Mil News Current Iran/Iraq/US Tensions and Actions Unfolding

[Euroamerican]

The Admiral Kuznetson is still docked @ the Zvezdochka ship repair yard in Murmansk having her heads unclogged. Launched in 85 & still has a few issues.

The aerial shots in Google Maps show her not looking quite ready to sail, but what about SSGNs?

 

[FLYNAVY]

The aerial shots in Google Maps show her not looking quite ready to sail, but what about SSGNs?

A few Oscars left Vilyuchinsk last thursday but I think that might be normal. For the Admiral to set sail it would probably take a few weeks to take the scaffolding down, do the fire repairs & shovel snow off her.

 

[FLYNAVY]

A video from a few years ago of the Kuznetsov in better days off Syria.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[BCNTM]

The aerial shots in Google Maps show her not looking quite ready to sail, but what about SSGNs?

They managed to get the crane off the top of it - just hope they have sorted the engines as you were more likely to die of the pollution it chucked out than the planes it had onboard
At least you always know where it is as you just track its tugs

 

[BCNTM]

A few Oscars left Vilyuchinsk last thursday but I think that might be normal. For the Admiral to set sail it would probably take a few weeks to take the scaffolding down, do the fire repairs & shovel snow off her. View attachment 283821

That crane looks a real threat

 

[Mardonius]

Which bases? Dear Lord, so many! Let's start with Whiteman Airforce Base in Missouri. They'd probably divert to Diego Garcia after the first evening of festivities, just to shorten their daily commute.

As you may be aware, it takes persistence to close down ONE air base. It takes MUCH MORE to close down many. On day 2, runways would be repaired, casualties evacuated, aircraft replaced. On that same day 2 for Iran, there would be no air defences , no power grid, no communications, no transportation, no anything. By day 3, the Mullahs would be wondering where they can escape to, to spend their stolen billions. Oh too late, those assets have been frozen/seized.

And once the IRGC is destroyed, what will the Iranian people and Iranian military do? Lots of unanswered questions when you open Pandora's Box.

Also, what will Israel and SA do after the first few days when they see Iran has been rendered defenseless? Lots to think about.

The same Saudis and Israelis that are flanked by proxy groups that are loyal to Iran? The same Israel that failed to defeat Hezbollah in 2006, and now has to live with a semi IRGC division next to its border that has more than 100.000 rockets (including guided missiles) in its arsenal? The same Saudi that faces weekly ballistic missile + drone attacks against it critical infrastructure, having failed to defeat the Houthis in 5+ year old conflict?

Iran influences an area that spans all the way from Afghanistan, Red Sea to the shores of the Eastern Mediterranean. In any conflict with a regional or international actor, Iran will unleash a fury of missile attacks that will set fire to the entire region. Dubai and Abu Dhabi will be utterly destroyed; the Saudis will lose all of their oil fields within minutes; Israel would be confronted by a determined Hezbollah that has the ability to hit every point on Israeli soil; every US base in the Middle East will face unrelenting attacks of ballistic and cruise missiles from every angle imaginable.

The idea that the US can keep these bases operational in the face of missiles, drones and rockets is absurd. If the Ain al-Asad attack has proven anything, it is the absolute horror that the soldiers at that base experienced when those missiles were hitting pre-arranged targets. We have reports of American and Danish soldiers being completely paralysed, crying out loud and refusing to leave their bunkers even hours after the last missile struck the base. In addition, it took a little more than a dozen of missiles to leave 100+ Americans with traumatic brain injuries that left them too injured to continue operations. And Iran did not even really try to cause casualties.

Now let's agree for the sake of the discussion with Ivan le Fool, who summed up all the bad things that Iran has done in the Middle East for the past decades, including causing hundreds if not thousands of American KIAs, supporting proxy groups, attacking ships in the Persian Gulf, supporting Hezbollah against Israel, advancing its nuclear program up to the point of nearly being a nuclear threshold state; building an advanced missile arsenal that could hit every corner in the region; etc.

Why hasn't Iran been attacked thus far? Israel has subdued countries for far less. It attacked Syrian and Iraqi nuclear facilities when they were in their infancy, yet it has allowed Iran to build a nuclear industry that is much more advanced and underground than anything the Syrians and Iraqis have ever accomplished. Failing to conventionally confront Iran for decades, it has resorted under the security umbrella of the Americans to assassinations and cyber attacks which the Iranians easily have overcome. The Americans primary weapon, sanctions, have similarly failed to force Iran on its knees.

You guys are trying hard to sum up reasons why Iran should be really afraid of the all-mighty Americans that reportedly have all kinds of wonder-weapons available to them that could quickly neutralize the Iranian threat whenever they want so (funny how these same wonder-weapons are failing in a 2 decades long conflict against the Taliban). Yet, despite all these fancy arguments, the reality is that the Iranians have hardly flinched. Not impressed by all the technological edges of the yanks and the empty threats of the Israelis, Iran has advanced on all of its strategic fronts: nuclear, missile and regional influence through allied groups and governments.

And this is easy to explain: Iran is heir to one of the oldest civilizations on earth, with a military culture that spans more than 3000 years. It is known for its scientific-minded people that have made all kinds of contributions to the world ever since their ascendency. Its leaders have throughout history been known for their strategic ingenuity and competency for warfare, which is exemplary to the Indo-European nature of Iranian culture. Combined with a highly nationalistic citizenry with strong ideological convictions, and it is of no surprise that Iran continues to defy the strongest actors in the world.

The idea that a proud country like Iran, which would hands down be the most competent and prepared actor the US has faced ever since the end of WW2 if conflict breaks out, would surrender in the face of foreign pressure is ludicrous. You guys are all living in la-la land. The period of western dominance is all but over; the quicker y'all wake up to the new reality, the less humiliations y'all suffer.

 

[Yevgeny]

A few Oscars left Vilyuchinsk last thursday but I think that might be normal.

How do you know that?

For the Admiral to set sail it would probably take a few weeks to take the scaffolding down, do the fire repairs & shovel snow off her.

You must be kidding. It will take years before Kuznetsov is back to service if ever...

 

[Chazman]

The same Saudis and Israelis that are flanked by proxy groups that are loyal to Iran? The same Israel that failed to defeat Hezbollah in 2006, and now has to live with a semi IRGC division next to its border that has more than 100.000 rockets (including guided missiles) in its arsenal? The same Saudi that faces weekly ballistic missile + drone attacks against it critical infrastructure, having failed to defeat the Houthis in 5+ year old conflict?

Iran influences an area that spans all the way from Afghanistan, Red Sea to the shores of the Eastern Mediterranean. In any conflict with a regional or international actor, Iran will unleash a fury of missile attacks that will set fire to the entire region. Dubai and Abu Dhabi will be utterly destroyed; the Saudis will lose all of their oil fields within minutes; Israel would be confronted by a determined Hezbollah that has the ability to hit every point on Israeli soil; every US base in the Middle East will face unrelenting attacks of ballistic and cruise missiles from every angle imaginable.

The idea that the US can keep these bases operational in the face of missiles, drones and rockets is absurd. If the Ain al-Asad attack has proven anything, it is the absolute horror that the soldiers at that base experienced when those missiles were hitting pre-arranged targets. We have reports of American and Danish soldiers being completely paralysed, crying out loud and refusing to leave their bunkers even hours after the last missile struck the base. In addition, it took a little more than a dozen of missiles to leave 100+ Americans with traumatic brain injuries that left them too injured to continue operations. And Iran did not even really try to cause casualties.

Now let's agree for the sake of the discussion with Ivan le Fool, who summed up all the bad things that Iran has done in the Middle East for the past decades, including causing hundreds if not thousands of American KIAs, supporting proxy groups, attacking ships in the Persian Gulf, supporting Hezbollah against Israel, advancing its nuclear program up to the point of nearly being a nuclear threshold state; building an advanced missile arsenal that could hit every corner in the region; etc.

Why hasn't Iran been attacked thus far? Israel has subdued countries for far less. It attacked Syrian and Iraqi nuclear facilities when they were in their infancy, yet it has allowed Iran to build a nuclear industry that is much more advanced and underground than anything the Syrians and Iraqis have ever accomplished. Failing to conventionally confront Iran for decades, it has resorted under the security umbrella of the Americans to assassinations and cyber attacks which the Iranians easily have overcome. The Americans primary weapon, sanctions, have similarly failed to force Iran on its knees.

You guys are trying hard to sum up reasons why Iran should be really afraid of the all-mighty Americans that reportedly have all kinds of wonder-weapons available to them that could quickly neutralize the Iranian threat whenever they want so (funny how these same wonder-weapons are failing in a 2 decades long conflict against the Taliban). Yet, despite all these fancy arguments, the reality is that the Iranians have hardly flinched. Not impressed by all the technological edges of the yanks and the empty threats of the Israelis, Iran has advanced on all of its strategic fronts: nuclear, missile and regional influence through allied groups and governments.

And this is easy to explain: Iran is heir to one of the oldest civilizations on earth, with a military culture that spans more than 3000 years. It is known for its scientific-minded people that have made all kinds of contributions to the world ever since their ascendency. Its leaders have throughout history been known for their strategic ingenuity and competency for warfare, which is exemplary to the Indo-European nature of Iranian culture. Combined with a highly nationalistic citizenry with strong ideological convictions, and it is of no surprise that Iran continues to defy the strongest actors in the world.

The idea that a proud country like Iran, which would hands down be the most competent and prepared actor the US has faced ever since the end of WW2 if conflict breaks out, would surrender in the face of foreign pressure is ludicrous. You guys are all living in la-la land. The period of western dominance is all but over; the quicker y'all wake up to the new reality, the less humiliations y'all suffer.

A few things to unpack here.

No doubt Israel and SA would prefer to have the US take down Iran. Israel could start a war with Iran, but it is unknown if they could finish it. Saudi Arabia? Well, they have a lot of fancy hardware, money and strategically located bases. SA is already fighting several proxy wars with Iran, namely Syria and Yemen. BTW, Syria will be both tragic and interesting in the coming years as Assad, Russia and Turkey vie for the upper hand and Iran gets sidelined. Israel has certainly destroyed lots of Iranian or Iranian backed targets there. I digress....

The al-Assad attack was in the world of Realpolitik, a tit for tat for the for the killing of Soleimani. Just enough to save some face, but not enough to trigger a response by the US. And I think you'll agree, all parties decided to leave it at that.

The point you are missing is that no one wants to destroy Iran. The people of Iran are generally good and progressive. But they are ruled by an oppressive dictatorship. The people of Iran want freedom and I trust they will eventually get it. There is nothing to be gained by the US for getting into a war with Iran.

 

[Mardonius]

No doubt Israel and SA would prefer to have the US take down Iran. Israel could start a war with Iran, but it is unknown if they could finish it.

That is not unknown. We have the former Israeli Chief of Staff outright denying that Israel can finish Iran. Watch at 38:30 and 52:25:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Saudi Arabia? Well, they have a lot of fancy hardware, money and strategically located bases. SA is already fighting several proxy wars with Iran, namely Syria and Yemen.

The Saudis are monkeys with Macbooks. They have absolutely no idea how to integrate all those fancy hardware into a competent military force. They have been decisively defeated by Iran both in Syria and Yemen.

BTW, Syria will be both tragic and interesting in the coming years as Assad, Russia and Turkey vie for the upper hand and Iran gets sidelined. Israel has certainly destroyed lots of Iranian or Iranian backed targets there. I digress...

Iran has more influence in Syria than which country whatsoever, and will not get sidelined by those aforementioned countries. Moreover, Iran is part of the Astana process together with Russia and Turkey.

The Israelis have targetted unmanned Iranian warehouses at night in Syria, but that has similarly failed to uproot Iranian influence and positions within the country. In the end, Israel is reactive to pro-active Iranian manoeuvrers at its borders, so it will always lag behind the events.

The al-Assad attack was in the world of Realpolitik, a tit for tat for the for the killing of Soleimani. Just enough to save some face, but not enough to trigger a response by the US. And I think you'll agree, all parties decided to leave it at that.

The Ain-al Asad attack was more a demonstration of ability by Iran, trying to showcase the incredibly accuracy of its missiles. Simply demonstrating what the US can expect in case of an all-out conflict. And it seems like the US got the message:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The point you are missing is that no one wants to destroy Iran. The people of Iran are generally good and progressive. But they are ruled by an oppressive dictatorship. The people of Iran want freedom and I trust they will eventually get it. There is nothing to be gained by the US for getting into a war with Iran.

There are a lot of actors on the international- and regional stage that want to destroy Iran. I mean, even in your country I could name at least a handful of powerful people that have publicly stated their desire to completely subdue Iran.

My point is that Iran is simply too strong to be attacked. If it wasn't, it would have been ganged up on already in the past.

 

[Chazman]

That is not unknown. We have the former Israeli Chief of Staff outright denying that Israel can finish Iran. Watch at 38:30 and 52:25:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The Saudis are monkeys with Macbooks. They have absolutely no idea how to integrate all those fancy hardware into a competent military force. They have been decisively defeated by Iran both in Syria and Yemen.



Iran has more influence in Syria than which country whatsoever, and will not get sidelined by those aforementioned countries. Moreover, Iran is part of the Astana process together with Russia and Turkey.

The Israelis have targetted unmanned Iranian warehouses at night in Syria, but that has similarly failed to uproot Iranian influence and positions within the country. In the end, Israel is reactive to pro-active Iranian manoeuvrers at its borders, so it will always lag behind the events.



The Ain-al Asad attack was more a demonstration of ability by Iran, trying to showcase the incredibly accuracy of its missiles. Simply demonstrating what the US can expect in case of an all-out conflict. And it seems like the US got the message:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

There are a lot of actors on the international- and regional stage that want to destroy Iran. I mean, even in your country I could name at least a handful of powerful people that have publicly stated their desire to completely subdue Iran.

My point is that Iran is simply too strong to be attacked. If it wasn't, it would have been ganged up on already in the past.

I guess if you want to find the message you want, you can through interpretation and extrapolation.

The Israeli said that Israel didn't have the capability to create Expeditionary Forces like the US and that Iran operates at a higher level of sophistication than ISIS. All that is true. That doesn't mean that Israel won't nuke Iran if it feels an existential threat, in the way that the corrupt Mullahs threaten to wipe Israel off the map the moment they get nuclear weapons.

No argument on the Saudis.

You are dreaming if you think the "US got the message" in that strike. I explained to you, it was a tit for tat and all parties agreed to leave it at that. Soleimani is dead, (at last), at the expense of several empty buildings. You need to read a bit less mind numbing propaganda.

Regarding Syria, things may spiral out of control there. Just a couple days ago, Erdogan threatened military action against those who fired missiles at the oil facilities. Was that Russia? Syria? Iran? We'll see.
Israel has destroyed quite a bit more than unmanned warehouses in Syria. There was that destroyed nuclear facility several years ago, where reportedly dozens of Iranian technicians were killed, for one. Many convoys loaded with missiles to Lebanon have also been destroyed.

No one, except maybe Israel as a last resort, is planning on attacking Iran. No one wants to conquer Iran. Most want a free Iran. Hopefully that will happen soon. The Iranian people deserve freedom from the corrupt regime which oppresses them.

 

[FLYNAVY]

How do you know that?

Ivan, a friend of a friend knows someone's Grandmother that has a submarine screw hobby.......

You must be kidding. It will take years before Kuznetsov is back to service if ever...

You might be right, the sea trial schedule seems to change every week, if ever. Maybe they're thinking they can make do with the 2 new LDs under construction.

 

[Yevgeny]

Does the Grandma know anything about movements by China's Navy?

 

[Yevgeny]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Fluff]

As long as it floats, its a carrier!!

 

[Fluff]

Does the Grandma know anything about movements by China's Navy?

what? Are you suggesting his Grandma is a chinese spy? She probably has had more communists than you have had hot dinners!

 

[Fluff]

That is not unknown. We have the former Israeli Chief of Staff outright denying that Israel can finish Iran. Watch at 38:30 and 52:25:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The Saudis are monkeys with Macbooks. They have absolutely no idea how to integrate all those fancy hardware into a competent military force. They have been decisively defeated by Iran both in Syria and Yemen.



Iran has more influence in Syria than which country whatsoever, and will not get sidelined by those aforementioned countries. Moreover, Iran is part of the Astana process together with Russia and Turkey.

The Israelis have targetted unmanned Iranian warehouses at night in Syria, but that has similarly failed to uproot Iranian influence and positions within the country. In the end, Israel is reactive to pro-active Iranian manoeuvrers at its borders, so it will always lag behind the events.



The Ain-al Asad attack was more a demonstration of ability by Iran, trying to showcase the incredibly accuracy of its missiles. Simply demonstrating what the US can expect in case of an all-out conflict. And it seems like the US got the message:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

There are a lot of actors on the international- and regional stage that want to destroy Iran. I mean, even in your country I could name at least a handful of powerful people that have publicly stated their desire to completely subdue Iran.

My point is that Iran is simply too strong to be attacked. If it wasn't, it would have been ganged up on already in the past.

1 - Israel 9 million people, Iran 83 million, I dare say those clever Juice have calculated they dont have enough bombs, on their own.
2 - Your dumber than a poostick if you think US didnt learn things from the missile attack. Maybe just maybe they played you, with the guys crying for their mamas? Note the west has lost thousands of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Still there. Maybe you dont understand the reason we are still there?
3 - Ivan Le fool is funny. Maybe even stays funny, more than once.
4- back to number 1 - Isreal without using nukes, could make life very uncomfortable for Iran. If Hezbollah start from Syria and lebanon, then they will lose a lot of people, like they did last time. Not reporting casualties doesn't mean there weren't any.
5- Isreal has nukes, so be a really bad idea to push them too far. I dont believe Iran has the political skills, nor the balanced internal discussions, to judge this accurately.
6 - UK has been attacked, USA has been attacked, Russia, etc. Iran is not in any way special, and is most certainly not too strong to be attacked.
7- things seem to be shaping up for a show down. My $ is not on Iran. The west or whoever attacks, like to minimise deaths. So expect a lot of material losses, in all areas. Probably leave you with your swing wing supersonic inteceptors, but only so you can sell them to museums.

Thats my tuppence.

 

[Ivan le Fou]

3 - Ivan Le fool is funny. Maybe even stays funny, more than once.

Aw.

 

[Chazman]

Not reporting casualties doesn't mean there weren't any.

Hezbollah took the brunt of "Iran's" casualties in Syria. We'll see how happy the rank and file are to die for Iran in the future.

 

[Mardonius]

The Israeli said that Israel didn't have the capability to create Expeditionary Forces like the US and that Iran operates at a higher level of sophistication than ISIS. All that is true. That doesn't mean that Israel won't nuke Iran if it feels an existential threat, in the way that the corrupt Mullahs threaten to wipe Israel off the map the moment they get nuclear weapons.

There is always the possibility that Israel might resort to nuclear weapons at one point, but that would open Pandora's box with likely grave consequences. And even then it is questionable whether nuclear weapons could completely nullify Iran's nuclear program.

But if Israel has nuclear weapons, which we all know they have, its possession of such weapons in itself gives them a strong strategic deterrence.

Iran is never going to use nuclear weapons. Not against Israel or any other state. Iran's security establishment simply isn't suicidal.

You are dreaming if you think the "US got the message" in that strike. I explained to you, it was a tit for tat and all parties agreed to leave it at that. Soleimani is dead, (at last), at the expense of several empty buildings. You need to read a bit less mind numbing propaganda.

Of course the US got the message. Iran displayed its latest technological achievement by accurately hitting a US base with ballistic missiles. How many countries have openly fired ballistic missiles at American air bases? None, excluding Iran.

The message was loud and clear, and if you are closely watching military developments in the region you would've known that the US is adjusting its regional posture as a consequence of that attack, including making plans to move its bases to western KSA to decrease vulnerability.

Regarding Syria, things may spiral out of control there. Just a couple days ago, Erdogan threatened military action against those who fired missiles at the oil facilities. Was that Russia? Syria? Iran? We'll see.

Last week, Erdogan threatened to invade Sinjar to drive the PKK away from the region. Until Iranian-backed militias fired a rocket at Turkish forces and threatened to confront the Turkish army in case they move forward with their plans.

Erdogan may be a powerful actor, but Iran has the region by the balls and they know it.

Israel has destroyed quite a bit more than unmanned warehouses in Syria. There was that destroyed nuclear facility several years ago, where reportedly dozens of Iranian technicians were killed, for one. Many convoys loaded with missiles to Lebanon have also been destroyed.

Israel attacks at night to prevent Iranian casualties, while both sides have pretty much accepted a free-for-all situation in Syria in which the rules of the game are looser than elsewhere.

My point is that Israel is reacting to Iranian moves; not the other way around. Even if it occasionally manages to halt certain weapon deliveries, it won't be able to completely stop Iranian entrenchment and logistical supplies to the likes of Hezbollah. Iran has mastered operating smuggling routes to supply its proxies with the necessary equipment.

No one, except maybe Israel as a last resort, is planning on attacking Iran. No one wants to conquer Iran. Most want a free Iran. Hopefully that will happen soon. The Iranian people deserve freedom from the corrupt regime which oppresses them.

The US has been planning to attack Iran ever since the Bush administration. As the saying went in Washington at the time, when the US invaded Iraq:

“Boys go to Baghdad, but real men go to Tehran”

So your argument that no one really wants to confront Iran is absurd. Iran isn't being left alone because it doesn't pose a threat, because it clearly does, but because Iran has acquired all kinds of means and capabilities over the decades that would bring any actor with plans of a pre-emptive attack enormous costs.

 

[Mardonius]

Hezbollah took the brunt of "Iran's" casualties in Syria. We'll see how happy the rank and file are to die for Iran in the future.

Look. I'm not trying to offend anyone over here, but you westerners are absolutely clueless when it comes the Middle East. The ideological and religious links between Hezbollah and Iran run so deep, that there is absolutely no doubt that all of its members would indeed be willing to die for Iran.

Lebanon's Shia community pretty much owns it existence to Iran.