Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aladin who wrote (110425)	8/7/2003 4:55:37 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi John Cavanaugh; Re: What you fail to point out is that many of our own aircraft deployed against it have similar legs." What's your point? It was perfectly legal for Iraq to own Foxbats. They had justifiable self defense considerations, as the US invasion proved. Re: "The real point of the administration was the trouble the Iraqi's had gone to to hide the planes." I suppose the administration is so stupid that they can't imagine that the Iraqis would bury the planes because they figured that their only other choice was to have them destroyed, LOL. It takes a "genius PhD" to overlook such an obvious explanation for a normal military action. Burying planes doesn't do much good for them, but they make good sources of spare parts when you dig them up later. And the spare parts you get are in far, far, far better condition than if you'd left them where they would be blown to bits. Re: "Before they were found, I am suprised that the press wasn't accusing the President of lying about the Iraqi Air Force - after all with no visible planes it must have never existed :-)" Our president's lies about the reason for attacking Iraq have put a blot on our country that will last for many decades. And the best you can do is to joke about it? Take a good hard look at the reason your joke is funny. It's because our president has now become one of those people that you wouldn't trust buying a used car from. In terms of leadership, the essential difference between post Watergate Nixon and our present Bush is that Nixon was generally believed to be a pretty smart dude. The funniest part of all this is that the neocons, after lying us into a quagmire, fully expect to be given the right to do it again. -- Carl

To: aladin who wrote (110425)	8/7/2003 5:40:25 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi John Cavanaugh; Re: "What you fail to point out is that many of our own aircraft deployed against it have similar legs." What's the point here? The Iraqis aren't allowed to have weapons from the 1970s because we have weapons from the 1970s? Sovereign nations own weapons so that they can defend their territory from aggressor nations. You can rely on your civilians to snipe at the occupiers, but it's better if your military is able to keep their military out of your country. Mig-25s are military forces, not WMDs. Re: "The real point of the administration was the trouble the Iraqi's had gone to to hide the planes." I live in the most powerful nation in history but my leadership is so stupid that when they send the Air Force over with instructions to destroy everything in Iraq that has even a vaguely airplane shaped silhouette, they still can't figure out why the other side would "hide the planes". This is why we're in trouble. The civilian leadership of the military is fully clueless. This is not rocket science, it is simple common sense. The Iraqis buried the planes so they wouldn't be destroyed by bombs. It's fairly well known that the Mig-25 (as compared to other Russian design fighters) is not an easy to maintain aircraft. Specifically, it's engine only works for a remarkably small number of hours. Iraq was able to fly some of these during the Kuwait war, but with sanctions on for 12 years, it's doubtful that they could fly more than one or two of their remaining 25s. The ones you can't fly you keep around for spare parts. When the US comes around and bombs the bejesus out of everything plane shaped, you naturally bury them or hide them one way or another. Planes don't improve with burial, but in the dry Iraqi desert they aren't hurt much, and you can dig them up later for spare parts. The administration has cried "wolf" so many times on this subject (Iraq WMDs), that it stuns me to find someone who doesn't treat every new attempt with disdain. -- Carl P.S. Some links about Foxbats that you may find of interest: ... The MiG-25 design was already over 20 years old in 1981, originating in the late 50s as a response to the ambitious Lockheed YF-12A development. Referred to inside the OKB as the Ye-155P-1 (P for Perekhvatchik or Interceptor), the prototype was powered by two Mikulin-Tumansky R-15B-300 turbojets (rated at 10,210 kg thrust with afterburner with a service life of only 150 hours). It's first flight was in September. ... The Tumansky engineers also managed to extend engine service life in stages to 1000 hours. ... piads.com.pk Compare: sci.fi ... However, the day of the Foxbat is drawing to a close and only around 15 remain in service with Russia, the majority of these aircraft are the MiG-25RBSh Foxbat-D's, equipped with the Shampol (Ramrod) SLAR. India is also in the process of retiring their Foxbats. The most numerous users are now various Arab countries such as Algeria, Syria and Iraq, although given the very poor standard of aircraft maintenance and spares support that generally occurs in these countries, how many actually remain in service is anyones guess. spyflight.co.uk