Iran

HKOwen said:
Certain parts of England are now Muslim, for you to quote the official religion as justification is both funny and hypocritical.

International law is a concept.

You have no idea what pre strike discussions were held, but likely we were told nothing because we are not trusted as a secure partner
Click to expand...
If that is true then trump has no right to criticise us now.
 
Spindle said:
OK sure, but that's fantasy, you are making up arms that don't exist. Making something that can be fired from range, carry enough munition, target and lock on, is NOT something cheap and easy to make. 150kg+ of frag warhead is what's needed. Torpedos are TWICE that sized warhead. Even the largest loitering munitions are only 50kg. Then the range is too far - where are they going to launch these things from exactly?
Click to expand...

Well ok, rather than argue that, the reality is that once the ship's defence/attack systems are degraded or put out of action the ship can be sunk using several other options.

As for range, that's just a developmental issue as I said.

You can call it fantasy but the Ukraine war has shown that drones went from hardly any use to dominating the battlefronts in a matter of a couple of years. The tech on them has been developing significantly. I see that being the case land and sea.....However, I'm not suggesting that defence systems can't also scale up to combat them.....but so far we haven't seen a really effective and successful answer....and by that we mean cheap...... in Ukraine.

You seem a bit annoyed by the conversation.....It's not really my intent, I'm just chewing the cud.
 
Starmer is awful but Trump criticising him for entering a war late is somewhat ironic considering the US did that in both world wars.
 
Stirlingsays said:
Starmer is awful but Trump criticising him for entering a war late is somewhat ironic considering the US did that in both world wars.
Click to expand...
I worked for an American bank. Whenever one of the Yanks was late for a meeting and apologised I would reply with a cheeky grin that we were used to that, 1917 and 1941. They never seemed to get the joke.
 
Stirlingsays said:
Well ok, rather than argue that, the reality is that once the ship's defence/attack systems are degraded or put out of action the ship can be sunk using several other options.

As for range, that's just a developmental issue as I said.

You can call it fantasy but the Ukraine war has shown that drones went from hardly any use to dominating the battlefronts in a matter of a couple of years. The tech on them has been developing significantly. I see that being the case land and sea.....However, I'm not suggesting that defence systems can't also scale up to combat them.....but so far we haven't seen a really effective and successful answer....and by that we mean cheap...... in Ukraine.

You seem a bit annoyed by the conversation.....It's not really my intent, I'm just chewing the cud.
Click to expand...

I'm not annoyed, I think it's pointless to suggest extreme what ifs.

Yes, ANY defence destroyed exposes vulnerability but you are arguing a capability that isn't realistically possible bar China or the USA deciding to attack one of our vessels, and spending a lot on doing so. Realistically that's not going to happen.

Ukraine is not the UK and I don't think the battle would be remotely the same had Ukraine got what we have - there would be no air force dropping GPS FAB500/1000/2000 glide bombs from 50km out for a start, they wouldn't be using the domestic radio control drones either because they'd also be pushed out of range. But this hypothetical war between the UK alone and Russia is also fantasy also. Ukraine has had a LOT of help on building important and large scale weapons though too, they didn't just step up and build long range cruise missiles, it's a very challenging thing to succeed in and they got a lot of help.

Will drone warfare change? Of course, war always forces innovative change, but your point was current day swarming of a Type 45, and that isn't possible.
 
Badger11 said:
I worked for an American bank. Whenever one of the Yanks was late for a meeting and apologised I would reply with a cheeky grin that we were used to that, 1917 and 1941. They never seemed to get the joke.
Click to expand...


I would've said "Practically 1942" though....... 😉
 
Sky TV interviewed the UK Russian ambassador this morning. As expected, they would side with Iran, saying that they are not neutral in this conflict. No real surprise. The conversation moved on…
However, he denied that the death of the once opposition leader being held in prison, who died from a tree frog poison, was anything to do with them. Even though he was in their captivity at the time.
He tried to imply that they wouldn’t have an Ecuadorean frog but then remarked that there was 6 places in London where you could buy a synthetic version of the poison.
How would he know that and why did he know that?!
 
Strange enough that I havnt had any spam calls/ texts or cold calls since the US attacked Iran....strange that 🤔
 
kevlee said:
Today's press conference was crazy. The language used was bizarre in parts. The war will end when Trump feels like it will end, not when the stated objectives are achieved. They seem to make it up as they go along. Iran isnt surrendering any time soon.
Click to expand...
Trump is starting to sound rather hollow , Iran are playing a blinder unfortunately .
Military hardware counts for nothing against a motivated Nation like Iran .
That $150 a barrel is nudging closer .
 
Racehorse-80s said:
Trump is starting to sound rather hollow , Iran are playing a blinder unfortunately .
Military hardware counts for nothing against a motivated Nation like Iran .
That $150 a barrel is nudging closer .
Click to expand...
What rubbish.
As I predicted earlier. Iran's military capability will be eroded to virtually nothing. The increase in oil prices while the Straits of Hormuz are being attacked will be temporary and a small price to pay for getting rid of Iran's threat.

The left's attitude and those with TDS has been anti Western. They have put politics before national security.

Why should anyone be surprised.
 
...
An Iranian politician has said Ukraine is a "legitimate and lawful target".

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said last week he had offered to provide support to the US over drone warfare.

Ebrahim Azizi, head of Iran's National Security Commission, said Ukraine was supporting Israel with drones and that this "makes the entire territory of Ukraine, based on Article 51 of the UN Charter, a legitimate and lawful target for Iran".

So, if Iran was supplying drones to Russia in their war with Ukraine, then that makes the entire territory of Iran a legitimate and lawful target?
 
It just has all the right ingredients for WW3. It just needs a stray few missiles and you just might have another super power wading in, under the guise of 'protecting their interests'.

This is all about oil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top