Russia Delivering Anti-Aircraft Missiles to Iran, Syria on Schedule--Daily Star

[Gloria]

RUSSIA DELIVERING ANTI-AIRCRAFT MISSILES TO IRAN AND SYRIA ON SCHEDULE

3//The Daily Star, Lebanon—RUSSIA DELIVERING ANTI-AIRCRAFT MISSILES TO IRAN AND SYRIA ON SCHEDULE
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&c...

Controversial Russian contracts to sell anti-aircraft weapons to Syria and Iran are being fulfilled on schedule, Russian news agencies cited defense and industry officials as saying Tuesday. At least half of the 29 Tor-M1 missile systems bought by Iran for $1.4 billion dollars had been delivered, state-run ITAR-TASS quoted an unnamed source at the Defense Ministry as saying.

"We are actively carrying out deliveries of the system to Iran. At least 50 percent of the contract has been delivered," the official was quoted as saying. The air defense systems are being stationed around Iran's civilian nuclear sites, according to ITAR-TASS. … . Meanwhile, Interfax news agency quoted Valery Kashin, head of weapons maker Engineering Design Bureau, as saying that Russia met all its commitments in 2006 under the contract to supply Syria with the Strelets anti-aircraft system. He gave no details.


From the new World Media Watch up tomorrow at Buzzflash.com
Visit the BUZZFLASH WORLD MEDIA WATCH M-W-F

[wtmusic]

1. Just to "be there" when World War III started...

how exciting!

[IndianaGreen]

2. Syria and Iran are potential targets of US/Israeli aggression

The primary mission of any sovereign nation is to defend itself against foreign aggression.

[Purveyor]

3. Iran and Syria have the right to "defend themselves", eh? n/t

[Hardrada]

4. Yeh.

[Moochy]

8. Of course not

they must grovel at our imperial might.. :sarcasm:

[mitchtv]

14. Or... they can just shut up and

Do what Count-the-lies-a orders them to do

[VegasWolf]

15. They can just get down on their knees and beg Bush not to shit on them. nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. Um, yes.

Do you disagree?

[Tight_rope]

23. They sure do...And with the likes of the Chimp stumbling around...I can't blame them.

[Gloria]

5. Since the beginning of this Iran thing, I've been wondering if Iran ALREADY

HAS nukes?? Wouldn't that be a blast?? (OOPS, sorry about that word choice)

[Drum]

6. "Security Council" ya call it?

The fuckers are just shameless aren't they---all of the "super" powers are just huffing-against or making selective war, while preaching for peace, while dealing arms to all comers.

Total parasites.

[FogerRox]

7. Thanks Gloria this is one of little "BIG" stories

If you check out my journal, you'll see what I mean. THis is a significant upgrade to Irans anti aircraft capabilities. Iran has may 60 SAM-6 launchers, older systems. THe Tor-29 system is to be considered a significant modernization compared to their existing SAM-6 launchers.

[Solo_in_MD]

11. You are the master of understatement

its like going from the 60s to the today. Iran had more modern systems under the Shaw (Hawk), but was unable to maintain them without US support and spares. Double digt SAMs are serious weapons.

The usual issues of training an operator competence will be there. Have to wonder if/when Iran is attacked over its nuclear program if the operators of those SAMs will be speaking Russian.

[FogerRox]

12. SAM -6 are old.

but upgradeable to fire SAM-11.

[hack89]

18. Actually not ...

See my post 17

These are short range weapons that cannot easily hit cruise missiles and cannot engage JDAM carrying bombers at altitude.

[FogerRox]

19. Well yes, but existing Iranian air defense doctrine

uses SAM systems as point defense. SO actually this purchase fits right into their existing defensive doctrine.

These 2 purchases should be considered a significant upgrade

2, Pechora-2A, 38km range
29, Tor-M1 25km range

in addition to the Existing

60+, SAM-6 launchers firing SAM-11 missiles, 25 km range.

According to Moscow the Pechora-2A system can:

"Pechora-2A can hit the air targets at distances from 3.5 to 38 kilometers and at heights from 0.02 to 20 kilometers, flying at a speed of up to 700 meters per second. The complex was successfully tested at a Middle East firing range, hitting an F-16 fighter and an analogue of a Tomahawk cruise missile."

http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/12/16/iranantiaircraft.shtml

Remember that the Tomahawk is subsonic, and that even the older SAM-6 can go trans sonic.

[hack89]

22. The Iran system is still less capable than the Iraq system ever was ...

so to think that it will serve as any sort of deterrent is misguided. It will not withstand a sophisticated US SEAD attack.

[FogerRox]

26. " It will not withstand a sophisticated US SEAD attack."

I never said it would. But at least paint an accurate picture, please.

Comparing what Iraq HAD, to now, what Iran has is apples to oranges. Iraq had more of western air dee grid while Iran does their own thing. I think If we sea launch Tom Toms, Iran is poised to shoot some down, considering the geography. If we use plane launched Tom Toms we severly limit flexibiblity.

Additionally I would not relish the thought of a Sunburn being launched from the Mountains, down at a vessel in the Persian Gulf, those Sunburns have a terminal attack speed of Mach 4.5.

The dopes in the Bush Admin are likely to make another mistake, Iran would not mind giving them a bloody nose.

A serious sea based US attack on Iran would/should come from the Arabian Sea, not the Persian Gulf, yes?

[kineneb]

31. agreed

I have seen photos and maps of the Persian Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz. Neither is very wide. A well-aimed (large) trebuchet or catapult could do serious damage to an aircraft carrier, never mind a single Sunburn missile. It would only take one hit to one of the ships to make it a very bad day. And knowing the Persian mentality as I do*, they WILL defend their country.

If Idjet Boy and his English Lap Dog do what I think they will do, all hell is going to break loose.

Good analysis:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA03Ak01.html

*My step-father is from Iran.

[FogerRox]

33. kineneb, the Iranian side of the Gulf is mountainous

SO Iran is shooting down at the US Navy, not good for the Navy.

[kineneb]

34. yup, I know.

That is what I was trying to say. The Iranian military will have a decided "home turf" advantage...US Navy be sitting ducks... bad for ships.

[formercia]

37. A Persian Gulf attack would be suicide.

Not enough room to maneuver and get out of range. No such thing as shoot and scoot there.

..but then, a 'Persian Gulf' fiasco with several carriers sunk could rally the Nation. :sarcasm:

[2Design]

9. not surprized - can not have one bully in the courtyard - must start to contain him

BFEE is the cause of this escalation - the world knows he is crazier than the guy he just murdered

[On the Road]

10. Just When People Were Getting Nostalgic for the Cold War

Here it comes again. Fights by proxy.

[NoodleyAppendage]

13. Putin just sent a huge "F YOU" to the Chimp.

This is major. Now the Chimp will have a harder time using the planned bombing of Iran as a 2008 Campaign issue for the Repukes.

J

[hack89]

17. Iran Buys False Hope

When it comes right down to it, the Iranians have spent some of their petrodollars to get a missile system that looks good on paper, and which generate media attention, but ultimately is a false sense of security. The Russians have managed to make some money, get an export customer, yet these systems will not be able to deflect a determined attack against the nuclear weapons program.

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/2006121123133.asp

[FogerRox]

20. A bit of a problem with that article

"A single Tor would have 49 seconds at most to engage a Tomahawk if it detects the missile at its maximum range."

The TOR-M1 needs 3 to 10 seconds from Aquisition of target to firing.

"Tor M1 can detect and track up to 48 targets (minimum radar cross section of 0.1 square meter) at a maximum range of 25 km, and engage two of them simultaneously, at a speed of up to 700 m/sec, and at a distance of 1 to 12 km. The system's high lethality (aircraft kill probability of 0.92-0.95) is maintained at altitude of 10 – 6,000 m'. The vertically launched, single-stage solid rocket propelled missile is capable of maneuvering at loads up to 30gs"

from

http://www.defense-update.com/products/t/tor.htm

All sea launched Tomahawks need to scale the coastal mountains on the coast of Iran. Not really an ideal scenario as spelled out at:

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/2006121123133.asp

Since the LAS class attack sub is our most prolific Tomahawk launch platform, our second choice would be Tomahawks fired from hi altitude planes.

Theres a little more to it than that. Iran has made a purchase that complicates the scenario.

[hack89]

21. Tomahawks would be used

for SEAD and taking out C2 nodes. I think high altitude JDAMs from stealth bombers would be the weapon of choice as only they have penetrating power against underground facilities. I just don't see this weapon significantly changing the strategic calculus.

[FogerRox]

24. We are talking bunker busters... right? JDAMS? Maybe not

seems to be up to 2000 pds. Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) GBU-29, GBU-30, GBU-31, GBU-32 ...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/jdam.htm

This is the the GBU-28 or the BLU-113, is 19 feet (5.8 meters). It weighs about 4,400 pounds.




SO do you think the GBU-28 is a better Penetrator than this?


Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant missile
On 27 May 1999 Raytheon was awarded a $25,829,379 undefinitized cost-plus-incentive-fee/cost-plus-fixed-fee, ceiling amount contract for the modification of the Tactical Tomahawk missile to the Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant configuration as part of the Second Counter-Proliferation Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. The Tactical Tomahawk missile will be modified to incorporate the government-furnished penetrator warhead and the hard-target smart fuze. Four Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant missiles will be assembled to conduct the advanced concept technology demonstration testing. Work will be performed in Tucson AZ and is expected to be completed by March 2003.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/bgm-109.htm

If we are talking Bunker busters the Tom Tom Penetrator Variant & The GBU-28 seem to be the King of the Hill, no?

[hack89]

25. Big bombs from stealth aircraft at high altitude

is that better? In conjunction with a well thought out SEAD plan, the Iranian air defense stands no real chance.

[FogerRox]

27. I don't know which is a better Bunker buster

the GBU-28 or the TOm TOm Penetrator. My guess is the TOm TOm. Which.... to me... means a sea based... Arabian sea task force launching Tom TOms.

Quatar based aircraft running CAP, on Iranian F-14, Su-27 & Mig-29.

Then ID SAM sites, which may be in tunnels...... and brought out last minute

Hi altitude planes as secondary bunker buster launch systems & Anti SAM efforts, they can loiter.

I think Iran just bought a better chance to bloody our nose.

I also think that as long as any US ships are in the Persian Gulf.... its about Battleship diplomacy, not attack. Though thats a guess, "if I was running the show". A bunch of jerk offs are running the show, who have a track record of screwing up. I just hope Iran is not able to take advantage of any major screw ups.

[hack89]

28. Think for a second...

what has a better penetrating capability - a 2000lb bomb falling at supersonic speeds from great altitudes or a 1000lb warhead traveling at subsonic speeds. Gravity is a wonderful thing.

[FogerRox]

30. GBU-28 is 4400 pnds.

But yes, good point, thanks.

[leesa]

38. Funny. All this bombs and ammo blah, blah, blah...we didn't learn anything

from 'shock and awe'. There are many more of them than us, and they have more will to fight and less 'stuff' to lose.

We will lose the war we start with Iran or Syria.

[confludemocrat]

42. "I just hope Iran is not able to take advantage of any major screw ups" WTF?

And thereby be successful in avoiding having their citizens made mincemeat of by a merciless attack by the U.S?

So, if you and your fellow armaments hardware fetishists were running the show, you would threaten better and if the President decided so, do a better job at waging aggressive, destructive and merciless killing of "the enemy"?

Messed up.

[MisterP]

29. link's broken, and I can't find anything on Buzzflash or the Daily Star

[FogerRox]

32. I got it covered here

http://rdanafox.blogspot.com/2007/01/iranian-missile-systems.html

[Imagevision]

35. Meanwhile half of our Naval fleet is either there or on it's way...

It appears Bush is looking for a confrontation with Syria and or Iran to distance himself from the Iraq mess.

[FogerRox]

36. NO.......... 9 of 12 carriers are in US ports

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/gonavy/atsugi/gonavy604.html

The Ike is in the Persain Gulf, the Kitty Hawk is in Japan while the FDR is in the Atlantic.




Vigilance.

[FogerRox]

39. OP on Iranian missiles SAMs & cruise

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3039044

[PVnRT]

40. ...and they say the Cold War ended

Ha!

[confludemocrat]

41. Good. I like a deterrent to the possible start of another war in the Middle East.

If the Lebanese gvt was a good government, it would try to do more to defend it's airspace (by buying some anti-bomber missiles, like these) from foreign powers raining death on its schools, hospitals and civilian infrastructure, as occurred last year.