Israel threatens to strike Russia's shipment of defensive weapons - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40816715]i don't care if the rebels get defensive aaa. all they could do with them is shoot planes down.[/QUOTE] or shoot down any nearby passenger liners

[QUOTE=scout1;40816685]and is there a reason you're discounting the rebels getting ahold of any,[/QUOTE] That's not how S-300s work.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;40816795]That's not how S-300s work.[/QUOTE] Please explain it to me.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40816386]I don't think that comment was serious.[/QUOTE] The idea of backing (I'm not talking military intervention in either case, only political support) Russia instead of Israel is stupid, though. What Israel is doing to the Palestinian people is despicable, but Russia is in an entirely different league overall. Assad as well. And Iran.

mini-Cuban Crisis V2 anyone? Exept this one doesn't risk triggering a nuclear war.

[QUOTE=Azaz3l;40816929]mini-Cuban Crisis V2 anyone? Exept this one doesn't risk triggering a nuclear war.[/QUOTE] You get the popcorn I'll call the 6th fleet

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;40815670]I don't know, I can see the defense minister's point. If Syria destabilizes and completely fucking implodes, those weapon systems could up and vanish. Isn't the first time that's happened and it probably won't be the last, so an advances SAM system could wind up in some random fucking place. I'm pretty sure those things could swat down a couple airliners if somebody wanted to do that. I'm not sure that pouring advanced weapons into what is basically a civil war is a good idea.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but it's completely okay when western powers want to give weapons to rebels.

[QUOTE=scout1;40816685]with an estimated engagement range of at least 75km... the border could hit almost anywhere in lebanon or israel and is there a reason you're discounting the rebels getting ahold of any, or the idea of giving the assad government more advanced weapons?[/QUOTE] Lebanon isn't a threat to Syria, infact one of the most powerful factions in Southern lebanon is Hezbollah.. who is currently helping them directly in the Syrian war. Plus, I doubt civilian jets fly over Syria or the Golan Heights. If Assad was interested in state-to-state terrorism he would have attacked when Israel blew up his nuclear reactor, or bombed Damascus. Plus he has had Yakhont anti ship missiles for ages and he has not done anything with those. Israel does not want Assad to have these weapons because they're a game changing defensive weapon. They won't be able to attack Damascus without taking some costly risks, infact Assad might even take steps to shoot down Israeli aircraft in Lebanon. [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=scout1;40816821]Please explain it to me.[/QUOTE] Okay you're being ignorant here, S-300's are a very sophisticated defensive weapon. Many analysts are even wagering that Russian experts are going to be operating these for the first little while. Hezbollah or the Syrian rebels could not make much use of these defensive weapons without proper support. The rebels have already captured close range surface-to-air missile systems and they have not been able to make much use of it, especially since the regime indiscriminately bombs any base that they abandon/lose. Here is a typical S-300 battery. [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YniKlbPh29k/So4JaJmMrpI/AAAAAAAAFso/Y7-0cltAyEQ/s1600/s-300-battery.gif[/IMG] I doubt he is getting anything more advanced any time soon, and the rebels aren't going to be able to operate it and I doubt Israel is going to let this system cross the border.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40817101]Lebanon isn't a threat to Syria [...] infact Assad might even take steps to shoot down Israeli aircraft in Lebanon.[/QUOTE] Next up: Shooting down Israeli aircraft in Israel. [QUOTE=laserguided;40817101] Plus, I doubt civilian jets fly over Syria or the Golan Heights. If Assad was interested in state-to-state terrorism he would have attacked when Israel blew up his nuclear reactor, or bombed Damascus. Plus he has had Yakhont anti ship missiles for ages and he has not done anything with those.[/QUOTE] Do you doubt that civilian jets fly over lebanon or israel? Let us not forget Assad was not facing a civil war and a desperate situation in 2007. And, you are still discounting the rebels getting ahold of them. [QUOTE=laserguided;40817101] Israel does not want Assad to have these weapons because they're a game changing defensive weapon. They won't be able to attack Damascus without taking some costly risks, infact Assad might even take steps to shoot down Israeli aircraft in Lebanon.[/QUOTE] SAMs being a "defensive" weapon didn't stop Egypt from using them quite offensively in the Yom Kippur war. Let us not forget that the US previously sold "dual use" chemicals to Iraq for "industrial" purposes and "vaccines". [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=laserguided;40817101] [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] Okay you're being ignorant here, S-300's are a very sophisticated defensive weapon. Many analysts are even wagering that Russian experts are going to be operating these for the first little while. Hezbollah or the Syrian rebels could not make much use of these defensive weapons without proper support. The rebels have already captured close range surface-to-air missile systems and they have not been able to make much use of it, especially since the regime indiscriminately bombs any base that they abandon/lose. Here is a typical S-300 battery. [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YniKlbPh29k/So4JaJmMrpI/AAAAAAAAFso/Y7-0cltAyEQ/s1600/s-300-battery.gif[/IMG] I doubt he is getting anything more advanced any time soon, and the rebels aren't going to be able to operate it and I doubt Israel is going to let this system cross the border.[/QUOTE] It's not like parts of the Syrian army defected or anything right? But sure we can assume that Russians are operating them and are the only people capable of operating them, and this will supposedly prevent Israel from bombing things in Syria. Which is a lot like treating the symptom instead of the problem, whilst throwing more and more weapons into a civil war. We all remember what a bad idea it is to supply weapons to sides in a civil war, right? How about Russia just not send weapons to either side or start tossing in bigger and better weapons so that when the violence spills over neighboring borders (as it [B]has[/B] and will continue to do so), it doesn't end up with a greater tragedy?

[QUOTE=scout1;40817312]Next up: Shooting down Israeli aircraft in Israel. Do you doubt that civilian jets fly over lebanon or israel? Let us not forget Assad was not facing a civil war and a desperate situation in 2007. And, you are still discounting the rebels getting ahold of them. SAMs being a "defensive" weapon didn't stop Egypt from using them quite offensively in the Yom Kippur war. Let us not forget that the US previously sold "dual use" chemicals to Iraq for "industrial" purposes and "vaccines". [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] It's not like parts of the Syrian army defected or anything right? But sure we can assume that Russians are operating them and are the only people capable of operating them, and this will supposedly prevent Israel from bombing things in Syria. Which is a lot like treating the symptom instead of the problem, whilst throwing more and more weapons into a civil war. We all remember what a bad idea it is to supply weapons to sides in a civil war, right? How about Russia just not send weapons to either side or start tossing in bigger and better weapons so that when the violence spills over neighboring borders (as it [B]has[/B] and will continue to do so), it doesn't end up with a greater tragedy?[/QUOTE] The rebels aren't going to get ahold and be able to operate S-300's. The only reason they're sending them now is because Israel kind of bombed Assad.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40817459]The rebels aren't going to get ahold[/QUOTE] Can you cite anything that makes this even remotely possible? The FSA has at least some of everything that Assad has access to. Including existing anti-aircraft weapons and armored vehicles. What stops them from getting access to this? Assad's army? Well, we know how well that's going. I have [B]no confidence[/B] that the rebels won't get ahold of a weapon simply because we wish and hope they won't. [QUOTE=laserguided;40817459]The rebels aren't going to [..] be able to operate S-300's.[/QUOTE] Again assuming this is true it is still not a good idea to supply desperate people fighting a civil war especially when one side is a dictator with a horrible history and the other side is a mixed bag of extremists, freedom fighters, terrorists, and god knows what else. [QUOTE=laserguided;40817459]The only reason they're sending them now is because Israel kind of bombed Assad.[/QUOTE] If that was Russia's concern they should use their military and political pressure to stop this, instead of sending weapons to in what is every way a worse government and country. Fueling the civil war is not going to help stop Israel from bombing what it sees as a threat. Israel will just [I]find a better way to bomb it.[/I] And then we can devolve this whole thing into rebels flinging shit as assad flinging shit at israel flinging shit at rebels, and we get to kill even more people! That is not a good solution.

My god the first page of this thread was bloodthirsty for Israel to get pounded by Russia. Do you all forget that Israel has many innocent people in it as much as any other place, despite their bad foreign policies? Not to mention all Israel really has to do is wait for the weapons to be put in Syrian hands - then attack it.

[QUOTE=scout1;40817603]Can you cite anything that makes this even remotely possible? The FSA has at least some of everything that Assad has access to. Including existing anti-aircraft weapons and armored vehicles. What stops them from getting access to this? Assad's army? Well, we know how well that's going. I have [B]no confidence[/B] that the rebels won't get ahold of a weapon simply because we wish and hope they won't. Again assuming this is true it is still not a good idea to supply desperate people fighting a civil war especially when one side is a dictator with a horrible history and the other side is a mixed bag of extremists, freedom fighters, terrorists, and god knows what else. If that was Russia's concern they should use their military and political pressure to stop this, instead of sending weapons to in what is every way a worse government and country. Fueling the civil war is not going to help stop Israel from bombing what it sees as a threat. Israel will just [I]find a better way to bomb it.[/I] And then we can devolve this whole thing into rebels flinging shit as assad flinging shit at israel flinging shit at rebels, and we get to kill even more people! That is not a good solution.[/QUOTE] By get ahold of I mean a entire operational battery. That includes personal to operate it and the logistics to sustain it. S-300's should be held far back behind lines because of their range. Plus it takes a lot of manpower and a year of training to manage/use/fire/sustain these batteries. I don't think Russia is going to let go of Syria, because its one of their few loyal allies and they have a naval base there. [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;40817772]My god the first page of this thread was bloodthirsty for Israel to get pounded by Russia. Do you all forget that Israel has many innocent people in it as much as any other place, despite their bad foreign policies? Not to mention all Israel really has to do is wait for the weapons to be put in Syrian hands - then attack it.[/QUOTE] I doubt Syria is going to be able to operate it for the first while, because they probably want the systems there ASAP they might contract Russian staff.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40817804]By get ahold of I mean a entire operational battery. That includes personal to operate it and the logistics to sustain it. S-300's should be held far back behind lines because of their range. I don't think Russia is going to let go of Syria, because its one of their few loyal allies and they have a naval base there. [/QUOTE] Yes, armies have never captured each others' equipment... And "far back behind lines" in a civil war (especially this one) is like 5 miles. Praying, hoping, and wishing is not going to stop reality from disseminating weapons. [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Syrian_civil_war.png[/img]

[QUOTE=scout1;40817857]Yes, armies have never captured each others' equipment... And "far back behind lines" in a civil war (especially this one) is like 5 miles. Praying, hoping, and wishing is not going to stop reality from disseminating weapons.[/QUOTE] These aren't decimating weapons, they're mean't for shooting down ballistic missiles and planes. I'm pretty sure Israel ceased flights in Northern Israel a while ago, and they could surely do that again if there was any risk. It even takes a lot of training just to drive TEL's, I honestly doubt anybody other than a unified army could operate these. They aren't going to be throwing these into rebel hands, they're standoff weapons. They sit and wait for the enemy to come to them, and the rebels don't have any sort of air support so they're definitely going to be defending the capital from attack by Israel. I do not think there is any risk at all, its a deterrent.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40817897]These aren't decimating weapons, they're mean't for shooting down ballistic missiles and planes. I'm pretty sure Israel ceased flights in Northern Israel a while ago, and they could surely do that again if there was any risk. It even takes a lot of training just to drive TEL's, I honestly doubt anybody other than a unified army could operate these.[/QUOTE] Iran's new armed forces sure didn't have any problems operating those weapons we left with the Shah

[QUOTE=scout1;40817908]Iran's new armed forces sure didn't have any problems operating those weapons we left with the Shah[/QUOTE] Because they were trained domestically, and it was a unified country of 50m and not a group of 100,000 rebels. Their army was intact from the days of the Shah. Oh and F-4 phantoms and Hawk missile systems aren't really advanced.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40817938]Because they were trained domestically, and it was a unified country of 50m and not a group of 100,000 rebels. Their army was intact from the days of the Shah.[/QUOTE] Don't the rebels only number around 30,000? and most of them are civilians with the odd defector? Not specially trained missile crews at that.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;40817976]Don't the rebels only number around 30,000? and most of them are civilians with the odd defector? Not specially trained missile crews at that.[/QUOTE] I dunno, I'd wager they're bigger than 30,000. Wikipedia has some random estimate of 100k.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;40817976]Don't the rebels only number around 30,000? and most of them are civilians with the odd defector? Not specially trained missile crews at that.[/QUOTE] While sourcing things earlier I read that 30% of the syrian army has defected, mostly along secretarian lines

Yeah 30k does sound far too low. I wonder where I get that number from.

[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;40816379]The unconditional hate for Israel is ridiculous. Yeah, they can be douchey. Yes, they can be REALLY REALLY douchey. But suggesting we just nuke them and forget about them is stupid as fuck.[/QUOTE] I recognize that Israel has a right to exist and that they have a place and have settled where they are. However, they're a fucking rogue state that invades, pillages, colonizes, steals secrets from their allies, sells technology to their enemies, etc etc. They're fucking out of control and need to be contained. [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=scout1;40817908]Iran's new armed forces sure didn't have any problems operating those weapons we left with the Shah[/QUOTE] The most advanced thing they have from us giving them weapons is probably the AH-1. [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] Like. The original AH-1.

Everyone just has to meddle

If Israel struck the shipment in Syrian hands, that shouldnt piss off Moscow right?(ie not striking a russian shipment) How does it work?

[QUOTE=C47;40823250]If Israel struck the shipment in Syrian hands, that shouldnt piss off Moscow right?(ie not striking a russian shipment) How does it work?[/QUOTE] It's still going to piss them off, because it's an act of war.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40823255]It's still going to piss them off, because it's an act of war.[/QUOTE] To Syria, but not Russia because he said in this scenario, it would be in Syria's hands.

Weren't people saying that Russian operators would need to run it for the first few weeks/months - meaning that there will never be a good time to strike it as that would surely piss of Russia (if Russian operators are killed).

Powder Keg

[QUOTE=Jonzky;40824389]Weren't people saying that Russian operators would need to run it for the first few weeks/months - meaning that there will never be a good time to strike it as that would surely piss of Russia (if Russian operators are killed).[/QUOTE] I suspect there will be boatloads of Russian advisers on this trip as much as the equipment.

Israel is world police V2