Putin’s Missile Could Make U.S. Attacks on Iran Nearly Impossible

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: AreUKiddingMe

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: AreUKiddingMe
Looks like Iran is going to be Russia's b**ch for real. This puts Iran on a level of rhetoric even higher than North Korea. We will need our own defense system to shield us from the rhetoric now.

Deal with Iran...off the table..hasn't been signed yet.

That doesn't even make sense. The original deal was signed in 2007 according to this article. Iran's survived this long without the S-300s, so why would they suddenly become dependent on Russia? In fact, Iran sued Russia in international court over Russia's breach of contract. So if anything, Russia's doing this to settle the lawsuit against themselves (I think it was a $4 billion lawsuit but too lazy to look it up).

Also, the S-300s are purely defensive. So that's like saying we need to built a missile defense system to guard ourselves against a fence LOL

No it doesn't make sense if you're used to quoting RT news, granted.

Wow that's a great argument. Of course the Russians would know when they signed a deal with Iran.

So please, with your more credible sources, can you tell me when Iran & Russia originally signed their deal for the S-300s? I originally thought it was 2008 but the article I linked says 2007. Either way, it was signed before the Obama Administration even came to power. Then it was suspended in 2010. The S-300 is a previous generation weapons system & the West already has ways around it. So what's your point?

My point is exactly what I wrote in my original response. In the context of today and what is happening globally, things are moving pretty rapidly. Regardless of any deal originally signed between Russia and Iran in the past, there has been a ban on delivery that just suddenly got "lifted". The backroom negotiations are what I'd like to know about. We could speculate but the coming weeks will tell. I think Russia persuaded them to forego any deal. I'm speaking from my own opinion and what is happening NOW, and not about anything that was signed 5 or 10 years ago. Now....do I need to spell it out even more? Link

I don't think the 300 poses much of a serious threat to the US or Israel. If a decision is made to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities it will be made with the intention of destroying Iran's entire military industrial complex. In essence they will destroy their ability to project any military power or defend themselves. In so doing they will kill upwards of 60 million people and run a direct risk of starting WW III. It will be a decision not made lightly and then carried out without warning. Iran will simply cease to exist for a few generations in the family of nations.

It may or may not happen and the Iranians themselves need to remove the possibility of it happening and that means giving up any desire to create bomb grade radioactive material. My best,

a reply to: Willtell

NATO has tested the S-300 system when Slovenia join. NATO held a training exercise in France and Slovenia brought along their S-300 system. NATO then tested the system against many different types of their aircraft. They never fully publicly stated what the out come was, but I would imagine such a test would give NATO members an idea of how to defeat the system.

Russia as also just sold China the S-400 system which maybe much more of a problem for south Korea and Japan.

a reply to: AreUKiddingMe

No, your post just doesn't fit reality. And the post I'm replying to right now has nothing to do with your first post that I replied to. This is what you said:

Looks like Iran is going to be Russia's b**ch for real. This puts Iran on a level of rhetoric even higher than North Korea. We will need our own defense system to shield us from the rhetoric now. Deal with Iran...off the table..hasn't been signed yet.

As we've already stated in this thread, the S-300s are old technology. And they have nothing to do with nuclear weapons. So how can sales of S-300s put Iran "on a level of even higher rhetoric than North Korea" when North Korea has actual nuclear weapons?

And this weapons system deal won't scuttle the West's deal with Iran. Quite the opposite. The original deal for the S-300s was halted because of the nuclear program talks. So now that a comprehensive nuclear deal has been agreed upon, there's no longer a need to halt the S-300 sales.

originally posted by: Willtell
Why now?

It would seem that Iran wouldn’t need this with the new agreement.

Why now? That's easy. He's sending a message to the conservatives in the US that a military strike is not and never has been on the table. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Obama gave the Russians permission to do this in departure from the old policy in order to get them on board with the current deal... the deal Obama wants everyone to go along with certainly looks more appealing when a strike is made more difficult if not impossible.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
The thing is, that radar system might be a challenge for the air craft that we know about.

What about the aircraft that we have in our arsenal that are still deep jet black? Meethinks they would cut through the S-300 like a hot knife.

The question there is, is Iran enough of a reason to tip our hand? If we were to declare war and bomb the hell out of them would we really actually gain anything? It could very easily backfire and give Iran an excellent pretense as to why they need nuclear weapons for defense. While on top of that we would show Russia, China, and everyone else what our secret equipment can do.

Couldn't that air defense system be knocked out using ship based cruise or tomahawk missile?

HERE ya go...www.boeing.com...

But you can buy the shutdown codes on EBay.

originally posted by: yuppa
S-300/400 not invincible defense it turns out

Flying below its radar detection height is also one of its weaknesses.

Another problem is the Raptor can get to within 25 NM before being detected. It was designed to defeat s300 and 400. Within 25 NM the launcher is gone. Throw is support aircraft with Jaming capabilities and they could literally fly over them lol. NATO members had access to the s300 for a long time thanks to greece.

originally posted by: yuppa
S-300/400 not invincible defense it turns out

Flying below its radar detection height is also one of its weaknesses.

Genuine question;

Doesn't the advent of military satellites at least make the old 'flying under the radar' a little redundant?

Missile system radars are of course required, but couldn't satellites looking down do a similar, if not 100% as good a job, to missile radar systems?

It logical to assume that an inherent weakness of the radar on an advanced anti-aircraft missile system would be addressed and the weakness somehow 'plugged' or mitigated?

One way to plug the gap in the radars would be to use IR satellites who's view would be covering sensitive installations and potential target areas.

Another way i'd guess could be effective, would be to have multiple, networked radars, feeding the actual S-300 system, hunting for a target, but with no active radar on the actual missile system...a pilot would lock onto one or more of the networked radars feeding the missiles with target data, but not the missiles themselves which would be free to engaged the attacking aircraft.

a reply to: dragonridr

NATO members had access to the s300 for a long time thanks to greece.

Knowing that, the owners of the system would have probably made significant modifications to counter that.

I would have thought so anyway..

a reply to: MysterX

Satellites aren't sensitive enough to pick up an aircraft in flight. They don't give off enough heat for an IR satellite, and a radar satellite would be overwhelmed by clutter if it had the power to see all the way to the ground.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks.

What about the multiple networked 'sacrificial / decoy radar' sites idea?

It does not make it impossible... It just changes the mission, by adding a covert phase to it.

What you need is a special forces unit on the ground taking out the air defenses before lighting the target up for a strike.

Simple really....

What this move does do however is make Iran a far more dangerous animal... since it means you can't take out the installations within a narrow time-frame...

I think more than anything this will escalate the situation and pushes it up the list of priories, It makes a covert strike more likely and sooner.

Of course Putin knows this....

Could this be a Trap??

There ya go. DARPA has been working on it for some time likely, seeing as it's being integrated with 4.5+ Gen aircraft & drones. Like Zaphod said, the S-300 isn't invincible.


BTW, I would love to see a drone C-130 with B-52 engines....DAAAYUM!

a reply to: MysterX

It would help, but that's where the RC-135s come in. They'd have the radars mapped before any attack, and the SEAD strikes would hit them ahead of the main package.

This all because of US meddling in Ukraine. Russia can be with lived with as long as you respect it. Russia has a sense od pride American policy makers. Stratfor may be encroaching on Moscow through its devious means but there will be a response from Russia and this is it. A nuclear Iran................... Is that what you wanted Washington?

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
I believe Russia has already completed the S-400 now (which are not in the deal). So this isn't as much of a game changer as some would have us believe. Iran & Russia first signed the deal for the S-300s back in 2008. So I'd guess Israel & the West have many ways to defeat them now.

It's true the West would have developed plans to counter the S-300.. it's only natural to do so ..
However, they can not completely neutralize the S-300 .. heavy loses would still be expected .. and thats where the problem lies ..
The West always wants to fight wars where their enemy is weak .. and where they don't suffer heavy loses..
In this case, heavy loses would resonate home directly .. and the people would rise up against the war ..as with Vietnam ..

a reply to: junglimogli

The S-300 isn't nearly as effective as it's being reported. It's definitely an improvement, but it's certainly not going to cause heavy losses against a strike package. The fifth generation and upgraded fourth generation equipment will go in first, and it's not nearly as effective against those as the S-400 or S-500 would be.

originally posted by: junglimogli
It's true the West would have developed plans to counter the S-300.. it's only natural to do so ..
However, they can not completely neutralize the S-300 .. heavy loses would still be expected .. and thats where the problem lies ..
The West always wants to fight wars where their enemy is weak .. and where they don't suffer heavy loses..
In this case, heavy loses would resonate home directly .. and the people would rise up against the war ..as with Vietnam ..

I don't think that those losses would be as heavy as you think. If I was Iran, the first thing that I would want to know is where are the four Ohio class missile subs that have been converted to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles? 154 Tactical Tomahawks can ruin your day. Throw in some armed Predator drones and there's a whole new element to SEAD. You don't have to destroy the enemy's SAM defences, you just have to get them to turn them off while you are in the neighborhood.