• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria

Mornin' Canell :2wave: .....actually according to the two members of Congress that were on Face the Nation. They believe Obama can start whatever process and then Congress can take it from there.

Evening, MMC. :)
One question though - can Congress cancel Obama's decision?
 
l remember hiroshima

Remember it as in lived at that time or simply remember what you read/heard about it?

A cruise missle (as used in Iraq) has a far different blast radius and is not a nuclear weapon.
 
When you are spending more than the next 17 nations, you better have a little suthin up your sleeve.

HARM is actually pretty cheap, and the original technology is from the Vietnam era. If you have ever seen Flight of the Intruder, they show the A-6's using the precursor, the SHRIKE.
 
I don't think our missiles will ever have a chance to find out. Not at 820k per Tomahawk


Russia Steps Up Missile Sales to Syria

Not only will Russia make good on delivering advanced S-300 anti-missile batteries and surface-to-air missiles to Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime, it has also provided anti-ship cruise missiles with advanced guidance systems, the New York Times reported on Thursday.

According to the report, an upgraded version of the Yakhont anti-ship missiles is equipped with more advanced radar systems that will effectively prevent any foreign military intervention in Syria.

"It enables the regime to deter foreign forces looking to supply the opposition from sea or from undertaking a more active role if a no-fly zone or shipping embargo were to be declared at some point," the Times quoted IHS Jane's International Defense Review editor-in-chief Nick Brown. "It's a real ship killer."

Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reported that Russia deployed at least a dozen warships to guard its naval base at Syria's Tartus port and provide further deterrence to any foreign intervention in the country's civil war.....snip~

Russia Steps Up Missile Sales to Syria - Inside Israel - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

Five Things You Should Know About Syria And Russia’s S-300 Missile System

3BC8275A-BC2D-4528-ACF3-B4EC84F699D2_w640_r1_s.jpg

An S-300 air-defense system seen during a large-scale military exercise in Kazakhstan in 2011

What are the capabilities of the S-300 system?

The S-300 missile system is designed to shoot down aircraft and missiles at a range of 5-to-150 kilometers. That gives it the ability to destroy not only attackers in Syrian airspace but also any attackers inside Israel.

It can track and strike multiple targets simultaneously at altitudes ranging from 10 meters to 27,000 meters.

"The S-300 is Russia's top-of-the-range air-defense system," says Robert Hewson, the London-based editor of "IHS Jane's Air-Launched Weapons." "It is a surface-to-air missile system that's capable of shooting down any modern combat aircraft or missiles, including cruise missiles. In a way, it is the Russian equivalent to the U.S. Patriot system. And what it does for Syria is it adds a whole new level of capability on top of the existing Syrian air defenses. Syria already has a lot of Russian [surface-to-air] missiles, but the S-300 would be the most advanced."

How much would a deployed S-300 system complicate a decision by the international community to create no-fly zones in Syria?

The deployment of the S-300 system would greatly complicate any such measures in Syria.

6672C619-FEA7-4922-9A83-7B7F2BD757BD_w640_s.jpg

A launch of the S-300 air-defense system

Could foreign powers find ways to circumvent the S-300 system if it were deployed?

One way to circumvent air-defense systems is to try to disrupt their operations through electronic techniques rather than attack them directly. But Elleman says it is an open question whether the S-300 could be blocked this way.

"Electronic warfare and spoofing of systems in quite common," he says, "but one must keep in mind that the S-300 is a very sophisticated piece of weaponry. And I am not convinced that the West, Israel, or Turkey could reliably neutralize the system without taking some kind of kinetic action -- in other words, going after some of the radar or some of the interceptors [with force]. So, in terms of circumventing, I think it would be very difficult and very risky." .....snip~

Five Things You Should Know About Syria And Russia

Which doesn't count the Russian's Destroyers that can launch a Cruise missile to take out another. Or any other Anti Missile defense systems. Nor does it count the Mig 35 or 47. Which is alleged to be able to drop in from above the earth's atmosphere.

Report: Russia Sent Syria Super-Advanced S-300 Missiles

A report Thursday said that Russia has supplied Syria with advanced S-300 missiles, and has sent advisers to help Syria run the system.

Russian warships that have reached waters off Syria in recent days were carrying, among other things, Russian technical advisors who will help the Syrians set up an array of S-300 missiles Damascus has received in recent weeks, a report in the London-based Arabic language Al Quds-Al Arabi said Thursday. Citing sources in Syria and Russia, the paper said that Moscow sees a Western attack on Syria as a “red line” that it will not tolerate.

Along with the missiles, the report says that Russia has installed advanced radar systems in all key Syrian military and industrial installations. The radar system also covers areas north and south of Syria, where it will be able to detect movement of troops or aircraft towards the Syrian border. The radar targets include much of Israel, as well as the Incirlik military base in Turkey, which is used by NATO.

The S-300 system is regarded as one of the most potent anti-aircraft missile systems available. The system's radar is able to simultaneously track up to 100 targets while engaging up to 12. Deployment time for the S-300 is five minutes, and they have a very long life span, with no maintenance needed.....snip~

Report: Russia Sent Syria Advanced S-300 Missiles - Defense/Security - News - Israel National News

They also probably have a couple hundred of the stingers stolen in the Lybian raid..
 
They also probably have a couple hundred of the stingers stolen in the Lybian raid..

The Stinger is a SAM. It is useless against cruise missiles...
 
Evening, MMC. :)
One question though - can Congress cancel Obama's decision?

I think they can.....the question is. Would they. Both Neo Cons and Neo Libs want this. Both sides think they can cut like a knife. It's not going to work with Syria. Like it did with Libya.
 
They also probably have a couple hundred of the stingers stolen in the Lybian raid..

Worse.....to protect those. They have SA 8s and Russian S 17s Anti missile defense. All to work with each other. Hence the only option they were looking at. Which is to try and affect them electronically. Again which they don't even know if it is possible. Which doesn't include any Syria Air Force. Nor any Syrian Cruise Missiles.

Nor any hand helds or Man Pads.
 
The Stinger is a SAM. It is useless against cruise missiles...

You did take in account that the S 300 is mobile.....Right? Plus their Cruise Missiles would have something to say to, don't you think?

s-300-missile-system.jpg
 
You did take in account that the S 300 is mobile.....Right? Plus their Cruise Missiles would have something to say to, don't you think?

Is the S3000 a Stinger? Then I was not talking about that. That is why I quoted the post I responded to and mentioned the weapon system I was talking about...
 
Is the S3000 a Stinger? Then I was not talking about that. That is why I quoted the post I responded to and mentioned the weapon system I was talking about...

Well, you did bring up the HARM and SHRIKE, Correct? Why do you think I posted the Pic of the S 300 again? Then said what I said?
 
The Stinger is a SAM. It is useless against cruise missiles...

They work fairly well against helicopters and jetliners taking off and landing. We keep presuming these countries "we" (which now means "President Obama") go to war with won't attack us here and abroad. Since we also make it clear the leader of those countries will be killed - as will their children etc - they have no reason not to once "we" go to war against them with missiles. Can't think of a reason they wouldn't go to war against us with missiles too - here and abroad - unless you think Syria couldn't get SAM missiles into a situation to shoot down USA airliners anywhere at all in the world.
 
How would they respond to stealth technology? A B2 bomber can send missiles at insane distances while disrupting radar systems. Plus it maybe possible for the common B1 bomber to drop bombs beyond the range of these systems.
 
Well, you did bring up the HARM and SHRIKE, Correct? Why do you think I posted the Pic of the S 300 again? Then said what I said?

Not in the post you quoted. HARM however do not have much trouble with mobile platforms. Reaction time is small.
 
They work fairly well against helicopters and jetliners taking off and landing. We keep presuming these countries "we" (which now means "President Obama") go to war with won't attack us here and abroad. Since we also make it clear the leader of those countries will be killed - as will their children etc - they have no reason not to once "we" go to war against them with missiles. Can't think of a reason they wouldn't go to war against us with missiles too - here and abroad - unless you think Syria couldn't get SAM missiles into a situation to shoot down USA airliners anywhere at all in the world.

None of which has anything to do with what any one is talking about here.
 
Is the S3000 a Stinger? Then I was not talking about that. That is why I quoted the post I responded to and mentioned the weapon system I was talking about...
It is entirely possible for a Stinger to take out a subsonic cruise missile. Lucky? Yeah, probably, but possible never the less.
 
It is entirely possible for a Stinger to take out a subsonic cruise missile. Lucky? Yeah, probably, but possible never the less.

The odds of success are extremely remote.
 
Not in the post you quoted. HARM however do not have much trouble with mobile platforms. Reaction time is small.

Meh
shrug.gif
.....were you being technical throughout your entire discussion? So is pick up and moval on the S 300.

Yeah like I said its all the other stuff that goes with it. Assad is more than capable without the S 300s. That just locked in his total defense.

While they agree that the S-300s are more accurate and have greater range than Assad’s current weapons systems, they say the Syrian leader is far from powerless without them. “We have seen over the past few years Russia supplying several different air-defense systems,” says Pieter Wezeman, senior researcher in the arms-transfer program of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which tracks weapons flows worldwide. “They [Syrian government] have really increased their capability. The missiles are both short and long range. If the S-300s do arrive, that would top it all off.” <<<<< Which we know they arrived.

Among the missiles already in place are two regiments of S-200 surface-to-air missiles, which have a range of about 150 miles, “with no less than 240 missiles ready to be fired in a matter of minutes,” says Igor Sutyagin, a Russian military scientist and senior researcher at the London think tank, Royal United Services Institute. Sutyagin, who was jailed in Russia on charges of spying for the U.S. and freed as part of a spy-prisoner swap in 2010, says Assad “has a lot” of air-defense systems acquired from Russia, including between 12 and 20 short-range missile systems called Pantsyr-S, which have a range of about 7.5 miles and which can be mounted on vehicles. Those were delivered to Syria about a year ago, in what he believes is the latest confirmed arms shipment from Moscow. In addition, Assad has 1,200 air-defense guns and between 4,000 and 8,000 Strela portable shoulder-fired missiles. “That IS the GREAT stockpile of Russian air defense weaponry.

Since Syrian rebels have no airplanes for Syrian forces to shoot down, Assad’s impressive air-defense arsenal has little bearing on the grueling war that has ravaged large parts of the country and killed an estimated 90,000 Syrians. But the antiaircraft weapons would be crucial if the U.N. voted to impose a no-fly zone over Syria or if Israel expands its sporadic strikes on Syria into a sustained bombing campaign. At that point, the S-300 missiles, which have a longer range and greater accuracy than Assad’s current weaponry, could inflict bigger losses and strike deep into Israel in retaliation — hence, Israel’s fury over the arms deal. With the S-300s in place, says Wezeman, “If Israel starts an air campaign, they would maybe lose a few more planes than they have until now. It is not a system which cannot be destroyed, but it would be a bigger campaign,” he says.

Syria’s military arsenal presents the West with a far different calculus, in part explaining why no Western country has intervened militarily so far. While Gaddafi had huge stocks of weaponry, including Russian and Chinese antiaircraft missiles, much of it was discovered after Gaddafi was killed in October 2011, lying unused in warehouses. That suggested that the Libyan military did not know how to install the new weapon systems or had not had time to do so, according to military analysts. And Assad could also have learned some lessons from Gaddafi’s spectacular defeat. Gaddafi lacked long-range missiles capable of combating the high-altitude bombing strikes that NATO fighter jets conducted over Libya. “It’s against these types of operations that, for example, the S-300s or other SAMs [surface-to-air missiles] could be used with some efficiency,” Wezeman says. “In Libya the systems were old and out of date, and the Libyans did not really know how to operate them. It would be much more difficult for outsiders to intervene in Syria, in the way that took place in Libya.”.....snip~

Syria's Air-Defense Arsenal: Russian Missiles Keeping Assad in Power | TIME.com
 
I just wonder if it's not just a huge mistake to get involved in Syria over them being accused of using weapons of mass destruction against their own people. Not from a personal standpoint though.

In 2002, when Congress passed the resolution fro war with Iraq one of the many reasons listed for doing so was because Saddam had done the same against his own people. Just as Syria is now. Same crime, just different date, different country. It didn't take the leftists long to lose sight of this issue, including our current President, and of course a big rift developed that continues to divide and cause problems is still in place. Now granted, should Obama take action against Syria, the left will never blame him if things get tough and body bags start arriving at Dover again. But they will find an excuse or reason not to see things through and leave things unfinished.

If this reason for war was not good enough for Iraq, it's not good enough for Syria.
 
How would they respond to stealth technology? A B2 bomber can send missiles at insane distances while disrupting radar systems. Plus it maybe possible for the common B1 bomber to drop bombs beyond the range of these systems.

So you think carpet bombing a civilian population is the way to go then? :stooges
 
It is entirely possible for a Stinger to take out a subsonic cruise missile. Lucky? Yeah, probably, but possible never the less.

Heya HB. :2wave: Well not really with the Man Pads.....they would have to be able to keep a laser on it. Otherwise they were meant for Aircraft.

s1.reutersmedia.net.jpg
 
They work fairly well against helicopters and jetliners taking off and landing. We keep presuming these countries "we" (which now means "President Obama") go to war with won't attack us here and abroad. Since we also make it clear the leader of those countries will be killed - as will their children etc - they have no reason not to once "we" go to war against them with missiles. Can't think of a reason they wouldn't go to war against us with missiles too - here and abroad - unless you think Syria couldn't get SAM missiles into a situation to shoot down USA airliners anywhere at all in the world.

Heya Joko :2wave: .....well they do have some of these.

raf.jpg


Plus the Russians Pantsyrs Sytems

Pantsir-S1_Pantsyr-S1_air_defense_missile_system_anti-aircraft_gun_sa-22_greyhound_Russia_Russian_army_006.jpg


th
 
Heya HB. :2wave: Well not really with the Man Pads.....they would have to be able to keep a laser on it. Otherwise they were meant for Aircraft.

s1.reutersmedia.net.jpg
I'm using the stats on the Stinger compared to that of the Tomahawk. I don't know what the Syrians may have in the hand held area. The Tomahawk flies at about 500. The Stinger can reach 1500 mph. IOW, the Stinger can easily run down a Tomahawk with a line of sight shot. The operator would have to be in the right place at the right time, but it could be done. True, it certainly isn't strategic or even tactical, but it's possible.
 
..........
 
Last edited:
Look up the "war powers act"

I know exactly where you're coming from... BUT ... we are talking the most radikal anti-Amerikan president and members of Congress in his party, and party base that have made it a point to ranted about getting permission from Congress...

NO... strike that...

they liked to rant about getting permission from the UN. Remember John F-ing kerry? Felonious Bill Clinton did just that... he wagged his finger (and the dog) and outsourced our national security to the UN on Iraq 12 to 14 times at least.

Just would like to see the anti-Amerikan Left uphold their own standards, like any decent lawyer would demand when negotiating on behalf of their client.
 
It just dawned on me what you guys mean when you say Obama (or anyone that is not far right) is antiAmerican. You really mean he is antiRight Wing. And, since right wingers arent really Americans anymore, now they are republicans, you guys just say he is AntiAmerican. I get it.
I know exactly where you're coming from... BUT ... we are talking the most radikal anti-Amerikan president and members of Congress in his party, and party base that have made it a point to ranted about getting permission from Congress... NO... strike that... that always ranted about getting permission from the UN. Remember John F-ing kerry? Felonious Bill Clinton did just that... he wagged his finger (and the dog) and outsourced our national security to the UN on Iraq 12 to 14 times at least. Just would like to see the anti-Amerikan Left uphold their own standards, like any decent lawyer would demand when negotiating on behalf of their client.
 
Back
Top Bottom