Russian analyst says US will not fire submarine-launched missiles on Iran

[BoyElroy]

BBC Monitoring Former Soviet Union - Political

February 12, 2006 Sunday

HEADLINE: Russian analyst says US will not fire submarine-launched missiles on Iran


Text of report by Russian news agency Ekho Moskvy on 12 February 06

[No dateline, as received] Reports that the Americans are intending to use submarine-launched ballistic missiles against Iran is no more than disinformation, independent military analyst Pavel Felgengauer has commented to Ekho Moskvy radio.

The Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported today that Pentagon strategists are actively developing plans to bomb Iran's nuclear sites with the support of submarines carrying ballistic missiles.

Felgengauer said "this is complete nonsense". "Nobody will use submarine-launched missiles, but they probably will use cruise missiles," he said. "The closer it gets to military action, the more disinformation of all kinds," he added.

"The Pentagon has been readying its plans for military action of some sort against Iran for many years. In the first instance, this is to do with Iran's plans to create nuclear weapons," he said. "As such military action gets more real because diplomatic efforts... [ellipsis as published] are hitting a dead end, lots of leaks will start appearing about the form American military intervention will take," said Felgengauer. "Most of these leaks are either inventions, or deliberate disinformation, something the Americans engage in successfully before wars," he said.

Source: Ekho Moskvy news agency, Moscow, in Russian 1057 gmt 12 Feb 06

[b1b]

in mother russia car drive you

[JasonH]

Aren't the US Sub's all trident carries (If so last I checked those carried nuclear warheads). If this is the case I wouldn't be suprised if this guy is right (Unless they brought back the nulcear bunker busters which were scrapped last year).

[b1b]

Aren't the US Sub's all trident carries (If so last I checked those carried nuclear warheads). If this is the case I wouldn't be suprised if this guy is right (Unless they brought back the nulcear bunker busters which were scrapped last year).


no either 2 or all of them were converted to tomhawk missles

[StealthMode]

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=70173&highlight=trident+converted

here is the link the the exact numbers.

4 subs to carry 154 missles a piece.

[C3F]

in mother russia car drive you

GREAT response!!!!!

MP back in the day (2002) was funny with funny pics and quotes. Bring back those days!!!

[Hellfish]

He's referring to ballistic missiles. Why would anyone think that we'd use those? We don't have conventional warheads for any of them AFAIK (though there's been talk about making non-explosive kinetic MIRVs) and we sure as hell aren't gonna nuke Iran.

[Blarney]

the nuclear option is non existant right now, they have done nothing but produce nuclear weapons. No one wants to deploy nukes, if we were to attack Iran, it would be conventional. air strikes and bombings...but a ground force, I dont know about that...America probably couldnt handle having 3 fronts of conflict as well as resources stretched across the globe.

[ed316]

Russian analyst

This explains it all. How would he know? Should he be help building the 5th generation stealth fighter or aircraft carrier for mother Russia?

[Igor01]

Pavel Felgengauer is as much a military analyst as I am the Pope. He regularly publishes pieces that are thin in analysis but rich in political agenda. He's a laughing stock in all Russian military forums.

[atlantos41]

Pavel Felgengauer is as much a military analyst as I am the Pope. He regularly publishes pieces that are thin in analysis but rich in political agenda. He's a laughing stock in all Russian military forums.

+1

But because of "thin in analysis but rich in political agenda", western media love to publish **** like this.

IMHO it looks like that every western journalist going to work in russia getting a brochure saying:
"If you want to write about russian army - ask Felgengauer.
If you want to write about Chechnia - ask Politkovskaia.
If you want to write about Putin - ask Masha Lipman from Carnegie Moscow Center."
;)

[saigonsmuggler]

Pavel Felgengauer is as much a military analyst as I am the Pope. He regularly publishes pieces that are thin in analysis but rich in political agenda. He's a laughing stock in all Russian military forums.
you must be the Pope then!

AFAIK he's well respected with the news organizations. Lots of what he said turned out to be true.

[Igor01]

AFAIK he's well respected with the news organizations. Lots of what he said turned out to be true.

He calls himself "an independent military analyst" but his analysis is as "independent" as a blowjob solicited for legal tender from a street hooker.

What can you expect from a guy who said that during the Moscow theater siege the Russians should have just complied with the terrorists' demands and pull out of Chechnya to save the hostages. I won't even go into his numerous revelations of how Putin's tyrany is leading Russia in the wrong direction selling arms to China and India while instead we should simply euthanize what's left of our military industry and buy American hardware.

[melon]

you must be the Pope then!

AFAIK he's well respected with the news organizations. Lots of what he said turned out to be true.

Maybe because he gets them the quotes they need to build a story around. Being respected by the media is hardly worth much, seeing how facts and integrity are not required prerequisites to earn a living as one these days.

[toad]

If the Russian analyst says the US is not going to fire any ballistic missiles armed conventionally from subs...then who are we to disagree?

But somebody in the US and Pentagon sure has some ideas and plans about doing it.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/01/a_bad_weapon_in.html

contracts are out to pay for it...

http://www.atk.com/NewsReleases2005/2005-07-12-SLIRBM.asp
Also under development, the Enhanced Effectiveness (E2) Reentry Body “brings GPS-like accuracy to a strategic weapon that can be launched and delivered to a target quickly after a decision to strike,” according to a navy admiral. This “expands the potential targets that are threatened by Trident,” and the expected improvement in accuracy means that nuclear as well as conventional warhead options are being considered.
SLIRBM is a conventional missile concept that builds on the heritage the two companies share in U.S. Navy strategic missile development (Lockheed Martin and ATK provide the U.S. Navy with the submarine-launched Trident D5 nuclear ballistic missile). SLIRBM is designed to precisely deliver a conventional payload on target at ranges in excess of 1100 miles within 10-15 minutes of launch.


http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33067.pdf#search='ballistic%20missile%20conventional%20warhead%20united'

The Navy may not do it....but they sure are talkin' about it...

Its just another tool in the bag...but this one gets there quick!