PDA

View Full Version : Iran Test-Fires Improved Extended-Range Missile



xinhui
16 Dec 09,, 20:00
Iran Test-Fires Improved Extended-Range Missile - Defense News (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4421883&c=MID&s=AIR)
Iran Test-Fires Improved Extended-Range Missile
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 16 Dec 2009 06:21
Print Print | Print Email

TEHRAN - A defiant Iran has test-fired an improved version of its Sejil 2 medium-range missile, which it says can reach targets inside Israel, prompting a sharp rebuke from Britain.

"It hit the defined target," state television reported without giving further details.
Related Topics

* Middle East & Africa
* Air Warfare

The two-stage Sejil, powered by solid fuel, launched Dec. 16 is capable according to Iran of traveling 1,240 miles (2,000 kilometers), which would put Israel, most Arab states and parts of Europe, including much of Turkey, within range.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the test of the missile was a matter of "serious concern" and makes the case for "moving further on sanctions."

Brown is in Copenhagen for the U.N. climate summit, where he discussed the development with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

"I have expressed to him and he has also expressed concern about the test of a long-range missile by Iran," Brown said, according to his Downing Street office in London.

"This is a matter of serious concern to the international community and it does make the case for us moving further on sanctions.

"We will treat this with the seriousness it deserves."

Iranian Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi said the test was aimed at bolstering Iran's defenses and insisted missiles would not be used for offensive purposes.

"The missile test that we witness today is one ring of our defense capability chain in line with increasing the armed forces' deterrent power," Vahidi was quoted as saying by the Fars news agency.

Iran's missile capability, he added, is "merely defensive and for peace, stability and calm in the region and will not be used against any country."

Vahidi said the latest version of the Sejil was "impossible to destroy" due to the "very high speed" at which it hits the ground. It also has anti-radar capability.

The United States and its regional ally Israel have not ruled out a military option to stop Tehran's controversial nuclear drive.

Iran has in the past threatened to target U.S. bases in the region and to block the strategic Gulf Strait of Hormuz waterway for oil tankers if its nuclear sites are attacked.

Iran is under three sets of U.N. sanctions for its refusal to suspend enrichment and risks a further round after rejecting a U.N.-brokered deal to send its low enriched uranium abroad to be further refined into fuel for a research reactor.

Enrichment lies at the heart of fears over Iran's controversial atomic work as the process to make nuclear fuel can also be used to make the fissile core of an atom bomb in much higher purifications.

Further pressuring Iran, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved sanctions legislation Dec. 15 aimed at forcing Iran to freeze the program by depriving it of petrol.

The measure would empower U.S. President Barack Obama to effectively block firms that supply Iran with refined petroleum products, or the ability to import or produce them at home, from doing business in the United States.

In late September, Iran test-fired the previous version of Sejil 2 (Lethal Stone), along with another similar-range weapon, the Shahab-3, and a host of shorter-range missiles as part of a military exercise.

The tests, which came ahead of key talks between Iran and six world powers in Geneva, drew the ire of the West, with Washington describing them as "provocative."

Kermanshahi
16 Dec 09,, 21:25
Here are the pictures:
http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8809/ImageReports/8809251228/1_8809251228_L600.jpg
http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8809/ImageReports/8809251228/3_8809251228_L600.jpg
http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8809/ImageReports/8809251228/3_8809251228_L600.jpg

Parihaka
16 Dec 09,, 21:33
By the looks of it they've done some refining of the guidance system.

Kermanshahi
16 Dec 09,, 21:38
Here are the different missiles of the recent time:

Shahab-3A:
http://www.payvand.com/news/06/nov/Shahab3-test-fire1.jpg
Shahab-3B:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/images/shahab-3b.jpg
Sejjil-1:
http://gdb.rferl.org/40C0F1B7-E2ED-4ED9-AB5F-10F85AE33938_mw800_mh600.jpg
Sejjil-2: (the one tested in May 2009)
http://www.allempires.net/uploads/2826/Sejjil2ed.JPG
Upgraded Version of Sejjil-2 tested today:
http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8809/ImageReports/8809251228/2_8809251228_L600.jpg

zraver
16 Dec 09,, 21:41
By the looks of it they've done some refining of the guidance system.

More importantly its solid fuel. Ignoring the clap trap about it being too fast to intercept or stealth its neither, solid fuel means the time from mission orders to launch is minutes not hours. The unit also needs fewer support vehicles making it easier to hide among civilian traffic and its more mobile.

Parihaka
16 Dec 09,, 22:16
More importantly its solid fuel. Ignoring the clap trap about it being too fast to intercept or stealth its neither, solid fuel means the time from mission orders to launch is minutes not hours. The unit also needs fewer support vehicles making it easier to hide among civilian traffic and its more mobile.

They launched the same configuration of solid fuel about 4 months ago, the changes to the guidance system from that one are what I was referring to.

zraver
17 Dec 09,, 01:59
They launched the same configuration of solid fuel about 4 months ago, the changes to the guidance system from that one are what I was referring to.

very true but as the cursed bulava program shows solid fuel rockets are not kink free. If Iran masters the technology and can put the system into serial production it poses a considerable threat

Kermanshahi
17 Dec 09,, 08:03
very true but as the cursed bulava program shows solid fuel rockets are not kink free. If Iran masters the technology and can put the system into serial production it poses a considerable threat

Sejjil-1 is already in production, they said they were going to make 70 a year as of 2008, I don't know about the Sejjil-2 though.

Zinja
17 Dec 09,, 23:32
Also this latested one seems to have a narrower base than one launched in May .. .. or is it my eyes?

Parihaka
17 Dec 09,, 23:35
Also this latested one seems to have a narrower base than one launched in May .. .. or is it my eyes?

No, you're seeing straight. That is the refinements in the guidance system.

Zinja
17 Dec 09,, 23:40
No, you're seeing straight. That is the refinements in the guidance system.

Then maybe its not just chest thumping after all, its a genuine advance. All US officials seem to be dismissing it though.

Parihaka
18 Dec 09,, 00:02
Then maybe its not just chest thumping after all, its a genuine advance. All US officials seem to be dismissing it though.

In and of itself it this launch isn't a great advance. The last launch was a test of the mating of a couple of systems which was IMO rather clever and sidestepped a number of issues preventing the Iranians from developing a threat. This launch was a test of the refinement of that approach.
I'd be surprised if this went into mass production because it's size means it can't deliver a very big payload and it's expensive to build.
What it does mean is that they can now go ahead with developing much larger tubes capable of delivering a much larger payload.

chakos
18 Dec 09,, 01:30
Ive got to hand it to the Iranians. Although most of their defence forces are a heap of rubbish their missile capabilities are nothing short of ingenious considering how little real help they have had (from countries with actually succesfull missile programs, North Korea doesnt count)

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 09:52
Ive got to hand it to the Iranians. Although most of their defence forces are a heap of rubbish their missile capabilities are nothing short of ingenious considering how little real help they have had (from countries with actually succesfull missile programs, North Korea doesnt count)

North Korea only helped at the beginning with the basic designs, today Iran has long surpassed North Korea, there is not much they can do for us anymore.
The rest of Iran's defence industry is coming along well, too, but the missiles have the priority, that's why they are the most advanced.

Parihaka
18 Dec 09,, 12:17
North Korea only helped at the beginning with the basic designs, today Iran has long surpassed North Korea, there is not much they can do for us anymore.
The rest of Iran's defence industry is coming along well, too, but the missiles have the priority, that's why they are the most advanced.
Understandable really, it's their last best hope. Can't hope to match the west in terms of conventional army, so missiles mounting whatever warhead offer the best affordable deterent.

Blue
18 Dec 09,, 14:39
Understandable really, it's their last best hope. Can't hope to match the west in terms of conventional army, so missiles mounting whatever warhead offer the best affordable deterent.

Deterent?? Do think they are going to use these for defence?

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 14:51
Deterent?? Do think they are going to use these for defence?

Iran hasn't attacked another country for nearly 300 years, we only fight back when we are attacked. These missiles will only be used if Iran is attacked.

The same however can't be said for America, which attacked Iraq in 2003, Afghanistan in 2001, Serbia in 1999, Haiti in 1994, Iraq in 1991, Panama in 1989, Grenada in 1983, Cuba in 1961, Korea in 1950, have attempted to occupy Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Lebanon, Germany and Japan and have carried out air raids against Libya, Syria, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistani, Iraq, Yugoslavia.

Equilibrium
18 Dec 09,, 15:34
Iran hasn't attacked another country for nearly 300 years, we only fight back when we are attacked. These missiles will only be used if Iran is attacked.

The same however can't be said for America, which attacked Iraq in 2003, Afghanistan in 2001, Serbia in 1999, Haiti in 1994, Iraq in 1991, Panama in 1989, Grenada in 1983, Cuba in 1961, Korea in 1950, have attempted to occupy Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Lebanon, Germany and Japan and have carried out air raids against Libya, Syria, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistani, Iraq, Yugoslavia.

I don't know how trying to bring US foreign policy is relevant to the post, but I believe you are under a misapprehension as to what the situations were surrounding US involvement in many cases you cited:

1941 Japan attacked and Germany declared war on the US

1964- The US sought to stop Communist North Vietnam from conquering the US allied South- the US kept its promise and its ground forces withdrew in 1972 when it did the job.

1983 Lebanon and Syria was in retaliation for the terrorist attacks on the French and US peacekeeping forces in Beirut.

1986- Libya was in retaliation for a series of terroist attacks.

1989- Panama declared war on the U.S. days before the US invasion

1950 North Korea invaded South Korea, a U.S. ally

2001- Afghanistan allowed itself to become a source for the deadliest terrorist attack in US history

1990 Iraq invaded US ally Kuwait

2008- The US began withdrawing its forces from Iraq after the Iraqi government demonstrated its ability to govern the country and the insurgency had been run to ground a year after the US added almost 30,000 more forces.

Lebanon, Somalia were multinational peacekeeping operations

Iran has gone on the attack several times; the theocratic regime seized the US embassy and took its staff hostage in 1979, has attacked US forces by terrorist proxy in Lebanon, Israel by proxy, suspected of bombing the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia and killing 16 US servicemen, sought to affect the global economy with its attacks on international oil shipping in the 1980's, supported insurgencies in the UAE, done the same against US, Iraqi and allied forces since 2004 and bankrolled several terror operations in Europe in the 1980's, threatens to bring ruin to Israel almost daily through its missiles and just today according to news reports, just seized Iraqi oil fields within disputed Iraqi territory. So Iran is not that much of an aggrieved passive neutral.

Blue
18 Dec 09,, 15:42
Iran hasn't attacked another country for nearly 300 years, we only fight back when we are attacked. Uh-huh.


These missiles will only be used if Iran is attacked. Sure they will!! Or either maybe you'll just give them to somebody else so you can continue fighting by proxy.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FckLO8HcNyo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FckLO8HcNyo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


The same however can't be said for America, which attacked Iraq in 2003, Afghanistan in 2001, Serbia in 1999, Haiti in 1994, Iraq in 1991, Panama in 1989, Grenada in 1983, Cuba in 1961, Korea in 1950, have attempted to occupy Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Lebanon, Germany and Japan and have carried out air raids against Libya, Syria, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistani, Iraq, Yugoslavia. Yep! Thats us, spreading hate, tyranny and oppression everywhere we go!! Those poor, poor people!

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 15:45
I don't know how trying to bring US foreign policy is relevant to the post, but I believe you are under a misapprehension as to what the situations were surrounding US involvement in many cases you cited:

1941 Japan attacked and Germany declared war on the US

1964- The US sought to stop Communist North Vietnam from conquering the US allied South- the US kept its promise and its ground forces withdrew in 1972 when it did the job.

1983 Lebanon and Syria was in retaliation for the terrorist attacks on the French and US peacekeeping forces in Beirut.

1986- Libya was in retaliation for a series of terroist attacks.

1989- Panama declared war on the U.S. days before the US invasion

1950 North Korea invaded South Korea, a U.S. ally

2001- Afghanistan allowed itself to become a source for the deadliest terrorist attack in US history

1990 Iraq invaded US ally Kuwait

2008- The US began withdrawing its forces from Iraq after the Iraqi government demonstrated its ability to govern the country and the insurgency had been run to ground a year after the US added almost 30,000 more forces.

Lebanon, Somalia were multinational peacekeeping operations

There are always excuses, always reosons for attack, some of them lies but the fact is you keep attackign other countries and we don't.


Iran has gone on the attack several times; the theocratic regime seized the US embassy and took its staff hostage in 1979,

Which was not attackign another country but was capturing foreing agents inside our country which were plotting a coup.


has attacked US forces by terrorist proxy in Lebanon, Israel by proxy,

No, we supported Lebanese and Palestinian people in their wars against occupiers but still we ourselfes didn't attack anyone.


suspected of bombing the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia and killing 16 US servicemen,

Iran was not responsible for this attack and infact those who executed the attack where not even alligned with Iran.


sought to affect the global economy with its attacks on international oil shipping in the 1980's,

Which was during a war, which Iraq started, and during which Iraq was attack our oil shipping.


supported insurgencies in the UAE,

Which insurgency in the UAE?


done the same against US, Iraqi and allied forces since 2004

Iran never backed Sunni insurgents, only Shi'a militia which are all members of security forces, some of these militia (most notably the Mahdi Army) have clashed with the Americans at some points but this is so much different from attacking another country.


and bankrolled several terror operations in Europe in the 1980's,

All of which were done by Sunni extremists who had nothing to do with Iran.


threatens to bring ruin to Israel almost daily through its missiles

Threatens to do so, if Israel attacks Iran.


and just today according to news reports, just seized Iraqi oil fields within disputed Iraqi territory.

disputed terrotiry = Iranian territory where Saddam laid claim on when he felt strong enough.


So Iran is not that much of an aggrieved passive neutral.

Iran has influence in the regeon but doesn't attack other countries.

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 15:50
Uh-huh.

Sure they will!! Or either maybe you'll just give them to somebody else so you can continue fighting by proxy.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FckLO8HcNyo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FckLO8HcNyo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Yep! Thats us, spreading hate, tyranny and oppression everywhere we go!! Those poor, poor people!

Yes, those poor people, milions have been killed due to American occupation of other countries and you support some of the most brutal dictatorships in the world, including the Saudi Regime, the Turkish Regime, the Zionist REgime, many African dictators, every single military dictatorship that has ever been in South America and Saddam's Regime during the 80s.

And Iran has said things, we've been threatened and returned threats, also have armed our allies in the regeon, but since the 1700s we have never attacked another country. And the last war Iran started, which was in the 1730s was to recapture lands which Turks had seized control of 10 years earlier.

Since our country'es re-establishment in 1501 we've only seeked to live in peace but have been victims of British, Russian, Turkish, Portuguese and American Imperialism.

Blue
18 Dec 09,, 15:54
There are always excuses, always reosons for attack, some of them lies but the fact is you keep attackign other countries and we don't. We attack and kill bad people that are killing innocent people. We don't support people who walk into malls with bombs, yell ALLAH AKBAR and kill all the INFIDELS!




Which was not attackign another country but was capturing foreing agents inside our country which were plotting a coup. Any embassy is supposed soveriegn territory of the country it represents.




No, we supported Lebanese and Palestinian people in their wars against occupiers but still we ourselfes didn't attack anyone.
Whatever it takes to make you feel good.





Iran has influence in the regeon but doesn't attack other countries. Proxy cowards!

Blue
18 Dec 09,, 16:02
Yes, those poor people, milions have been killed due to American occupation of other countries and you support some of the most brutal dictatorships in the world, including the Saudi Regime, the Turkish Regime, the Zionist REgime, many African dictators, every single military dictatorship that has ever been in South America and Saddam's Regime during the 80s. Your history is very skewed. Simply untrue. I haven't the time to even address all that.


but since the 1700s we have never attacked another country. Maily because you haven't been able to. But don't fret, you'll be flingin missiles at Isreal in no time.


Since our country'es re-establishment in 1501 we've only seeked to live in peace but have been victims of British, Russian, Turkish, Portuguese and American Imperialism.

British, Russian, Turkish, and Portuguese, perhaps so, but America hasn't done jack to you guys but you sponsor terrorism and islamic extremism. What do you think your going to get for that?

Dreadnought
18 Dec 09,, 17:20
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: More of A-jad's coolade anyone?

Equilibrium
18 Dec 09,, 17:20
Which insurgency in the UAE?

My apologies, I meant Yemen.

Dreadnought
18 Dec 09,, 17:23
Iran has influence in the regeon but doesn't attack other countries.

The biggest bullshit statment on this entire thread. Many come close but this one takes the prize.:rolleyes:

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 17:23
We attack and kill bad people that are killing innocent people. We don't support people who walk into malls with bombs, yell ALLAH AKBAR and kill all the INFIDELS!

But you support governments which bomb the hell out of thousands of villages with no regard for human life at all.


Any embassy is supposed soveriegn territory of the country it represents.

In any way, it was an act of self-defence. The embassy personell were going across the country creating a spy network and negotiating with military leaders, trying to organise a coup. Something had to be done or else 1953 would be repeated.


Proxy cowards!

And the US doesn't use proxies?:P


Your history is very skewed. Simply untrue. I haven't the time to even address all that.

Untrue that America supports rightist dictaotrships? Untrue that 1 milion Vietnamese civilians and now 1 milion Iraqi and Afghan civilians died due to American occupation?


Maily because you haven't been able to. But don't fret, you'll be flingin missiles at Isreal in no time.

Iran had the most powerfull military in the Middle East during the 60s and 70s and today has the most powerfull military in the Middle East again, but still, we never attack anybody.


British, Russian, Turkish, and Portuguese, perhaps so, but America hasn't done jack to you guys but you sponsor terrorism and islamic extremism. What do you think your going to get for that?

America overthrew Iran's democraticly elected government in 1953 and supported Saddam in the 1980-1988 War which killed 1 milion Iranians (including 250 thousand civilians!) while today they are pushing for international boycots to sop Iranian development

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 17:26
My apologies, I meant Yemen.

You know Yemen used to be a Shi'a state, with a Shi'a government. An invasion by Sunni Egypt overthrew the Shi'a government and put a Sunni regime in place which rules Yemen until today.
Now Shi'a rise against the Sunni dictatorship and you expect Iran, the Shi'a state not to help them? It is our responsibility to sent support to our brothers who fight this tyranical opression.
And America support Yemen's government and the Saudi invaders is the same (agression wise) as Iran supporting the Yemeni Shi'a in their struggle for representation and equal rights.

Dreadnought
18 Dec 09,, 17:32
Your history is very skewed. Simply untrue. I haven't the time to even address all that.

7th, Dont waste your time it will do no good trust me we have been through this enough times on this thread already. Its a lost cause and one of the funniest points made is Iran fighting for the rights of others when they cant even give their own people basic human rights..;)

Zinja
18 Dec 09,, 19:35
There are always excuses,......


.....Which was not attackign another country but was capturing foreing agents inside our country which were plotting a coup.



Now who is making excuses? Funny heh!



No, we supported Lebanese and Palestinian people in their wars against occupiers but still we ourselfes didn't attack anyone.



Yeah, you wouldn't attack anyone because you are spinless cowards sacrificing other people's children to fight an enemy which you yourselves have no guts to face up to. You are happy to cheer up Hezbollah and Hamas to provoke an enemy and when the enemy marches in and clobber them too good and you shout Allah akbah for 1 killed of the enemy for every 100 of your surrogates, and you call that 'victory'.




Threatens to do so, if Israel attacks Iran.


Give us one good reason why Israel shouldn't attack you when you are busy threatening Israel and shouting death to Israel at every pulpit and at the same time embarking on a clandestine nuclear activity? Israel has not taken a single penny from you or interfered with any of your domestic issues yet you can not stop calling them everything evil under the sun. Who is provoking who here?




disputed terrotiry = Iranian territory where Saddam laid claim on when he felt strong enough.


Oil well 4 is well into Iraq territory.

Zinja
18 Dec 09,, 19:45
Iran had the most powerfull military in the Middle East during the 60s and 70s and today has the most powerfull military in the Middle East again,.....

Tic, tic, tic! You are so self-deluded, its unbelievable. Your chest pounding makes you look foolish, honestly, its not funny. Israel would clobber you like baby seals any time any day. Probably Saudi would also have you for breakfast and Turkey for supper. You honestly should thank God for Syria and Iraq that is between you and Israel, and America for restraining them, otherwise someone would be shouting death to Israel from caves by now.

Zinja
18 Dec 09,, 19:54
You know Yemen used to be a Shi'a state, with a Shi'a government. An invasion by Sunni Egypt overthrew the Shi'a government and put a Sunni regime in place which rules Yemen until today.
Now Shi'a rise against the Sunni dictatorship and you expect Iran, the Shi'a state not to help them? It is our responsibility to sent support to our brothers who fight this tyranical opression.
And America support Yemen's government and the Saudi invaders is the same (agression wise) as Iran supporting the Yemeni Shi'a in their struggle for representation and equal rights.

Tell us great Iran defenders of the Muslim faith, where were you when Serbia was slitting throats of your brothers and raping your muslim sisters? Oh yeah, shouting death to Israel at your mosques. Tell us, where were you when your muslim brothers and sisters were being turned white like chalk by Russian weaponry, where were you mighty difenders of the Muslim faith?

You are nothing but hate mongering antisemite racists. You are motivated by nothing other than your fanatical hatred for Jews, thats who you are the likes of you in Iran.

Kermanshahi
18 Dec 09,, 20:09
Now who is making excuses? Funny heh!

Americans are making the excuses but fact is you invade other countries, we don't.


Yeah, you wouldn't attack anyone because you are spinless cowards sacrificing other people's children to fight an enemy which you yourselves have no guts to face up to. You are happy to cheer up Hezbollah and Hamas to provoke an enemy and when the enemy marches in and clobber them too good and you shout Allah akbah for 1 killed of the enemy for every 100 of your surrogates, and you call that 'victory'.

Iranians among the bravest fighters in the world, we don't attack others because we are peacefull but when our brothers are attacked by Zionists in Palestine or Lebanon, we will help them to defend themselfes.


Give us one good reason why Israel shouldn't attack you when you are busy threatening Israel and shouting death to Israel at every pulpit and at the same time embarking on a clandestine nuclear activity? Israel has not taken a single penny from you or interfered with any of your domestic issues yet you can not stop calling them everything evil under the sun. Who is provoking who here?

Let them attack, we'll whipe the floor with them.


Oil well 4 is well into Iraq territory.

Situation is still slightly unclear, but no-one has been killed or injured.

Dreadnought
18 Dec 09,, 20:19
:rolleyes:

Parihaka
18 Dec 09,, 20:39
Deterent?? Do think they are going to use these for defence?

No, I think they are going to use them for aggressive posturing. I don't think they are going to use them in a first strike. Rather they'll use them as fall-back when they increase their attacks on Israel via Hamas and Hezbollah.

Parihaka
18 Dec 09,, 20:40
Iran hasn't attacked another country for nearly 300 years, we only fight back when we are attacked.
Balls. Iran is constantly attacking Israel via the Hezbollah brigades.

Parihaka
18 Dec 09,, 20:43
Well this was a waste of a thread wasn't it. Zinja and Kermanshahi blocked from posting on this thread.

sappersgt
18 Dec 09,, 22:00
Well this was a waste of a thread wasn't it. Zinja and Kermanshahi blocked from posting on this thread.

I see you did not ban them Omnipotent One. You shall be known as Parihaka The Merciful...:biggrin:

Chunder
19 Dec 09,, 01:41
Which was not attackign another country but was capturing foreing agents inside our country which were plotting a coup.


Why don't you Cut the crap. Former U.S Embassy staff have openly said that their awareness of CIA intel on Iran was next to Nil. Nada, None, and are free to speak on the record as they do so. NO evidence was ever turned up whatsoever from the U.S Embassy that they were plotting a coup, because THERE WAS NONE. There is absolutely no evidence with any signatures anywhere whatsoever of any coup being plotted at all.

Furthermore, Foreign Embassies are Sovereign land. You can tell them to GTFO but you can't legally forcably seize them. There are protocols to follow.

A continually perpetuated myth that offers no evidence of existence, other than that based on a catch cry & hysteria of the revolution.

You would think being Students that were educated, they would have some sort of acknowledgement of being able to proove themselves & their sources. But they havn't. Saving face is hard, especially when it makes you look like a dumbass - and thats what that movement was to do. Whats more, during the time where they falsely,illegally & criminally neglected imprisoned staff, they got absolutely nothing of value whatsoever. NOTHING.

Further, although the Marines surrendered with a fight, the intruders of sovereign land got people to lie face down with guns pulled to their heads.

What happened was criminal. No two ways about it. 30 years of trying to make something legitimate by repeating bullshit still hasn't worked, and it really is pathetic.

Don't insult innocent people that were extremely traumatised by fabricating events. It is standard protocol to prevent any unauthorised viewing of government documents. On the record are Embassy staff that continue to say it was a crock.

Chunder
19 Dec 09,, 01:44
Infact stuff it, Go watch frontline.org. Thats supposedly a 'leftist sympathy' machine. Watch their report on it.

MIKEMUN
19 Dec 09,, 02:20
Well this was a waste of a thread wasn't it. Zinja and Kermanshahi blocked from posting on this thread.




Awww Pari,I was watching that....:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

MIKEMUN
19 Dec 09,, 02:23
Iraq asks Iran to withdraw troops from oil field

Iraq has demanded the immediate withdrawal of Iranian troops who it says have crossed into Iraqi territory and taken control of an oil well.

An Iraqi government spokesman condemned the alleged incursion but said Baghdad was committed to resolving the issue by diplomatic means.

The Iraqis say 11 Iranian soldiers were involved and that they had raised the Iranian flag over the Fakkah oil field.

The National Iranian Oil Company denied that there had been an incursion.

But Iraq's Deputy Interior Minister, Ahmed Ali al-Khafaji, said the Iranians were in control of the well.

"[At 1530] 11 Iranian soldiers infiltrated the Iran-Iraq border and took control of the oil well," he told Reuters news agency.

"They raised the Iranian flag and they are still there until this moment."

He said there had been no military response from Iraqi forces.

"We are awaiting orders from our leader," he added.

Similar incidents have happened before along the border, which has never been properly defined since the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s - although relations between the two neighbours are now cordial.



BBC News - Iraq asks Iran to withdraw troops from oil field (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8421971.stm)

NJS21
20 Apr 10,, 08:27
Iran may be able to build a missile capable of striking the United States by 2015, according to an unclassified Defense Department report on Iran's military sent to Congress and released on Monday.

"With sufficient foreign assistance, Iran could probably develop and test an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching the United States by 2015," said the April report, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters.

A classified version was also submitted to Congress.

The timing of advances in Iran's long-range missile technology is being closely watched in Washington, which accuses Tehran of pursuing nuclear weapons and is pushing for a new round of sanctions. Iran denies the charges and says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

"Iran's nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility of developing nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy," the report said.

The U.S. military tried and failed to shoot down a simulated Iranian missile strike on the United States in January, in a botched $150 million exercise over the Pacific Ocean. That attempt failed because of a malfunction in a radar built by Raytheon Co.

It was not immediately clear whether the latest estimate on Iran's missile technology was a departure from a May 2009 National Intelligence Estimate, which deemed Tehran unlikely to have a long-range missile until between 2015 and 2020, according to U.S. officials who saw the report at the time.

The 2009 estimate was revised from an earlier range of between 2012 to 2015.

Representative Ike Skelton, chairman of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, called the report a "comprehensive view of the military situation in Iran."

LEBANON RE-ARMED, TALIBAN SUPPORT

The report also included an assessment of Iran's broader military capabilities and support for insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as groups like Hamas in the Palestinian territories and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

With Iranian support, Hezbollah has replenished its arsenal beyond levels it had in the 2006 war with Israel, the report said, without offering specifics.

"Iran, through its long-standing relationship with Lebanese (Hezbollah), maintains a capability to strike Israel directly and threatens Israeli and U.S. interests worldwide," it said.

The report cited recently uncovered caches of weapons that Iran's Qods Force gave to Afghan militants. They contained "large amounts of Iranian-manufactured weapons," including 107 mm rockets.

It estimated the size of Iran's "Ground Force" at 220,000 personnel and the Revolutionary Guard Corps's "Ground Resistance Forces" at 130,000 personnel. It said Iran had between 1,800 and 1,900 tanks.

President Barack Obama's national security advisers are considering a broad range of options to curb Iran's nuclear program, among them military strikes, if diplomacy and sanctions fail.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on Sunday the military options available to Obama would go "a long way" to delaying Iran's nuclear progress but may not set the country back long-term.

He called a military strike his "last option" right now and has repeatedly warned of potential, unintended consequences of any action against Iran.
( by Phil Stewart and Adam Entous )

S2
20 Apr 10,, 12:02
Reuters is reporting that unclassified DoD sources indicate that Iran may be capable of fielding with unspecified foreign assistance an ICBM capable of reaching America by 2015-

Iranian Missile May Be Capable Of Hitting U.S. By 2015-NYT/Reuters April 19, 2010 (http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/04/19/world/international-us-iran-usa-missile.html?_r=1&ref=world)

Tronic
20 Apr 10,, 17:58
They're blowing this out of proportions. Iran will not be able to hit the US any time soon, and nor are they that stupid that they will do that. I only see Iran trying to build a deterrence. And by that I don't mean actually building the bomb, I mean building the capability so to having the means to build the bomb.

Dreadnought
20 Apr 10,, 18:04
Even when they claim they can they still have to get past the cruisers and more then likely there are a few in Bahrain stationed with the 5th Fleet.

The tech they get will more then likely be NK. Its junk!;)

Stitch
20 Apr 10,, 18:34
Looks like the flight path for any ICBM's launched from Iran at the US would take them right over western Russia; wonder what the Russians think of that? Sounds to me like it's time for us to station some ABM-capable Ticonderoga's in the Arctic Ocean starting in 2015.

zraver
21 Apr 10,, 02:06
Even when they claim they can they still have to get past the cruisers and more then likely there are a few in Bahrain stationed with the 5th Fleet.

The tech they get will more then likely be NK. Its junk!;)

Incorrect, Iran has solid fuel technology, something the Norks lack. The only thing Iran needs at this point is refinement of existing technology. They were able to put a small satellite into orbit. Once they can increase the payload- they are there as far as range goes.

Chogy
21 Apr 10,, 13:42
One must consider the mass of the payload. A tiny "noobie" satellite that chirps morse code might not weigh more than 3 to 10 kilos. A first-effort nuke, on the other hand... I think they can do better than Fat Man or Little Boy, but it will still be a heavy beast.

Marriage of payload to adequate booster, guidance system, many things must come together to deliver a nuke with any reasonable accuracy. I think they are years away, assuming they have the nuclear material right now, which I don't believe they do.

And conventional payloads simply aren't that scary.

Dreadnought
21 Apr 10,, 14:21
Incorrect, Iran has solid fuel technology, something the Norks lack. The only thing Iran needs at this point is refinement of existing technology. They were able to put a small satellite into orbit. Once they can increase the payload- they are there as far as range goes.


The beginning:

EARLY MISSILE AMBITIONS
Iran's determination to acquire and produce ballistic missiles grew out of its war with Iraq in the 1980s. Tehran found itself ill-prepared to retaliate against Iraq's missile attacks on Iranian cities. Tehran decided that, for its own protection, it had to achieve self-reliance in missile production.

Scud B and Scud C
Iran's first efforts to achieve this aim focused on the import and production of short-range Scud-type missiles. In 1985, the then-head of Iran's Parliament, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, led a high-level delegation to Libya, Syria, North Korea, and China. As a result of the trip, Iran obtained Scud missiles from Libya and North Korea, and later acquired rocket components and know-how from both North Korea and China.

Iran's first batch of Scuds (known as Scud Bs) arrived from Libya in 1985. These single-stage, nuclear-capable, Soviet-origin missiles use liquid fuel and can fly about 280-300 km when carrying a 770-1,000 kg warhead. Before long, Iran had depleted its small supply. It then turned to North Korea in hope of finding a new supplier. Tehran offered to help finance Pyongyang's missile program in exchange for technology transfer and an option to buy North Korean missiles as soon as they came off the production line.

The first batch of North Korean Scud Bs was delivered in July 1987, and it was reported that the delivery took place even before the missiles were available to North Korea's own army. Over the next seven months, Iran imported 90-100 missiles, most of which were promptly used in combat. According to the U.S. Defense Department, Iran fired nearly 100 Scuds at Iraq between 1985 and 1988.

After the war ended, Tehran continued its missile efforts. By late 1990, Tehran had negotiated to buy North Korea's newest missile offering, the Scud C. U.S. intelligence began to detect shipments of North Korean Scud C missiles moving to Iran in 1991. The liquid-fuel Scud C is longer and wider than the Scud B, which suggests that the fuel tanks were expanded to hold more propellant. It has an estimated range of more than 500 km when carrying a 700 kg warhead. According to press reports, Iran ordered some 200 Scud Bs and Scud Cs from North Korea in 1991. Iran also succeeded in test-firing what U.S. intelligence identified as a Scud C in 1991.


In early 1993, an additional North Korean shipment of Scud Cs, along with several launching pads, was reported by the Israeli media. According to U.S. intelligence, Pyongyang also supplied Scud production technology. "Iran's relationship with North Korea follows the usual pattern," said a U.S. State Department official at the time, "you first buy entire missiles and the kits to assemble missiles, and then you learn to make them on your own – designs and blueprints come with the package." According to the official, North Korean specialists worked on the ground in Iran to help Iranian scientists master the basic steps of Scud production. In 1993, Iranian Minister of Defense Akbar Torkan announced that "our technological capability is such that if we require similar missiles [to the Scud-B] then we can manufacture them ourselves."

According to The Middle East Military Balance, an annual survey of military might published by Israel's Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, Iran was already thought to have acquired or built some 300 Scud B missiles and 100 Scud Cs by 1994. The Central Intelligence Agency, in a report on missile proliferation in 2003, estimated that Iran possessed "a few hundred" short-range ballistic missiles at that time. According to a threat assessment in 2010 by the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, Iran's inventory of ballistic missiles had grown to be the largest in the Middle East.

LIQUID FUEL TECHNOLOGY

Shahab-3
In July 1998, Iran first tested its imported version of North Korea's medium-range No-Dong missile. This single-stage, liquid-fueled, road mobile, nuclear-capable ballistic missile became known as the Shahab-3 in Iran. According to Iranian officials and U.S. and Russian technical experts, the original Shahab-3 could carry a 1,000 kg payload 1,300 km. Iran subjected the missile to at least seven test flights, with mixed results, between July 1998 and July 2003, when Iran declared the missile operational and delivered it to the armed forces. After these initial steps, Iran has continued to test variants of the missile. According to Uzi Rubin, Iran tested a longer-range version of the missile, in 2004, with a much revised baby bottle-shaped reentry vehicle. Analysts report that Iran displayed two new Shahab-3 variants -- assessed to have increased ranges of 1,500 to 2,000 km—at a 2004 military parade in Tehran.

The Shahab-3, like the North Korean No-Dong missile from which it is derived, is a scaled-up version of the Scud B and Scud C missiles, and shares the Scud's weaknesses. The Scud B is only accurate to within about a kilometer of its target at a range of 300 km. Because accuracy diminishes with range for a given guidance system, the accuracy of the Shahab-3 at a range of 1,300 km has been estimated at no better than three kilometers of its target, making it of little use as a battlefield weapon. With such low accuracy, it could not be counted on to hit troops or even an airfield. An Israeli news source reported in 2009, that Iran is believed to have over a hundred Shahab-3 missiles. According to a 2009 assessment by the U.S. Air Force’s National Air and Space Intelligence Center, Iran has fewer than fifty launchers for all variants of the Shahab-3.

BM-25
In November 2007, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that North Korea had sold Iran a missile with a range of 2,500 kilometers. This appeared to confirm earlier press reports that Iran had acquired the BM-25, a modified version of the Soviet SS-N-6, which is a single-stage, liquid-fueled, submarine-launched ballistic missile with a range of 2,400 to 3,000 km and the ability to carry a nuclear warhead.

Space Launch Vehicle
In October 2005, Russia launched Iran's first satellite, the Sina-1, on a Russian rocket. From that point, Iran began to pursue the technology needed to launch a satellite into space on its own. February 2008 saw the inauguration of an Iranian space center in Semnan Province, marked by the test launch of Iran's Kavoshgar 1 research rocket. Iran's first space launch vehicle, the Safir, failed during an August 2008 flight test, but the following February, Iran demonstrated how rapidly it was progressing by successfully launching a two-stage space rocket, the Safir-2, and placing Iran’s first domestically-built satellite, Omid, into low earth orbit. According to news reports, the Safir-2 is a 22-meter-long, liquid-fueled rocket with a diameter of about 1.25 meters, which is sufficient to accommodate a nuclear warhead.

As a result of the launch, international concern over Iran’s ballistic missile program increased exponentially. According to the findings of a joint assessment by U.S. and Russian technical experts, the successful launch showed that Iran “can exploit low-thrust rocket motors to build a two-stage rocket, and that it has qualified engineers who are able to make good use of the technology that is available to them.” According to the U.S. Air Force’s National Air and Space Intelligence Center, Iran’s space launch vehicle could “serve as a testbed for long-range ballistic missile technologies.” The U.S.-Russian joint assessment calculated that “the Safir could be modified with a different upper rocket stage so that it could carry a warhead weighing roughly 1,000 kg to a range of about 2,000 km.”

SOLID FUEL TECHNOLOGY

In addition to its Scud and Shahab missiles, which rely on liquid fuel technology, Iran has developed solid fuel technology, which is more useful militarily.

Short-range Missiles
One of Iran's earliest steps in this direction was to produce the "Mushak" short-range surface-to-surface missile. A U.S. official compared this primitive solid-fuel missile to the unguided Soviet Frog missile and to the Pakistani Hatf 1 missile, which flies about 80 km. The first Mushak, also known as the Iran-130, was test-fired in early 1988, and was designed to fly to a maximum range of 130 km. By March 1988, five Mushak missiles had been fired at Iraq during the War of the Cities. And by August 1988, Tehran had test-fired a 160 km-range Mushak and announced that mass production would soon follow. Iran claimed that the Mushak was designed and produced without foreign support, but Chinese assistance was suspected.

Iran also possesses the solid-fueled, Chinese-made, 150 km-range CSS 8 (also called the Tondar 69) and a second solid-fuel missile called the Fateh 110. Both are short-range, tactical missiles. Iran claims to have successfully flight tested the Fateh 110 in September 2002. It is reportedly a single-stage missile with at least a 200 km range. Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who has served as head of Iran's Parliament and as President of Iran, asserted that Iran itself produced the solid fuel propellant for the missile. In addition, Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani announced in January 2000 that Iran had commissioned projects to produce the solid fuel ingredients HTPB resin, aluminum powder and potassium chlorite at the Ministry of Defense's Education and Research Institute. The Aerospace Industries Organization, which reportedly manages a number of missile plants, claims to be capable of producing "many types of liquid and solid propellant." According to an Iranian media report, the Aerospace Industries Organization opened a plant to mass produce the Fateh 110 in mid-September 2002, after completing a successful test flight. Iran reported another successful test of the Fateh 110 in September 2009.

Sejjil and Sejjil-2
On May 20, 2009, Iran successfully tested the Sejjil-2, a two-stage, solid-fuel, surface-to-surface missile. U.S. officials confirmed Iran’s claim that the missile’s range is between 2,000 to 2,500 km. A May 2009 joint threat assessment by U.S. and Russian technical experts estimated the rocket motors for each of the two stages are alike except for their length. The assessment also estimated an overall weight of roughly 21 tons, if the missile were carrying a 1-ton warhead, which the Sejjil "should be able to carry…to a range of about 2200 km.” Further advances on the Sejjil continue. Iran announced that it test-fired an upgraded version in December 2009. According to an Iranian official, this version boasted a shorter launch time.

MATING WARHEAD TO MISSILE

In 2008, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that it had been shown documents containing evidence of high explosives testing, and work done to redesign the inner payload chamber of the Shahab-3 re-entry vehicle to accommodate a "nuclear device." This effort was known as "Project 111." The IAEA has repeatedly asked Iran to explain this evidence, but Iran has claimed that the evidence was fabricated.

CLAIMS BY THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF RESISTANCE OF IRAN

The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), an exiled Iranian opposition group that is listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government, has made a number of claims about Iran's missile program. Its claims should be viewed with caution. Nevertheless, its information has sometimes proved reliable. In the summer of 2002, the NCRI disclosed information about a number of Iranian nuclear sites that were either unknown or poorly understood at the time. The information proved accurate and triggered a strong international reaction.

The NCRI has claimed recently that, according to information from the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), the actual range of Iran's two-stage solid-fuel missiles, is 2,500 to 3,000 km and that the missiles are capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Because this would put several European countries within range of the missiles, the NCRI asserts that the Iranian government has deliberately concealed the true range to avoid international reactions such as heightened sanctions. According to the NCRI, the solid fuel missiles are manufactured by Bakeri Industry Group, which has been sanctioned by the United States and by the U.N. Security Council. The NCRI also asserts that Iran's liquid-fuel missiles are made by Hemmat Aerospace Industry Group. The U.S. government has not confirmed any of these claims.