Desert Storm - The Air War

[SQ8]

did Iraq kill anything in the air war?

It was unable to - not because of being weak but because it was faced with superior strategy and technology.

 

[Qmjd]

And I explained to you why this was the case. Even though IqAF had top-of-the-line French (Mirage F1) and Soviet aircraft (MiG-29 and MiG-25 variants) in its arsenal back in 1991, American F-15E outclassed each and its BVR engagement capabilities were put to good use against Iraqi combat aircraft with aid of sophisticated AWACS systems in aerial engagements (USAF demonstrated netcentric warfare techniques - world's first).

It is immature to assert/argue that IqAF was 3rd class back in 1991; USAF had evolved in comparison to any other Air Force in the world instead but few had firsthand knowledge of the matter (there wasn't much coverage about military-related developments back then). There is far more exposure and coverage about military-related developments around the world in current times. But even in this age - few get things right.


This was a much different war of-course; IqAF was in bad shape in 2003. Primary reason is that US did not allow Iraq to recover/rebuild/advance its military strength since 1991 (sad and unfortunate). Therefore, Iraq had no choice but to shift to asymmetric methods of warfare.

now compare your statement in contrast with israel vs arab war.(tiny israel vs allied forces of arab)
do you think israel was more advance than Arab and employ tactics that are not known to the world at that arab israel war.
mature me on this argument plz.

 

[Mamajama]

now compare your statement in contrast with israel vs arab war.(tiny israel vs allied forces of arab)
do you think israel was more advance than Arab and employ tactics that are not known to the world at that arab israel war.
mature me on this argument plz.

Us and western planes are much better than soviet planes at the time. Soviet was quantity over quality while western was quality over quantity.

 

[Qmjd]

A good leadership with a few chinks can still win. Bad leadership, with good hardware, will always give bad results.

you are absolutely right.Khalid bin Waleed vs Persian empire 30000 vs 300000.
The current generation needs a good history lesson to learn.

 

[Qmjd]

Us and western planes are much better than soviet planes at the time. Soviet was quantity over quality while western was quality over quantity.

nop man its smart people with a smart strategy with smart employment.
israel has a secret weapon with them in war just like Pakistan does. nonother Muslim country had that caliber of weapon.
guess it

 

[Mamajama]

nop man its smart people with a smart strategy with smart employment.
israel has a secret weapon with them in war just like Pakistan does. nonother Muslim country had that caliber of weapon.
guess it

Dont know about that, sounds a bit racist.

 

[Qmjd]

It was unable to - not because of being weak but because it was faced with superior strategy and technology.

now compare your statement in contrast with israel vs arab war.(tiny israel vs allied forces of arab)
do you think israel was more advance than Arab and employ tactics that are not known to the world at that arab israel war.

 

[Qmjd]

Dont know about that, sounds a bit racist.

that secret weapon is called a secret intelligence agency.
that will gives advanced information on the strategy of the enemy.
so you engage them comfortably and plan your moves ahead.
that strategy was also shown on feb 19 to india its called (YOU NEVER SURPRISE US)
israel also had this weapon of mass surprise.

 

[Blacklight]

you are absolutely right.Khalid bin Waleed vs Persian empire 30000 vs 300000.
The current generation needs a good history lesson to learn.

My unfortunate observation has been, that majority of poster come here not to learn, but to howl their ignorance, and stupidity, and then bask in the glory of irrelevant internet glorification by their very own ilk.

There are few good rational posters, who are really worth listening to, just focus on them, and ignore the rest.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

I still remember those iconic news reports with a shudder: "the skies over Baghdad have been illuminated".

USA had something to prove to the world after Vietnam.

Iraq's military were no mugs, not in the slightest. As others have said, their air force alone had serious potential. But this was American-style blitzkrieg at its best. They had a plan to simply overwhelm Saddam's forces - "you fly, you die". Severe damage was wrought to airfields and planes on the ground. The Americans didn't need to or intend to waste time dogfighting. It all went to plan.

 

[LeGenD]

now compare your statement in contrast with israel vs arab war.(tiny israel vs allied forces of arab)
do you think israel was more advance than Arab and employ tactics that are not known to the world at that arab israel war.
mature me on this argument plz.

Which Arab-Israeli war you want me to expand upon? Six-Day War (1967)? Of-course, I understand the significance/importance of brilliant planning and tactics. Operation Focus was a brilliant preemptive move by Israel to shape the course of war for instance.

NOW; committing to a full-scale war with a tech-savvy SUPERPOWER can turn into a much different experience for any regional power (a nightmare in short). Case in point: Pacific War (World War II; Japan versus USA). Recall Pearl Harbor in 1941 (Japanese preemptive move to damage USN)? What happened afterwards? Americans regrouped and defeated (mild word) Japan in the war as it progressed further (Battle of Midway being the turning point in 1942).

WE can argue that Saddam regime (Iraq) had the option to commit to 'preemptive strikes' on the Coalition Forces during the buildup phase within KSA (Desert Shield) but USAF and USN would have been called to counter such moves. Take a good look at the geography of KSA as well; huge terrain offering much space for a potential military buildup. Arabs were footing the bill on top.

Lesson: "choose your battles wisely."

Tactical brilliance and courage notwithstanding, a regional power cannot win every war it may choose to fight. One should be mindful of a SUPERPOWER-led COALITION type opposition in particular.

you are absolutely right.Khalid bin Waleed vs Persian empire 30000 vs 300000.
The current generation needs a good history lesson to learn.

I can expand much on this theme/example but this would be off-topic discussion.

 

[Qmjd]

Which Arab-Israeli war you want me to expand upon? Six-Day War (1967)? Of-course, I understand the significance/importance of brilliant planning and tactics. Operation Focus was a brilliant preemptive move by Israel to shape the course of war for instance.

NOW; committing to a full-scale war with a tech-savvy SUPERPOWER can turn into a much different experience for a regional power (a nightmare in short). Case in point: Pacific War (World War II; Japan versus USA). Recall Pearl Harbor in 1941 (Japanese preemptive move to damage USN)? What happened afterwards? Americans regrouped and defeated Japan in the war as it progressed further (Battle of Midway being the turning point in 1942).

WE can argue that Saddam regime (Iraq) had the option to commit to 'preemptive strikes' on the Coalition Forces during the buildup phase within KSA (Desert Shield) but USAF and USN would have been called to counter such moves. Take a good look at the geography of KSA as well; huge terrain offering much space for a potential military buildup. Arabs were also footing the bill.

Lesson: "choose your battles wisely."

Tactical brilliance and courage notwithstanding, a regional power cannot win every war it may choose to fight. It is better to be mindful of a COALITION-type opposition in particular.


I can expand much on this theme/example but this would be off-topic discussion.

you are just saying don`t challenge superpower.that`s discouraging man
Lesson: "choose your battles wisely." nop
Lesson: "surprise your enemy"

 

[LeGenD]

you are just saying don`t challenge superpower.that`s discouraging man
Lesson: "choose your battles wisely." nop
Lesson: "surprise your enemy"

There is a difference between 'challenging' a superpower in limited geopolitical context (interests part) and choosing to fighting a full-scale war with one simply for the sake of it. WE do not live in Medieval Times for one, and it is important to understand what type of enemy YOU are choosing to confront so openly at the expense of the wellbeing of YOUR nation. There were Empires in ancient times but not well-entrenched superpowers like in the present.

There are examples of grave miscalculations by regional powers and resultant consequences in this very thread.

Japan attempted to 'surprise' USA in World War II - ended up with its teeth knocked in anyways. Surprise does not work in the face of overwhelming odds.

 

[PakFactor]

you are just saying don`t challenge superpower.that`s discouraging man
Lesson: "choose your battles wisely." nop
Lesson: "surprise your enemy"

Big difference fighting with swords and shields, Jazba is good to have but play it smart.
Had the Persians had an air force you think they're would've been the same result?