were resistant to enemy penetration was impressive and challenging to destroy. The best way for the attacker was to avoid engagement and bypass the forts. Even today, such an approach still works if possible by avoiding conflict with the defenders. But if no way to bypass the
castle, it could only be destroyed through tunneling with special combat engineering equipment and remote fire or through long-term and extremely costly and less successful sieges.
On the other hand, if the enemy is able to damage the tower and ramparts of the castle from
far away, and in a safe and uncontested area without coming close to the firing range of the castle, and maintain this presence for a significant period of time, the bell of defeat will be heard. In such a situation, the best thing to do for defenders is to make remote areas
unsafe for the enemy.
Today, the air/sea forces of an adversary such as the United States, with all the available quality and quantity, have the ability to minimize the presence of its main forces in heavily protected and even lightly protected areas using long-range weapons
and establishing monitoring and aerial battle managing capability far from the frontier in an uncontested sky.
Even if the Islamic Republic of Iran's defense fortresses is armed with long-range missiles more than 200 kilometers, they will not last for a long time.
Here, an element such as the Karrar interceptor, which is so simple and cheap to produce in large quantity, that it is the training target of numerous exercises, is noteworthy. On the other hand, Karrar has a significant flight range, a low RCS, and the ability to be armed with
a variety of air-to-air weapons, ECM equipment, and various sensors that can push the enemy’s border of the uncontested sky back hundreds of kilometers.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh