Not sure what planet you’re living on. In addition to India, Pakistan, Israel and South Africa there are any number of nations that could make nukes if they felt like it: Japan, Korea, Turkey, Germany, Sweden, Brazil, Australia, etc. etc. Nukes are easy; modern combat aircraft are much more difficult.

India has not been able to make any nuclear power plant ever since Canada and the US terminated their nuclear assistance to India in 1974.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_India

Nuke is not easy if you don’t have the know how of how to make it.

India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel are all armed with nuclear weapons.

As for victors of WWII – that’s now purely historical and not really relevant to 21st century.

And also up to 1971 Republic of China (Taiwan) was the Security Council member and not PRC.

They don’t have thermonukes. They also cannot manufacture nukes on their own. Taiwan is a rogue state for going up against the people. Taiwan is not a legitimate country. As for WW2, it will forever be remembered as the deadliest war of humanity and the war that ended all major wars.

You actually believe Iranians with their QF313 BSplane, their knock offs of 1970s designs and grand statements of superiority?

And it would appear Iranian definition of advanced avionics is commercially available systems for Cessna’s.

You also completely disregard such things as jammers etc as well.

Jammers don’t always work, and they are not effective against phased array radars. They can also be destroyed by MANPAD.

Iranian AD is in even more of dire straights than Syrias, as it’s had no major upgrading since 1979. All of their mainstay systems are thoroughly obsolete (MIM-23, SA-5, Crotale based Chinese knockoffs).

It’s cutting edge is literally a handful of SA-22 and Tor’s which I doubt they would deploy to Syria – they are after all interested in defending their own country too.

So Iran gets involved, it’ll lose it’s air force and it’s AD network and probably suffer a big delay to it’s nuclear program.

On the contrary, MIM-23B sold to Iran in the 1970s is in the same era as F-15 and F-16 which Israel still uses. If the US imposes no fly over Syria, S300 would be pouring into Syria and Iran. The last thing the US wants is to mess with the Land of the Aryans.

As for MANPADS, so far they’ve not proven a threat to high flying jets.

True, but for urban combat F-16 jets would have fly low where they are vulnerable to MANPADs.

Oh and all those systems are not stopping Israelis flying in and out and bombing at will. And they’re certainly using F-15 and F-16s.

The Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets got nowhere near Syrian airspace. They used long range stand off missiles and struck while they were over Lebanon.

EA-18G, EA-6B

They are no good against phased array radars, plus EA-6B have been shot down in 1991 over Iraq.

It is not the case that the main combatants in the Syria conflict are from Syria. Syria has a large number of Iraqi expats fighting in the Syrian military. Unlike the Spanish Civil War where there was a small but significant International Brigade fighting on the side of the Republicans, at least a third of the combatants fighting in the Syria conflict are foreigners, and hence it cannot be called a civil war.

Back to the topic, air power is not effective for urban combat, especially house to house and street to street fighting, which is why the Syrian air force has not been a playing a big role in the Syria conflict.