VEVAK
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2013
- Messages
- 2,406
- Reaction score
- 1
I would expect nothing more from a government shill. If you think Iran has more than 5,000-7,500 long range missiles you are out of your mind. US intelligence is 2,000 and I’m going to be liberal and say that it’s 3x that number so 6,000 or so.
Take 6,000 x it by 700kg warhead. And see what you get. Russia/US/Syria dropped that many bombs in Syria in Just one YEAR.
So now not even 6,000 missiles will be enough fire power to target US military assets considering it takes about 200-300 missiles to severely destroy an airbase alone assuming 30-40% fail for whatever reason.
So Iran will blow through its entire missile stockpile in the first year of war assuming a conservative # of 10-20% of missile stockpile get destroyed by enemy bombardment on Iran followed by another 30-40% fail to hit their target (intercepted, tech failure, miss target, etc).
So let’s run the numbers again assuming a HIGHLY optimistic scenario of Iran haven’t a stockpile of 7,500 missiles and using the numbers above of up to 40-60% never being fired or reaching target or hitting target that means you should reduce the number of missiles by 3,250 missiles.
Meaning Iran will have an arsenal of 3,250 missiles that score direct hits on their target. And if Iran doesn’t have an arsenal of 7,500 missiles and has something like 3,000 then only 1,500 missiles will score direct hits.
That is simply not enough in all out war. This is why Iran needs an air force as well.
Time will prove I am right.
1st off what do you mean by long range missiles??
FYI By 2005 Israeli estimates were that Iran had between 400-500 Missiles capable of reaching Israel. So I don't know where you come up with that 2000 figure but it more or less seems like a delusional figure to me....
FYI U.S. has well over 50 military installations that are within ~600km of Iranian soil so why do you assume that Iran's stock of long rage missiles will be the main factor?? also why do you assume that BM are Iran's ONLY means of retaliation?
As for the value of an Air Force vs missiles I believe Iran's recent strikes using Tactical BM have already answered that!!!
what exactly do you think Iran's response would have been if instead of a Missile Program we had instead purchased a fleet of 100 Su-30 + 50 MiG-29 + 50 MiG-35 + 50 Su-35's + 50 Su-34 lets say instead of a missile program we had built up a fleet like that. Now tell me what exactly do you think Iran could or would have been able to achieve against the U.S.?????