Putin to offer advanced antimissiles to soothe Iran’s S-300 grudge – report

[Tovarish]

Russian President Vladimir Putin may visit Tehran next month, according to a newspaper report. Among other things, he is to discuss with Iran's new president is a possible deal to supply advanced antiballistic missiles to the Islamic Republic.

Russia is offering Iran to purchase S-300VM Antey-2500 air defense systems, according to defense industry sources. It's a cousin of the S-300 long-range surface-to-air missile family. S-300s were developed for the Soviet air defense forces, but the ground forces, an organizationally distinct branch of the army, wanted a similar system tailored for their own needs. On their order the S-300V was developed and later upgraded to the better S-300VM version.

An S-300VM battery is capable of taking down both aerial targets moving as fast as 4,500kph, tracking and engaging up to 24 aircraft or up to 16 ballistic missiles simultaneously. It has a range of up to 200km for aircraft and up to 40km for ballistic missiles. It takes no more than 6 minutes for a trained crew to deploy the system from travel position to combat position.
The system is cleared for international export. Russia sold two S-300VM batteries to Venezuela in April this year, which was the first deal fort the hardware. Turkey and India are among possible buyers of the system. Putin to offer advanced antimissiles to soothe Iran?s S-300 grudge ? report ? RT News

 

[Fallenangel]

a. I don't see any positive things in supplying Iran with anything.
b. Whoever wrote this article needs to study a bit more about how Israel allegedly conducts air strikes on foreign land, and about the intention and the capabilities of IDF.
Because this "A possible Israeli attack on Iran is expected to start with a massive missile attack on Iran’s key air defense sites and military air bases before follow-up airstrikes at its fortified nuclear enrichment facilities. S-300VMs are well-suited to counter this threat, Kommersant said." is just idiotic.


Fallen.

 

[Tovarish]

a. I don't see any positive things in supplying Iran with anything.
b. Whoever wrote this article needs to study a bit more about how Israel allegedly conducts air strikes on foreign land, and about the intention and the capabilities of IDF.
Because this "A possible Israeli attack on Iran is expected to start with a massive missile attack on Iran’s key air defense sites and military air bases before follow-up airstrikes at its fortified nuclear enrichment facilities. S-300VMs are well-suited to counter this threat, Kommersant said." is just idiotic.


Fallen.

Did not Israel bombed Syria? Did not Israel attacked Lebanon in 2007? It seems to me that many terrorists Israel released in exchange for Israeli soldier. Although I could be wrong. I do not know the situation completely

 

[ecofarm]

Stupid RT...

Further provisions of the resolution included:[4]

Iran could not participate in any activities related to ballistic missiles.

A ban on all countries providing military vehicles, aircraft or warships and missiles or missile systems and related materiel to Iran;

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Russian media is attempting to gain favor with Iran through false promises and deception. Pathetic. The article is slop for morons.

 

[notquiteright]

I believe it is foolish to think the Israelis will do as they have always done- after all technology has advanced quite a bit. I can see the Israelis using the American model of a large wave of unmanned weapon systems attacking the key defense centers before sending in the more vulnerable manned aircraft.

Seems to me the Iranians are smart in at least attempting to negate a missile first wave.

 

[Fallenangel]

Did not Israel bombed Syria? Did not Israel attacked Lebanon in 2007?

Allegedly Israel carried out the attacks in Syria, but these strikes were carried out differently i.e using other means, techniques etc.

Blowing up Iranian, anti-aircraft systems, bases, using tons of ballistic missiles etc...as described in that article, means opening a full scale war against Iran.
At this time, and in the near future Israel does not see an option of opening a full confrontation with Iran (at least not without the involvement of US) as possible - so the scenario in the article is idiotic.

Lebanon 2007....Maybe you meant to say 2006?!?

It seems to me that many terrorists Israel released in exchange for Israeli soldier. Although I could be wrong. I do not know the situation completely

I don't get how it is relevant to Iran, S-300, or Israel's military capabilities?!?

Fallen.

 

[Tovarish]

Stupid RT...

*laughs* For intellectuals - of course Fox News and wikipedia.

 

[Tovarish]

Allegedly Israel carried out the attacks in Syria, but these strikes were carried out differently i.e using other means, techniques etc.

Blowing up Iranian, anti-aircraft systems, bases, using tons of ballistic missiles etc...as described in that article, means opening a full scale war against Iran.
At this time, and in the near future Israel does not see an option of opening a full confrontation with Iran (at least not without the involvement of US) as possible - so the scenario in the article is idiotic.

Lebanon 2007....Maybe you meant to say 2006?!?


I don't get how it is relevant to Iran, S-300, or Israel's military capabilities?!?

Fallen.

Right - 2006.

I don't get how it is relevant to Iran, S-300, or Israel's military capabilities?!?

I think the result of the invasion of Lebanon - reveals Israel's military capabilities. Or not?

 

[ecofarm]

*laughs* For intellectuals - of course Fox News and wikipedia.

I'm not conservative or republican. Perhaps the next time you are inclined to believe that piece of garbage called RT, you'll check with reality first.

 

[Tovarish]

I'm not conservative or republican. Perhaps the next time you are inclined to believe that piece of garbage called RT, you'll check with reality first.

Of course. And the reality - a chemical weapon Saddam Hussein? For example.

 

[ecofarm]

Of course. And the reality - a chemical weapon Saddam Hussein? For example.

The reality is that Saddam was intentionally faking a WMD program to keep Iran at bay.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

I was staying at a Colorado Springs hotel for a few days last January. I was flipping through the channels one evening and noticed I was watching a network I had never heard of before: Russia Today.

Curiosity got the best of me so I watched for a little while. It was absolutely the most ridiculous, dishonest, and utterly transparent propagandist programming I have ever seen in my life. They were actually exploring the events of 9-11 through the perspective of a conspiracy theorist and presenting it as if it were some kind of consensus summary of the event.:shock:

 

[Tovarish]

The reality is that Saddam was intentionally faking a WMD program to keep Iran at bay.

In CIA work idiots? It is alleged chemical weapons were the cause of the attack on Iraq. U.S. Secretary of Defense turned flask white powder in front of his nose at a meeting of the United Nations. And the U.S. media were shouting about a chemical weapons. But I'll be no surprised . The U.S. policy is based on lies. Although funny as "patriots" called stupid - RT. Bravo!

 

[ecofarm]

In CIA work idiots? It is alleged chemical weapons were the cause of the attack on Iraq. U.S. Secretary of Defense turned flask white powder in front of his nose at a meeting of the United Nations. And the U.S. media were shouting about a chemical weapons. But I'll be no surprised . The U.S. policy is based on lies. Although funny as "patriots" called stupid - RT. Bravo!

Saddam was faking a WMD program. Of course, that was not the only reason for invasion.

RT is a pathetic source. Believing it is not all but destroys ones credibility.


Good day.

 

[Tovarish]

I was staying at a Colorado Springs hotel for a few days last January. I was flipping through the channels one evening and noticed I was watching a network I had never heard of before: Russia Today.

Curiosity got the best of me so I watched for a little while. It was absolutely the most ridiculous, dishonest, and utterly transparent propagandist programming I have ever seen in my life. They were actually exploring the events of 9-11 through the perspective of a conspiracy theorist and presenting it as if it were some kind of consensus summary of the event.:shock:

*laughs* But it was hard to stop watching. RT channel on YouTube watching more than a billion. By the way, what you see deception in this story? You do not believe that Putin will travel to Iran? Or you do not believe that there will be negotiations about arms?

 

[Jack Fabulous]

*laughs* But it was hard to stop watching. RT channel on YouTube watching more than a billion. By the way, what you see deception in this story? You do not believe that Putin will travel to Iran? Or you do not believe that there will be negotiations about arms?

I'm only commenting about the reliability, or lack there of, of the source.

 

[Fallenangel]

Right - 2006.
I think the result of the invasion of Lebanon - reveals Israel's military capabilities. Or not?

It is irrelevant, because no one is discussing a full or even partial military assault on Iran. (at least not without US's full involvement)
What is being discussed as last resort measures, are pinpoint strikes on key compounds/facilities of the Iranian nuclear program, similar in style to the alleged Syrian strikes etc...

Fallen.

 

[American]

The reality is that Saddam was intentionally faking a WMD program to keep Iran at bay.

And everyone including the Russians, Chinese and everyone else with a brain believed it. The deception was well conducted, and because it was so illogical it worked. No ever thought he was more afraid of Iran than the US.

 

[Tovarish]

And everyone including the Russians, Chinese and everyone else with a brain believed it. The deception was well conducted, and because it was so illogical it worked. No ever thought he was more afraid of Iran than the US.

* Laughs * If this is the case - it turns out in CIA working idiots. And who is now afraid of the U.S.?