Iran's new strategy to counter U.S. military strike.

funtz

New Member
Send in the troops i say, occupy them, put in a dummy government, give all the oil contracts to US based firms. Make profit till the sun shines (all that is going to happen is the international section of newspaper covered with pictures and comments from the US, Iran and some times France)

Its not going to help in iraq in any way, but hey atleast you get some profits, as i said before and as the article states
What will they do about Syria, and its not like changing the supply route to some other border is all that difficult
As for the Irans involvement it is there it will be there, money, men , weapons , training.

If they are nor supplying iraqi insurgents with money,weapons training etc. etc., what are they doing its the best time to bog down the US, the aforementioned international arms market is there. They are already doing it quite evedently with hezbolla.
 
Last edited:

metro

New Member
A quote from the article



Full scale attack? limited strike? send in ground troops? occupation?
1) I know you read a lot an I respect you opinion. I also believe you know how important it is to read/find the 1st hand sources on your own. As with most articles by Hersh, unnamed sources who are qualified with some "top position," seem to fill his writings. Even saying "His writings" (IMO), is very dubious. I believe that article is filled with a selection of pieces, pieced together by Hersh, using "his unbelievable set" of unnamed contacts (IMO, it's something that shows up often in "his articles"). Reading Hersh almost always gives me a feeling of deja-vu.

2) What does the end of that quote you posted by Kay say. I think the way it is posted/edited is a bit misleading as it doesn't provide the full context of what he said (i.e. the end of the sentence).
 
1) I know you read a lot an I respect you opinion. I also believe you know how important it is to read/find the 1st hand sources on your own. As with most articles by Hersh, unnamed sources who are qualified with some "top position," seem to fill his writings. Even saying "His writings" (IMO), is very dubious. I believe that article is filled with a selection of pieces, pieced together by Hersh, using "his unbelievable set" of unnamed contacts (IMO, it's something that shows up often in "his articles"). Reading Hersh almost always gives me a feeling of deja-vu.
I find Sy Hersh as credible as they come based on his past reporting. Some of his sources that he used in the article are still in govt. which is why they can't be named. If you look at his field of work from the Vietnam war to now, he has a very good track record.
 
Last edited:

Firehorse

Banned Member
plan of attack

'War on terror' has been a 'disaster': British think tank
"Whatever the problems with Iran, war should be avoided at all costs -- the mistakes already made will be completely overshadowed by the consequences of a war with Iran."
My question is: should there be attempt to target the Iranian Navy, can USN SEALS/SOF capture at least one of their 3 Kilo subs, not just destroy them? Such SSKs could be used for training in ASW and/or sold to Taiwan! Currently there is a Swedish SSK Gotland in San Diego, California playing that role.

 
Last edited:

Izzy1

Banned Member
'War on terror' has been a 'disaster': British think tank


My question is: should there be attempt to target the Iranian Navy, can USN SEALS/SOF capture at least one of their 3 Kilo subs, not just destroy them? Such SSK could be used for training in ASW and/or sold to Taiwan! Currently there is a Swedish SSK in San Diego playing that role.
In regards to the Iranian Kilo's, have they ever left Bandar Abbas since being delivered? You can see the rust now on Google Earth...
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
rust

Corrosion is a problem on ALL ships, wether they leave port or not. I have no idea how long they been pierside and at sea, perhaps someone can elighten us. But for initial training it's enough to drill inport and close to shore- if nothing else, to avoid spying. BTW, with just 3 of them, the Iranians might build mockups as a deversionary tactic. Let the Americans shoot their Harpoons/CMs at them, while the real subs are laying mines or hiding some place else!
 

Izzy1

Banned Member
Corrosion is a problem on ALL ships, wether they leave port or not. I have no idea how long they been pierside and at sea, perhaps someone can elighten us. But for initial training it's enough to drill inport and close to shore- if nothing else, to avoid spying. BTW, with just 3 of them, the Iranians might build mockups as a deversionary tactic. Let the Americans shoot their Harpoons/CMs at them, while the real subs are laying mines or hiding some place else!
Ever been to the Persian Gulf Firehorse?
 

Vladimir80

Banned Member
In regards to the Iranian Kilo's, have they ever left Bandar Abbas since being delivered? You can see the rust now on Google Earth...
Kommersant said:
Russia Will Equip Iranian Subs with Missiles
// Arms Export

July 04, 2005

Yesterday the Second International Naval Show (IMDS-2005) finished its work in St. Petersburg. During its course there were negotiations about new shipments of naval military equipment to China and Mexico, and about the refurbishing Iranian submarines.
On the show about 300 Russian defense companies demonstrated their production ready for export. In the Sea Station pier, the visitors were able to examine ships from the Russian Navy. For a first time on the show was a demonstration of the Russian submarine of new generation “Sankt-Petersburg” Project 677 “Lada”, which the state company Admiralty Shipyards finishing for Russian Navy. The export version of this sub –Project 1650 “Amur”- the Admiralty Shipyards was offering to India for sale. However, Indian Navy preferred to buy six French subs Scorpene and currently finalizing the negotiations of the deal that amounts to $1.8-2 billion.

However, Admiralty Shipyards signed contracts with India and China to supply parts for the diesel-electric submarines of Project 877EKM and their modernized version of Project 636 that were sold to these countries earlier. Each contract is appraised at about $1 million. The Indian Navel force has 10 submarines of Project 877EKM and two more would be shipped this year directly from the Russian navy. China has two subs of Project 877EKM and two of Project 636. From last year, the Chinese navy also started to receive new subs of Project 636 that according to a contract from 2002 will amount to eight submarines worth $1.4 billion.

The St. Petersburg shipbuilding company Almaz was negotiating with representatives of the Chinese defense ministry. Before the end of the year, they hoped to sign a contract for the building of two Zubr Class Air Cushioned Landing Craft (CMSTS) of Project 1232.2 with options for several more such ships. Each craft costs more than $60 million. And the corporation Concern of Middle and Small Tonnage Shipbuilding until the end of the year plans to strike an agreement with Mexico for not less than two patrol cutters of Project 14310 Mirage. “Cameroon is also interested to buy Cutter of the Project 12150 Mongoose. Within several months they are ready to sign a contract for up to 10 Mongooses,” Valentine Lyashenko, deputy director of CMSTS told Kommersant.

Moreover, Kommersant found out that Rosoboronexport is negotiating with Iran about repair and modernization of Iranian submarines. Iran has three submarines of Project 877EKM that were supplied by Russia in 1992 (Russian name of the sub B-219, Iranian—901 Tareq), in June 1993 (B-224, 902 Noor) and in November 1996 (B-175, 903 Yunes). It was expected that all the major components that already exceeded their life expectancy will be replaced. Also, the new anti-ship missile complex Club-S with the target distance of 200 km will be installed on these subs. The refurbishing of each sub would be done under the contract which costs anywhere from $80 to $90 million. Originally it was expected that the refurbishing will be done in Zvezdochka Co (Severo-Dvinsk) but Admiralty Shipyards are also fighting for the contract.

Vladimir Pakhomov, deputy director general of Rosoboronexport, stated in the IMDS-2005 show that naval ships and systems this year will take first place among all Russian weapons exports and according to him the company is planning to export production of the military use for $5.1 billion from which 51 percent will be military naval equipment. Last year, Rosoboronexport exported weapons valued at $5.12 billion, from which only 24 percent were represented by naval production.
kommersant.com/page.asp?id=588627
 

funtz

New Member
They payed a whole think tank to come up with that.
damn it!!!! i am in the wrong profession.

Russia Will Equip Iranian Subs with Missiles
right on!!!
Perfect time for the Russians to earn some Rial's (they will like euro, yes please).

Sell them some SAMs, and then some SU30s, don't forget the supersonic missiles, and come on what about more nuclear technology.

I still remember rolling on the floor with laughter when a guy said on national TV
PUTIN=Planes, Uranium, Tanks, Infrastructure and Nuclear power.

Go Putin, nothing can cheer you up more than flowing foreign currency.
 

metro

New Member
They payed a whole think tank to come up with that.
damn it!!!! i am in the wrong profession.
LOL! Not only do they get paid, they get paid very well. Now, they can point to their in depth analysis and most probably, correct conclusion, as proof as to how valuable the information this think tank produces is for policy makers. Perhaps, a raise in pay is in order for them!;)


RE: Kilo subs:
Don't some countries, like India (others) have Kilo class subs? I'm guessing we have directly had access to the subs, played games with them, and know their capabilities. In the worst case, our "friends" have had access.
 

funtz

New Member
seriously man what a load of bull, if you want to ask some one ask the guy who is there taking the bullets, communicating with real living Iraqis, who has actually seen innocent people dying in those IED's, someone who was actually there to see people jumping with joy when Saddam had to run from Baghdad.

Well with notoriously money consuming intelligence services and mechanism i will hope they have the required information, even if IN said no to using KILOs.
 

jthieme

New Member
RE: Plan of Attack

I highly doubt the Iranians will use their Kilo's to attack our navy. The only real option they have is to use them to do one of two things.

1. Lay mines to slow the USN to get within strike distance. As I said this will only slow the USN, not stop it. Also, the mines would be laid to destroy oil tankers coming out of the Straight of Hormuz.

2. Directly attack oil tankers leaving ports headed for the west or directly attack them while in the Straight of Hormuz.

Other than those two options, which are very similar, the Iranian navy really has little options. The seriousness of the attacks on the oil tankers would be much more dangerous to USA and western Europe and carry with it a much higher % of success than to engage a carrier fleet. If they would succeed in destroying just a single tanker, the price of oil would skyrocket mostly due to the insurance premiums going up on the transportation of other oil tankers. I work for Oil traders and that is their #1 concern if the USA would attack Iran. The insurance costs of the transportation of oil.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
Ever been to the Persian Gulf Firehorse?
What's your point? I may have but not on the Iranian side. Have you been to their submarine base or near it?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvxR933rvwY&mode=related&search="]YouTube - War on Iran[/ame]
 
Last edited:

rossfrb_1

Member
What's your point? I may have but not on the Iranian side. Have you been to their submarine base or near it?
Cute cartoon.
Iran might cope if the US only send in one plane at a time, without any supporting assets.
But then again, that isn't going to happen is it?

rb
 

metro

New Member
Well with notoriously money consuming intelligence services and mechanism i will hope they have the required information, even if IN said no to using KILOs.
I'm sure our relatively "new" relationship India has provided us with the opportunity to get a really good look at the sub. If we haven't for whatever reason, there's another US ally who I know has had access to them.

Regardless, those kilos wouldn't last very long if the US decides to attack.

-BTW, what do the oil traders say about oil prices if Iran goes nuclear?
 

jthieme

New Member
The price of oil isn't solely dependent on Iran's nuclear capability due to the fact that they can not sell it directly to western Europe or the USA for that matter. There are many ways that the commodity brokers in the USA purchase oil from Iran to sell to the refineries here. Just because we have little to no relations with that country doesn't mean that it is impossible to trade with them, just much harder and more expensive. I can outline many ways brokers here get away with trading for Iranian oil but don't want to get too off topic. But to answer your question about the price of oil with a nuclear Iran; the price is already trending towards $88-$90/barrel. If Iran does go nuclear, the price would increase to $95-$97 in the short term, with a strong likelihood of extended periods of time trading over $100. If the US does decide to strike Iran, the price will spike and probably hit between $90-$95/barrel.

Once the strike is over, expect the price to drop significantly lower than they are now which is around $80. There are many oil traders that are positioning themselves for a strike in 2008, I personally don't know any that are buying oil contracts right now that are preparing for a strike in 2007. Regardless of a nuclear Iran, oil is headed much higher.
 
I'm sure our relatively "new" relationship India has provided us with the opportunity to get a really good look at the sub. If we haven't for whatever reason, there's another US ally who I know has had access to them.
The USN trained with the Polish Kilos in or around 2004. The Indians didn't use their Kilos for the Malabar series exercise in 2005 apparently at the urging from Russia.
 

Chrom

New Member
Oil prices will 100% certainly rise to 90$ in the next 2 years and short term may be even 100$. This is NOT including any inflation american $ might suffer. So actual prices in $ might be even higher. They will not be lower than 80$ no matter what - BRIC increase oil consumtion every 3 years more than whole Iraq production.

Price will not be higher than 90$ - 100$ long term becouse at that point it is economicaly viable to use solar, wind, etc. energy sources, and also economicaly viable to extract oil from oil sands and other hard-to-extract places.

As for iranian military... i'm sure Iran cant do much against USA / NATO. Iraqi - style insurgency is of course ensured (in fact, i think iranian resistance will be order of magnitude stronger...), but by very definition of "insurgency" this will occur only after iranian regular army will be defeated and iranian goverment fallen.
 

AGRA

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Cute cartoon.
It was hilarious. My view stopped right as the Buk was shooting down a Hornet. Which was kind of funny because of all the systems shown, S-300, S-300V and Buk, none are in Iranian service. They just took delivery of some Tors so maybe the rest of the video has these guys?

However the whole thing was complete crap, typical platform centric world view point put about by the amateurs like Air Power Australia and vendors of Russian weapons. S-300V shooting down AWACS was particularly hilarious. But all those little red and blue lines shown connecting the systems are meant to operate without opposition interference? And is an AWACS really going to fly into the S-300V's no escape zone? The curvature of the earth people?

Well one shouldn’t complain. The tin pot dictators of the world can go about buying these systems and thinking this gives them a defence capability, one that is purely illusory. The funds can go into Russia to help grow their economy which Ruble by Ruble propels them closer to their natural partnership with the ‘western’ states of Europe, North America et al.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
video

That clip is just a sales pitch, I just posted it here for fun.
Algeria also has two Project 877EKM Kilos, and Romania has 1 inoperational; but in any case any submarine not destroyed/captured or disabled should be treated very seriously, especially when armed with ASMs.
 
Last edited:
Top