2026 Israel-US vs. Iran conflict [Military updates/News Only]

[SteelBird]

As expected. The only terms is unconditional surrender.

View attachment 175225

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

According to my understanding of what Trump wrote: All are crazy except Donald Trump!

I always say: at some place where everybody wears clothes but you're naked, people would say that you are crazy. At some other place where everyone is naked while you're the only one who wears clothes, people would say that you are crazy!

 

[tankphobia]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

HQ-9B is actually in Middle East now, except not on Iran's side but on Saudi Arabia's side curtesy of Pakistan.

Even so, if shooting start again I rather doubt it would make much difference. It's not like HQ-9B was designed to counter massed drones.

If the war goes hot again, will Pakistan join in on offensive action? We might see offensive use of jf-17 after all.

 

[Temstar]

If the war goes hot again, will Pakistan join in on offensive action? We might see offensive use of jf-17 after all.

No it would be against the conditions of their security pact, it's meant to be purely defensive:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Shilao and co did point out a while ago when the Pakistan involvement first came to light that this is indeed going to be a sensitive matter since it involves Chinese hardware. He said the fact that Pakistan's contingent in Saudi Arabia doesn't include J-10CE means Pakistan side have also thought about this carefully and made the right call. If there is J-10CE based in Saudi Arabia should Iran consider hitting them with Shahed or not? Even if Iran doesn't try to target them, you can never tell if US wouldn't try to hit them with LUCAS drone and pretend it was Iran to stir up drama.

 

[siegecrossbow]

If the war goes hot again, will Pakistan join in on offensive action? We might see offensive use of jf-17 after all.

Probably cheap option for interception Shaheeds.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Probably cheap option for interception Shaheeds.

It isn't all that cheap without apkws type...
I.e. there's gun of course, but it's tricky.

 

[tankphobia]

No it would be against the conditions of their security pact, it's meant to be purely defensive:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Shilao and co did point out a while ago when the Pakistan involvement first came to light that this is indeed going to be a sensitive matter since it involves Chinese hardware. He said the fact that Pakistan's contingent in Saudi Arabia doesn't include J-10CE means Pakistan side have also thought about this carefully and made the right call. If there is J-10CE based in Saudi Arabia should Iran consider hitting them with Shahed or not? Even if Iran doesn't try to target them, you can never tell if US wouldn't try to hit them with LUCAS drone and pretend it was Iran to stir up drama.

I mean NATO is a defensive alliance... I don't think the actual terms are out and about. Defense can be a lot of things too, if Saudi Arabian flagged vessels are trying to run the blockade, do Pakistani assets provide escort? That could easily escalate into a situation where Pakistani jets are blowing up Iranian speed boats.

 

[FriedButter]

I mean NATO is a defensive alliance... I don't think the actual terms are out and about. Defense can be a lot of things too, if Saudi Arabian flagged vessels are trying to run the blockade, do Pakistani assets provide escort? That could easily escalate into a situation where Pakistani jets are blowing up Iranian speed boats.

Internal debates also noted that threats to Saudi sovereignty and interests might not remain confined within Saudi territory, and could require military action outside Saudi Arabia. The Pakistani side subsequently sought to narrow the scope of its obligations to Saudi territory.

Under the current terms of the deal, which is entirely defensive, Saudi Arabia could not request that Pakistan counterattack Iran, even from Saudi territory. An attack launched from Pakistani soil also appears unlikely, and would likely fall outside the scope of the SMDA.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Also the “mutual” part of the defense pact is a total lie.

The amendment was one-sided, some worried, and would obligate Pakistan to defend Saudi Arabia, without imposing a reciprocal obligation on Riyadh.

 

[Maikeru]

The absence of J-10CE may simply be a matter of lacking the numbers without risking home defence. PAF only has 20 so far. Agreed JF-17 really needs a APKWS analogue to be really effective at killing drones.

Saudi provides the funds, Pakistan provides the force. No need for Saudi to defend Pakistan directly if Pakistan has enough modern kit, and Saudi can always wield the oil weapon against India instead.

 

[FriedButter]

I believe the menu today is the imported Argentinian beef tacos.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

We are waiting for the markets to close again - Donnie

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2056748310094884887

 

[Jaroslav]

Friday?