Russia lifts ban on delivering missile-defence system to Iran

Russia wants money.

Russia wants money.

Yeah....terrified...www.boeing.com...

Good.
Now Iran has a fair chance if the US attacks.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


What are we setting up for here? Russia MUST know that the neocons are going to take the White House

Pull your troops back from all those NATO bases that are encroaching on Russia, give up you STRATFOR attempts at taking over areas of importance to Russia like Ukraine and you will find that Russia behaves peacefully towrads the USA. It's by pushing the largest country on Planet Earth with masses of globe ending scary weaponry that USA will get a push back. This is their move. You really got to go careful with Russia, it has its pride and USA/NATO are pushing it too far. This S300 is their response to US policy. Wait until Russia makes its next move, nukes into Venezeula or something similar. It's a message from Vlad that read................. Ukraine is our back yard, clear off or get bitten the guard dog

originally posted by: yeahsurexxx
Good.
Now Iran has a fair chance if the US attacks.

HAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

they took their first shipment in 2005. the 2007 deal was just for the missile upgrade aaiu.

signed after they shot down a raid launched from Baghdad but had several misses as the planes entered their airspace.

passive radar (which is an amazing bit of tech)
200km odd range per launcher
4000km system range.
120 odd simultanious target engagement.

it was one of these that shot down the blackbird.

s400 is basically a simple upgrade to make shooting drones down cheaper.

system like this removes us air superiority.

f35...

yeah. might help maybe if they were operations ready.

Again I am baffled by the working of other men's minds.

Russia plants a "missile defense systems" in Iran and it's all good because obviously it's only a defensive weapon.

The US plants a "missile defense system" in Europe and it's an act of aggression against Russia.

How many sides of one's face can a man speak out of?

*please note that I am speaking in general and not about any particular poster/mod/politician.

originally posted by: mSparks43
they took their first shipment in 2005. the 2007 deal was just for the missile upgrade aaiu.

signed after they shot down a raid launched from Baghdad but had several misses as the planes entered their airspace.

passive radar (which is an amazing bit of tech)
200km odd range per launcher
4000km system range.
120 odd simultanious target engagement.

it was one of these that shot down the blackbird.

s400 is basically a simple upgrade to make shooting drones down cheaper.

system like this removes us air superiority.

f35...

yeah. might help maybe if they were operations ready.

No blackbirds have been shot down by a S-300. You mena the NIGHTHAWK right?
There is a reason the nighthawk was shot down. One it was not operating at night like it is suppossed to to. Two it was flying the exact same flight path day after day. SO using soem simple math the commander shot a SAM unguided mind you into the path of the aircraft and set it for proximity explosion. Didnt have a lock on warning either since it was fired unguided.

the amount of targets that can b e engaged dont really matter IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE NUMBERS TO INTERCEPT THEM ALL. A s-300 or 400 launcher has 4-6 tubes with a sam each. They have a guidance issue when below 150 ft. WHOOPS i guess a cruise missile would slide in th e back door. Greece had these and let the airforce test against these. they arent infalliable and are just as vulnerable these days. Even with out the f-35 if need be.

a reply to: yuppa

It was definately an SR71, in the 80s or 90s, whenever it was they first admitted they existed. (before then they were all "UFOs")

I think they blamed it on the migs in the end looking at google.

But Russian media had footage of the wreckage and were shouting about how great their new missile system was.

Its about time they started declassifying more of the passive radar stuff though. Explains totally why EA wasn't the success it was supposed to be.

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: yuppa

It was definately an SR71, in the 80s or 90s, whenever it was they first admitted they existed. (before then they were all "UFOs")

I think they blamed it on the migs in the end looking at google.

But Russian media had footage of the wreckage and were shouting about how great their new missile system was.

Its about time they started declassifying more of the passive radar stuff though. Explains totally why EA wasn't the success it was supposed to be.

NOPE. sorry it was a "THEORETICAL INTERCEPT" Read this quote i found an d look it up.

"For those who doubt the validity of my original post, see Jane's Fighter Combat
in the Jet Age page 116-117 "SR71 the Ultimate Target" . June 3, 1986 an SR was
on a mission over the Barents Sea. "Six Mig 31 Foxhounds, vastly superior to
the Mig25 Foxbat,performed a coordinated intercept that would have subjected
the SR71 to an all-angle AAM attack that even a combination of high-altitude
maneuverability and ECM could not have defeated. Fortunately for the American
jet, the interception took place over international waters, but the Soviets
proved their point." The Mig 31 is no ****box; it shouldn't be,'cause they
stole some of our best stuff to stick in the radome. Sorry that my mistake
about the year fueled a passionate reply from those who expect nothing less
than perfection from the SR71.

SO your SOurce is incorrect. A theoretical shoot down is not a REAL SHOOT DOWN. The only ones the russians ever shot down was a U2.

a reply to: yuppa

s300 is a vastly superior aa system than a mig31.

capable of taking out an icbm in space.

night/day doesn't make any difference.
stealth - no point. the latest passive radar measures air disturbance down to a few inches.

mig31 was just a cover story for classified events.

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: yuppa

s300 is a vastly superior aa system than a mig31.

capable of taking out an icbm in space.

night/day doesn't make any difference.
stealth - no point. the latest passive radar measures air disturbance down to a few inches.

mig31 was just a cover story for classified events.

You seemed to have went from a sr-71 shoot down to S-300. why?
A S-300 that cant aquire a target due to its being BELOW ITS RADAR is just another dead target. The F-35 is a S-300 killer. so is the f-22 since it can get within 25 miles before detection according to greek testing. the glide range of some of the bombs on a f-22 are 60 miles. the newer anti radiation missiles we have also can use passive/active and image/IR/and loiter in the relative area to attack the radars an d launchers. So once agin S-300 not that great.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: yuppa

s300 is a vastly superior aa system than a mig31.

capable of taking out an icbm in space.

night/day doesn't make any difference.
stealth - no point. the latest passive radar measures air disturbance down to a few inches.

mig31 was just a cover story for classified events.

You seemed to have went from a sr-71 shoot down to S-300. why?
A S-300 that cant aquire a target due to its being BELOW ITS RADAR is just another dead target. The F-35 is a S-300 killer. so is the f-22 since it can get within 25 miles before detection according to greek testing. the glide range of some of the bombs on a f-22 are 60 miles. the newer anti radiation missiles we have also can use passive/active and image/IR/and loiter in the relative area to attack the radars an d launchers. So once agin S-300 not that great.

there is no "below it's radar" with the s300. it's a large scale integrated system.
there is above.
125km high.

"down to a few inches" is the level of accuracy they get on measureing air disturbance.
like the weather guys use to see clouds or snow or rain only real time and much more detailed.

you could even posit the mig31s were part of it.
how do you think they knew to be there in the first place?
accidently?

again passive radar.
look it up.
there is no ecm that can counter passive radar. it is measuring airspeed of the air. from multiple mobile receivers which are only detectable by visual and Los.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Israel cannot take on Iran without the US.

Well as far as militarily, Israel could take care of Iran without the US.

As this shows Iran is ranked 5th in the ME, while Israel is ranked 1st.

www.businessinsider.com...

When it comes down to it Israel finds a way to win.

a reply to: 200Plus

Russia plants a "missile defense systems" in Iran and it's all good because obviously it's only a defensive weapon.

The US plants a "missile defense system" in Europe and it's an act of aggression against Russia.

Well that's because according to some the US is the cause of all bad things done throughout history, and some will blame us for something in the future.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: 200Plus

Russia plants a "missile defense systems" in Iran and it's all good because obviously it's only a defensive weapon.

The US plants a "missile defense system" in Europe and it's an act of aggression against Russia.

Well that's because according to some the US is the cause of all bad things done throughout history, and some will blame us for something in the future.

yeah but boy do they love our foreign aid!

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

originally posted by: xuenchen
Well this will make the P5+1 talks interesting.

Especially 'cause Russia is one of the P5.

Obama turns cheek.

Kerry turns cheek.

Putin smirks loudly.

Rouhani smirks in private.

edit on Apr-13-2015 by xuenchen because: ;;66[_||_]44;;

And all the Neo-Cons s# in their diapers at Peace in the Middle East.


Sad, I know.

Course they do, its the end of the gravy train.

How much money did Bush and Cheny make again off there wars?

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Israel cannot take on Iran without the US.

Well as far as militarily, Israel could take care of Iran without the US.

As this shows Iran is ranked 5th in the ME, while Israel is ranked 1st.

www.businessinsider.com...

When it comes down to it Israel finds a way to win.

It doesn't take into account "near" ME countries like Turkey(who IS #1 in the region) and Egypt.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

yeah but boy do they love our foreign aid!

Who doesn't?