SomaliNet Forums

Weapons used:
1) For the show
2) to kill other muslims in the name of America.

This is why the army should be running the country, The parasites i.e all the political parties have destroyed all the good that Musharif did in the 90's.

Nasr will Plug the strategic hole in pakistans defense , due to indias cold start doctrine.


You maybe right about the eireye awac, its the swedes that pioneered AESA radars in the first place so its likely that they have a lead on the isrealis..
but pakistans disadvantage doesnt come from Phalcons in the IAF..
It comes from the combination of the SU-30 mki and the Phalcons..

Do you know that each sukhhoi fighter plane holds one giant radar system, and they have the ability to datalink with other aircrafts such as indias Mig-27 upgrades
and also with the Phalcons..
So you have each SU-30Mki acting as a mini-awac feeding data to other aircrafts..

I dont know what pakistans strategy is to defeat this, they are very smart, i am sure they have already thought of it, i can only guess at solutions as i dont have the technical background..

Gurey,

BVR engagements between India and Pakistan will be very minimal because of the close geographical proximity between the 2 countries. Most air-battles will be wvr and no one beats the Pakistanis when it comes to wvr. Pakistan and Israel are alleged to have some of the best anti-bvr tactics in the world, in fact, in a recent exercise in Turkey, the Israelis made a specific request forbidding their pilots engaging with the Pakistanis in the fear of exposing their tactics. Thus request was made to Turkey during the last Antolian Eagle war games.

Also, with Ra'ad Air Launched Subsonic Cruise Missile, Pakistan has a huge advantage in terms of Stand-off weapons. The Indians already know the playing field is vast changing and a quick peruse on their media will reveal the paranoia of both their military and media loool

About Musharra, you are right, things have slowed down since his departure, but you have to compare the state of the PAK economy during his tenure and now. Besides, most of the Armed Forces Modernization Program (AFMP) objectives have been carried out except the U-214 subs from Germany. But the recent order of similar subs from China PLUS A NUCLEAR Submarine more than makes up for it.

pakistan need BVR capability more than india..
Why ? its becuase the indian airforce outnumbers them 2 to 1...

The advantage is to the one that sees the the other one first and shoots..
The entire point of the race in radar tech is to shoot the other person first before he even sees you,

The US airforces entire philosophy depends on this, and WVR is to be avoided at all costs..

The isrealis seem to like WVR because they are good at it, but the primary aim is to not get into knife fights..



by the way,
Western aircrafts are not designed for these WVR knife fights, but they can hold their own if they have to,
but Russian aircraft are ideal..

e.g an F-22 will lock on and shoot at a SU-30 first before the Su-30 pilot knows whats happening,
and by the time the missle is detected, its usually too late, and if you are lucky to dodge it and your jamming tech works as advertised, you are still fucked becuase the F-22 would have used those seconds to sneak in and slit your throat quietly..

ofcourse if the US pilot is an idiot and makes even a tiny error, he will find himself in a knife fight, and Withing Visual Range, there is no such thing as stealth.
It will be a pitbull againsta german shepard, and we all no that a pitbull can take on 3 german shepards each one bigger than himself and still win..

(if seen with my own eyes a pitbull take on 3 rotwielers, it took less than 30 seconds and the pitbull tore them up)

in a real life situation an F-22 will use its supercruise capability to run like hell, and avoid combat...
an F-35 joint strike fighter cannot and will be toast..

roving madness:any modern conventional army in the world would blush at the saudi performance in the houthie operation.not to mention there werent a single decisive battle in which they overwhelemed them,it was rather the houthis who asked for truce and went bk to their dwells on the yemeni side of the border cuz they didnt really need all that air bombing and two front in the first place.just compare it with the isreali-hizbollah conflict in 2006.even though hizbollah is one of the best gorilla armies in the world,has a sophisticated techniques and exteremly mobilable light katiosha missiles which they fired thousands of them at the yahuuds.yet the yahuuds had only 113 deaths,and hizbollah emerged as the victorious.not to mention the isareli prime minster was embarassed,generals got reshuffled around and it was basically considered isreaili waterloo.so,even though nobody cares about those shia milita but they indeed could claim victory as much as hizbollah did.

gurey:I never really paid attention to the U.A.E air force until that General pateraes comment of Emerati air force ability to defeat the Iranian airforce,then I digged and realized these niggas added so much custom made stuff to their f-16's as far as the engine and avionics.its a good tactic for making up for the fact they are out numbered.but I dont think their infantry army is any good.its full of foreigns.especially somalis and sudanis.i remember this dude that I knew joined the emerati army and few months later calool baa ka soo dhacday .it turned out he was getting so much money and not much of a training.if that nigga and his likes were sent to a war against the iranians.they will either desert or they wont fight as sincere as the imam khumayni crazed,jannah plastic keys carrying in their pockets shia fighters.

waryaa wrote:weapons producing firms/countries must be trying hard to start a middle east confrontation so that they can sell more weapons to oil rich kingdoms.

I think Iran would come out victorious because they are coming to the field with home grown ingenuity and technology while the kingdoms are fighting with leased equipment (rented fighter jets from Hertz/Budget and "rent a shooter" from Pakistan).


According to publicly available data, Iran is much stronger. Here's one of many military statistics sites:
http://www.globalfirepower.com/

Compare the two side by side.
http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp

these websites are crap bro,i dont know where they get their data from,but no freaking authoritarian country really discloses how much weapons they have,the numbers in there are grossly exaggerated and the thought of Syria having a 90 operational airports is laughable.

Most of their soldiers look black just like most of their football players, haha I knew that actual Saudis wouldn't be in the army as they are too weak for that stuff.

Mckuus wrote:Most of their soldiers look black just like most of their football players, haha I knew that actual Saudis wouldn't be in the army as they are too weak for that stuff.

The Saudi Royal family have black roots, some relatives look darker then sudanis. Generations of selective breeding with europian women has diluted some members other have visible features of their Bantu past.



Prince Bandar(Bandar in hindi = monkey)

There is a reason why they loved michael jackson.

Cirwaaq wrote:

Mckuus wrote:Most of their soldiers look black just like most of their football players, haha I knew that actual Saudis wouldn't be in the army as they are too weak for that stuff.

The Saudi Royal family have black roots, some relatives look darker then sudanis. Generations of selective breeding with europian women has diluted some members other have visible features of their Bantu past.



Prince Bandar(Bandar in hindi = monkey)

There is a reason why they loved michael jackson.

dude,where do you get these info from?your ignorant comments are getting annoying.prince bandar is dark skinned cuz his mom was african not cuz the saud house has any sort of dark skinned roots.

samadoon-waaxid wrote:roving madness:any modern conventional army in the world would blush at the saudi performance in the houthie operation.not to mention there werent a single decisive battle in which they overwhelemed them,it was rather the houthis who asked for truce and went bk to their dwells on the yemeni side of the border cuz they didnt really need all that air bombing and two front in the first place.just compare it with the isreali-hizbollah conflict in 2006.even though hizbollah is one of the best gorilla armies in the world,has a sophisticated techniques and exteremly mobilable light katiosha missiles which they fired thousands of them at the yahuuds.yet the yahuuds had only 113 deaths,and hizbollah emerged as the victorious.not to mention the isareli prime minster was embarassed,generals got reshuffled around and it was basically considered isreaili waterloo.so,even though nobody cares about those shia milita but they indeed could claim victory as much as hizbollah did.

In military terms, victory is measured by one's ability to accomplish stated objectives. The Saudi objectives were to undermine the Hauthis as a military threat and bring them to the negotiating table. They accomplished both, so they won the war. By the same token, the Israelis failed in their objectives of dismantling and crippling Hizbullah, and so they lost the war; and because of that their top generals had to resign. Its military science 101