Article

2006-11-24 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by .com 2006-11-24 10:02|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Who gets the feeling China/Russia are the brains behind the terrorist states of Iran, North of Korea and Syria???!!

Posted by Ebbolump Glomotle9608 2006-11-24 11:33|| 2006-11-24 11:33|| Front Page Top

#2 Anybody who doesn't understand the effects of the Islamic meme on its victims.

Posted by gromgoru 2006-11-24 11:39|| 2006-11-24 11:39|| Front Page Top

#3 at: http://defense-update.com/products/t/tor.htm

is a description of the Tor-M1

It is advertised to be able to hit cruise missiles and other smaller targets with a high degree of accuracy.

I'm willing to believe the Tor-M1 could take out helicopters or most jets that got within 4 miles of the site but its hard to believe it could take out our best (or even 2nd best) air to surface missiles.

Anyone familiar with the Tor-M1?

Posted by mhw 2006-11-24 14:05|| http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]">[http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/] 2006-11-24 14:05|| Front Page Top

#4 What good is a missile with that range when we have GPS-guided iron bombs with greater range?

Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford 2006-11-24 15:06|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2006-11-24 15:06|| Front Page Top

#5 Russian officials say that the missiles are purely defensive weapons with a limited range.

So why bother owning them if they do nothing? Protection against another locust invasion or something?

Russian media have reported previously that Moscow had conducted talks on selling even more powerful long-range S-300 air defense missiles, but Russian officials have denied that.

Well, any excuses that they came up with were so wretchedly flimsy all they had left was denial, I suppose.

Posted by gorb 2006-11-24 16:46|| 2006-11-24 16:46|| Front Page Top

#6 So why bother owning them if they do nothing? Protection against another locust invasion or something?

Think Medicine Shirt

Posted by Shipman 2006-11-24 18:36|| 2006-11-24 18:36|| Front Page Top

#7 Actually, I'm thinking that now we know why they say Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes . . . .

Posted by gorb 2006-11-24 19:21|| 2006-11-24 19:21|| Front Page Top

#8 Various Mil Forum'ers believe that Iran is intent on setting up circa INTEGRATED, TIGHTLY CONTROLLED FIVE KILLING ZONES around Iran in case of a US invasion, as defended by well-equipped IRGC + asymmetric warfare guerilla = insurgent units. Iran is intent on acquiring S-300/400's, KILOS, ADVANS FLANKERS, + UPGRADED FENCER FIGHTER-BOMBERS, Missle-/Air Defense Radars. NOT JUST FROM RUSSIA, BUT ALSO FROM CHINA + EUROS [read, FRANCE]. RUSSIA > IRAN WILL HAVE NUKE BOMBS IN TWO YEARS [2008? Calling POTUS/CO-POTUS VEEP HILLARY]. Nuke bombs = meant as a last-resort, "take 'em all with us to hell" act agz ISRAEL = US Euro-Allies.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-11-24 21:13|| 2006-11-24 21:13|| Front Page Top

#9 Something needs to be flown up ~~Ras~~Putin's shorts damn soon.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-11-24 22:14|| 2006-11-24 22:14|| Front Page Top

23:40 gorb
23:35 Mark Z
23:31 Mark Z
23:28 gorb
23:27 Mark Z
23:21 gorb
23:20 gorb
23:18 Seafarious
23:17 gorb
23:17 Seafarious
23:17 gorb
23:14 Mark Z
23:09 gorb
23:06 gorb
22:59 wxjames
22:57 C-Low
22:48 Zenster
22:44 rjschwarz
22:42 Zenster
22:42 gorb
22:40 Verlaine
22:37 Zenster
22:32 Zenster
22:29 Verlaine