Latest Breaking News

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)

51. I wouldn't say brilliant. I would say transparent and anti-peace. And your military analysis is

Mon Apr 13, 2015, 01:56 PM

Apr 2015

also wrong.

No one weapons system can accomplish what you wrote. There are ways around this missile system just like there are ways around just about everything else. One of the more simple methods is to launch standoff traditional (i.e. non cruise) missiles against the system itself to destroy the S-300 system before more traditional air attacks.

There is no question that the S-300 makes attacking Iran more complicated, but it is not a guarantee by any means to cause an attacker to "suffer 50-75% loss of aircraft and pilots".

But all of that is besides the point. This move by Putin now is designed to provide ammunition to the peace deal's opponents to scuttle the deal. None of the other arguments for it stand up to scrutiny.

In two months, once the deal is done, this move might be for money or various other reasons.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

106 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Russia lifts ban on S-300 missile system delivery to Iran [View all] Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 OP

This is a deliberate attempt to scuttle the peace deal by handing critics here in the US something stevenleser Apr 2015 #1

Exactly iandhr Apr 2015 #2

Vlad needs some TLC from one of the rebellious Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #5

Do you guys advocate for war here? rainmaker21 Apr 2015 #58

No, but some internal dissent to take Vlad off his bare-backed high horse, sure, why not? Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #59

And what of people who will die due to the violence that may follow? rainmaker21 Apr 2015 #79

Collateral damage? Talk to Vlad about collateral damage Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #80

You do realize the Chechnya insurgents killed 380 people at Beslan I hope. rainmaker21 Apr 2015 #85

You do realize that Vlad and Cie have their jack boot on the throat of Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #88

So you want Chechnyan terrorists to reign him in? rainmaker21 Apr 2015 #99

Once again: Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #103

It is acknowledgment that Republicans and Mullahs do not hold all the cards and Iran has abided by the interim Fred Sanders Apr 2015 #6

My understanding is that the S-300 system is defensive TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #3

The question is why would Putin do this and why specifically NOW. And there is only one reason stevenleser Apr 2015 #4

Delivery of the S-300s was cancelled in 2010 after the UN imposed sanctions on Iran over its nuclear TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #7

You're repeating stuff that everyone knows. The question is why Putin would do this NOW. stevenleser Apr 2015 #11

Yes, sanctions are to be lifted after Iran gets down to 6,000 centrifuges and an agreed upon okaawhatever Apr 2015 #90

The deal hasn't been agreed to yet. Calista241 Apr 2015 #104

either that or a signal that the consequences to walking away from a deal with Iran geek tragedy Apr 2015 #9

I don't think the US counts on Russia to uphold any agreements at this point. Russia has already stevenleser Apr 2015 #21

Defensive capabilities against Bibi and the Bombers is logical, as is lifting sanctions now. Fred Sanders Apr 2015 #8

It's logical three months from now after the peace agreement is complete. Now, its transparently a stevenleser Apr 2015 #14

I think you have it backwards, it is a signal that Russia, a negotiator, agrees that Iran sanctions should be Fred Sanders Apr 2015 #19

No, I don't. And it's obvious what this is about. nt stevenleser Apr 2015 #22

What's obvious is whose hair is on fire. Comrade Grumpy Apr 2015 #36

No. What you just wrote makes sense once the deal is done in two months. Not now. stevenleser Apr 2015 #49

Correct. The logic train of "Russia, a negotiater in the deal, suddenly killing the deal" is a wreck. Fred Sanders Apr 2015 #105

Why would France & Germany follow suit? They're honest negotiators, unlike Putin. They will stick okaawhatever Apr 2015 #92

Why should they be lifted now. What incentive would Iran have to sign the deal? Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #38

Was it absolutely imperative to get this arms deal back on track Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #10

Exactly. All it would have taken was to wait 3 months. Amazing how some are desperately trying stevenleser Apr 2015 #12

Economics may be a factor TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #13

There is a simple answer. You seem to be throwing everything at this to try to obscure it. stevenleser Apr 2015 #15

OK- make your case that it is only Putie-poot TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #20

The timing makes my case. It's the only thing that makes sense. In two months this is a non-issue. stevenleser Apr 2015 #24

You ain't got nothing but your opinion and that's OK TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #37

Nope, I've got much more than that. I've got a theory that accounts for all the facts stevenleser Apr 2015 #45

So you say, you win, I'm out of this thread. TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #48

Leser is absolutely right. Why, he told us so himself. Comrade Grumpy Apr 2015 #50

I provided you the reasons. If you don't want to accept them, that's up to you. The facts are with stevenleser Apr 2015 #52

You have an opinion. Talk trash all you want, that's all it is. Comrade Grumpy Apr 2015 #57

I'm confident that reasonable people see I am right. nt stevenleser Apr 2015 #64

I was wrong- I'm baaaakkkk! for one more TexasProgresive Apr 2015 #70

That's because you have your fingers firmly planted in your ears and are shouting jeff47 Apr 2015 #86

No one has provided a reason why Russia would do this now and not two months from now. stevenleser Apr 2015 #94

Actually, several people have. They even provided the same one. jeff47 Apr 2015 #96

No, they haven't. Any response works the same two months from now except what I suggest. nt stevenleser Apr 2015 #97

No, because two months from now there's an explicit ban on military goods. jeff47 Apr 2015 #98

No, no-one has provided *your* reasoning. You may not recognize it but you are newthinking Apr 2015 #102

Strange ripcord Apr 2015 #74

One of many, many inconvenient facts those wanting to believe something other than the truth here stevenleser Apr 2015 #95

Russia needs money. Iran needs missile defenses. bemildred Apr 2015 #16

+(the cost of an S-300 missile system) jeff47 Apr 2015 #23

Oh the critics in the USA are going to have a lot to say about it. The question is will it be stevenleser Apr 2015 #26

You know what I meant. bemildred Apr 2015 #30

It is another brilliant move by Putin cosmicone Apr 2015 #34

I wouldn't say brilliant. I would say transparent and anti-peace. And your military analysis is stevenleser Apr 2015 #51

It actually does the opposite of what you speculate. cosmicone Apr 2015 #63

No, it doesn't, and the proof with links is downthread. Opponents of the peace deal are all over stevenleser Apr 2015 #65

This is right on Abouttime Apr 2015 #106

Would Russia have made this move safeinOhio Apr 2015 #17

Good question. nt bemildred Apr 2015 #18

Probably not. This move by Putin is aimed at them and senators who might be persuade-able stevenleser Apr 2015 #29

"Vlad" is getting desperate for money. jeff47 Apr 2015 #25

And he could have the money in two months without threatening the deal. stevenleser Apr 2015 #27

Only if "the deal" doesn't block the sale of these missiles. jeff47 Apr 2015 #28

Putin cares nothing for international agreements. If he did, Ukraine would be intact stevenleser Apr 2015 #31

So in your world, we would scuttle a deal with Iran because we're not happy with Russia? jeff47 Apr 2015 #32

Nope, thats not what I said. Not even close. nt stevenleser Apr 2015 #33

:eyes: jeff47 Apr 2015 #35

I'm sorry you are meeting with such craziness. Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #42

I expect it where Putin/Russia is concerned. Some folks here are heavily invested in the idea stevenleser Apr 2015 #47

Right, everybody else is obsessed with Putin, but not you. bemildred Apr 2015 #56

Because he has the courtesy to reply to peoples questions/statements he's obsessed? Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #60

Just think about it. Folks who claim to be anti-war, are cheering missile sales. stevenleser Apr 2015 #62

Putin is an asshole. That is not news. bemildred Apr 2015 #66

They are obsessed too, the one does not prevent the other? bemildred Apr 2015 #68

Clever straw man. Again, not what I said. I never said others were or were not obsessed with Putin. stevenleser Apr 2015 #61

Please see post #66. bemildred Apr 2015 #67

Crazy is believing that Russia resorting to arms dealing jeff47 Apr 2015 #87

He's not a hero to me. Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #89

Yet you are claiming he is a hero to anyone who disagrees with you. jeff47 Apr 2015 #91

Not at all. I said "they" referring to specific posters in this thread. Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #101

Israel: Russian missile sale 'direct result' of nuclear deal bemildred Apr 2015 #39

Well, THAT didn't take long... Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #40

Well it is correct as far as it goes, that's the thing. bemildred Apr 2015 #41

Yes, bring Iran in from the cold. But, before that can happen, Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #43

Right, the future is uncertain. nt bemildred Apr 2015 #44

Which is exactly what I said would be the result and that is Putin's intent. This is just the stevenleser Apr 2015 #53

A curse that many Russians just love 'cause he's Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #54

Have you seen this, steven? Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #69

Part of the Executive branch - it's the rogue Rep legislators that want to kill the deal. Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #73

Yes, and Vlad looks determined to give them their wish list. Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #75

Yep, Everyone who doesn't want this deal finalized will pounce on this news. stevenleser Apr 2015 #77

24 responses to this... MattSh Apr 2015 #84

Well, if you didn't want posts by me, engaging me and asking me for a response is a curious way stevenleser Apr 2015 #93

What? They've been trying to kill it since day 1. Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #71

I am glad to see that we can agree. nt bemildred Apr 2015 #72

Do you side with Russia/Israel or the United States? Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #76

Please try to reformulate that into a coherent question and I'll try to answer. bemildred Apr 2015 #78

That's OK. This thread is dead to me. Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #81

Cheerio. bemildred Apr 2015 #82

Pip, pip! Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #83

Pentagon opposes Russian move to sell missiles to Iran Bosonic Apr 2015 #46

Thanks for adding this to the mix, Bosonic. Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #55

Right. It's only US weapons sales that are "helpful." Comrade Grumpy Apr 2015 #100