Unlike the SANG, the Pasdaran is intended to be used as a 'shock force' or in areas of critical importance and less for internal security. They are a much bigger institution than the SANG, which much more influence and political pull. They also have wide business interests and run charities.
Effect of the massive Saudi military purchases on the region?
- Thread starter Eeshaan
- Start date
- Status
Beatmaster
New Member
I see.
However those elites, could with proper training be a real pain during a war.
Hypothetical speaking speaking lets assume that the main army is defeated and the elites hide in cities and would fight a guerrilla /C-ops war then i believe this could prove to be most difficult, also in a war i can imagine that their expertise can be used to seriously inflict damage to enemy units and strategic positions.
Or am i all wrong here?
My knowledge of the IRGC is limited, but I always thought that the majority of the IRGC were volunteer troops like the gendarmerie. Can this force really be used as an effective shock force against a very well equipped Saudi military.
I guess they could in they way the Iraqi militias did when the regime was falling. During the 8 year war they were used to shore up positions that were in danger of collapsing and were used to spearhead offensives or counter attacks. Unlike the Iranian military [especially the air force], which contained a lot officers who were seen as Shah supporters, the Pasdaran were seen as entirely politically reliable and dedicated to the cause. Over the years, elements of Pasdaran have also been operating in Lebanon.
They are volunteer troops but the roles they perform are very different than the gendamerie or the SANG. They have a much greater say in the overall scheme of things and much more political pull. From the perspective of the Iranian leadership, they are the most reliable. Whether they are the most capable remains to be seen. They have or had a mini air force [F-7s, light planes and ultralights] and small craft but still lack the firepower of the army, they are meant to complement the army not replace it.
As a Saudi who has grown tired of this BS. I mean really really tired would like to tell people things change. Things are not the same as it was 20 years ago. hell it is not the same as it was 5 years ago even.
We have went way beyond that now. But people just have stiff heads filled with rocks that won't accept the change of the time.
Instead of giving defensive smart ass comments, perhaps it would have been better if you had explained as to how exactly things have changed. If you're stating as a fact that Saudi is able to operate its high tech gear without foreign in country support and that I was totally wrong in saying that Saudi still had large numbers of foreign contractors, it would have been better to have set the record straight to explain how things have changed and to explain how I was wrong. Btw, I NEVER implied that Saudi was incapable of positive change. Since you're a Saudi and are better informed of new developments within the Saudi Armed Forces, by all means please enlighten us....
''Army units also had Pakistani and other nationals, following them in the field to conduct basic maintenance, such as changing dust filters in tanks, etc. ''
If you care to notice, the key word here was HAD. I never implied or stated that this was still the case.
Last edited:
Okay fair enough:
Well for one you clearly gave the impression of Saudis being incapable to operate all their gear. And I am fair guy and I do have to agree that in the past our armed forces for all intents and purposes sucked.... I mean really sucked.
However since then after the harsh lesson of the Gulf War the previous purpose of the Army changed from "Royal corruption cash cow" to Army. In the past KSA was under populated under manned and under gunned. Right now it is the opposite actually. Sure we are not the best in the world or we are as good as Israeli's professionalism but we are damn close.
I'll be the first to admit that most of what I know about the Saudi military is from Pollack's 'Arabs At War', which was written years ago. Apart from articles in magazines such Janes or IDR, unfortunately there is not much info on the Saudi military available in English.
Well and you won't see much either. I mean you have to look no further than the latest Houthi conflict to see how much things changed bare in mind this is the first totally independent Saudi fight since 1936. It showed that the biggest flaw remains to be junior officers leadership skills. Technical and training proved to be excellent. Special Forces, Air Force and Navy did their operations flawlessly. The army lacked in effective leadership skills which caused many soldiers their lives.
But in reality the whole purpose of the conflict was to test out the arms forces and see what needs to be tweaked and what are our short comings and it revealed them and since then steps have been taken to negate these problems.
People don't realize but KSA wants to be the Police of the Middle East. As the USA is pulling out of Iraq and will be focusing on the Pacific front there will be a power vacuum in the Middle East that will be filled with either KSA or Iran...I mean today I read an article that compulsory military service for all Saudi citizens will be implemented "Soon". So don't be surprised if you see more deals and more military products coming out of KSA in the near future.
Now this power vacuum. How true is it? Look at a map of the Middle east. Western Forces will never leave the middle east my firend.Look at those in charge who set policy in the middle east. Aren't they all regimes or clone governments? Here is the List of pro western regimes:
Saudi Arabia- pro western dictatorship
UAE
Qatar
Jordan
Israel
Lebanon
Egypt-military dictatorship
Turkey
Pakistan
Afghanistan
Kuwait
Iraq
Yemen
Baharain
This leaves only Iran and its "proxies" :
Iran
Syria
Sudan
Lebanon
Iraq {notice I mention Iraq and Lebanon here also}
So western countires will always have their energy interest secured in the Middle east whilst reducing their military force in the middle east. Its not so much the military force that props these regimer but more so international political support. Some of these "kings" could be easily overthrown but too who's benefit?Its a similar suituation to Africa, western colonist have left but they haven't left.
Due to the increase Iranian influence these arab regimes fear freedom coming to their land, hence they also seek to increase internal political stability and military power as they as a miniority rule over the majority.
Saudi Arabia- pro western dictatorship
UAE
Qatar
Jordan
Israel
Lebanon
Egypt-military dictatorship
Turkey
Pakistan
Afghanistan
Kuwait
Iraq
Yemen
Baharain
This leaves only Iran and its "proxies" :
Iran
Syria
Sudan
Lebanon
Iraq {notice I mention Iraq and Lebanon here also}
So western countires will always have their energy interest secured in the Middle east whilst reducing their military force in the middle east. Its not so much the military force that props these regimer but more so international political support. Some of these "kings" could be easily overthrown but too who's benefit?Its a similar suituation to Africa, western colonist have left but they haven't left.
Due to the increase Iranian influence these arab regimes fear freedom coming to their land, hence they also seek to increase internal political stability and military power as they as a miniority rule over the majority.
Notwithstanding its policy of placing greater importance in the Asia Pacific region, the U.S. will continue to have a strong military presence in the Middle East as it is an area of vital importance. Off topic but my personal opinion is that a lot of problems would be solved if Western troops were to completely vacate Arab lands - whether they will actually do this and whether such a move would actually be welcomed by certain Arab governments is of course a completely different story.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/03/201232710543250236.html
The View From Riyadh [Patrick Seale]
http://www.agenceglobal.com/article.asp?id=2734
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/03/201232710543250236.html
The View From Riyadh [Patrick Seale]
http://www.agenceglobal.com/article.asp?id=2734
I fail to see how the Lebanon could be described as an Iranian proxy. Sure Iran has a lot of influence in Lebanon via Hezbollah and the Shi community but it has not managed to create Lebabon into a 'proxy', for a number of reasons.
Last edited:
I don't think that's true. I think Saudi want's to impose policy and broker power, but from behind the scenes. The huge buildup is (imho) defensive and aimed at Iran. Saudi's strong support for inclusion of Jordan in the GCC is, some say, born out of a desire to use Jordan's professional army in a policing role as and when needed. I think Saudi would have much rather had Jordan at the front of the spear in Bahrain. Jordan, needless to say, isn't arguing.
Cool story bro. LoL
I as a Saudi am happy with this "Dictatorship" as you put it. Me as well as 99% of Saudi population so your argument fails.
The inclusion of Jordan is so GCC won't be restricted to Arabia but will also have land in the Levant. Also in the event of an Israeli adventure on Jordan it has to think in terms of the entire GCC power coming after it. We gave them a peace plan a decade ago but they choose war and if need be a war they will get.
This build up is not defensive. Not defensive at all. If you analyze the gear and if your military knowledge is not sufficient read articles about it you will see that it is an extremely offensive capability this build up is going. Not forgetting the SANG which will take the main role as the protector of the home land to free up the Army for any future operation.
You might say that I am dreaming but I invite you to take all the 2s here and add them together and you will get your answer.
Equinox
New Member
There are few pieces of military equipment and capability that can't be both defensive and offensive. It all depends on the intent, but military equipment itself isn't really an indicator, it's the rhetoric behind it.
surpreme
Member
The deal that the Saudi just made with US has the maintainance crews training in the US. I was reading some posts and notice someone from Saudi Arabia said things has change can you show me prove that the Saudi has made changes such as limited contractors from foriegn countries. During the time I was in Saudi Arabia in the 90's I saw lots foriegn contractors. I know it been 20 years ago I haven't heard or read any chances yet unless it something I didn't see or read. After sitting down talking with someone from Saudi he did mention that alot Saudis are take up techincial skill in foreign countries. This new deal is the only time I recalled where the maintainance crews will be trained to take care of the new RSAF F-15SA. Also the eurofighter or Typoon the Saudis suppose to start producing some of them in Saudi Arabia. With this being done at this time thing will change for the Saudis as more Saudis recieve more techinical skills. My conclusion is the Saudi military purchase will effect the region as they become self relience. My estimate is in about 5 years there will be a different in the region. If they get a deal to produce tanks in Saudi watch out that will be a game changer.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #119
Well that's exactly what the question is about. A game changer for what game ?
Iran ? Is it becoming so much of a CONVENTIONAL military threat to the region that this massive buildup is required ?
Of course, nuclear talks aren't getting anywhere, but the economic sanctions, international pressure, outdated military equipment, faltering economy and unpopular regime aren't exactly helping strengthen Iran in any way, other than the last nuclear option they have left.
One wonders what exactly do the Iranians have to gain by arming themselves with nuclear weapons in such a volatile region.
Due to the nature of the relationship between the Gulf States and Uncle Sam, any threat to these countries by Iran will lead to a U.S. military response and the the Gulf States will not be placed in a position where they will have to take military steps on their own. The Gulf States know this but the arms build up or modernisation of their militaries provides them with reassurance, prestige and keeps the large defence companies happy - contributing to the relationship with various countries
. Traditionally [and I've stated this before in previous posts], apart from their longstanding fears/concerns with Iran, the main concern of many Arab countries were other Arab countries and internal security.Regime change. The Iranians have seen what happened to Saddam and Gadaffi and may be convinced, with justification, that having nukes will be the only thing preventing the entry of Western military units, with Arab allies in tow, into Tehran and the formation of a Western 'friendly' Iranian government [which brings to mind why isn't there any mention by the U.S of striking North Korea since it is known that this country, unlike Iran actually has a nukes programme and has nuke devices]. And bear in mind that Iran is already surrounded by countries that play host to the U.S. military and on its Western flank, faces a whole list of Sunni Arab countries that supported Saddam during his 8 year war with Iran - a war which devastated Iran and led to thousands of deaths. The Iranians are also viewing the situation in Syria [Iran's only Arab ally] with much concern. as well as calls for regime change there and support to the rebels by a number of countries.
Last edited:
- Status