RIYADH/DUBAI - Billions of dollars spent by Saudi Arabia on cutting edge Western military hardware mainly designed to deter high altitude attacks has proved no match for low-cost drones and cruise missiles used in a strike that crippled its giant oil industry.
Tehran has denied such accusations, saying that Yemenis opposing Saudi-led forces carried it out. Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi movement is alone in claiming responsibility. Riyadh said preliminary results indicated the weapons used were Iranian but the launch location was still undetermined. The main Saudi air defense system, positioned mainly to defend major cities and installations, has long been the U.S.-made long-range Patriot system.
Two oil pumping stations were hit that month. A transformer station near a desalination plant in Shuqaiq in the south was struck in June. Asked why Saudi defenses did not intercept Saturday’s attack, coalition spokesman Col. Turki al-Malki told reporters: “More than 230 ballistic missiles were intercepted by coalition forces...we have the operational capacity to counter all the threats and protect the national security of Saudi Arabia.”It is unclear if U.S.-built short-range Avengers and medium-range I-Hawks and Swiss short-range Orelikons which the kingdom owns are currently operational.
Intercepting drones possibly worth several hundred dollars with Patriots is also extremely expensive, with each missile costing around $3 million.
stephenkalin s_westall It’s called asymmetric warfare, and has had many forms over the centuries. The concept is old, the technology new.
stephenkalin s_westall With 300 top of the line fighter jets Saudia cannot protect its oilfields. Only thing they need now is men who could fly them.
stephenkalin s_westall Are their computers passwords “123456?”
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: TheEconomist - 🏆 6. / 92 Read more »
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
Source: politico - 🏆 381. / 59 Read more »
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »