Iran could bloody our nose if Bush attacks. A look at Iranian missiles.

[FogerRox]

Please go to Kos to see all the sources, they are hot linked there. Covered are the SAM-6 and SAM 11, as well as the Tor M-1 system recently purchased, as well as the Pechora-2A. On the offensive side I also cover the Sunburn, C-801 and C-802 cruise missiles. The Sunbrun is very capable, as you will read. Here is a taste:

Until recently Iran had relied on the Russian SAM-6 surface to air missile. With a range of 25 km it might be considered a short range or point defense system. The Russian SAM-11 missile looks like it can be fired from older SAM-6 launchers with little work to accommodate the SAM-11 missile. The SAM-6 was first developed by Russia, starting in 1958. By the 1973 yon Kippur war it was a proven system.

Yesterday I published the 1st in a series of diaries on Middle Eastern weapons systems. Yesterdays diary was about how Saudi Arabia has recently modernized its long range missile program. These long range missiles are basically short ranged ICBMs, capable of delivering a nuclear, WMD or conventional warhead to nearly any point in the Middle East. Todays diary deals with the defensive & offensive missile systems Iran has, and their possible doctrine of use and deployment.


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

Until recently Iran had relied on the Russian SAM-6 surface to air missile. With a range of 25 km it might be considered a short range or point defense system. The Russian SAM-11 missile looks like it can be fired from older SAM-6 launchers with little work to accommodate the SAM-11 missile. The SAM-6 was first developed by Russia, starting in 1958. By the 1973 yon Kippur war it was a proven system.

In August 1992 the NYT. reported "Iran is reportedly negotiating the purchase of SAM-5, SAM-11, and SAM-13 missiles from Russia and other Eastern European countries." Don't forget that the SAM-11 missile looks able to be fired from Iran's existing SAM-6 mobile launchers.

In the Summer of 2006 reports suggested that Iran was looking to buy the Tor-M1 Air defense system, This was confirmed in the first week of 2007 from Russian sources

The TOR-M1 surface-to-air missile system is a mobile, integrated air defense system, designed for operation at medium-, low- and very low –altitudes, against fixed/rotary wing aircraft, UAVs, guided missiles and precision weapon. The system is capable of operating in an intensive aerial jamming environment.
The Tor-M1 system has a range of 25 KM, making it a significant qualitative upgrade from the existing SAM-6 systems. The same source indicates the Iranians also are buying the longer range Pechora-2A.




http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/5/162546/5327

[Junkdrawer]

1. Everybody is tooling up for something....

Springtime at the latest...And Spring seems early this year...

[ContraBass Black]

2. No, Iran could break our nose, and several fingers.

[Rick Myers]

6. Is fighting broke out, no matter who 'started it'

The Iranians can CLOSE the Gulf at the Straits of Hormuz, and the carriers would be very hard-pressed to defend themselves under a barrage of high-speed cruise missiles!

[FogerRox]

11. Yes, see Greemans post downthread.

AS long as we have a navay in the Persian Gulf I see this as Battleship diplomacy. THe Persian Gulf is too vulnerable to leave them in a shooting war. Go west to the Gulf of Oman, basically open sea.

[Crazy Dave]

3. I seriously don't think they would launch a US strike

Even if they wanted to launch a strike against the US they would more than likely launch an attack on Israel or another middle eastern allie to get back at us instead. That has been an unfortunate circumstance to most of the US's friends and allies after Bush's "Bring it on!" speech.

[shraby]

5. A point to consider is if we have ships in the Persian Gulf,

I wouldn't doubt but what Iran would block the exit from the Gulf and our ships are trapped in there, subject to bombardment.

[Crazy Dave]

14. That's a possibility there

These wars need public support in order to happen. Any ballistic missile strike against America would get nearly 100% support from the US population and both political parties would join hand in hand to annihilate and bomb Iran back into the stone age but not so much against a missile attack on Israel or Jordan, etc. Plus nearly every economy in the world is strongly linked or dependant on the US that they would lose all their UN and the rest of the world's support too and give the US an even greener light to blast them to smithereens.

All this is is just another cold war with both sides saying they have to protect us from them in order to justify their bloated and unnecessary defense budgets instead of increasing education and health care programs. Got to keep the peasants safe and dumb instead of educated and healthy.

[FogerRox]

9. I tend to agree, no attack on Iran

But Bush is daft.

[wakeme2008]

4. Plus Iran has three Kilo Class Soviet subs.

And if I was Iran, I would move them one night under no moon out, and replace them with plywood models for the Intel Sats to see.....

There would have to be more than just plywood models but nothing that is not doable.

[FogerRox]

17. IIRC subs that can launch Sunburn missiles...

[greenman3610]

7. In War Gaming, asymmetrical attack crippled US Navy

http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html

It all comes out of the "Millenium Challenge '02" war games we staged in the Persian Gulf this summer. The big scandal was that the Opposing Force Commander, Gen. Paul van Ripen, quit mid-game because the games were rigged for the US forces to win. The scenario was a US invasion of an unnamed Persian Gulf country (either Iraq or Iran). The US was testing a new hi-tech joint force doctrine, so naturally van Riper used every lo-tech trick he could think of to mess things up. When the Americans jammed his CCC network , he sent messages by motorbike.

But that was just playing around. They wouldn't have minded that. Might've even congratulated van Ripen, bought him a drink for his smarts, at the post-games party.

The truth is that van Ripen did something so important that I still can't believe the mainstream press hasn't made anything of it. With nothing more than a few "small boats and aircraft," van Ripen managed to sink most of the US fleet in the Persian Gulf.



http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1060102.php

When the Blue commander issued an ultimatum to Red to surrender or face destruction, Van Riper took the initiative, issuing attack orders via the morning call to prayer broadcast from the minarets of his country’s mosques. His force’s small boats and aircraft sped into action

“By that time there wasn’t enough time left to intercept them,” Oakley said. As a result of Van Riper’s cunning, much of the Blue navy ended up at the bottom of the ocean. The Joint Forces Command officials had to stop the exercise and “refloat” the fleet in order to continue, Oakley said.

[FogerRox]

8. Excellent point Greenman, thanks

Dont forget that irans coast on the Persian Gulf is mountainous, they sort of have the hi ground advantage, they would shooting down at the US Navy.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. Yes, they would.

I've a question, maybe you'd know.

About 10 years ago there were a number of reports in the news about how the U.S. was running out of guided munitions. Particularly tomahawks. I'd imagine we've used quite a few more in the last few years. So just how much do we have left?

[FogerRox]

13. Look in my journal for a contract to build more

Edit, heres the link

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

[LSK]

12. agreed, we could easily loose entire carrier groups

and the Gulf would be shut down.

[Swede]

15. Two carriers have 10,000 personnel.

That doesn't include that battle group. Sheesh,what a disaster.

[FogerRox]

16. Sheesh,what a disaster.

YOu mean BUSH, right? LOL,



yeah I hear ya.

[FogerRox]

18. after dinner kick