"Iranian air defenses degraded" Topic

I'm reading on X (so no link here) that Israel eliminated pretty much all of Iranian missile defense. Anybody else reading about that?

Speculation is that Iran has until the US election before Israel takes out other targets, hopefully the nuke program.

Here's the story from a (GASP!) right wing blogger. (Run away, run away . . .)

link

and another story:

link

"We should understand that Tehran is naked right now, the ayatollah has no clothes," said Richard Goldberg, a former White House National Security Council member who worked the Iran portfolio. "Israel destroyed Iran's strategic air defense capabilities and set back its missile and drone production extensively."

Though Iran knew the attack was coming—and was even able to prepare following the explosive leak of classified American intelligence on Israel's military movements—it still failed to stop more than 100 Israeli Air Force planes as they hit deep inside the Islamic Republic. This was made possible in part by Israel's initial strike on radar systems stationed in Syria, essentially leaving Tehran blind as Israeli planes flew more than 1,000 miles into Iranian airspace.

Satellite imagery reviewed by the Associated Press showed extensive damage to sensitive Iranian military sites, including some previously linked to Tehran's illicit nuclear weapons program. Other facilities targeted by the Israelis included manufacturing points for Tehran's ballistic missile industry, which is responsible for fueling the two massive attacks on Israel this year that set the stage for Friday's retaliatory operation. Iran says four military members were killed during the strike.

One can only hope.

I'm waiting until the real story emerges. In the first week you get a lot of guesses, rumors, etc.

I want to know what route these aircraft took. Did they fly over Iraq? I don't see how they could avoid it. Iraq's air defense could surely warn Iran? Or are they helpless, too?

Iran needs to shut up and rebuild. It should be clear after two exchanges that Iran can launch hundreds of missiles and hit essentially nothing, while the IDF can fly over Iran and do whatever it wants. Iran is essentially at Israel's mercy. They need to keep a low profile. That might mean letting all the proxies get flattened, but you have to cut your losses. That's what proxies are for.

And I keep thinking that all this was inevitable. Iran didn't keep a tight enough leash on Hamas. Hamas was always going to eventually do an October 7, and Israel was always going to retaliate by flattening Gaza. Iran didn't control the Houthis or Hezbollah either, so they chipped in for who knows what reason, so now they'll all be flattened. Yes, Israel looks like the bad guy – in part and only in part because they've gone a little far – but they're used to that.

What was not inevitable was Israel and Iran attacking each other directly, revealing what most of us suspected, that Israel has such a technological advantage that they are virtually immune from attack and can attack Iran with virtual impunity. Now that this is not suspected but established, it changes things.

The interesting part of this is that for the second time, no Iranian aircraft intercepted the strikes. Obviously, their Integrated Air & Missile Defense (IAMD) might work against low tech opponents, but not against Israeli or USAF assets. Western equipment, while insanely expensive, actually works pretty well.

…It should be clear after two exchanges that Iran can launch hundreds of missiles and hit essentially nothing…

They apparently hit one or more hangars at an Israeli air base, Israel is not saying much about this, might have taken out some F-35s.

Swarm tactics can be effective.

That's a shame.

As for Iraq I think they know when to just sit quietly and let their two neighbors fight. The last 30 years have been rough for them and it's best to just keep low for a bit.

And if Iran is weakened enough, might just pick up a little territory along the border.

Bunkermeister

The IDF AF executed a good example of SEADS. They took out ADA sites in Syria, Iraq and Iran. Clearing the way for the strike packages.

Even if Iran knew the strikes were coming. They could do little about it. The lost their ADA along the flight routes. And they wouldn't dare try to go toe-to-toe and try to intercept the IDF aircraft …

Hope an F-35 was not hit. But overwhelming an objective with numbers can be effective. They can't kill all of them … Like the Zulus in the attack, they always had numbers going for them. Or the Chicoms during the Korean War. Reports said they just kept coming, no matter how many died …

I think the claim that they eliminated all of the defenses is overblown.
In Iraq wars I and II it took days of repeated strikes with large numbers of aircraft and missiles to bring down Saddam's air defenses.
Russia pretty much gave up hope on taking down Ukraine's air defenses after declaring the job done on the first days.
The Ukrainians can't come close to bringing down Russian air defenses.
But Israel took out Iran's defenses on one day?
I think, instead, what Israel did was demonstrate that they could operate where and when they wanted in Iraq, and destroy what they wished to destroy, and coupled with the bunker busting abilities shown against Hezbollah, this was a very personal message to the leadership: "Any time we want, we will kill you. Not the poor dumb a-hole you send out to fight us, you. And the guy standing to your left."

Iran had four Russian-made S-300 long-range SAM systems before the 25OCT strikes. Israel claims to have destroyed all four. It also appears the Israelis successfully jammed the Iranian early warning radar network before the strikes.

Source: link

From what I've read, the Iranian Air Force is largely a paper tiger. The planes are old, they don't have spare parts, etc.. It's entirely possible that they couldn't scramble effective planes to fight the Israelis, and probably knew that any they did scramble would just be shot down in short order. (And, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if their air force's command structure decided to "sit this one out." No need to die for that bunch of madmen in the IRG.)

I did read that Jordan also had no objections to Israel flying across its territory.
Nobody in the Middle East outside of the radical terrorist organizations and Iran (same thing really) want to be a part of this fight. They are more than happy to look aside when Iran gets bashed around by Israel. Nobody loves Iran— not even its people.

A New Flashpoint for the Axis of Resistance?

link

Armand

But Israel took out Iran's defenses on one day?

I'd think they just took out the ADA in one or more air routes. Not all of Iran's ADA …

It also appears the Israelis successfully jammed the Iranian early warning radar network before the strikes

That would be a priority/SOP before sending in any strike packages.

I did read that Jordan also had no objections to Israel flying across its territory.
Nobody in the Middle East outside of the radical terrorist organizations and Iran (same thing really) want to be a part of this fight. They are more than happy to look aside when Iran gets bashed around by Israel. Nobody loves Iran— not even its people.

That is all very true AFAIK … Iran's plan to stop the KSA and other Arab nations from having good relations/trade with Israel was not very realistic. As we see, Hezbollah was supposed to attack on 7 Oct. They fired some missile, rockets, etc. And recently when they tried to get more aggressive the IDF took care of that. IIRC Hezbollah wants to make a peace deal now.

Hamas has been very much attrited. And it cost them thousands of their fighters and even many more of their civilians. Now as before, the IDF will have to have occupy Gaza again. As well as up their missions against the PLO in the West Bank.

Not a very good result for Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran.

Israel Inflicted Severe Damage on Iran's Missile Program and Air Defenses

link

Armand

Good to know … Atrriting Iran assets is a good thing … The US has naval and air assets in the region/area. But Iran knows the US Forces there won't do much of anything really provocative. As it is not in the US leaderships' predilections, capabilities, etc.

That may change soon …

I don't agree here Legion. Both political parties feature weak leaders, IMO. Nothing good can come from accelerating US troop involvement in the ME, as Reagan learned the hard way. The current admin blew it in Afghanistan, indecisive about Gaza and Israel. The previous admin did Iran sanctions full of loopholes, ineffective strikes in Syria, clueless about dealing with Taliban.

You have mentioned the lack of historical perspective. Both political sides seem disconnected from history. ME terrorists are sworn enemies of the US and the western world. You cannot let them sneak in over an open border. You cannot ignore the atrocities, the long history of Hezbollah going back to Beirut. But you also cannot invite the Taliban to Camp David near the 9/11 anniversary. You cannot insist on cutting deals with people who have no intention of complying.

The leadership we need must be better versed in lessons of the past and much smarter, IMO. Not gonna happen for now. All we can do is hope the next Prez defers to better qualified staff as needed.

"… The leadership we need must be better versed in lessons of the past and much smarter…"

Who are talking about my friend…? (smile)

Armand

Nothing good can come from accelerating US troop involvement in the ME

I don't think anything needs to be done with boots on the ground. But US Naval and Air asset can do a lot of damage. As the IDF AF just showed in Iran.

The US has about 900 troops in Syria and about 2500 in Iraq. I had heard they were going to pull them all out. And leave the region to its own devises. And our leaders must know, based what has occurred in the past. If things go South, and they may … No boots on the ground. Only Naval and Air assets. There is nothing in Iraq, Syria, Iran, etc. we really need to seize and hold. Our only mission would be to destroy. Mostly military assets and certain infrastructure.

Of course the IDF, Mossad, etc. has waged a very good campaign of killing off key leaders. We may think about that if some on our terrorist hit list show up. Like what happened to AQ's AZH in A'stan after the US left. He and a few of his associates were "Ginsued" … We need to see more of that … they must know, no matter how long it takes, the US will hunt you down and "terminate with extreme prejudice". The IDF seems to be the masters at this …

Both political sides seem disconnected from history. ME terrorists are sworn enemies of the US and the western world. You cannot let them sneak in over an open border. You cannot ignore the atrocities, the long history of Hezbollah going back to Beirut. But you also cannot invite the Taliban to Camp David near the 9/11 anniversary. You cannot insist on cutting deals with people who have no intention of complying.

Hindsight is 20/20 … Regardless the open border IMO is the #1 threat to the US. And it has to be shutdown. And mass deportations must be in effect. With the current US Gov't sanctioned open border policy. They really did little about it. It was not on their agenda "to fundamentally change America" …

But if our leaders were serious about controlling the border. With this illegal alien invasion. The US Army and USMC know how to defend and protect a border. Not with firepower, but it must be there to remind invaders that the firepower is available if needed. The US ARMY and USMC would set up Forward Operating Bases, etc. Coordinate with local LEOs, etc. Run patrols to hunt down illegal aliens. Any who surrender will be feed, housed, provided medical care, etc. And then load them up on USAF transports. With USAF Sec. Police, Army and Marine well arm "escorts". And flown back to where they came from. If the invaders know they will be captured and deported ASAP. They may think about crossing the US border.

If cartels of gangs come armed and looking for trouble, well if they start some the US Army and Marines, will "terminate with extreme prejudice".

With 8-10-12-20 million[does anybody really know?] illegal aliens roaming around the US. Well enough is enough … the party is over. You have to go home because you can't stay here …

The damage done over the past 4 years by our elected and appointed leaders may take many years to repair. If it even can be ?

We may find out the hard way. The worst thing about this letting people in then having no clue where they are, who they are,

Armand, I don't know very much about one candidate, way too much about another. But one clearly knows very little about American history. This does not work for me in the long run. Vote for Eisenhower. He may be dead, but at least we know the truth about his health!

"We may find out the hard way. The worst thing about this letting people in then having no clue where they are, who they are,"

100% true

"Armand, I don't know very much about one candidate, way too much about another. But one clearly knows very little about American history. "

Tort, I doubt the "other" one even knows "history" exists and can't be confused by or be "unburdened by what has been". 😉

We may find out the hard way. The worst thing about this letting people in then having no clue where they are, who they are,

We should know in 48+ hours or so …

I stock up every time I go to the grocery stores. With things on sale. My freezer, cupboards and table are full. As I don't see prices going down unless we have a major change in leadership.

And I don't care what many pundits, talking heads, etc. in the media say. The problems that Covid had caused in the economy has passed. And in not just IMO, the poor economy especially for the middle class can be blamed on … well … never mind …

The overall economy is doing well. Prices have always gone up. Obama had a lower inflation rate than Trump. Reagan higher. It is part of the system. Price gouging is a long standing practice around food and gas also.

The next round of tariffs will drive up consumer prices again and may start a recession, per many economists. Some businesses are already planning price hikes to counter the new impact.

Biden kept the Trump tariffs, which had already cost consumers and driven up the deficit. He has taken in even more than Trump did. The tariffs kill the middle class. I don't think either guy understood them in some ways. If you can find someone to tell how great tariffs are for middle class working people I would be glad to read about it. I am no economist, but the amount of info out there on the tariffs is large and pretty much says the same thing.

Thanks (smile)

Armand

Tortella, you are wrong in your information and your understanding. I can't begin to list the ways in which you are wrong. To do so would violate politics here. Plus, it would make me very, very angry. I'll just say this: 13 at Dover. And "I was involved in every major decision."
That ought to be enough to make a decision on. But apparently not.

As for Economics 101: All business— yes, all— even the ones you like— all business set prices based on what the market will bear. They all also expect to make a profit. There is for any product or service a cost at which both the number of purchasers and the profit are maximized; this is the ideal and even the "true" cost of that product or service. Also, in all cases— again, all— the price of a good must be above the cost of providing that good (all costs). Thus, taxes on businesses (as is being proposed) are and can only be a tax on consumers, because a tax is one of the costs of doing business, and all costs of doing business are inherently part of the cost of producing the good or service. Thus, the cost of the tax is part of the price of the product— period.
Furthermore, if the tax is sufficiently high, or is applied after the fact (on "profits"), then the cost of the tax will instead be covered by lowering other costs in the making of the product— which means "labor costs," which are really the only cost the business can actually control. The business will thus pay their workers less or hire fewer workers in order to make up the cost of the tax. And it doesn't matter how the tax law is worded, this is what MUST happen as an economic reality; it is simply fact. You cannot charge less than the cost of a good and remain in business. You cannot charge more than the market will bear and remain in business. If the tax increases the latter, then one must find a way to lower the former— by firing employees. That's what business taxes do. And that's all they do— raise prices and/or lower wages. They can't do anything else. Taxes on business are fundamentally a waste of government time. In the end, they're just taxes on personal incomes, collected at a different stage. And they're doubly stupid because they're inefficient— they require bureaucracy to collect, with all its absurd and wasteful costs. Waste of time, waste of government revenues which could be acquired more efficiently (and more fairly) through other mechanisms.

So, as to tariffs. They are bad ways to raise government revenues as a direct thing. But then so are all other taxes on business, QED. So what is a tariff for?
It's a bargaining chip. A tariff is a tool to bring foreign governments and foreign business to the negotiation table to create an opportunity to come up with a fair trade deal (and ideally a truly free one). Which is exactly how they're being proposed— as a tool, not as a revenue stream. The purpose of the tariff is to create a standard of expected behavior in order to have access to the powerful US market— the wealthiest market in the world. That behavior will include tax reciprocity, the hiring of US workers, the establishment of US manufacturing plants, protection of copyright and patents, and so forth. Tariffs are the Economic Big Stick which causes foreign leaders to listen to the much softer talk. "If you don't do what we ask, we'll raise tariffs on you, and you won't sell those goods to our people because they won't pay it. If you do as we ask, the tariffs go away— and you can sell as much as you can to our people."

And that's the point of the tariffs.

For the record, I favor dumping ALL taxes and government fees (except for those covering very specific and complicated processes, as patents and the like) currently levied and replace them solely with a national sales tax placed on all non-life-essential* goods sold or imported into the US. Why? Because a sales tax is the one tax the individual consumer can actually choose not to pay. All he has to do is not buy the product. He walks away with the money in his pocket.
If he wants to buy the product, then he agrees that the tax is part of its price, and pays it. There is no need for an IRS. No need for personal audits. No need for tax agents or G-men. No need for IRS forms and yearly anxiety. (Think of it— on April 15 and for months before and after, millions of American citizens are frightened of their government— frightened that the government will harass and punish them for minor mistakes, or even major, unintended mistakes. It is horrific to me that our nation has reached that point.)
Another advantage of a sales tax is that it is directly tied to national economic success— the more successful our economy, the more revenue the government takes in. And no one is ever taxed an amount they can't afford to pay, because if they can't afford it, they can't buy the product and thus pay the tax.
*By non-life-essential I mean basic foods— milk, eggs, bread, fruits, vegetables, juice, etc.— basically groceries, and clothing below a certain price range, medicine, and shelter, and school supplies, etc.. Thus, the truly poor are not taxed at all, and most middle class will see minimal taxation in their daily lives. The wealthy will pay considerable taxes because they will choose to purchase luxury goods. But they will get to choose.

I will say certain individuals will take an initial hit from this idea— namely tax attorneys and CPAs, as they will no longer be nearly as necessary. I do not consider this a bad thing.

And Tango, you might want to rethink that "smile" thing on certain topics. It comes across as smug and very, very annoying. Or possibly also inappropriate.

"Apparently not" sure is right, Parz… I respect your views and agree with some of what you say. I do not believe that much of what you might wish for would work. But I do believe the current system is a mess. On tariffs and the economy I think what I said reflects the prevailing opinions from what I have heard and read. But again, I am not economist.

And I seem to have hijacked this thread, so I will bow out.

As for Economics 101: All business— yes, all— even the ones you like— all business set prices based on what the market will bear. They all also expect to make a profit. There is for any product or service a cost at which both the number of purchasers and the profit are maximized; this is the ideal and even the "true" cost of that product or service.

Bingo !!!

"The goal of profit is profit."

"No matter how bad it gets, someone makes a profit."