Iran is big, sukhois are better suited for them. With their bigger range they can be used from bases far from the south where tomahawks can't reach them.
Iran is not that big... there are no airfields in Iran that US missiles could not reach.
MiGs will be cheaper and easier to make and can be made in much greater numbers offering better coverage.
A flanker is physically bigger and has a longer flight range but to cover air space it has approximately the same flight speed as a Fulcrum so they in effect cover the same area it is just that the flanker can do it for longer.
With a few inflight refuelling tankers there is no difference in range it is just that the MiGs are cheaper to make or buy.
10 S-300VM to counter israeli jerichos against big bases. 200 Pantsirs to couter cruise missiles and protect all the borders. 4 or so S-400 to keep awacs and fighters away or fly low and be destroyed by pantsirs. 120 su-35 for air to air and 70 su-34 for anti shipping. Another 50 mig-35 for interception would be nice. 24 su-57 for deep strikes with kh-59mk2.
Now you are talking, but more like 300 MiG-29M2s, plus 50 more upgraded to MiG-35 level... and large coastal sonar arrays that will tell them what is operating well off their coastline and coastal missiles to deal with anything coming from that direction.
Well F, what a waste of time, i thought at least the Chinese would stay out of that, considering how much they depend on Iran for oil, but no.
The deal was a good deal for China as it created a structure to deal with Iran commercially in return for promises not to make nuclear weapons... China does not want Iran to have nukes any more than Russia wants Iran to have nukes... Iran wouldn't want nukes if the Americans and Israelis and Saudis weren't being such
This is not Chinas fault or Irans fault... it is Americas fault.
Damned fools, it looks like they fell for the old Weapons embargo BS, the U.S loves to attack countries after a few years of embargo's, granted Iran is no Iraq, but they were idiots to accept that Conventional Weapons clause.
If the deal totally collapses... which it will if Iran pulls out of it Russia and China can just say no to UNSC sanctions from now on because it was the US and the EU that ultimately broke the deal... why should Iran be punished for that?
Either way is looks like this agreement is barely holding a pullout looks inevitable.
The deal is dead... if the US is not going to invest honestly in Iran and is going to impose sanctions and it is going to force other countries not to invest in Iran and to not buy their oil then Iran has absolutely no reason to keep up their end, which was to promise not to make nuke weapons and to follow extreme rules regarding its right to nuclear technology to create electricity. No other country has to go through this shit, except North Korea... why isn't Israel forced to sign up to the non proliferation treaty and let international inspectors access to all their secret nuclear weapons caches?
The deal does not benefit Iran so there is no point in the charade of pretending... with the deal gone Russia and China can sell what they want and Iran can make itself safe by developing nuclear weapons.
They still have them, & used them as mini AWACS against Iraq. With their VGWs, they can use roads as well.
Probably not in great condition... even the US Navy struggled to keep theirs going...
Also, longer range fighter bombers will give their AF more aggressive look- Iran's doctrine is defensive, not offensive, & the leadership wants to keep it that way.
Indeed... the Fulcrum is seriously underrated in the west, yet is 90% of what a Flanker is most of the time. Fulcrums properly used would be much more effective than MiG-21s properly used, and the Indians showed a properly used MiG-21 can surprise the Americans still.
When all your neighbours are buying f-15/rafales/typhoons and let US bring f-22 and f-35 there you don't care about the look of your army.
They could afford twice as many Fulcrums as they could Flankers and with similar weapons at similar altitudes and similar speeds more aircraft makes sense...
They are more likely to be able to produce MiGs than Flankers.
Iran doesn't care about how other see their doctrine. Hundreds of ballistic missiles deployed don't make it a defensive doctrine.
Using ballistic missiles instead of modern fighters is a honey bee or a porcupine method.... looks dangerous but is rather fragile to be honest.
Not many countries can afford the full chess set of pieces and while for master players they might get away with a few pieces missing the more pieces you have the more options and opportunities you have...
Americas main advantage in a conflict with all the little countries it attacks and breaks is that they can't hit America back directly... but when they do it is 11/9 and they shit themselves...
Defensive doctrine are useless. They need powerfull army if they want to survive. Mig-29M won't help at all. Su-35/34/57 will.
Honestly it is the best they can afford... and if MiG-29Ms are not good enough then Flankers wont be much better... they are not that different in performance terms that matter in this case.
Ballistic missile won't stop foreign bombers bombing iran.
No, it wont, but the threat to use them against Israel or Saudi Arabia or any US base where an attack on Iran is mounted from might seriously limit the choices the US has going in to this conflict.
China might want to test some of its ballistic anti ship technologies for instance... and Russia might let slip the precise location of US carriers in the region if that might be useful...
The US might pound the shit out of them in return but they could do that anyway so Trump can look hard on his enemies for the next election... but of course if an Iranian missile hits an F-22 or F-35... they have systems with optical guidance and they seemed to be able to deal with that super stealth drone the US lost in Iran too... or for that matter a B-2... or even an aircraft carrier...
The point is that there is no level of US bombing that can stop them developing nuclear weapons... they just don't know all the underground locations they could be done in and they don't know about the ones they don't know about... Iran does not need to make millions of bombs... just a couple of small ones... test one so the world knows they have them and then say fuck off US or we nuke Israel... you want your embassy in Jerusalem we will give you free lighting and heating to last you a million years...
Iraq was attacked by like 75% of the world. Only nuks could have make them won the war.
Iran has rather more support even if it is not in the open.. Vietnam didn't need nukes to win... they just needed to continue to fight knowing the US will get tired and leave.
The important part is to make it cost... money better than lives... but both important...
The situation in Iran is different. It can reach its neighbours with ballistic missiles while its sukhois would deal with anything left. Su-34 would attack US ships. Russia and china are much more powerfull than in the 90s when US were the only superpower left and could whatever they wanted. So they can help.
See, now even the Russians think the best way to defeat a carrier is with a small and fast unmanned missile... not an aircraft.
An Iskander missile relabeled Kinzhal launched from a MiG-31 would be the weapon of choice to remove US carriers and ships from the equation entirely... but they would send F-22s and F-35s and missiles to every Iranian base to remove that threat so on its own it would be no good anyway...
Iran simply is too weak economically to afford all those birds u listed.
Which is why Pompeo and Bolton and Bush have such a hard on for the fight... they have selected the fat kid they want to beat up and humiliate and they are prancing around the playground telling everyone that that fat kid is going to get beaten up... but they wont say when or where...
Their local made SAM and all army (but ballistic missiles) are not a match for all the f-35 that will bomb them
You say that... but a well camouflaged non emitting SAM like an SA-8 or Pantsir with missiles ready to fire and with optical guidance would be a real threat to Stealth fighters having to cover large distances inside enemy territory to reach launch points to hit targets... I mean any area related to large underground facilities, related to the nuclear or ballistic missile programme, and of course government related areas like major SAMs that don't move as well as civilian and military radar bases and communications centres will also be very likely targets... the known ranges of weapons and likely launch and recover directions limit where the attacks will actually come from and where the aircraft need to be to launch their weapons.
With communications and lots of SAMs of medium to small sizes you could certainly disrupt...
The west has a long history of falling foul of its own systems... Iran has HAWK missiles and heavily modified Phoenix missiles, and in the general region I am sure they could boost supplies of weapons to friendly forces in the region to put pressure on their new enemies.
Wouldn't be hard to get some Iraqis to surround US bases in Iraq... and even just radio when aircraft take off... what type and which direction they are heading and with what load on board... do it in code obviously... My mother and two aunties are coming to visit... via a northern route and their bags are packed... lots of fuel so they might drive all the way without stopping for fuel... maybe top up on the way home... etc etc.
If upgrading su-27 and mig-29 they would have done that instead of invasting into su-57 and new S-400 and S-500.
The US is only a small part of the threat Russia faces... you need to add the EU and some other countries as well... plus Iran can't expect to win, they just need to make it too bloody to tolerate for the US.
Their economy would be better if they were smarter and stoped saying they will destroy USA and Israel. USA and jews control the world economy. No need to be a genius to know that "saying you will destroy them" means only they will crush your economy and send you back in 1890.
Oh fuck off... are you suggesting they should just do as they are told and shut the fuck up... they aren't in the EU you know.
Why shouldn't they want Israel destroyed... it is a fictional country of nazis doing to palestinians what the German nazis did to jews and commies... except these nazis are jews... you would think with their history they would know better, but they have gotten so used to using the victim card they don't see they are actually doing worse things... the golan heights... the start of living space in the east?
The US and the jews control the west... and the world needs to create its own economy that is no part of that if it wants a future without all this bullshit.
The F-35 is a poor bomber; it can't carry bunker busters. The US won't risk sending them until after the AD is eliminated, lest they too get shot down/crash in Iran, given to RF/PRC, & reverse engineered.
It is a poor aircraft in every respect... if Israel wont fly them in Syrian air space why would the US fly them in Iranian air space?
They will use them. Even if it is a poor bomber and a poor fighter, its formidable stealth and ARMs will destroy iranian air defences. Its aesa radarand amraams will blow up any 3rd or 4th gen fighter Iran can send in the air. Iran has nothing to counter f-35.
But how many are they going to send? These planes don't have much capacity for weapons and carrying them externally means the stealth is gone... how much ARMs and how much ARH AAMs will they be carrying?
To be honest it is pretty clear if it comes to a dog fight most modern fighters will beat it if they can get within gun range...
And even if they don't use them they still can send 400 f-18 and 200 f-15. The result will be the same. With the air forces of the middle east mainly composed of last 4+ eurocanards and US fighters the result is even more deadlier for iran.
Which is why they need to be proactive and attack nearby US air bases with ballistic missiles so when the US aircraft arrive they hit empty launchers and empty BM sites and go home to ruins and damage for a change.
Iran could be as rich as Saudi arabia and affoard anything they were doing things better.
Saudi Arabia is not rich, the family Saud is rich and bloated, the country is worse off than Venezuela in terms of oil dependency, and those cards wont hold up forever...
The US has been interfering in Iran for a century... Iran doesn't want to be Americas bitch... they have made that clear multiple times in the past.
You might as well tell Serbia... give up Kosovo and then you can join NATO and the EU and be wealthy like Albanian or Ukraine...
And north koreas economy is destroyed. Even Russia and China don't support them.
Iran did business with Europeans and India and China. And instead of keeping their ties with them strong they give US and israel more tools to destroy them economically by keeping saying they will restart nuclear program, they will destroy us and israel, they will close hormuz ...
If they had hust shut up they would be in a better situation, US can't attack on their own and Saudi arabia would be totally weak as Iran oil can replace theirs. EU was for dealing with them too but now things gets bad.
Yeah, lets blame the victim... that little girl was asking to be raped by that big hairy strong man... did you see what she was wearing... asking for it... what a bitch to make that big strong man into not only a rapist but also a child molester too... what an evil little bitch... all she had to do was do as she was told.
Without european support US can't do anything to iran. That would destabilize our economies as iran can still destroy saudi oil facilities.
Wow.... almost sounds like you are even blaming europe for not holding its end of the deal with Iran...
At the end of the day a group of countries signed a deal... one has broken it and has set in motion actions towards all the other members of the deal to force them to break it too... and you are blaming Iran?
I could understand blaming the US, that is obvious... not only for breaking the deal, but also trying to bully other countries to also break the deal, I could even understanding blaming moral and high and mighty EU for totally ignoring all its own principles and screwing Iran and breaking this deal because of Americas threats for the financial cost American threats will create, but I really don't understand you complaining that it is all Irans fault for not being enough of a bitch of the US.... considering Americas history of peace and fucking love in the region...
Of the countries that signed respect to Iran and Russia and China and the rest I have zero respect for.