Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[Meengla]

Both Israel and the deep state want this war until they can achieve regime change or at least Iran that has no teeth (no nukes, no missiles) to bite. Figures like John Bolton, Lindsey Graham, and Marco Rubio have been the public face of this campaign.
As for Trump, they got something on him that he doesn't want his MAGA base to know. They will drive him to whatever direction that they want.

I believe most analysts say the ideal goal is a destablized, fragmented Iran with Kurdistan acting like another UAE like thorn on Iran and Turkey.
As for Trump and Epstein Saga, it remains to be seen what kind of influence Israel has due to ES but Max seems to think so far the influence seems indirect on Trump by targeting some close to Trump. Doesn't matter: Similar results! And shame on the damn pedophiles!!

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

The world is increasingly becoming multipolar, defined by the rise of "middle powers" that no longer strictly align with any single superpower.

One prominent emerging bloc is the Turkey-Saudi-Pakistan-Azerbaijan axis. This group is increasingly formalized through trilateral defense agreements and the Middle Corridor trade route, connecting the Central Asian "stans" to Europe. This alignment often includes Indonesia and Egypt on issues of Islamic diplomacy, and extends influence into parts of Africa—such as Libya and Sudan—where Turkey and Saudi Arabia hold significant mediation roles.

To balance this, a rival "Indo-Abrahamic" grouping has solidified around the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). This bloc consists of the UAE, Israel, India, and European partners like Greece. They are supported by African nations like Morocco and certain factions in Somaliland, focusing on maritime security and trade routes that bypass traditional chokepoints.

In this landscape, Qatar remains the quintessential swing state, maintaining its role as a vital mediator between the West, the Taliban, and regional rivals. Meanwhile, Iran and its "Axis of Resistance" partners (including the Houthi movement in Yemen) form a separate, albeit currently pressured, group. Notably, Syria is currently in a state of transition, moving away from the Iranian orbit toward a more independent, regionally integrated stance under its new interim government.

 

[ShapurII]

The whole idea of an IADS without a capable air force to complement it is delusional for two basic reasons:

First of all, even when you are using a fully mobile system like S-300, you still need to remain stationary to track targets with precision from a reference point. You cannot launch a huge missile from a truck that is bouncing up and down on the road. So, even when all components are mobile, to operate during war time, you still need to be stationary which means you can be detected and targeted by the enemy.

Secondly, even the best long-range systems like S-500 can hardly lock on targets that are more than 500kms away from them. That is still too short to stop the enemy from firing ALBMs and ALCMs over the sky of your neighboring countries. If your air force cannot create a buffer zone to prevent that from happening, your AD remains vulnerable and it's a sitting duck for your enemy. This is exactly what happened in Israeli strikes on Iran in Operation Days of Repentance and Operation Rising Lions.

 

[Ali_Baba]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Oh sh*t !!!

 

[Ali_Baba]

The whole idea of an IADS without a capable air force to complement it is delusional for two basic reasons:

Agree - they are complimentary. You need both.

First of all, even when you are using a fully mobile system like S-300, you still need to remain stationary to track targets with precision from a reference point. You cannot launch a huge missile from a truck that is bouncing up and down on the road. So, even when all components are mobile, to operate during war time, you still need to be stationary which means you can be detected and targeted by the enemy.

Yes - but in a fully "integrated" IADS, targeting can be offloaded to other sensors in the IADS once the initial lock-on-shot is taken. Shoot and scoot is the doctrine for an IADS.

Secondly, even the best long-range systems like S-500 can hardly lock on targets that are more than 500kms away from them. That is still too short to stop the enemy from firing ALBMs and ALCMs over the sky of your neighboring countries. If your air force cannot create a buffer zone to prevent that from happening, your AD remains vulnerable and it's a sitting duck for your enemy. This is exactly what happened in Israeli strikes on Iran in Operation Days of Repentance and Operation Rising Lions.

A system like an S300 has to be protected by both LOMADS and SHORADs and end-stage CIWS systems to protect it from ALBM and other threats, you cannot leave a system of the S300 class "undefended". It has to be layered like an onion is, to protect the inner core.

 

[Meengla]

The whole idea of an IADS without a capable air force to complement it is delusional for two basic reasons:
First of all, even when you are using a fully mobile system like S-300, you still need to remain stationary to track targets with precision from a reference point. You cannot launch a huge missile from a truck that is bouncing up and down on the road. So, even when all components are mobile, to operate during war time, you still need to be stationary which means you can be detected and targeted by the enemy.
Secondly, even the best long-range systems like S-500 can hardly lock on targets that are more than 500kms away from them. That is still too short to stop the enemy from firing ALBMs and ALCMs over the sky of your neighboring countries. If your air force cannot create a buffer zone to prevent that from happening, your AD remains vulnerable and it's a sitting duck for your enemy. This is exactly what happened in Israeli strikes on Iran in Operation Days of Repentance and Operation Rising Lions.

Great post!
And sorry to be so blunt: It will take Iran decades to come to even Pakistan Airforce Capabilities, forget the combined USA-NATO-Israel ones and that's why the Iranians didn't invest/waste money on sophisticated fighter jets; they would be destroyed in their hangars. Total waste of money unless used against neighbors like Afghanistan and similar countries.
There are lots of videos out there about Pakistani Airforce to learn from and even then Pakistan is blessed to have the Chinese weapon supplies rushed and the Chinese satellite / intelligence as help.
You will see most analysts saying the ballistic missiles are Iran's only real deterrence; even Iran's 'first line of defense', as Trita called in the video I posted above, the militias are largely neutralized within last two years.

 

[ShapurII]

Great post!
And sorry to be so blunt: It will take Iran decades to come to even Pakistan Airforce Capabilities, forget the combined USA-NATO-Israel ones and that's why the Iranians didn't invest/waste money on sophisticated fighter jets; they would be destroyed in their hangars. Total waste of money unless used against neighbors like Afghanistan and similar countries.
There are lots of videos out there about Pakistani Airforce to learn from and even then Pakistan is blessed to have the Chinese weapon supplies rushed and the Chinese satellite / intelligence as help.
You will see most analysts saying the ballistic missiles are Iran's only real deterrence; even Iran's 'first line of defense', as Trita called in the video I posted above, the militias are largely neutralized within last two years.

Honestly, we don't have an air force at the moment but with good investment and a US-friendly government, Iran can start a new air force from scratch. It just needs good investment and it will take 5-10 years in my opinion.

However, if we want to stay anti-US, then I doubt the Chinese would be willing to help us create a new air force at all.

 

[ShapurII]

Agree - they are complimentary. You need both.



Yes - but in a fully "integrated" IADS, targeting can be offloaded to other sensors in the IADS once the initial lock-on-shot is taken. Shoot and scoot is the doctrine for an IADS.



A system like an S300 has to be protected by both LOMADS and SHORADs and end-stage CIWS systems to protect it from ALBM and other threats, you cannot leave a system of the S300 class "undefended". It has to be layered like an onion is, to protect the inner core.

Our S-300s weren't undefended, but we didn't have enough redundancy to protect our critical assets.

A good dense, highly-layered air defense for a country as large as Iran will be very expensive as well. It makes more sense to invest on your air force to also have offensive capabilities than to simply rely on density and layering for your AD, which is only for defensive purposes.

 

[LX1111]

I will write the way I want or can.



For us with 30-40 Billion USD military budget against 2+trillion USD budget of enemy, its either missiles or AF for now. We cant wait for 5-8 years to build an AF while sacrificing the only deterrent we have.



Outside China no country on earth including Russia can even dream of pitting "airpower" against US+NATO+Israel.



Missile infratsucture is underground so you are wrong in comparing it to open airbases, also missiles have zero vulnerurability in air compared to a fighter jet facing worlds meanest airpower. Per unit price for delivering 0.5-1.0 tonne warhead is 20-50K USD while a fighter jet if lost in air or on ground (most likely against US+allies) means 100 million USD lost. A single squadron of SU-35S + AWACS if disabled means 2-3 billion USD lost or atleats not useful in combat anymore. Same amount given to IRGCASF means they can have IRBMs, MRBMs, LACMs, AShB/CMs without vulnurability.



Your point is invalid. Outside US, Russia, France and recently China nobody makes modern turbofans. Who will supply critical engine parts, wear n tear moveables in an elongated war? critical armaments when PGM and A2A weapons deplete? Even Russians face shortage because the formula of launching expensive PGMs did not work in a years long war. Economy crumbles when wars elongate. Assembling CKD kits and calling it a "local fighter" does not mean having local aviation industry. When you have Superpowers as enemies they can always get all of this CKD supply blocked because they have the diplomatic and financial power to do so. It has happened to us twice in past when Russia backedout of weapons deal due to US and Israeli pressure. We faced it in an elongated war where 450 jets were on ground and government had to smuggle spare parts. When our AIM-54A depleted our engineers had to install I-Hawks as A2A weapons. Still we had aces of aces but thats not the point. We saw this happening to our airforce because we fought against an alliance of 11 countries with oil money and superpowers at their back in an 8 years long conflict. You are talking about 1 week long shock n awe campaign where such thing will work but not in a long war against hyperpowers like US+NATO.



Saddam probably could have had air superiority against US+NATO+Allies with 1000 MIG-31+SU-27+25 AWACS. Get real.



Unless we have 6-7 underground airbases that can house atleast 10-12 squadrons of huge air-superiority fighters the size of SU-35S or 57 in future, whatever we get in IRIAF will be rubbled by USAF/USN/NATO/Israelis.



China has a GDP of 22 Trillion USD with 1.2 Trillion trade surplus. Do you want me to list the same numbers for countries in the region ? some have Trade defecits and live on IMF/WB food stamps yet you are talking about "Air-superiority" matching China. Not even Russia is using its AF anymore, instead is causing massive destruction in Ukraine with its Iskanders, Kalibr, Khinzals, Shaheds etc. There is a reason Jew controlled ME countries are allowed airforces but not lethal billions of USD worth missile infra structure that can actually threaten Israel.



Defence doctrines are built around the threats you face. I have already describe the kind of threat we face. Good luck achieving "air-superiority" against this enemy that not even Russians can do so I dont know what are you trying to say here. Keeping some imported 4th gen Airforce on conventional open airbases on surface will means suicide for the force, people and hundreds of billions USD lost. Morale down.

Also missile bases are underground, so are there storage units, maintanance infrastructure. We can spread thousands of cheap welded TEL as launch points or fire from Silos with them. There is ZERO risk of losing 50-100 million USD fighter or pilot in it. Against Some regional 3rd world military it will work, not against hyperpower and its first world allies.

The mission of the Iranian Air Force and its anti-aircraft missiles is not to defeat the IAF or the USAAF. The most fundamental task of the Iranian Air Force is to ensure that ballistic missiles have sufficient time to be launched. This requires that the Israelis spend at least several hours in order to eliminate the Iranian Air Force.
If the Iranians are willing to further develop their air force, they will need to purchase several dozen fourth-generation and fifth-generation fighter , at least in the skies over Tehran, Mashhad, and Isfahan, and be able to shoot down several F-15.Let the Israelis know that they lost their pilots in Iran, and the Iranian skies are not a risk-free playground for the Israelis.

 

[Ali_Baba]

You I

Our S-300s weren't undefended, but we didn't have enough redundancy to protect our critical assets.

A good dense, highly-layered air defense for a country as large as Iran will be very expensive as well. It makes more sense to invest on your air force to also have offensive capabilities than to simply rely on density and layering for your AD, which is only for defensive purposes.

You invest in both to protect high value targets. No one tries to protect their entire airspace, that is too expensive as you say

 

[The SC]

Senior Senator Ted Cruz on Fox News
After receiving permission from Donald Trump
Revealing what he said was the content of the negotiations:
Ayatollah Khamenei and the mullahs have told us that they must leave the country and hand over power
Otherwise, they will be removed from power by force

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[The SC]

News:

South Korea calls on its citizens to leave Iran
Italy calls on its citizens to leave Iran
Germany calls on its citizens to leave Iran
Slovakia calls on its citizens to leave Iran
Serbia calls on its citizens to leave Iran
Sweden calls on its citizens to leave Iran
Spain calls on its citizens to leave Iran
France calls on its citizens to leave Iran

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[mulj]

The whole idea of an IADS without a capable air force to complement it is delusional for two basic reasons:

First of all, even when you are using a fully mobile system like S-300, you still need to remain stationary to track targets with precision from a reference point. You cannot launch a huge missile from a truck that is bouncing up and down on the road. So, even when all components are mobile, to operate during war time, you still need to be stationary which means you can be detected and targeted by the enemy.

Secondly, even the best long-range systems like S-500 can hardly lock on targets that are more than 500kms away from them. That is still too short to stop the enemy from firing ALBMs and ALCMs over the sky of your neighboring countries. If your air force cannot create a buffer zone to prevent that from happening, your AD remains vulnerable and it's a sitting duck for your enemy. This is exactly what happened in Israeli strikes on Iran in Operation Days of Repentance and Operation Rising Lions.

In that case iads are redundant, all enemy has to do is lobbying albm onto targets.

 

[ShapurII]

In that case iads are redundant, all enemy has to do is lobbying albm onto targets.

They won't be able to do that if your air force can create a buffer zone to stop them from launching ALBMs/ALCMs. Besides that, modern IADS also feature anti-ballistic capabilities.

An air force is an important, critical part of an IADS. The ability of your air force to communicate with your radars and even SAMs significantly improves your defensive capabilities over the skies of your territory and neighboring countries.

 

[Ali_Baba]

In that case iads are redundant, all enemy has to do is lobbying albm onto targets.

if you invest in SHORADs, LOMADs and CIWs, then you can neutralise ALBMs.