Posted on 10/07/2007 11:53:36 PM PDT by jdm
Mysteries still surround Israel’s air strike against Syria. Where was the attack, what was struck and how did Israel’s non-stealthy warplanes fly undetected through the Russian-made air defense radars in Syria?
There also are clues that while the U.S. and Israel are struggling in the broader information war with Islamic fundamentalists, Tel Aviv’s air attack against a “construction site” in northern Syria may mean the two countries are beginning to win some cyberwar battles.
U.S. officials say that close examination of the few details of the mission offers a glimpse of what’s new in the world of sophisticated electronic sleight-of-hand. That said, they fault the Pentagon for not moving more quickly to make cyberwarfare operational and for not integrating the capability into the U.S. military forces faster.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said last week that the Israelis struck a building site at Tall al-Abyad just south of the Turkish border on Sept. 6. Press reports from the region say witnesses saw the Israeli aircraft approach from the Mediterranean Sea while others said they found unmarked drop tanks in Turkey near the border with Syria. Israeli defense officials finally admitted Oct. 2 that the Israeli Air Force made the raid.
U.S. aerospace industry and retired military officials indicated the Israelis utilized a technology like the U.S.-developed “Suter” airborne network attack system developed by BAE Systems and integrated into U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle operations by L-3 Communications. Israel has long been adept at using unmanned systems to provoke and spoof Syrian surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, as far back as the Bekka Valley engagements in 1982.
Air Force officials will often talk about jamming, but the term now involves increasingly sophisticated techniques such as network attack and information warfare. How many of their new electronic attack options were mixed and matched to pull off this raid is not known.
The U.S. version of the system has been at the very least tested operationally in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last year, most likely against insurgent communication networks. The technology allows users to invade communications networks, see what enemy sensors see and even take over as systems administrator so sensors can be manipulated into positions where approaching aircraft can’t be seen, they say. The process involves locating enemy emitters with great precision and then directing data streams into them that can include false targets and misleading messages that allow a number of activities including control.
Clues, both good and unlikely, are found in Middle East press reports. At least one places some responsibility for the attack’s success on the U.S.
After the strike, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Watan reported that U.S. jets provided aerial cover for Israeli strike aircraft during the attack on Syria. Similar statements of American involvement were made by Egyptian officials after the 1967 and 1973 wars with Israel.
More interesting is the newspaper’s claim that “Russian experts are studying why the two state-of-the-art Russian-built radar systems in Syria did not detect the Israeli jets entering Syrian territory,” it said. “Iran reportedly has asked the same question, since it is buying the same systems and might have paid for the Syrian acquisitions.”
Syria’s most recent confirmed procurement was of the Tor-M1 (SA-15 Gauntlet) short-range mobile SAM system. It uses vehicle-mounted target-acquisition and target-tracking radars. It is not known whether any of the Tor systems were deployed in the point-defense role at the target site struck by Israeli aircraft. If, however, the target was as “high-value” as the Israeli raid would suggest, then Tor systems could well have been deployed.
Iran bought 29 of the Tor launchers from Russia for $750 million to guard its nuclear sites, and they were delivered in January, according to Agence France-Presse and ITAR-TASS. According to the Syrian press, they were tested in February. Syria has also upgraded some of its aging S-125s (SA-3 Goa) to the Pechora-2A standard. This upgrade swaps out obsolete analog components for digital.
Syrian air defense infrastructure is based on for the most part aging Soviet SAMs and associated radar. Damascus has been trying to acquire more capable “strategic” air defense systems, with the country repeatedly associated with efforts to purchase the Russian S-300 (SA-10 Grumble/SA-20) long-range SAM. It also still operates the obsolescent S-200 (SA-5 Gammon) long-range system and its associated 5N62 Square Pair target engagement radar. There are also unconfirmed reports of Syrian interest in the 36D6 Tin Shield search radar.
There remains the second mystery of the actual site of the target and its use. Israeli news reports contend it was a compound near Dayr az-Zwar in north central Syria, and not Tall al-Abyad farther north. The site of the attack has been described as a transshipment point for weapons intended for the Hezbollah in Lebanon to restock missile stores that were used in last summer’s fighting with Israel. Others contend it is a site with nuclear materials that may be associated with Iran’s nuclear bomb program. Mentions are also made of a North Korean ship arriving in Syria only days before the attack and the presence of North Korean workers in Syria for several months.
“There are always indications the North Koreans are doing something they shouldn’t, Vice Adm. Robert Murrett, director of the National Geospatial-intelligence Agency (NGA), told Aviation Week & Space Technology in response to a question about the shipment of nuclear materials from North Korea to Syria, which were subsequently bombed. “They are a high priority. We work as a key element . . . on the trafficking of WMD [weapons of mass destruction] and high-interest arms shipments anyplace.”
It’s part of a growing NGA role in spotting the proliferation of weapons technology “which may be coming from East Asia to the Middle East . . . that we don’t want to cross borders.” Other crucial boundaries for surveillance include the borders in all directions in Afghanistan and Iraq—which includes Syria and Iran—as well as semi-governed areas such as the Horn of Africa. The use of automation to aid rapid analysis is improving, but that’s being balanced by the fact that “the sheer volumes of data we are ingesting now . . . continue to increase by a couple of orders of magnitude on an annual basis,” he says.
What's your evidence for any of this--seems like hearsay to me.
The only way to compare the two, other than your making assertions with no backing, is to compare their use in similar situations.
Russian technology led to a decade of failure in Afghanistan.
American technology led to a takeover in a matter of weeks.
One has only to look at the data to see that Russian technology is nothing compared to the west’s, particularly military tech.==
“Nothing compared”? :))
Let us take just one simple example: AK-74 vs M-16. Will you still state that AK-74 is “Nothing compared” to M-16?
You're talking hearsay--which supposedly you don't care for.
One word: Afghanistan.
Next.
Russian technology led to a decade of failure in Afghanistan.
American technology led to a takeover in a matter of weeks.==
In Afganistan there wer soviet technology. But anyways Soviets took whole Afganistan into 3 days. Later the guerilla war began. After 9 years of war Soviets lost 15000 but the guerillas lost 1.5 mlns. It is about 1:100 kill ratio.
Now just recall 2001 winter. If you remember Kabul was taken by forces of Northen allience which was trained and supplied by Russia. United States gave airsupport only. The american ground troops came into Afganistan later when all fighting was over. Maybe that is Now the north of Afganistan is calm because it is held by pro-russian Northern allience. But on south we have the guerilla war witout end. Just like 20 years ago.
I give credit Americans that they crushed quickly Saddams army. But again what we see now there the endless guerilla war. No matter the techniological overcome the guerillas will do fights endlessly.
There are so many untruths in your post--for one thing, your number isn't of guerillas killed, but Afghanis--including civilians.
But don't take my word:
Following the deployment, the Soviet troops were unable to establish authority outside Kabul. As much as 80% of the countryside still escaped effective government control....The inability of the Soviet Union to break the military stalemate, gain a significant number of Afghan supporters, and to rebuild the Afghan Army, required the increasing direct use of its own forces to fight the rebels. Soviet soldiers often found themselves fighting against civilians due to the elusive tactics of the rebels. They repeated one of the American Vietnam mistakes by winning almost all of the major battles, but failing to control the countryside....Mikhail Gorbachev, then General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, said: The main reason that there has been no national consolidation so far is that Comrade Karmal is hoping to continue sitting in Kabul with our help.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#The_Soviet_deployment
In 1979, the USSR took control of the Afghan capital, Kabul, and tried through the following decade to gain control over the whole country and its people. The invasion was a failure, costing thousands of lives and having serious consequences still felt today. To better understand the reason for the Soviet invasion and failure, first one must understand the geography and culture in Afghanistan....The Soviets brought in over one hundred thousand soldiers, secured Kabul quickly and installed Babrak Karmal as their puppet leader. However, they were met with fierce resistance when they ventured out of their strongholds into the countryside.
(This is not winning in three days and fighting guerillas--the Soviets took only Kabul.)-DW
On December 27th, 1979, Amin was shot by the Russians and he was replaced by Babrak Kamal. His position as head of the Afghan government depended entirely on the fact that he needed Russian military support to keep him in power. Many Afghan soldiers had deserted to the Mujahedeen and the Kamal government needed 85,000 Russian soldiers to keep him in power.
http://www.2-russia.com/russia-afghanistan.asp
I don't care for propaganda from those who are embarassed by the Soviet Union's complete and total failure. As for the AK-47, congratulations on outfitting terrorists everywhere with the ability to kill innocent people--how proud you must be!
They injected a virus.
The sensors showed what we wanted them to show. Nothing.
Islamic Arabs, heirs to the one true religion, which is destined to takeover the world, who by Allah's Word are superior to everyone, cannot believe that the small country of Jews, Israel, could defeat them. So, they credit their defeat to a great power, who pulls Israel's strings or vice versa.
What kind of advance was the 74 aside from the bullet?
The 5.45 bullet seemed to be a move toward the western ammo doctrine.
“Air Force officials will often talk about jamming, but the term now involves increasingly sophisticated techniques such as network attack and information warfare.”
All the Syrian radar screens had a big yellow smiley face.
There are so many untruths in your post—for one thing, your number isn’t of guerillas killed, but Afghanis—including civilians. ==
You show me civilians during guerilla war? Soviets didn’t target civilians directly. If they did that they simply depopulated Afganistan.
Following the deployment, the Soviet troops were unable to establish authority outside Kabul. As much as 80% of the countryside still escaped effective government control....==
As I said Soviets took whole territory during 3 days. Later the guerilla war began. This exerpt from Wiki means the guerilla war continued.
But these days we also can say that NATO cann’t go free around Afganistan countryside and sit in Kabul and thier fortified military bases.
Mikhail Gorbachev, then General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, said: The main reason that there has been no national consolidation so far is that Comrade Karmal is hoping to continue sitting in Kabul with our help. ==
True. Why to continue to kill Afganis if they do not want Karmal? That is the main reason to withdraw soviet troops.
In 1979, the USSR took control of the Afghan capital, Kabul, and tried through the following decade to gain control over the whole country and its people.==
In 1979 USSR took control of all Afgani towns in very short time. Much shorter then same task took in 2001.
“...Russian technology led to a decade of failure in Afghanistan.
American technology led to a takeover in a matter of weeks. ...” YOU said that.
I just showed you that Soviets took matter in Afganistan for much shorter time then it tokk during the winter 2001.
Concerning the guerilla war it is still continued in Afganistan and in Iraq. And I do not see no signs to end them whatsoever. You will understand that to win those war you need to kill them all. Soviet Union understood it in 1988 so withdrew. America is the second to go.
They injected a virus.
The sensors showed what we wanted them to show. Nothing.==
You think that syrian antiaircraft radars are run by Windows?:) No absolutely not.
You are lying. You said the Soviets took over the country in 3 days. They did not. The facts show this. The Soviets occuppied Kabul.
There is no need for me to continue talking to someone who obviously longs for the days of the Soviet Union. I have no use for liars.
You are lying. You said the Soviets took over the country in 3 days. They did not. The facts show this. The Soviets occuppied Kabul.==
Seems to me you do not know nothing about Afgan war 1979-88 and do not want to know because it is contradict with your supperiority complex toward russians:).
FYI Soviets took every town and even village of Afganistan with population more then 1000. They took all roads and road intersections, tunnels and all mountain passages. It all was done during 1 week of occupation.
Later during guerilla war afgan insurgents took some high mountain small vilages and build covered bases high in mountine gorges. But Afgan towns Soviet hold all the time until withdrawal. Just check the Jelalabad battle for example. The attempt to take this town which Afganis tried in 1987 or so.
EA-6B........
EA-6B........==
Another sitting duck. I try to explain people here that any emmiting aircraft is the easy target. Especially so slow as the old known A-6.
During this syrian endevor those syrians probably were afraid just to shoot down the jamming aircraft since it was american so israelies slipped through. It won’t work during teh actual war.
That's because it's a secret. But, give 'em time. Aviation Speak and Space Tattletale will leak it to the world as soon as they figure out what happened.....
Number of EA-6Bs lost in combat = 0
Number of strike aircraft lost in combat escorted by EA-6Bs = 0
During this syrian endevor those syrians probably were afraid just to shoot down the jamming aircraft since it was american so israelies slipped through. It won’t work during teh actual war.
Pure Bravo Sierra, Ivan. What evidence do you have that Prowlers escorted the Israelis?
What evidence do you have that Prowlers escorted the Israelis?==
Did I say prowler escorted? I said that some pobably presumes that american aircraft did jamming.
Read the article: “...Clues, both good and unlikely, are found in Middle East press reports. At least one places some responsibility for the attack’s success on the U.S.
After the strike, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Watan reported that U.S. jets provided aerial cover for Israeli strike aircraft during the attack on Syria. ...”
Number of EA-6Bs lost in combat = 0 ==
Number of strike aircraft lost in combat escorted by EA-6Bs = 0 ==
Combat with the technologically equal or with 20 years old export type soviet equipment? If second then I congradulate you:).
Yeah, you’re right.........it has only worked in every engagement it has ever been in since vietnam....including gulf #1 and #2.....and if it does not work, why does this 30+ year old aircraft continue to be a mainstay in naval aviation?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.