Middle East Defence & Security

T

T.C.P

Well-Known Member
Feanor said:
. On the other hand, the sad non-performance by the Iranian navy points to the exact same thing. All destroyed in port without even making an effort to do something. I guess it's really leaving me confused. The US was building up forces for quite some time before launching this war, and everyone was playing the guessing game about when the war would start in the run-up. Surely the US knew on some level that a war was a real possibility. And Iran had to know it was possible, if not imminent.
Click to expand...

I mean what else is the Iranian navy supposed to do??

Being parked in ports, mean the ships can be salvaged later. They would have been taken down in open waters anyways.

Iran's only bet is to develop more USVs for kamikaze atacks and remote mining.

I am more interested in the status of the Iranian Kilos. Are they still alive? Are they in sailing conditions? The subs are the only thing that could give them some assymetric tools in Hormuz.
 
T

T.C.P

Well-Known Member
Feanor said:
EDIT2: Just read an interesting point on a Russian site. There are Pantsyr SAMs in the UAE, and possibly in Saudi Arabia, and it would make sense to use these systems against things like Iranian Shaheds. They will burn through missile stockpiles, meaning they may be reaching out to Russia for SAMs to replace expended munitions. Will Russia supply them? On the one hand Russia has a shortage of SAMs itself, on the other hand Russia probably won't want to be seen as an unreliable partner, on the third hand Iran is a strategic partner for Russia. It's quite the conundrum.
Click to expand...

How funny would it be if Russia sent some drone hunting teams with Yolka interceptors to protect the commercial ports of UAE and the ARAMCO facilities. I would fall off my chair laughing.
 
K

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
T.C.P said:
I am more interested in the status of the Iranian Kilos. Are they still alive? Are they in sailing conditions? The subs are the only thing that could give them some assymetric tools in Hormuz.
Click to expand...
From what I have seen and read, none of the subs have moved, while the vessels around were struck multiple times. Probably an indication that they are not in sailing condition and Israel and US know about it.
 
T

T.C.P

Well-Known Member
KipPotapych said:
From what I have seen and read, none of the subs have moved, while the vessels around were struck multiple times. Probably an indication that they are not in sailing condition and Israel and US know about it.
Click to expand...
Iran has a bunch of Little Person submarines. Can they be used for mining operations?
 
K

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
T.C.P said:
Iran has a bunch of Little Person submarines. Can they be used for mining operations?
Click to expand...
I do not have the answer for that, sorry.


Another genius. Literally, he said that Iran was an imminent threat for 47 years, so Trump was right to act. Where do they get these people and why are they on TV?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2028854712678707321


As posted above my post, the Ghost of Kyiv Kuwait had entered the room:

IMG_4191.jpeg


Saw some analysis of the released strike videos and it appears that Iran is using cheap Shahed decoys. Here is one example:

IMG_4181.jpeg


An NYT article (currently without paywall) talking about some damage to the US military infrastructure caused by the Iranian strikes and I am fairly certain it is not complete as I have seen a few more sites hit as evidenced from the satellite imagery:


Iran has not only had some success hitting US military installations, but in the political spectrum as well:

IMG_4186.jpeg


Trump is determined to provide a “reasonably priced” insurance to all maritime traffic in the Gulf, especially energy related; also, US Navy escorts through Hormuz. Imagine being an American and supporting this nonsense: paying for the war, paying more for natural gas and at the gas pump (and another round of inflation), and now subsidizing oil and gas flows through out the world, including those heading to… drum roll… Jina!

IMG_4182.jpeg

Now with the reports of the plan to involve the Kurds to either destabilize the country or occupy part of its territory with intent unknown, this appears to be a long haul. Kurds are in for the “fell for it again” award if the reports are true and the plan materializes. Zero chance general populace in Iran will support any of it and what remains of the regime will only harden and gain support, in my opinion.


For those who want a peak at the first “victims” of the war and Hormuz in particular, take a look at the Korean stock exchange (google KOSPI) - down nearly 12% at the moment.
 
K

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
Some humour on the subject:

IMG_4179.jpeg

(They did though and it appears to be the martyr’s son, potentially soon to be a martyr the way things are going?)


IMG_4175.jpeg


IMG_4171.jpeg


IMG_4176.jpeg


Also (serious) humour: one cannot help but wonder what Merz and other Euros, but Merz expressed it today, think about the “day after” if the plan is to destabilize the country (Israel’s plan is probably to wreck the state altogether) and what that “day after” entails for Europe. Merz threw his full support behind it. Will be interesting to return to this some months and years from now.
 
K

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Curious situation with IRIS Dena. She was just in India to attend the International Fleet Review (IFR2026) and MILAN 2026 exercises. With war breaking out, it would have made sense for her to shelter in a port outside of Iran.

And now she is sinking in Sri Lanka's territorial waters.

If she was attacked by US forces, it would be a significant escalation. One, it signals all Iranian military assets overseas are potential targets, and two, it is a grave violation of another nation who had no business in the conflict (which is an unsanctioned military operation by the US and Israel)

seawaves.com

Iranian Corvette Dena Participates in MILAN 2026 - SeaWaves Magazine

Iran’s Dena destroyer has participated in MILAN 2026 Naval Exercise in India, which was held with the participation of 72 countries and hosted by the Indian Navy. The event, hosted by the Indian Navy, began with the participation of 72 countries in the port of Visakhapatnam. This 10-day...
seawaves.com seawaves.com
www.channelnewsasia.com

Sri Lanka rescues 32 sailors from sunk Iranian warship

No information was immediately available on the cause of the explosion that sank the IRIS Dena, Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath said.
www.channelnewsasia.com www.channelnewsasia.com
 
DDG38

DDG38

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Sudden explosion at sea, sounds like either an accident on board or ASM/SLASM strike. Diego Garcia is around 3000km away, could be an SSN lurking in the area as well. If it was an attack you would think they would have waited until she was further out, or maybe someone wanted to give the crew a chance of survival. Won't know more until they interview the crew and information is released.
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
Sinking ships won't win this war. You can sink Iran's entire navy, shoot down its entire airforce and you still won't win. Really Trump and Netanyahu are gambling on regime change. Eventually America will run out of missiles and then what? I am not seeing any exit strategy here.

If there isn't regime change America will eventually be forced to withdraw. Iran will go back to trying to build nukes and sponsoring international terrorism. I doubt the US could stomach another Middle East land war.

What we might be seeing are the death throes of a fading superpower. America is gambling that it will score a quick win through airpower alone. I am not seeing a Plan B.
 
Sandhi Yudha

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
hauritz said:
Sinking ships won't win this war. You can sink Iran's entire navy, shoot down its entire airforce and you still won't win. Really Trump and Netanyahu are gambling on regime change. Eventually America will run out of missiles and then what? I am not seeing any exit strategy here.

If there isn't regime change America will eventually be forced to withdraw. Iran will go back to trying to build nukes and sponsoring international terrorism. I doubt the US could stomach another Middle East land war.

What we might be seeing are the death throes of a fading superpower. America is gambling that it will score a quick win through airpower alone. I am not seeing a Plan B.
Click to expand...
I expect the US will eventually stop the attacks and claim they won the war, like they did in Afghanistan. And after that the orange man demands the Nobel Price for Peace because thanks to him the world became a better place.
 
S

SinisterMinister

Member
KipPotapych said:
Also (serious) humour: one cannot help but wonder what Merz and other Euros, but Merz expressed it today, think about the “day after” if the plan is to destabilize the country (Israel’s plan is probably to wreck the state altogether) and what that “day after” entails for Europe. Merz threw his full support behind it. Will be interesting to return to this some months and years from now.
Click to expand...
Carney at least seems to have quickly realized his error in so eagerly jumping aboard the train. The Euro leaders (Rutte, Van der Leyen and Merz in particular) have capitulated to Trump in such a humiliating way that their political survival beyond the next year seems unlikely. How could they not understand how unpopular and short-sighted this war is?

Sandhi Yudha said:
I expect the US will eventually stop the attacks and claim they won the war, like they did in Afghanistan. And after that the orange man demands the Nobel Price for Peace because thanks to him the world became a better place.
Click to expand...
The problem is, will Iran stop striking Gulf oil infrastructure and US bases? They seem unlikely to settle for a simple ceasefire that allows the US and Israel to come at them again in a year.
 
Ananda

Ananda

The Bunker Group
www.theguardian.com

US submarine sank Iranian warship off Sri Lanka’s coast, Hegseth says

Defence secretary confirms strike on Iris Dena in first US attack on Iranian forces outside Middle East during conflict
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

"It was sunk by a torpedo, a quiet death – the first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since world war II,” said Hegseth. “Like in that war, back when we were still the war department, we are fighting to win.”
Click to expand...
Did he really means first sinking by US Navy or by any Navy. If first one, then his right. If second one then is Pentagon staff really gulible and let him talk that as fact ?

At least Pakistan sunk India Destroyer, Brits sunk Argentina Cruiser and DPRK sunk ROK Corvette. All with torpedoes and no matter how Hegseth like to bragging, it is not going to hide the fact, this is not first warship being sunk by torpedo after WW2.
 
P

personaldesas

Active Member

The article argues that the US-Israeli war against Iran has been a major operational military success so far, even though the political strategy behind it is messy and unclear.

Militarily, the campaign has been massive and highly coordinated. In just a few days the US claims to have hit nearly 2,000 targets, while Israel is striking around 1,000 targets per day. Iran’s weakened air defenses allow American and Israeli aircraft to operate over Iranian territory and use large numbers of guided bombs rather than expensive stand-off weapons.

The two countries have divided Iran into operational zones:
• Israel focuses on western and central Iran (including Tehran) and regime targets.
• The US focuses on southern Iran and naval forces.

Iran’s military capabilities appear to be degrading quickly: missile launches and drone attacks have dropped sharply, and there are reports of Iranian security forces failing to report for duty.

The war is being fought with a mix of new technologies and weapons, including cheap attack drones, new US ballistic missiles, and AI-assisted targeting.

However, military success does not necessarily achieve the political goal, which seems to include weakening or collapsing the Iranian regime. The article notes that even overwhelming military attrition does not guarantee regime change, leaving the long-term outcome uncertain.
 
P

personaldesas

Active Member
Ananda said:
Did he really means first sinking by US Navy or by any Navy. If first one, then his right. If second one then is Pentagon staff really gulible and let him talk that as fact ?
Click to expand...
Thinking this was meant in a general sense would be quite an uncharitable reading. I wouldn’t necessarily put it past Hegseth to say something sloppy like that, but the phrasing in context seems to refer to the first use by the US Navy since WWII, not globally.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top