Isku Iraniin

  • Viestiketjun aloittaja Viestiketjun aloittaja ctg
  • Aloitus PVM Aloitus PVM
  • Tagit Tagit
    iran
Mielestäni isku olisi onnistunut sekä etukäteen syötetyillä reittipisteillä/gps-ohjauksella, tai edellisellä + lopussa käytetyllä 4G/kameraohjauksella. Maalinosoitusta tuohon ei minusta tarvita. Drone-operaattorin ei tarvitse olla fyysisesti jalostamon läheisyydessä, koska 4G-yhteys on hyvin kattava teollisuusalueilla/taajamissa. 4G-yhteys sopii hyvin hitaisiin, matalan lentokorkeuden kauko-ohjattuihin iskuihin.

Lisäys: satelliittinavigoinnilla päästään sentin tarkuuteen, kun käytetään GPS/QZSS/GLONASS-järjestelmiä rinnakkain.

'Magellan Systems Japan is showing off their next generation high precision multi-frequency multi-GNSS receiver that reduces implementation cost compared to a conventional high precision RTK-PPP receiver. This supports GPS, QZSS and GLONASS, algorithm to output measuring data of carrier phase positioning, RTK-PPP, QZSS L6 signal, PPP-AR this solution can provide down to 1 centimeter accuracy which can be useful for self-driving cars, farm machines, construction machines, drones and more.'

 
Viimeksi muokattu:
Maalit olivat isokokoisia kiinteitä rakennuksia, joten ei niitä kovinkaan paljon ole tarvinnut maalailla lasereilla tai millään. Siviili-GPS:nkin tarkkuus on nykyään (kun epätarkkuutus ei ole enää käytössä) muutaman metrin luokkaa, mikä riittää hyvin sellaiseen isoon säiliöön osumiseen. Tarvittaessa Jenkit voisivat kytkeä siviilisignaalien epätarkkuutuksen taas päälle, mutta sillä ei nykyään olisi enää niin merkittävää vaikutusta, koska GLONASS+Galileo+Beidou alkavat löytyä halvempienkin puhelimien paikannussirujen kyvyistä.

Kaiketi kuitenkin on käytetty GPS-navigointia pääsyyn lähelle ja loppulähestyminen hoidettu hahmontunnistuksen avulla. Kohteena olleet tornit ovat sen verran kapeita, että tuskin olisi osunut pelkällä satnavilla. Hahmontunnistukseen riittää esim. halpa kameramoduli ja Rasperry Pi tasoinen laskentateho. Osa käytetyistä aseista oli risteilyohjuksia joissa käytetyt hakeutumisjärjestelmät ovat voineet olla enemmän sotilastasoisia.

Näytä "drone-iskuja" on tapahtunut myös aikaisemmin tänä vuonna:

Yanbun (satamakaupunki Punaisenmeren rannalla) hyökkäys ainakin lienee toteutettu Jemenistä käsin, koska matka Iranista olisi varsin pitkä.
 
MOPit esiin.

Iranin ydinlaitoksiin iskettäisiin todennäköisesti uusilla GBU-57-jättiaseilla.

Yhdysvaltain ilmavoimat päivittää massiivisten bunkkeripommien arsenaaliaan 90 miljoonan dollarin eli 81 miljoonan euron hankintaohjelmalla. 14 000 kilogrammaa painavia GBU-57 MOP -pommeja uudistetaan entistä tehokkaammilla taistelukärjillä. The War Zone -sivuston mukaan sopimus myönnettiin Ohion ja Pennsylvanian osavaltioissa sijaitseville yhtiöille.

Toimenpide on nähty vastauksena Iranin ilmoitukselle kiihdyttää uraanin rikastamista maan alle rakennetussa Fordon tehtaassa. Toimenpide rikkoo vuonna 2015 solmittua ydinsopimusta. Mahdollinen hyökkäys maan ydinlaitoksia vastaan tehtäisiin todennäköisesti B-2 Spirit -pommikoneiden kuljettamilla MOP-pommeilla, jotka pystyvät pureutumaan jopa 60 metrin syvyydessä sijaitseviin kohteisiin. On epäselvää, riittäisikö edes kyseisten jättipommien tuhovoima Fordossa, jonka pääosien arvioidaan sijaitsevan noin 90 metrin syvyydessä. Laitoksen seinämät on suojattu paksuilla teräsbetonikerroksilla.

Yhdysvaltain ilmavoimien mukaan uusimmat bunkkeripommit on varustettu tarkalla GPS-ohjauksella, minkä seurauksena samaa kohdetta voitaisiin ”kaivaa” useilla peräkkäisillä iskuilla.

https://www.verkkouutiset.fi/usan-ilmavoimille-uusia-bunkkeripommeja/
 
Special Report:‘Time to take out our swords': Inside Iran’s plot to attack Saudi Arabia

(Reuters) - Four months before a swarm of drones and missiles crippled the world’s biggest oil processing facility in Saudi Arabia, Iranian security officials gathered at a heavily fortified compound in Tehran.

The group included the top echelons of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, an elite branch of the Iranian military whose portfolio includes missile development and covert operations.

The main topic that day in May: How to punish the United States for pulling out of a landmark nuclear treaty and re-imposing economic sanctions on Iran, moves that have hit the Islamic Republic hard.

With Major General Hossein Salami, leader of the Revolutionary Guards, looking on, a senior commander took the floor.

“It is time to take out our swords and teach them a lesson,” the commander said, according to four people familiar with the meeting.

Hard-liners in the meeting talked of attacking high-value targets, including American military bases.

Yet, what ultimately emerged was a plan that stopped short of direct confrontation that could trigger a devastating U.S. response. Iran opted instead to target oil installations of America’s ally, Saudi Arabia, a proposal discussed by top Iranian military officials in that May meeting and at least four that followed.

This account, described to Reuters by three officials familiar with the meetings and a fourth close to Iran’s decision making, is the first to describe the role of Iran’s leaders in plotting the Sept. 14 attack on Saudi Aramco, Saudi Arabia’s state-controlled oil company.

These people said Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei approved the operation, but with strict conditions: Iranian forces must avoid hitting any civilians or Americans.

Reuters was unable to confirm their version of events with Iran’s leadership. A Revolutionary Guards spokesman declined to comment. Tehran has steadfastly denied involvement.

Alireza Miryousefi, spokesman for the Iranian Mission to the United Nations in New York, rejected the version of events the four people described to Reuters. He said Iran played no part in the strikes, that no meetings of senior security officials took place to discuss such an operation, and that Khamenei did not authorize any attack.

“No, no, no, no, no, and no,” Miryousefi said to detailed questions from Reuters on the alleged gatherings and Khamenei’s purported role.

The Saudi government communications office did not respond to a request for comment.

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon declined to comment. A senior Trump administration official did not directly comment on Reuters’ findings but said Tehran’s “behavior and its decades-long history of destructive attacks and support for terrorism are why Iran’s economy is in shambles.”

Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi rebels, at the center of a civil war against Saudi-backed forces, claimed responsibility for the assault on Saudi oil facilities. That declaration was rebuffed by U.S. and Saudi officials, who said the sophistication of the offensive pointed to Iran.

Saudi Arabia was a strategic target.

The kingdom is Iran’s principal regional rival and a petroleum giant whose production is crucial to the world economy. It is an important U.S. security partner. But its war on Yemen, which has killed thousands of civilians, and the brutal murder of Washington-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents last year, have strained its relations with U.S. lawmakers. There was no groundswell of support in Congress for military intervention to aid the Saudis after the attack.

The 17-minute strike on two Aramco installations by 18 drones and three low-flying missiles revealed the vulnerability of the Saudi oil company, despite billions spent by the kingdom on security. Fires erupted at the company’s Khurais oil installation and at the Abqaiq oil processing facility, the world’s largest.

The attack temporarily halved Saudi Arabia’s oil production and knocked out 5% of the world’s oil supply. Global crude prices spiked.

The assault prompted U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to accuse Iran of an “act of war.” In the aftermath, Tehran was hit with additional U.S. sanctions. The United States also launched cyber attacks against Iran, U.S. officials told Reuters.

The Islamic Republic has blamed “thugs” linked to the United States and other regional adversaries for orchestrating street demonstrations that have rocked Iran since mid-November, when the government hiked fuel prices.

Speaking at a televised, pro-government rally in Tehran on Monday, Salami, the Revolutionary Guards chief commander, warned Washington against any further escalation of tensions: “We have shown patience towards the hostile moves of America, the Zionist regime (Israel) and Saudi Arabia against Iran... but we will destroy them if they cross our red lines.”

SCOURING TARGETS

The plan by Iranian military leaders to strike Saudi oil installations developed over several months, according to the official close to Iran’s decision making.

“Details were discussed thoroughly in at least five meetings and the final go ahead was given” by early September, the official said.

All of those meetings took place at a secure location inside the southern Tehran compound, three of the officials told Reuters. They said Khamenei, the supreme leader, attended one of the gatherings at his residence, which is also inside that complex.

Other attendees at some of those meetings included Khamenei’s top military advisor, Yahya Rahim-Safavi, and a deputy of Qasem Soleimani, who heads the Revolutionary Guards’ foreign military and clandestine operations, the three officials said. Rahim-Safavi could not be reached for comment.

Among the possible targets initially discussed were a seaport in Saudi Arabia, an airport and U.S. military bases, the official close to Iran’s decision making said. The person would not provide additional details.

Those ideas were ultimately dismissed over concerns about mass casualties that could provoke fierce retaliation by the United States and embolden Israel, potentially pushing the region into war, the four people said.

The official close to Iran’s decision making said the group settled on the plan to attack Saudi Arabia’s oil installations because it could grab big headlines, inflict economic pain on an adversary and still deliver a strong message to Washington.

“Agreement on Aramco was almost reached unanimously,” the official said. “The idea was to display Iran’s deep access and military capabilities.”

The attack was the worst on Middle East oil facilities since Saddam Hussein, the late Iraqi strongman, torched Kuwait’s oil fields during the 1991 Gulf crisis.

U.S. Senator Martha McSally, an Air Force combat veteran and Republican lawmaker who was briefed by U.S. and Saudi officials, and who visited Aramco’s Abqaiq facility days after the attack, said the perpetrators knew precisely where to strike to create as much damage as possible.

“It showed somebody who had a sophisticated understanding of facility operations like theirs, instead of just hitting things off of satellite photos,” she told Reuters. The drones and missiles, she added, “came from Iranian soil, from an Iranian base.”

A Middle East source, who was briefed by a country investigating the attack, said the launch site was the Ahvaz air base in southwest Iran. That account matched those of three U.S. officials and two other people who spoke to Reuters: a Western intelligence official and a Western source based in the Middle East.

Rather than fly directly from Iran to Saudi Arabia over the Gulf, the missiles and drones took different, circuitous paths to the oil installations, part of Iran’s effort to mask its involvement, the people said.

Some of the craft flew over Iraq and Kuwait before landing in Saudi Arabia, according to the Western intelligence source, who said that trajectory provided Iran with plausible deniability.

“That wouldn’t have been the case if missiles and drones had been seen or heard flying into Saudi Arabia over the Gulf from a south flight path” from Iran, the person said.

Revolutionary Guards commanders briefed the supreme leader on the successful operation hours after the attack, according to the official close to the country’s decision making.

Images of fires raging at the Saudi facilities were broadcast worldwide. The country’s stock market swooned. Global oil prices initially surged 20%. Officials at Saudi Aramco gathered in what was referred to internally as the “emergency management room” at the company’s headquarters.

One of the officials who spoke with Reuters said Tehran was delighted with the outcome of the operation: Iran had landed a painful blow on Saudi Arabia and thumbed its nose at the United States.

SIZING UP TRUMP

The Revolutionary Guards and other branches of the Iranian military all ultimately report to Khamenei. The supreme leader has been defiant in response to Trump’s abandonment last year of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly called the Iran nuclear deal.

That 2015 accord with five permanent members of the U.S. Security Council – the United States, Russia, France, China and the United Kingdom – as well as Germany, removed billions of dollars’ worth of sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran’s curbing its nuclear program.

Trump’s demand for a better deal has seen Iran launch a two-pronged strategy to win relief from sweeping sanctions reimposed by the United States, penalties that have crippled its oil exports and all but shut it out of the international banking system.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has signaled a willingness to meet with American officials on condition that all sanctions be lifted. Simultaneously, Iran is flaunting its military and technical prowess.

In recent months, Iran has shot down a U.S. surveillance drone and seized a British oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel through which about a fifth of the world’s oil moves. And it has announced it has amassed stockpiles of enriched uranium in violation of the U.N agreement, part of its vow to restart its nuclear program.

The Aramco attacks were an escalation that came as Trump had been pursuing his long-stated goal of extricating American forces from the Middle East. Just days after announcing an abrupt pullout of U.S. troops in northern Syria, the Trump administration on Oct. 11 said it would send fighter jets, missile-defense weaponry and 2,800 more troops to Saudi Arabia to bolster the kingdom’s defenses.

“Do not strike another sovereign state, do not threaten American interests, American forces, or we will respond,” U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper warned Tehran during a press briefing.

Still, Iran appears to have calculated that the Trump administration would not risk an all-out assault that could destabilize the region in the service of protecting Saudi oil, said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, a nonprofit working to end global conflict.

In Iran, “hard-liners have come to believe that Trump is a Twitter tiger,” Vaez said. “As such there is little diplomatic or military cost associated with pushing back.”

The senior Trump administration official disputed the suggestion that Iran’s operation has strengthened its hand in working out a deal for sanctions relief from the United States.

“Iran knows exactly what it needs to do to see sanctions lifted,” the official said.

The administration has said Iran must end support for terrorist groups in the Middle East and submit to tougher terms that would permanently snuff its nuclear ambitions. Iran has said it has no ties to terrorist groups.

Whether Tehran accedes to U.S. demands remains to be seen.

In one of the final meetings held ahead of the Saudi oil attack, another Revolutionary Guards commander was already looking ahead, according to the official close to Iran’s decision making who was briefed on that gathering.

“Rest assured Allah almighty will be with us,” the commander told senior security officials. “Start planning for the next one.”

 
Special Report:‘Time to take out our swords': Inside Iran’s plot to attack Saudi Arabia

(Reuters) - Four months before a swarm of drones and missiles crippled the world’s biggest oil processing facility in Saudi Arabia, Iranian security officials gathered at a heavily fortified compound in Tehran.

The group included the top echelons of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, an elite branch of the Iranian military whose portfolio includes missile development and covert operations.

The main topic that day in May: How to punish the United States for pulling out of a landmark nuclear treaty and re-imposing economic sanctions on Iran, moves that have hit the Islamic Republic hard.

With Major General Hossein Salami, leader of the Revolutionary Guards, looking on, a senior commander took the floor.

“It is time to take out our swords and teach them a lesson,” the commander said, according to four people familiar with the meeting.

Hard-liners in the meeting talked of attacking high-value targets, including American military bases.

Yet, what ultimately emerged was a plan that stopped short of direct confrontation that could trigger a devastating U.S. response. Iran opted instead to target oil installations of America’s ally, Saudi Arabia, a proposal discussed by top Iranian military officials in that May meeting and at least four that followed.

This account, described to Reuters by three officials familiar with the meetings and a fourth close to Iran’s decision making, is the first to describe the role of Iran’s leaders in plotting the Sept. 14 attack on Saudi Aramco, Saudi Arabia’s state-controlled oil company.

These people said Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei approved the operation, but with strict conditions: Iranian forces must avoid hitting any civilians or Americans.

Reuters was unable to confirm their version of events with Iran’s leadership. A Revolutionary Guards spokesman declined to comment. Tehran has steadfastly denied involvement.

Alireza Miryousefi, spokesman for the Iranian Mission to the United Nations in New York, rejected the version of events the four people described to Reuters. He said Iran played no part in the strikes, that no meetings of senior security officials took place to discuss such an operation, and that Khamenei did not authorize any attack.

“No, no, no, no, no, and no,” Miryousefi said to detailed questions from Reuters on the alleged gatherings and Khamenei’s purported role.

The Saudi government communications office did not respond to a request for comment.

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon declined to comment. A senior Trump administration official did not directly comment on Reuters’ findings but said Tehran’s “behavior and its decades-long history of destructive attacks and support for terrorism are why Iran’s economy is in shambles.”

Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi rebels, at the center of a civil war against Saudi-backed forces, claimed responsibility for the assault on Saudi oil facilities. That declaration was rebuffed by U.S. and Saudi officials, who said the sophistication of the offensive pointed to Iran.

Saudi Arabia was a strategic target.

The kingdom is Iran’s principal regional rival and a petroleum giant whose production is crucial to the world economy. It is an important U.S. security partner. But its war on Yemen, which has killed thousands of civilians, and the brutal murder of Washington-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents last year, have strained its relations with U.S. lawmakers. There was no groundswell of support in Congress for military intervention to aid the Saudis after the attack.

The 17-minute strike on two Aramco installations by 18 drones and three low-flying missiles revealed the vulnerability of the Saudi oil company, despite billions spent by the kingdom on security. Fires erupted at the company’s Khurais oil installation and at the Abqaiq oil processing facility, the world’s largest.

The attack temporarily halved Saudi Arabia’s oil production and knocked out 5% of the world’s oil supply. Global crude prices spiked.

The assault prompted U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to accuse Iran of an “act of war.” In the aftermath, Tehran was hit with additional U.S. sanctions. The United States also launched cyber attacks against Iran, U.S. officials told Reuters.

The Islamic Republic has blamed “thugs” linked to the United States and other regional adversaries for orchestrating street demonstrations that have rocked Iran since mid-November, when the government hiked fuel prices.

Speaking at a televised, pro-government rally in Tehran on Monday, Salami, the Revolutionary Guards chief commander, warned Washington against any further escalation of tensions: “We have shown patience towards the hostile moves of America, the Zionist regime (Israel) and Saudi Arabia against Iran... but we will destroy them if they cross our red lines.”

SCOURING TARGETS

The plan by Iranian military leaders to strike Saudi oil installations developed over several months, according to the official close to Iran’s decision making.

“Details were discussed thoroughly in at least five meetings and the final go ahead was given” by early September, the official said.

All of those meetings took place at a secure location inside the southern Tehran compound, three of the officials told Reuters. They said Khamenei, the supreme leader, attended one of the gatherings at his residence, which is also inside that complex.

Other attendees at some of those meetings included Khamenei’s top military advisor, Yahya Rahim-Safavi, and a deputy of Qasem Soleimani, who heads the Revolutionary Guards’ foreign military and clandestine operations, the three officials said. Rahim-Safavi could not be reached for comment.

Among the possible targets initially discussed were a seaport in Saudi Arabia, an airport and U.S. military bases, the official close to Iran’s decision making said. The person would not provide additional details.

Those ideas were ultimately dismissed over concerns about mass casualties that could provoke fierce retaliation by the United States and embolden Israel, potentially pushing the region into war, the four people said.

The official close to Iran’s decision making said the group settled on the plan to attack Saudi Arabia’s oil installations because it could grab big headlines, inflict economic pain on an adversary and still deliver a strong message to Washington.

“Agreement on Aramco was almost reached unanimously,” the official said. “The idea was to display Iran’s deep access and military capabilities.”

The attack was the worst on Middle East oil facilities since Saddam Hussein, the late Iraqi strongman, torched Kuwait’s oil fields during the 1991 Gulf crisis.

U.S. Senator Martha McSally, an Air Force combat veteran and Republican lawmaker who was briefed by U.S. and Saudi officials, and who visited Aramco’s Abqaiq facility days after the attack, said the perpetrators knew precisely where to strike to create as much damage as possible.

“It showed somebody who had a sophisticated understanding of facility operations like theirs, instead of just hitting things off of satellite photos,” she told Reuters. The drones and missiles, she added, “came from Iranian soil, from an Iranian base.”

A Middle East source, who was briefed by a country investigating the attack, said the launch site was the Ahvaz air base in southwest Iran. That account matched those of three U.S. officials and two other people who spoke to Reuters: a Western intelligence official and a Western source based in the Middle East.

Rather than fly directly from Iran to Saudi Arabia over the Gulf, the missiles and drones took different, circuitous paths to the oil installations, part of Iran’s effort to mask its involvement, the people said.

Some of the craft flew over Iraq and Kuwait before landing in Saudi Arabia, according to the Western intelligence source, who said that trajectory provided Iran with plausible deniability.

“That wouldn’t have been the case if missiles and drones had been seen or heard flying into Saudi Arabia over the Gulf from a south flight path” from Iran, the person said.

Revolutionary Guards commanders briefed the supreme leader on the successful operation hours after the attack, according to the official close to the country’s decision making.

Images of fires raging at the Saudi facilities were broadcast worldwide. The country’s stock market swooned. Global oil prices initially surged 20%. Officials at Saudi Aramco gathered in what was referred to internally as the “emergency management room” at the company’s headquarters.

One of the officials who spoke with Reuters said Tehran was delighted with the outcome of the operation: Iran had landed a painful blow on Saudi Arabia and thumbed its nose at the United States.

SIZING UP TRUMP

The Revolutionary Guards and other branches of the Iranian military all ultimately report to Khamenei. The supreme leader has been defiant in response to Trump’s abandonment last year of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly called the Iran nuclear deal.

That 2015 accord with five permanent members of the U.S. Security Council – the United States, Russia, France, China and the United Kingdom – as well as Germany, removed billions of dollars’ worth of sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran’s curbing its nuclear program.

Trump’s demand for a better deal has seen Iran launch a two-pronged strategy to win relief from sweeping sanctions reimposed by the United States, penalties that have crippled its oil exports and all but shut it out of the international banking system.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has signaled a willingness to meet with American officials on condition that all sanctions be lifted. Simultaneously, Iran is flaunting its military and technical prowess.

In recent months, Iran has shot down a U.S. surveillance drone and seized a British oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel through which about a fifth of the world’s oil moves. And it has announced it has amassed stockpiles of enriched uranium in violation of the U.N agreement, part of its vow to restart its nuclear program.

The Aramco attacks were an escalation that came as Trump had been pursuing his long-stated goal of extricating American forces from the Middle East. Just days after announcing an abrupt pullout of U.S. troops in northern Syria, the Trump administration on Oct. 11 said it would send fighter jets, missile-defense weaponry and 2,800 more troops to Saudi Arabia to bolster the kingdom’s defenses.

“Do not strike another sovereign state, do not threaten American interests, American forces, or we will respond,” U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper warned Tehran during a press briefing.

Still, Iran appears to have calculated that the Trump administration would not risk an all-out assault that could destabilize the region in the service of protecting Saudi oil, said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, a nonprofit working to end global conflict.

In Iran, “hard-liners have come to believe that Trump is a Twitter tiger,” Vaez said. “As such there is little diplomatic or military cost associated with pushing back.”

The senior Trump administration official disputed the suggestion that Iran’s operation has strengthened its hand in working out a deal for sanctions relief from the United States.

“Iran knows exactly what it needs to do to see sanctions lifted,” the official said.

The administration has said Iran must end support for terrorist groups in the Middle East and submit to tougher terms that would permanently snuff its nuclear ambitions. Iran has said it has no ties to terrorist groups.

Whether Tehran accedes to U.S. demands remains to be seen.

In one of the final meetings held ahead of the Saudi oil attack, another Revolutionary Guards commander was already looking ahead, according to the official close to Iran’s decision making who was briefed on that gathering.

“Rest assured Allah almighty will be with us,” the commander told senior security officials. “Start planning for the next one.”

Pakko olla fakenews. Vallankumouskaartin päälliköt tietävät ettei heillä ole mahdollisuuksia Saudeja vastaan. Turpaan tulisi saudelta mutta ennenkaikkea myös länsi liittoumalta. Saattavat soittaa suutaan mutta siihen jää. Mitä tähän sanoo uusi jäsenemme
@Kaveri Joonas
 
Pakko olla fakenews. Vallankumouskaartin päälliköt tietävät ettei heillä ole mahdollisuuksia Saudeja vastaan. Turpaan tulisi saudelta mutta ennenkaikkea myös länsi liittoumalta. Saattavat soittaa suutaan mutta siihen jää. Mitä tähän sanoo uusi jäsenemme
@Kaveri Joonas

Saudien kiiltokaluunaunivormuarmeija ei pärjää Iranille jos tasaiselle mennään. Saudeilla on rautaa mutta ei oikeasti osaavaa sotilasorganisaatiota. Trumppi taas on ihan piimää rätissä eikä Naton isoista ydinasejäsenmaista ole niistäkään sotaretkelle Persianlahdelle. Israel tekee sen, mitä katsoo omalta kannaltaan tarpeelliseksi. Joku sopimus niillä on Saudien kanssa.
 
Saudien kiiltokaluunaunivormuarmeija ei pärjää Iranille jos tasaiselle mennään. Saudeilla on rautaa mutta ei oikeasti osaavaa sotilasorganisaatiota. Trumppi taas on ihan piimää rätissä eikä Naton isoista ydinasejäsenmaista ole niistäkään sotaretkelle Persianlahdelle. Israel tekee sen, mitä katsoo omalta kannaltaan tarpeelliseksi. Joku sopimus niillä on Saudien kanssa.

Toivoisin että asia olisi toisin, mutta uskon että Stepan on osin oikeassa.

Saudit + UAE... Niiden armeijat ovat osittain paraatiarmeijoita. Ylennykset ja asemat voivat olla enemmän sidoksissa siihen että mihin sukuun kuuluu kuin siihen, kuinka tehokas on käymään sotaa.

Erityisen keskeistä on sekin, että ajattelu, itsenäinen toiminta ja jossain määrin jopa reaktiivinen toiminta on sidoksissa sotilasarvoon. Vain upseeri saa ajatella. Ja upseeriksi nousemisessa ajattelu ja osaaminen ei ole ratkaisevinta.

Armeija on noissa maissa vähän sellainen tyylikkäämpi suojatyöpaikka. (Henkivartiokaarteissa asia voi olla toisin.)

Iran on ollut Hesbollahin kautta ja kanssa vuosikymmeniä Israelin kanssa sodassa. Se on sotinut Jemenissä tehokkaasti. Sillä on erittäin vahva jalansija Libanonissa ja Syyriassa. Se on saanut Irakissa valtaa ja asemaa. Se osaa toimia asymmetrisesti ja ovelasti. Vallankumouskaartit taitavat olla aika sitoutuneita. Se voi haitata (joskaan ei estää) ohjuksin ja miinoin muiden maiden merivoimien liikkumista sekä Persianlahdella että Punaisella merellä.

Ilma ja ilmasta maahan olisivat tietenkin Saudien + liittolaisten hallussa. Sen merkitystä ei vielä tiedä. Asiaan voi liittyä yllätyksiä.

Turkki pelaa kaksilla korteilla. Se pyrkii Kalifaatiksi. Se edellyttää sekä alueellista sotilaallista ylivoimaa että mahdollisuutta yhdistää sunnit ja shiat. Siihen tarvitaan molempien heikkenemistä + yhteinen agenda eli yhteinen vihollinen.

Saudit ja UAE ovat opetelleet sotimista Jemenissä jo jonkin aikaa. Aika harva asia viittaa siihen suuntaan että olisivat oppineet kunnolla. Iran taas osaa selvästi aika paljon.

Jos ja kun Saudit eivät saa Jemenin kanssa juurikaan tavoitteitaan läpi, niin Iran? Ei toivoakaan.

Mutta sen verran sekava toi lähi-itä on että jos siellä tulee Iran vs Saudit + molempien proxyt ja liittolaiset + Turkin Kalifaattiyritys niin siinä alkaa olla jo lähellä kolmas maailmanpipi + Ilmestyskirja ja Jesaja ja Hesekiel ja Mahdin odotus ja... eli vähän silleen... peli vailla sääntökirjaa.

Ja muistutus: Täysin riippumatta siitä mihin kukin uskoo, on tilanne se, että sekä kristityillä että muslimeilla on pyhissä kirjoituksissaan samanlainen, mutta vastakkaispuolinen kuvaus lopun ajan tapahtumista / Antikristuksen saapumisesta ja valtakunnasta / Kalifaatin perustamisesta. Tämmöisillä kirjoituksilla on valtava ohjaava voima. Eikä se ohjaava voima poistu sillä jos joku ei usko että siihen kytkeytyisi jumaluuksia.
 
Pakko olla fakenews. Vallankumouskaartin päälliköt tietävät ettei heillä ole mahdollisuuksia Saudeja vastaan. Turpaan tulisi saudelta mutta ennenkaikkea myös länsi liittoumalta. Saattavat soittaa suutaan mutta siihen jää. Mitä tähän sanoo uusi jäsenemme
@Kaveri Joonas
Pakko olla fakenews. Vallankumouskaartin päälliköt tietävät ettei heillä ole mahdollisuuksia Saudeja vastaan. Turpaan tulisi saudelta mutta ennenkaikkea myös länsi liittoumalta. Saattavat soittaa suutaan mutta siihen jää. Mitä tähän sanoo uusi jäsenemme
@Kaveri Joonas
Aramcon öljyntuotantolaitoksiin kohdistuneista iskuista sen verran, että osumatarkkuus on korkealuokkaista. Säiliöiden osumakohtia tarkastellen voi havaita aukkojen reunojen painautuneen sisäänpäin. Tämä tarkoittaa, että kohteeseen on isketty törmäyksen voimalla.
Mikäli näiden kahdeksan säiliön vaurioittamiseksi olisi käytetty räjähteitä, Saudi-Arabialta olisi mennyt vähintään vuosi saadakseen tuotantonsa ennalleen.

Miksi tuhota jalostamoiden toisarvoisia kohteita räjähteillä, ja vaurioittaa pääkohteita ilman räjähteitä. Mieleeni tulee kyseessä olevan lavastus Iranin syyllistämiseksi, mutta saudit tuskin uskaltaisivat asettaa amerikkalaisten torjuntaohjusten puolustuskykyä kysenalaiseen asemaan.

Mitä luultavimmin iskut ovat näytösluontoinen varoitus Iranilta, että heillä on kyky tuhota Saudi-Arabian tuotantolaitokset ja näin tultaisiin toimimaan, mikäli Iraniin iskettäisiin.
 
Aramcon öljyntuotantolaitoksiin kohdistuneista iskuista sen verran, että osumatarkkuus on korkealuokkaista. Säiliöiden osumakohtia tarkastellen voi havaita aukkojen reunojen painautuneen sisäänpäin. Tämä tarkoittaa, että kohteeseen on isketty törmäyksen voimalla.
Mikäli näiden kahdeksan säiliön vaurioittamiseksi olisi käytetty räjähteitä, Saudi-Arabialta olisi mennyt vähintään vuosi saadakseen tuotantonsa ennalleen.

Miksi tuhota jalostamoiden toisarvoisia kohteita räjähteillä, ja vaurioittaa pääkohteita ilman räjähteitä. Mieleeni tulee kyseessä olevan lavastus Iranin syyllistämiseksi, mutta saudit tuskin uskaltaisivat asettaa amerikkalaisten torjuntaohjusten puolustuskykyä kysenalaiseen asemaan.

Mitä luultavimmin iskut ovat näytösluontoinen varoitus Iranilta, että heillä on kyky tuhota Saudi-Arabian tuotantolaitokset ja näin tultaisiin toimimaan, mikäli Iraniin iskettäisiin.
Kuten tuossa Reutersin nasevassa raportissa mainittiin, Iranilla ei ollut halua provosoida USA:ta massiiviseen vastaiskuun. Tilanne on lisäksi edelleen ns. päällä: sekä Israel että USA ovat ilmoittaneet odottavansa Iranin jatkavan iskujaan.
 
Aramcon öljyntuotantolaitoksiin kohdistuneista iskuista sen verran, että osumatarkkuus on korkealuokkaista. Säiliöiden osumakohtia tarkastellen voi havaita aukkojen reunojen painautuneen sisäänpäin. Tämä tarkoittaa, että kohteeseen on isketty törmäyksen voimalla.
Mikäli näiden kahdeksan säiliön vaurioittamiseksi olisi käytetty räjähteitä, Saudi-Arabialta olisi mennyt vähintään vuosi saadakseen tuotantonsa ennalleen.

Miksi tuhota jalostamoiden toisarvoisia kohteita räjähteillä, ja vaurioittaa pääkohteita ilman räjähteitä. Mieleeni tulee kyseessä olevan lavastus Iranin syyllistämiseksi, mutta saudit tuskin uskaltaisivat asettaa amerikkalaisten torjuntaohjusten puolustuskykyä kysenalaiseen asemaan.

Mitä luultavimmin iskut ovat näytösluontoinen varoitus Iranilta, että heillä on kyky tuhota Saudi-Arabian tuotantolaitokset ja näin tultaisiin toimimaan, mikäli Iraniin iskettäisiin.

En tunne räjähteiden sielunelämää paljoakaan, mutta eikö ole niin, että jos metallilevyn ulkopinnalle asettaa paukun, niin se metalli taipuu poispäin räjähdyksestä? Eli tässä tapauksessa jos säiliöön osuu hitaasti lentävä drooni, niin räjähdys tapahtuu ulkopinnalla ja nimenomaan painaa reunat sisäänpäin. Jos kyseessä olisi nopeasti lentävä ohjus, paukku voisi painua säiliön sisään ja reunat olisivat silloin ulospäin?
 
En tunne räjähteiden sielunelämää paljoakaan, mutta eikö ole niin, että jos metallilevyn ulkopinnalle asettaa paukun, niin se metalli taipuu poispäin räjähdyksestä? Eli tässä tapauksessa jos säiliöön osuu hitaasti lentävä drooni, niin räjähdys tapahtuu ulkopinnalla ja nimenomaan painaa reunat sisäänpäin. Jos kyseessä olisi nopeasti lentävä ohjus, paukku voisi painua säiliön sisään ja reunat olisivat silloin ulospäin?
Pääpiirteittäin näin, toki riippuu myös ohjuksen sytyttimen herätteisyydestä, sytytyksen viiveestä sekä taistelukärjen varsinaisesta sijainnista ohjuksen pituusakselilla.
 
14 säiliötä sai osuman ja hyökkäyksessä käytettyjä ristelyohjuksia oli kolme. En voi itse ainakaan väittää nähneeni yhtään risteilyohjuksen osumaa säiliöihin.
 
  • Tykkää
Reactions: ctg
Jos ristelyohjuksissa on ollut se ilmailuharrastajatason TJ100-suihkuturbiini, niin maksinopeus on ollut luokkaa 220-250km/h, eli se on risteilyohjukseksi todella hidas.
 
Top U.S. General: It’s ‘Very Possible’ Iran Will Attack Again

The threat from Tehran continues to increase despite U.S. military buildup, U.S. Central Command’s Gen. Kenneth McKenzie says.

ANAMA, Bahrain—Since May, the Pentagon has dispatched 14,000 additional U.S. troops, an aircraft carrier, and tens of thousands of pounds of military equipment to the Middle East to respond to what it says are alarming new threats from Iran. But despite the stepped-up U.S. military posture, the top U.S. general in the region believes the Iranian threat continues to rise—and Tehran is likely to continue lashing out.

“I think the strike on Saudi Aramco in September is pretty indicative of a nation that is behaving irresponsibly,” said Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, the commander of U.S. Central Command, in a Friday interview, referring to the Sept. 14 Iran-sponsored attack on Saudi facilities that took half of Riyadh’s oil production offline.

“My judgment is that it is very possible they will attack again.”

McKenzie, who stepped into his new job in March, assumed command of the world’s most volatile theater at a particularly turbulent time. Over the past eight months, the Taliban has intensified attacks in Afghanistan, Turkey invaded northeast Syria, the Islamic State has threatened to resurge, and Yemen continues to be the world’s worst humanitarian disaster. But Iran is the one common thread undermining regional stability through direct attacks on its neighbors, supporting disruptive proxies such as the Taliban in Afghanistan and Yemen’s Houthi rebels, and increasingly penetrating Iraq and Syria.

While Iran’s primary goal is to preserve its clerical regime, Tehran has long had hegemonic ambitions, McKenzie said. Over the last 10 years, Iran has invested heavily in ballistic missiles and other capabilities in order to threaten its neighbors. Indeed, according to a new report on Iran’s military power from the Defense Intelligence Agency—the first of its kind—Tehran significantly increased its defense spending from its recent low in 2014 to $27.3 billion, or 6 percent of GDP, in 2018.

In recent months, the regime has lashed out against a new threat: a U.S. maximum pressure campaign that has imposed heavy economic costs, including forcing Iran to slash its defense budget to $20.7 billion, or 3.8 percent of GDP, in 2019. In addition to Iran’s alleged attacks on commercial shipping in the Persian Gulf and the Sept. 14 attack on Saudi oil, U.S. defense officials have been warning for months about “credible” threats to U.S. forces, but they have declined to say what exactly that threat looks like.

McKenzie shed new light on the threat, saying he is particularly concerned about the possibility of a strike involving large numbers of drones and missiles—much like the Aramco attack, which used dozens of Iran-manufactured cruise missiles and drones to devastate Saudi oil infrastructure.

U.S. officials are particularly concerned about the threat to critical desalination plants in the Gulf, said a senior U.S. military official in the region. An attack on these facilities, which could threaten the region’s primary source of drinking water and potentially cause a humanitarian crisis, would be a “gamechanger,” the official said.

McKenzie cautioned that Tehran’s actions are unpredictable. “I wouldn’t discount anything from Iran,” McKenzie said. “When a nation behaves that irresponsibly, you have to be very cautious when you evaluate what they might do in the future.”

So far, the U.S. response to Iranian threat has been “scoped”—designed to send a strong deterrent message but not to provoke fresh attacks, McKenzie said. The additional forces the Pentagon has sent to the region are mostly defensive: an aircraft carrier strike group, fighter and bomber squadrons, as well as air and missile defense batteries.

McKenzie sent the carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, on a transit through the Strait of Hormuz last week for the first time since it deployed to demonstrate U.S. naval power before it heads home. The Lincoln, which will soon be replaced by a new carrier, the USS Harry S. Truman, was diverted to the Middle East in May to respond to the Iranian threat, but had remained in the Arabian Sea.

But so far, these moves have had “mixed” results, McKenzie said. Tehran has successfully been deterred from attacking U.S. forces, but not from taking provocative actions against regional partners.

Perhaps part of the reason Iran has continued to raise the temperature in the region is because it has so far not faced any significant repercussions. Even Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, usually a staunch ally of U.S. President Donald Trump, criticized the president’s last-minute decision not to launch a retaliatory strike after Tehran shot down an expensive U.S. surveillance drone in June, saying the regime saw it “as a sign of weakness.”

In addition to shoring up U.S. defenses in the region, McKenzie is working to rally international support for countering Iran. So far, six nations have signed on to the United States’ International Maritime Security Coalition, a multinational naval force designed to provide security for commercial ships in the vital Strait of Hormuz: the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Australia, the United Arab Emirates, and Albania.

Speaking at the Manama Dialogue in Bahrain on Saturday, McKenzie stressed the impact of Iran’s recent attacks on shipping in the Persian Gulf on the global market, noting that insurance rates for oil tankers have increased by a factor of 10 since May. He praised the efforts of the maritime coalition so far, calling it a “good, albeit nascent” measure, and urged regional partners to band together against Tehran.

“Unfortunately, sometimes the Iranian regime has proved itself to be the bully in the neighborhood. And the only way to stand up to a bully is to do it together. ” McKenzie told the audience. “It’s a great big world, and there’s a lot of water to cover.”

Under the maritime coalition, initially dubbed “Operation Sentinel,” the coalition keeps two so-called Sentinel ships at each end of the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz, typically a high-end U.S. or U.K. asset such as an Arleigh Burke destroyer, McKenzie told Foreign Policy. Those warships are linked into an “elaborate overhead intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance architecture” that allows the coalition to monitor activities in the Gulf.

“Our intent to shine a spotlight on malign and illegal activity,” McKenzie said. “We don’t have enough ships to be everywhere all the time and we don’t seek to be, but what we found though is that when people are worried about attribution of their acts, they tend to behave better.”

Depending on the daily threat level, the coalition will “fairly frequently” send warships to escort commercial vessels through the Strait, McKenzie said. However, it’s the “unblinking stare overhead” that serves as the most effective deterrent, rather than the presence of warships, he stressed.

“Since the [coalition] has begun over the last couple of months we have been able to move stuff through the Strait of Hormuz pretty much without interference,” he said.

Experts have expressed skepticism about the International Maritime Security Coalition, noting that the United States struggled initially to shore up any international support for the effort after it was announced this summer. While several countries have since signed on, there is still little representation from Europe and none from Asia.

European nations such as France have indicated that they will participate in a separate, EU-led maritime security initiative, primarily to distance themselves from the U.S. maximum pressure campaign. But the senior U.S. military official expressed skepticism that the effort will get off the ground, calling it “perpetually nascent.”

The initiative also raises the risk that the U.S. military could be dragged into conflict if the Gulf states engage in hostilities with Iran, experts said. Anthony Cordesman, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, questioned the “competence” of some Gulf navies.

“They could certainly sail with the tankers, but if they got into trouble over it, the question is who would support them and how,” Cordesman told Foreign Policy in June.

Iran’s malign activities don’t end in the Strait of Hormuz. McKenzie is also concerned about Tehran’s actions in Syria, particularly moving in weapon systems that directly threaten Israel, and in Iraq, where the regime is quietly penetrating Iraq’s elected government. And in Yemen, Iran is working to undermine recent progress toward peace between the Saudi-backed Yemeni government and Houthi rebels, which Tehran has supported with arms and other resources.

“As usual, the major actor that’s working to sabotage that is Iran,” which wants to prevent a relationship between the Houthis and Riyadh, McKenzie said. “Left to their own devices I think the Houthis might be able to come to some relationship with the Saudis.”

Although McKenzie believes the United States has robust defenses against Iran, there is only so much deterrence can do when faced with an irrational actor.

“Deterrence assumes there is going to be a rational actor on the other end,” he said. “There is a basic recklessness and irresponsibility to their actions that makes you very concerned about what they might do tomorrow or the next day, and that’s very concerning.”

 
Back
Top