Top Gun and the Alternate Universe of Military Propaganda

T. A. Gardner said:
I think Israel would make a deal with like Bahrain or the UAE to fly in their strike planes, refuel them, then hit Iran if that were the case. The Gulf States and the Saudis pretty much hate Iran with a capital HATE. If they can make a deal that gets Iran whacked and they can't be blamed for it, I'd bet they'd make that deal in a nanosecond.
Click to expand...

What countries do they overfly to get to Bahrain or UAE? Maybe Turkey or KSA, if they did it would be on a 'turn a blind eye' basis only I suspect.
 
Last edited:
Callinectes said:
Why do you think it was Iran? Everyone I've talked to who has seen it says its russia itself, (I haven't seen it) specifically because of the 5th gen fighters
Click to expand...

It's a uranium enrichment facility. That would be an issue with Iran, since it's not currently part of the nuclear club, and enriching uranium is the least technologically sophisticated way to get there. But with Russia, they'd have no need for that. They already have a bunch of nuclear reactors that produce a bunch of plutonium, and plutonium is preferable to enriched uranium for weapons. And even if, for some reason, Russia was building a uranium enrichment facility and we didn't like that, we'd rely on diplomacy or sanctions or untraceable sabotage, rather than a military strike, since actually attacking Russia might trigger WWIII.

So, I saw this as some near-future situation where Iran has bought a trio of 5th-generation fighters from Russia, while still also running F-14s (I think they're the only country that still uses those).

Cruise missiles MIGHT work, but they couldn't be sea launched
Click to expand...

Why not? There are all sorts of ways to launch cruise missiles at sea. The Arleigh Burke class of guided missile destroyers are specifically meant to be platforms for that. Subs can also launch them.
 
Primavera said:
What countries do they overfly to get to Bahrain or UAE? Maybe Turkey or KSA, if they did it would be on a 'turn a blind eye' basis only I suspect.
Click to expand...

They could fly down the Red Sea and then over Saudi in a remote section with a nod from the Saudis to do so.
 
Mina said:
It's a uranium enrichment facility. That would be an issue with Iran, since it's not currently part of the nuclear club, and enriching uranium is the least technologically sophisticated way to get there. But with Russia, they'd have no need for that. They already have a bunch of nuclear reactors that produce a bunch of plutonium, and plutonium is preferable to enriched uranium for weapons. And even if, for some reason, Russia was building a uranium enrichment facility and we didn't like that, we'd rely on diplomacy or sanctions or untraceable sabotage, rather than a military strike, since actually attacking Russia might trigger WWIII.

So, I saw this as some near-future situation where Iran has bought a trio of 5th-generation fighters from Russia, while still also running F-14s (I think they're the only country that still uses those).



Why not? There are all sorts of ways to launch cruise missiles at sea. The Arleigh Burke class of guided missile destroyers are specifically meant to be platforms for that. Subs can also launch them.
Click to expand...

It's a uranium enrichment facility. That would be an issue with Iran, since it's not currently part of the nuclear club, and enriching uranium is the least technologically sophisticated way to get there. But with Russia, they'd have no need for that. They already have a bunch of nuclear reactors that produce a bunch of plutonium, and plutonium is preferable to enriched uranium for weapons. And even if, for some reason, Russia was building a uranium enrichment facility and we didn't like that, we'd rely on diplomacy or sanctions or untraceable sabotage, rather than a military strike, since actually attacking Russia might trigger WWIII.
Click to expand...

You sold me.

So, I saw this as some near-future situation where Iran has bought a trio of 5th-generation fighters from Russia, while still also running F-14s (I think they're the only country that still uses those).
Click to expand...

Well that nails it, especially the F-14 part. They DO have a few left. I saw the Tomcat in the trailer, but I figured it was just a Maverick flashback or something.

Why not? There are all sorts of ways to launch cruise missiles at sea. The Arleigh Burke class of guided missile destroyers are specifically meant to be platforms for that. Subs can also launch them.
Click to expand...

No one launches from the sea unannounced unless they're in a shooting war. The missiles can be tracked at launch, and nobody would know if they were nukes or not. Also there are countermeasures for them. Six strike fighters flying nap of the earth would probably have a better than even chance of hitting the target and getting back to the boat for milk and cookies.
 
Mina said:
To a limited extent, in that they're both skillful filmmaking and yet also culturally problematic in that they're shameless military propaganda.
Click to expand...

I think you're reading too much into this. It's Tom Cruise and a bunch of LW Hollywood types seeking to make a lot of money riding on the coattails of the United States Navy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top