Compare Syrian regime attacks on its civilians with those of Israel on Palestinians

'The picture above (and follow link)  is from an attack on civilians in Aleppo, Syria, by forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose regime is indifferent to attacks on civilians. Compare that to Israel, which uses its drone technology to minimize civilian casualties.
http://israelmatzav.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/who-avoids-civilian-casualties-and-who.html

Is it a 'war' in Libya

Summer Patriot, Winter Soldier has his doubts. Read it all but here's an extract:

'it is not war. i do not know what it is, other than slightly absurd & ridiculous upon its face, but it is not war, no matter how hushed and dramatic the tones of the c.n.n. announcers. now, to those who have somehow managed to get themselves killed in this fracas, my opinions on the matter may seem somewhat flippant.

but, the events described above, simply cannot be dignified by any description as somber and respectful as war. this is more like a soccer riot with guns, or what you might have at an obama demonstration when the s.e.i.u., or is that s.i.e.u. finally comes from the closet. but, it is not war.

people in wars get killed on purpose, and by the scientific application of warfare doctrine as learned in the ages. war is not two groups in pickups with machine guns in the back, who cannot hit anyone except by sheer accident at 200 meters. this is like gunfire erupting between two back yard barbecues in miami, arguing over when to put the sauce on the ribs.

maybe, a more apt description would be a gilbert and sullivan operetta, played before a packed house of islamists in the balconies, with guns. and, just every now and again, a bullet does not go through the ceiling.'

Read the whole piece for context. My apologies for the odd usage of English; I don't think the author's shift key works!

Is there any defence against Sunburn?

You must read Mark Gaffney's paper entitled:

'The Sunburn - Iran's Awesome Nuclear Anti-Ship Missile - The Weapon That Could Defeat The US In The Gulf'

Here are some extracts but you need to read the whole paper:

'Many years ago, Soviet planners gave up trying to match the US Navy ship for ship, gun for gun, and dollar for dollar. The Soviets simply could not compete with the high levels of US spending required to build up and maintain a huge naval armada. They shrewdly adopted an alternative approach based on strategic defense. They searched for weaknesses, and sought relatively inexpensive ways to exploit those weaknesses. The Soviets succeeded: by developing several supersonic anti-ship missiles, one of which, the SS-N-22 Sunburn, has been called "the most lethal missile in the world today."

...

The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes "violent end maneuvers" to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder "just in time."

The Sunburn's combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat.

...

The Sunburn's amazing accuracy was demonstrated not long ago in a live test staged at sea by the Chinese and observed by US spy planes. Not only did the Sunburn missile destroy the dummy target ship, it scored a perfect bull's eye, hitting the crosshairs of a large "X" mounted on the ship's bridge. The only word that does it justice, awesome, has become a cliché, hackneyed from hyperbolic excess.

...

Let us pray that the US sailors who are unlucky enough to be on duty in the Persian Gulf when the shooting starts can escape the fate of the Roman army at Cannae. The odds will be heavily against them, however, because they will face the same type of danger, tantamount to envelopment. The US ships in the Gulf will already have come within range of the Sunburn missiles and the even more-advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles, also Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the Gulf's northern shore. Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field.

Anti-ship cruise missiles are not new, as I've mentioned. Nor have they yet determined the outcome in a conflict. But this is probably only because these horrible weapons have never been deployed in sufficient numbers. At the time of the Falklands war the Argentine air force possessed only five Exocets, yet managed to sink two ships. With enough of them, the Argentineans might have sunk the entire British fleet, and won the war. Although we've never seen a massed attack of cruise missiles, this is exactly what the US Navy could face in the next war in the Gulf.

Try and imagine it if you can: barrage after barrage of Exocet-class missiles, which the Iranians are known to possess in the hundreds, as well as the unstoppable Sunburn and Yakhonts missiles. The questions that our purblind government leaders should be asking themselves, today, if they value what historians will one day write about them, are two: how many of the Russian anti-ship missiles has Putin already supplied to Iran? And: How many more are currently in the pipeline?'

There is much in the paper that I disagree about, especially around Israel and the USA's intentions around Iran and geo-politic, but if Mark Gaffney is correct about Sunburn then his message should be read and reacted to.

And maybe Metal Storm may provide the answer...


Thanks to Man in a Shed for the spot.