is being discussed here is the Spanish American War...so lets not distort the facts with very vague and false statements. We were at war with Spain.
But this is just one of the examples where the quotes you provided are distorted.
| Quote: | 1950
The US starts the formation of NATO. This does two things for the Americans. First, they solidify their relationship with their allies, and hope that they never have to fight alone anymore (There are no countries bigger than all of the countries of NATO together.) Second, it gives them lots of places that they can send troops on "foreign service" duty, and thus give them pretty medals. The Americans thus become the only democracy where a private can have three rows of medals without ever firing at an enemy. |
humor me some more...this quotes states that the US was tired of fightinhg wars alone...and yet previously the writer states that in WWI we were letting the other allies (this being a key word) fight the war. Well in my 10+ years of military service I've never seen a private with 3 rows of war medals.
It's obvious this rhetoric that you posted are whimsical at best and very lacking of any real substance.
| Quote: | 1812-1814
With Britain busy at war with France, the US again decides to liberate Canada. The Americans begin by capturing the ship, the Lord Nelson, 13 days prior to declaring war. Canada repulses early American probes. At the Battle of Chrysler's Farm 4000 American invaders valiantly retreat under the "heavy and galling fire" of 40 Canadian militia. Detroit (and thus Michigan) is captured by a Canadian force of 30 men and 1 cannon, against an American force of 2500 men.
The Americans then reply by attacking (and being repulsed) at Queenston and Kingston. The Americans maintain a blockade at Kingston. This results in the British retreating from Michigan.
The next American attack succeeds in capturing and burning York (now
Toronto) and Fort George, but ultimately they retreat from the Niagara Peninsula. The British respond by burning Buffalo and Washington. During the battle of Washington, British and Canadian troops burn the president's residence. This is renamed the "White House", after it was painted to hide the smoke damage.
Britain finally beats the French, and start coming back in force to North America. The US agrees to cease hostilities. |
The problem with this statement...is that it is humorously false and out of context...first of Canada wasn't a country then but a commonwealth of England. As such the war of 1812 which was between the US and Brittain. And being Canada was part of Brittain and where the bulk of the Brittish Military might was located. So we were also fighting Canadians. Oh and Guess what...Brittain lost and retreated and they never regained control of the USA. So let's not post false info.
Get serious bc...comical opinions do not accurately represent history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
surfguy
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 6979
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
But having said all this...lets get back on topic:
| Quote: | | Syria's Russian made Air Defenses-useless |
and this was a follow up question:
| Quote: |
Well It doesn't make sense that the russian systems didn't work...I just wonder if Russia was in on it and had kill switches...and shut the defenses off |
Which gomer responded very intelligently to.
So Ken...I hope you realize this and quit highjacking threads to promote Canada and your inferiority complex. After all you should be a proud Canuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
