Most definitely. This is the biggest weakness of poorer countries. Especially when the country is authoritarian or totalitarian. That's also why they resort to purges.
During the Cold War, most of our MPs were also bought by the US and USSR.
US - Iran Flare Up
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
Most definitely. This is the biggest weakness of poorer countries. Especially when the country is authoritarian or totalitarian. That's also why they resort to purges.
During the Cold War, most of our MPs were also bought by the US and USSR.
Apparently, most of the hosts and earliest recruits to the ISIS in Iraq were Sunni Arab tribes who were ex Iraqi Army including from the senior echelons. If their loyalties were so easily bought off, what explains the successful run of a few years the ISIS enjoyed in Iraq. Let me also state that tribes in Iraq have extended kin beyond borders extending into Syria on one hand & into the Hejaz on the other. That's one of the reasons why they could establish themselves so readily in Syria.
Falcon had pointed it out already. The Iraqis were convinced to choose insurgency over fighting a conventional battle.
So you mean to say the US paid ex service personnel of the Iraqi Army to become ISIS.
More or less. But no. The Baath Party had their own insurgency going and they later joined the new group called ISIS.
What you can say is certain sections of the Iraqi Army leadership were paid off not to fight. They probably took the money and ran away. The remnants who were left in the dust had to pick up the pieces and then fight the Americans later on, and then some of them became part of ISIS.
Iran cannot afford 200 Su-57s. They don't even have 200 combat aircraft in total, even including cack like MiG-23s, F-4s, F-5s,, Mirrage F1 and Su-17s.
https://www.historynet.com/did-russ...ase-helped-the-soviets-defeat-the-germans.htm
But since the collapse of the Soviet Union, a trickle of information has emerged from archives in Moscow, shedding new light on the subject. While much of the documentary evidence remains classified “secret” in the Central Archives of the Ministry of Defense and the Russian State Archive of the Economy, Western and Russian researchers have been able to gain access to important, previously unavailable firsthand documents. I was recently able to examine Russian-language materials of the State Defense Committee—the Soviet equivalent of the British War Cabinet—held in the former Central Party Archive. Together with other recently published sources, including the wartime diaries of N. I. Biriukov, a Red Army officer responsible from August 1941 on for the distribution of recently acquired tanks to the front lines, this newly available evidence paints a very different picture from the received wisdom. In particular, it shows that British Lend-Lease assistance to the Soviet Union in late 1941 and early 1942 played a far more significant part in the defense of Moscow and the revival of Soviet fortunes in late 1941 than has been acknowledged.
Particularly important for the Soviets in late 1941 were British-supplied tanks and aircraft. American contributions of the time were far fewer. In fact, for a brief period during December 1941, the relative importance of British aid increased well beyond levels planned by the Allies as a result of American reaction to the outbreak of war with Japan; some American equipment destined for the Soviet Union was actually unloaded from merchant vessels and provided to American forces instead.
Even aid that might seem like a drop in the bucket in the larger context of Soviet production for the war played a crucial role in filling gaps at important moments during this period. At a time when Soviet industry was in disarray—many of their industrial plants were destroyed or captured by the advancing Nazi troops or in the process of evacuation east—battlefield losses of specific equipment approached or even exceeded the rate at which Soviet domestic production could replace them during this crucial period. Under these circumstances even small quantities of aid took on far greater significance.
Lend-Lease aid did not “save” the Soviet Union from defeat during the Battle of Moscow. But the speed at which Britain in particular was willing and able to provide aid to the Soviet Union, and at which the Soviet Union was able to put foreign equipment into frontline use, is still an underappreciated part of this story. During the bitter fighting of the winter of 1941–1942, British aid made a crucial difference.
It isn't remotely true. When you look at the volume of tanks and armoured vehicles wiped out in air attacks and the allied advance, it's simply a fact that they got complicated destroyed. A-10s, F-15Es and F-111s wiped out 4-digit quantities of armoured vehicles each.
Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II - Wikipedia
Boeing AH-64 Apache - Wikipedia
General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark - Wikipedia
McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle - Wikipedia
There's a lot of people here who likely weren't alive in 1991 and don't have a clue what they're talking about. There was literally nothing the Iraqi forces could do.
They can. The country is an oil exporter, and they have a trade surplus. Their forex is more than $130B. Their external debt is peanuts. And their per capita income puts them in the upper middle income bracket, while also possessing a high HDI. You can also expect China to be a major provider of a large credit line over the next few years. And since they are bring threatened by major powers, defence is their highest priority and is also one of their main employment generators. So they have interest in expanding their defence industry. They can easily afford to induct 12-20 PAK FAs a year, especially on long term loans, funded by Russian and Chinese banks.
Thank you for all the song & dance you've staged up here. It was quite a spectacle. Not needed though and completely unnecessary except if it serves as a mutual pat on the back among fellow Brits. Thanks for the effort.Jolly good show, ole chap, jolly good show.
Doesn't take away a bit from what we've been maintaining throughout. That British aid to the former USSR was a drop in the ocean.
Now, can we get back to the topic.
Then, why did Mr. Pompeo say this. Do not assume that US radars are configured to detect slow moving, ground hugging targets... Even the pantsir -s1 had problems with slow moving Israeli targets in Syria..
Pompeo statement:
“We’ve seen air defence systems all around the world have mixed success. Some of the finest in the world don’t always pick things up. We want to work to make sure that infrastructure and resources are put in place such that attacks like this would be less successful than this one appears to have been.”
I read news about saudi interest in Biho from South Korea. Indian army was very impressed with Biho and we have a 2.6 billion dollar deal. They are pretty good against UAVs and cruise missiles. The US should load dozens of these on c-17s from South Korea and install them opposite iran, to have full spectrum air defence
WTF man! Battle of Moscow ended in "Soviet victory" and the end of Operation Barbarossa". The German momentum was halted here. I propose you keep your distance from the trashy article which you quoted. Napoleon was the last guy to have captured Moscow, although the Germans reached pretty close..
The article does not dispute that, it only says that lend-lease didn't prove crucial in that battle, but it did in the overall effort.
Their debt is peanuts because nobody will lend to them at a decent rate.
If they could afford that, they would have already inducted 200 Su-35s starting in 2003 if you think about it. The fact is that they can't. And taking out their navy will prevent them hijacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz as well as being just punishment.
Even assuming your statement to be true, by the time Iran inducts 200 Su-57s at that rate, the US will have B-21s, 1,000+ F-35s, 187 F-22s and LRSO, ARRW, HACKSAW, guided IRBMs and SM-3 IIA etc.
Acts of terrorism during peace time are the maximum extent of their capability, which puts them roughly on par with IS. In fact, technically IS have successfully conducted more terror attacks... even on France alone. They also showed that they can also operate RC planes, which puts them roughly on par with an 11 year-old.
Asking what they could do with 200 Su-57s is like asking what the US could do with 24 Death Stars, because both are roughly the same distance outside their likely defence budgets.
I should say that repeating the abqaiq kind of attack is not in the offing in the near future.. Iran did this using vintage technology. It's main assets were the guys it managed to infiltrate the facilities, and who painted the targets. This might have taken years and there would have been dozens of operatives on the ground. Saudis and Americans would be already hunting them down, if Iran has not yet managed to exfiltrate them.. The next time, Iran if it decides to target abqaiq and khurais with cruise missiles and drones would find the task more difficult... But if they have managed to develop a terrain mapping stealthy missile like SCALP or if they acquire one... then it would be a different story...