That's the long term aim. In the interim, Iran would do it's best to up the ante and sabotage oil production & distribution of the UAE & KSA. The US may have surely gamed a response. Let's see how things pan out in the interim.
US - Iran Flare Up
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
Sébastien Roblin
Why U.S. Patriot missiles failed to stop drones and cruise missiles attacking Saudi oil sites
Opinion | Why U.S. Patriot missiles failed to stop the attack on Saudi oil sites
The United States is sending American troops to the Middle East to provide better air and missile defenses after an aerial attack on Saudi oil targets last week. The raid began around 4 a.m. on the morning of Sept. 14, with explosions rippling across the Kurais and Abqaiq Aramco oil processing facilities inside Saudi Arabia as the sound of defensive automatic machine-gun fire rang in the air.
In theory, the oil facilities both lay under the defensive umbrella ofPatriot PAC-2 surface-to-air missile batteries that the U.S. sold to Saudi Arabia to intercept aircraft and missiles up to 100 miles away. However, if Saudi radars detected the 18 triangular drones and seven cruise missiles (judging by recovered debris) that bombarded them last week, they did so too late. Instead, they were forced to fire sporadically with automatic weapons, which didn’t prevent widespread damage that temporarily disruptedshipments of 5.7 million barrels of oil daily — half of Saudi Arabia’s output.
Indeed, while the U.S. troops are intended to provide help against this type of threat — believed to have been launched by Iran — air attacks by low-flying drones and cruise missiles are exactly the types of systems the U.S. is having trouble defending against after years of focusing on longer-range threats.
Short-range air defense systems — or SHORADS in Army lingo — have existed almost as long as combat aircraft, and are used to protect vital bases and facilities, as well as troops on the front lines. In both the world wars, they consisted of heavy machine guns and rapid-fire cannons designed to rake warplanes as they swooped down to attack. During the Cold War, anti-aircraft artillery increasingly benefited from radar guidance, and were joined by heat-seeking missiles fired by vehicles or bazooka-like shoulder launchers.
However, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. Armysharply downsized itsshort-range anti-air capabilities in the belief that they were no longer greatly needed. They trusted that U.S. jet fighters could neutralize most enemy aircraft before they became a problem. Two threats that have grown significantly these days — drones and ground skimming cruise missiles — were minimal at that point: Armed drones were rare and expensive, and the Soviet Union was the only adversary that had many land-attack cruise missiles and it wasn’t expected that other countries, let alone terrorist groups, would develop them.
Instead, the Pentagon saw a need for medium- and long-range air defenses like the Patriot to protect against ballistic missiles that arc high up into the exo-atmosphere at immense speeds and long distances. That’s where they focused the military’s planning — to some success, as suggested by the Saudi-based Patriot battery’s record of intercepting dozens of high-flying ballistic missiles from Yemen in recent years.
But it turned out that the threat that has grown most rapidly in recent years comes not from manned aircraft, but the drones and low-flying cruise missiles that are proliferating rapidly across the globe due to exports fromChina,Israel andRussia.
Drones and missiles can be detected by radar, but they tend to have small radar signatures and can fly close to the ground, sharply reducing the detection range and thus opportunities to fire on them from far away. They also are easy to maneuver, allowing them to hit the coverage gaps between radars and Patriot batteries. And drones and cruise missiles are often cheaper than a $2 million or $3 million Patriot missile, meaning the supply of Patriots can be depleted much faster than the bevy of drones launching attacks.
That’s why short-range defenses that protect against targets within visual range are so important: Some targets aren’t likely to be consistently detected from far away, and long-range missiles are too expensive to use against certain cheap but numerous threats.
Even organizations like ISIS have cobbled together surveillance and combat drones. During the battle to liberate the Iraqi metropolis of Mosul in 2016-17, ISIS made extensive use of small grenade-bearing drones against Iraqi and U.S. troops.
There are some existing systems to handle these threats, but most rely on Cold War-era technology designed to shoot down airplanes and helicopters. The Saudi Abqaiq oil facilitywas guarded by a half-dozen Shahine short-range missile systems and radar-guided air defense cannons, but since neither of the old systems were designed for defense against drones or missiles, they did very little good.
To its credit, the U.S. Army has realized the dangerous new vulnerability and in the last few years has madedeploying more SHORADcapabilities one of its six top modernization priorities. Among other ideas in development, by 2022 the Army will field aspecialized wheeled armored vehicle with a missile-armed turret as well as a cannon specifically for providing air defenses that accompany troops moving forward in battle.
In the meantime, to fulfill a congressional mandate to obtain a stop-gap defense system against cruise missiles, the Pentagon announced plans in 2019 to take the rare step of purchasing arms not entirely American-made. The military purchased two batteries of the Iron Dome air defense system Israel developed with help from the U.S. to shoot down unguided rockets fired by Palestinian militants. However, the missiles used as interceptors still cost around $40,000 dollars each, while commercial drones may cost considerably less. Thus drones could potentially overwhelm existing defenses with sheer numbers.
Another option in development — by China andRussia as well as the United States — is the use of laser weapons that could burn drones or missiles out of the sky with a “shot” that costs virtually nothing (though the weapons themselves aren’t cheap). Lasers also boast very fast reaction times and a high degree of accuracy. On the downside, lasers lack a kinetic “punch” to jar an incoming missile off its trajectory if the laser’s heat doesn’t do the job; they can be degraded by foggy conditions; and they require a lot of power to work at longer distances.
Deploying more electronic warfare systems that can disrupt or even hijack the communications links between drones and their operators is another approach that has proven successful when tested in combat by Russia and the United States. Recently, U.S. Marines used a jeep-mounted jammeron the deck of a carrier to bring down an Iranian drone.
Short-range air defenses are not a magic bullet — and in fact work best when integrated with longer-range defenses. They can be overwhelmed or picked off by more advanced weapons, and may easily end up far more expensive than threats they are designed to counter. Furthermore, by their nature, short-range defenses cannot provide blanket protection for a region but must be deployed selectively to protect key facilities and vulnerable front-line combat units.
But even if there’s no such thing as a perfect defense, deploying new short-range air defenses will remain vital in the 21st century — not only to protect the lives of soldiers on the front lines or valuable military bases, but also to defend vital civilian infrastructure, as the recent attack on Saudi Arabia’s oil processing facilities vividly demonstrates.
Why U.S. Patriot missiles failed to stop drones and cruise missiles attacking Saudi oil sites
Opinion | Why U.S. Patriot missiles failed to stop the attack on Saudi oil sites
The United States is sending American troops to the Middle East to provide better air and missile defenses after an aerial attack on Saudi oil targets last week. The raid began around 4 a.m. on the morning of Sept. 14, with explosions rippling across the Kurais and Abqaiq Aramco oil processing facilities inside Saudi Arabia as the sound of defensive automatic machine-gun fire rang in the air.
In theory, the oil facilities both lay under the defensive umbrella ofPatriot PAC-2 surface-to-air missile batteries that the U.S. sold to Saudi Arabia to intercept aircraft and missiles up to 100 miles away. However, if Saudi radars detected the 18 triangular drones and seven cruise missiles (judging by recovered debris) that bombarded them last week, they did so too late. Instead, they were forced to fire sporadically with automatic weapons, which didn’t prevent widespread damage that temporarily disruptedshipments of 5.7 million barrels of oil daily — half of Saudi Arabia’s output.
Indeed, while the U.S. troops are intended to provide help against this type of threat — believed to have been launched by Iran — air attacks by low-flying drones and cruise missiles are exactly the types of systems the U.S. is having trouble defending against after years of focusing on longer-range threats.
Short-range air defense systems — or SHORADS in Army lingo — have existed almost as long as combat aircraft, and are used to protect vital bases and facilities, as well as troops on the front lines. In both the world wars, they consisted of heavy machine guns and rapid-fire cannons designed to rake warplanes as they swooped down to attack. During the Cold War, anti-aircraft artillery increasingly benefited from radar guidance, and were joined by heat-seeking missiles fired by vehicles or bazooka-like shoulder launchers.
However, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. Armysharply downsized itsshort-range anti-air capabilities in the belief that they were no longer greatly needed. They trusted that U.S. jet fighters could neutralize most enemy aircraft before they became a problem. Two threats that have grown significantly these days — drones and ground skimming cruise missiles — were minimal at that point: Armed drones were rare and expensive, and the Soviet Union was the only adversary that had many land-attack cruise missiles and it wasn’t expected that other countries, let alone terrorist groups, would develop them.
Instead, the Pentagon saw a need for medium- and long-range air defenses like the Patriot to protect against ballistic missiles that arc high up into the exo-atmosphere at immense speeds and long distances. That’s where they focused the military’s planning — to some success, as suggested by the Saudi-based Patriot battery’s record of intercepting dozens of high-flying ballistic missiles from Yemen in recent years.
But it turned out that the threat that has grown most rapidly in recent years comes not from manned aircraft, but the drones and low-flying cruise missiles that are proliferating rapidly across the globe due to exports fromChina,Israel andRussia.
Drones and missiles can be detected by radar, but they tend to have small radar signatures and can fly close to the ground, sharply reducing the detection range and thus opportunities to fire on them from far away. They also are easy to maneuver, allowing them to hit the coverage gaps between radars and Patriot batteries. And drones and cruise missiles are often cheaper than a $2 million or $3 million Patriot missile, meaning the supply of Patriots can be depleted much faster than the bevy of drones launching attacks.
That’s why short-range defenses that protect against targets within visual range are so important: Some targets aren’t likely to be consistently detected from far away, and long-range missiles are too expensive to use against certain cheap but numerous threats.
Even organizations like ISIS have cobbled together surveillance and combat drones. During the battle to liberate the Iraqi metropolis of Mosul in 2016-17, ISIS made extensive use of small grenade-bearing drones against Iraqi and U.S. troops.
There are some existing systems to handle these threats, but most rely on Cold War-era technology designed to shoot down airplanes and helicopters. The Saudi Abqaiq oil facilitywas guarded by a half-dozen Shahine short-range missile systems and radar-guided air defense cannons, but since neither of the old systems were designed for defense against drones or missiles, they did very little good.
To its credit, the U.S. Army has realized the dangerous new vulnerability and in the last few years has madedeploying more SHORADcapabilities one of its six top modernization priorities. Among other ideas in development, by 2022 the Army will field aspecialized wheeled armored vehicle with a missile-armed turret as well as a cannon specifically for providing air defenses that accompany troops moving forward in battle.
In the meantime, to fulfill a congressional mandate to obtain a stop-gap defense system against cruise missiles, the Pentagon announced plans in 2019 to take the rare step of purchasing arms not entirely American-made. The military purchased two batteries of the Iron Dome air defense system Israel developed with help from the U.S. to shoot down unguided rockets fired by Palestinian militants. However, the missiles used as interceptors still cost around $40,000 dollars each, while commercial drones may cost considerably less. Thus drones could potentially overwhelm existing defenses with sheer numbers.
Another option in development — by China andRussia as well as the United States — is the use of laser weapons that could burn drones or missiles out of the sky with a “shot” that costs virtually nothing (though the weapons themselves aren’t cheap). Lasers also boast very fast reaction times and a high degree of accuracy. On the downside, lasers lack a kinetic “punch” to jar an incoming missile off its trajectory if the laser’s heat doesn’t do the job; they can be degraded by foggy conditions; and they require a lot of power to work at longer distances.
Deploying more electronic warfare systems that can disrupt or even hijack the communications links between drones and their operators is another approach that has proven successful when tested in combat by Russia and the United States. Recently, U.S. Marines used a jeep-mounted jammeron the deck of a carrier to bring down an Iranian drone.
Short-range air defenses are not a magic bullet — and in fact work best when integrated with longer-range defenses. They can be overwhelmed or picked off by more advanced weapons, and may easily end up far more expensive than threats they are designed to counter. Furthermore, by their nature, short-range defenses cannot provide blanket protection for a region but must be deployed selectively to protect key facilities and vulnerable front-line combat units.
But even if there’s no such thing as a perfect defense, deploying new short-range air defenses will remain vital in the 21st century — not only to protect the lives of soldiers on the front lines or valuable military bases, but also to defend vital civilian infrastructure, as the recent attack on Saudi Arabia’s oil processing facilities vividly demonstrates.
Why Iran would want to precipitate matters is not clear. However one thing is clear just like white house is a divided house on the question of US decion to go to war against Iran. Tehran also appears to a divided camp on how to respond to US threats. Rouhani is not popular among the conservative Khomeinist camp. While Rouhani may still hope to salvage his nuclear deal with Obama and steer Iran clear off the path of direct confrontation with US, there appears to be a powerful segments within the govt and military to taunt US/Saudi alliance. I'm wondering if the Rouhani is even in full control of the powerful military, esp the IRGC, and is in a position to impose restraint on aggressive elements in the security establishment.
Iran's defense minister rejects any deal on missile program
Iran's defense minister rejects any deal on missile program
Associated Press•September 25, 2019
Shiite Houthi tribesmen hold their weapons during a tribal gathering showing support for the Houthi movement, in Sanaa, Yemen, Saturday Sept. 21, 2019. Yemen's Houthi rebels said late Friday night that they were halting drone and missile attacks against Saudi Arabia, one week after they claimed responsibility for a strike that crippled a key oil facility in the kingdom. (AP Photo/Hani Mohammed)
More
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran's defense minister Wednesday rejected the idea of a deal with world powers over the country's missile program.
The official IRNA news agency quoted Gen. Amir Hatami as saying that any deal with the United States over Iran's "missile power" would damage the country's capabilities. He said Iran's leaders all support improving the missile program.
Tehran long has insisted its ballistic missile program is non-negotiable. President Donald Trump, however, cited it as a reason for unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. from the nuclear deal between Iran and Western powers over a year ago.
Hatami's remarks come as the U.S. and its allies say Iran is behind a major drone-and-missile strike on Saudi Arabia's oil industry. Iran has denied the allegations, saying any strikes by the U.S. or Saudi Arabia will lead to "all-out war."
Separately, the chief of the powerful Revolutionary Guard in charge of the country's missile program, Gen. Hossein Salami, was quoted by the semi-official Tasnim news agency as saying Wednesday that Iran has shown self-restraint despite the capabilities of its military, including its missile program.
"We are not looking for trouble but we will respond to troublemakers," he said.
Referring to Iran-backed Houthi rebel attacks on Saudi Arabia, Salami said Iran has improved its military power to the extent that other countries blame it for actions carried out by the rebels themselves.
"The enemy assumes that we are in charge of any sophisticated job," he said. Without elaborating, he added that the Houthis were capable of "changing the entire field of war."
Iran has medium-range surface-to-surface missiles with a range up to 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles) that can reach archenemy Israel and U.S. bases in the region.
Iran's defense minister rejects any deal on missile program
Associated Press•September 25, 2019
Shiite Houthi tribesmen hold their weapons during a tribal gathering showing support for the Houthi movement, in Sanaa, Yemen, Saturday Sept. 21, 2019. Yemen's Houthi rebels said late Friday night that they were halting drone and missile attacks against Saudi Arabia, one week after they claimed responsibility for a strike that crippled a key oil facility in the kingdom. (AP Photo/Hani Mohammed)
More
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran's defense minister Wednesday rejected the idea of a deal with world powers over the country's missile program.
The official IRNA news agency quoted Gen. Amir Hatami as saying that any deal with the United States over Iran's "missile power" would damage the country's capabilities. He said Iran's leaders all support improving the missile program.
Tehran long has insisted its ballistic missile program is non-negotiable. President Donald Trump, however, cited it as a reason for unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. from the nuclear deal between Iran and Western powers over a year ago.
Hatami's remarks come as the U.S. and its allies say Iran is behind a major drone-and-missile strike on Saudi Arabia's oil industry. Iran has denied the allegations, saying any strikes by the U.S. or Saudi Arabia will lead to "all-out war."
Separately, the chief of the powerful Revolutionary Guard in charge of the country's missile program, Gen. Hossein Salami, was quoted by the semi-official Tasnim news agency as saying Wednesday that Iran has shown self-restraint despite the capabilities of its military, including its missile program.
"We are not looking for trouble but we will respond to troublemakers," he said.
Referring to Iran-backed Houthi rebel attacks on Saudi Arabia, Salami said Iran has improved its military power to the extent that other countries blame it for actions carried out by the rebels themselves.
"The enemy assumes that we are in charge of any sophisticated job," he said. Without elaborating, he added that the Houthis were capable of "changing the entire field of war."
Iran has medium-range surface-to-surface missiles with a range up to 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles) that can reach archenemy Israel and U.S. bases in the region.
US sanctions COSCO linked ship charter company for Iran sanctions violation.This is huge... Not only China but other nations too use their services. Iran will now hit the US Military for sure, and then I want to see what POTUS does.. I am so thrilled... Let the games begin...
I don't know why the prospect of war thrills you. I guess it's an amazing spectacle except for those fighting it.
I think the real problem lies in rebuilding and providing security. Removing the regime itself is actually easy. So it could just be left there, and then presumably Shias and IS will take turns bumming each other in Iran for 10-20 years thereafter.
Those were & will be isolated attacks originating mostly in the AfPak region usually sponsored by their Gulf Arab overlords. If you think once the US deposes the mullahs somehow, there's going to be an Iraq style civil war between the Shi'as & the Sunnis rallying behind ISIS , you're mistaken.
Well then democracy should be relatively straight forward for them, unless the civil war is theocrats vs democrats.
Sanjay Dixit ಸಂಜಯ್ ದೀಕ್ಷಿತ್ संजय दीक्षित (@Sanjay_Dixit) Tweeted:
‘A controversial Bill passed in Iran, it allows men to marry daughters, draws flak from other nations. How progressive indeed. Indian leftists would be damn pleased. A controversial Bill passed in Iran, it allows men to marry daughters, draws flak from other nations? ( )
Jazkallah, Subhan Allah.
Allah , ata farmaaye humare Irani bhaiyon aur behanon par. Pakistan kab aisa kanoon layega ? Ya aise kanoon ki koi khaas zaroorat maloom nahin hoti. Waise bhi halaala aur muta'ah lazmi hain shari'ah ke nazariye se . Aur bade / chote abbu ki dukhtar toh............ @Arsalan123 ; @safriz
‘A controversial Bill passed in Iran, it allows men to marry daughters, draws flak from other nations. How progressive indeed. Indian leftists would be damn pleased. A controversial Bill passed in Iran, it allows men to marry daughters, draws flak from other nations? ( )
Jazkallah, Subhan Allah.
Allah , ata farmaaye humare Irani bhaiyon aur behanon par. Pakistan kab aisa kanoon layega ? Ya aise kanoon ki koi khaas zaroorat maloom nahin hoti. Waise bhi halaala aur muta'ah lazmi hain shari'ah ke nazariye se . Aur bade / chote abbu ki dukhtar toh............ @Arsalan123 ; @safriz
Last edited:
TankerTrackers.com, Inc.
️🛢 (@TankerTrackers) Tweeted:
That is NOT what we said. We said the oil transfer is still unconfirmed. For all we know, the two crews could be enjoying coffee and playing cards together. One requires two dots in order to draw a line. We have to confirm the oil transfer. This is brand misrepresentation. #OOTT Secretary Pompeo on Twitter ( )
@BMD
️🛢 (@TankerTrackers) Tweeted:That is NOT what we said. We said the oil transfer is still unconfirmed. For all we know, the two crews could be enjoying coffee and playing cards together. One requires two dots in order to draw a line. We have to confirm the oil transfer. This is brand misrepresentation. #OOTT Secretary Pompeo on Twitter ( )
@BMD
I can see a quid pro quo written all over it with the Brits under Boorish Hustling Johnson having chickened out of a confrontation. Hence the Iranians released the Brit tanker while the Brits weaseled and released the Iranian Tanker under some vague assurances by the Iranians that the oil wasn't destined for Syria. As soon as the tanker was released, they didn't even bother to cover their tracks while unloading the oil in Syria.
It really pains me to see Brit impotence. Something you must be quite used to now in spite of the protestations of indignities you mount here from time to time
I don't see India doing much either in this situation, or as China claims the entire SCS in their neighbourhood.