|
|
Russian Missiles to Syria, Venezuela and Iran? Why?
By: geostrategymap.com on: 21.01.2005 [00:56 ] (5841 reads)
|
Recent U.S. political and ideological intervention in Ukraine did not constitute merely a shot across Russia's bow, warning it not to continue in its course of expanding geopolitical influence by virtue of energy dominance. It was rather an 'armed torpedo' launched directly at one of Russia's 'lead ships', so-to-speak. In a literal naval encounter that sort of action is, of course, tantamount to a declaration of war. The true meaning of recent U.S. actions inside Russia's traditional sphere of influence have not been lost on the Kremlin. This is war - albeit of the geopolitical flavor. The U.S. intends to roll back the rapidly growing Russian geopolitical influence. How is Russia answering that clear challenge?
|
|
(5947 bytes) [nc]
|
|
Temporary offline
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 21.01.2005 [11:33 ]
|
|
|
Not just long range ballistics - but also SAMs, AGMs, and cruise missiles.
|
by BERNIE on 21.01.2005 [12:08 ]
|
|
|
u.s.a. can only fight one war at a time alone.
just a side note: u.s.a. lost over 4,000 airplanes during the KOREAN war.
|
by hayate on 21.01.2005 [14:45 ]
|
|
|
approx. 3000 fixed wing and 5000-17000 helicopters during their Viet Nam war crime. Yugoslav sams kept them from flying above 10000 metres and fear of the same initially kept them flying at high altitude in Afghanistan.
Those manpack sams and AT missiles would be the best deterrent to ameroisraeli invasion. The longer ranged, larger and more sophisticated systems mentioned might make a dent initially, but they are expensive and complicated to operate and would only likely be aquired in small munbers. Not enough to stop a determined ameroisraeli invasion. But the SS missiles might make an effective deterrent against israeli aggression if they know they will get hit back if they attack.
|
by hayate on 21.01.2005 [14:47 ]
|
|
|
"Yugoslav sams kept them from flying above 10000 metres"
should be below 10000 metres.
|
by kintanar on 21.01.2005 [16:27 ]
|
|
|
"Many analysts like to repeat the mantra that Russia is no match for the U.S. in the military sphere"
Then...why is the US fear?...
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 21.01.2005 [16:48 ]
|
|
|
"Reports also indicate the S-300 air defense complex might be under consideration for transfer to at least one of the three states."
Iran has been buying the S-300 for years and is now making its own varient.
|
by freedom4all on 21.01.2005 [17:00 ]
|
|
|
Russia has learned its lessons from Afghanistan when Americans help exhaust Russian economy by funding and arming resistance fighters. Well guess what, Russia can play that game too. Pay back is sweet.
|
by freedom4all on 21.01.2005 [17:11 ]
|
|
|
Like it or not Russia and China wouldn’t let America occupy Iran. So stop freaking out people.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 21.01.2005 [18:52 ]
|
|
|
what? ? ? ? ?
|
by buSShdiesoon on 22.01.2005 [02:38 ]
|
|
|
its technology to the uSSSStates first. In order to keep those fucking bastard paying and to keep those bastard ameriKKKans under control. their problem is they are no people. they are a bunch of robbed or bribed individues, collected and ruled by Satan.
|
by Westerner on 02.04.2006 [18:13 ]
|
|
|
Has Russia forgotten that Islamic Extremism as practiced in Iran is a violent and widespread threat to all Western and all non-Islamic countries, including Russia?
Selling arms to Iran is an irresponsible act of opportunism that Russia may have to regret within the next 10 years when it faces widespread terrorism coming from lots of countries with names ending in "-stan" on its Southerns borders.
And why is Russia attempting to shield Iran while it develops nuclear bombs? Surely it doesn't believe the transparant claims that Iran's nuclear enrichment programme is "civillian"? Why does Russia seem so hell-bent on fostering an irresponsible terrorist state with nuclear weapons to its south? Does it want a return to the times of "Mutal Assured Destruction", this time not with a rational West but with an irrational Middle-East?
Has it forgotten that its secular nature is incompatible with the more extremist manifestations of Islam? How would the Kremlin like to see the Southern states turn into the same kind of Islamic estremists as we saw in Afghanistan and continue to see in in Iran?
Is this mere short-sightedness or just opportunism?
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
