It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran builds Merkava MBT

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Iran has supplied Hizbollah with a new tank system, many suspect it is an exact replica of the Merkava MBT.



DEBKAfile Exclusive: Iranian military instructors have slipped into Lebanon with new missile to teach Hizballah how better to destroy Israeli tanks
November 28, 2005, 9:23 PM (GMT+02:00)

The clandestine arrival of scores of Iranian Revolutionary Guards specialist instructors via Damascus is Tehran’s response to the shortcomings displayed by the Hizballah when it bombarded northern Israel on Nov. 21 - DEBKAfile’s military sources reveal.

Our exclusive sources disclose they stole into the Hizballah’s Lebanese Beqaa Valley bases complete with two new weapons systems.

One is the new Iranian Motemared (Rebel) anti-tank missile, exposed for the first time in the Middle East. The IDF is not familiar with this weapon, beyond that it is the Iranian version of the Russian K and capable of piercing protective anti-explosive belts 1100-1200 mm thick. It is an all-weather weapon, day-or-night and wire-guided. The missile does not work well where there are tall trees, high electricity wires or water pipes, but is at peak effectiveness in open country of hills and valleys such as South Lebanon.

The surprise the Iranians brought with them was a mockup of an Israel Merkava (Chariot) tank. No one knows where it was manufactured or from what materials. Intelligence watchers report it is an exact replica of the real thing.
...............
This episode also shows how closely Israel’s armed forces are watched by Iran and the speed at which its strategists are capable of drawing operational lessons.

www.debka.com...


Iranians proved to be far more advanced than expected in nuclear technology when IAEA inspectors went into Iran. I was just wondering if they have more sophisticated undeclared weapons systems ?

Are we under-estimating iranian military capabilities when it comes to military hardware?

Could they one day catch up with US/ China/ Russia in terms of military hardware?

Could they create an upset in case of US invasion?

btw, how did they smuggle a tank into lebanon?




RESPECT

[edit on 16-12-2005 by proprog]

[edit on 16-12-2005 by proprog]

[edit on 16-12-2005 by proprog]




posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 05:08 AM
link   
The advanced Iranian nuclear technilogy is actualy Russian nuclear tech given by Iran.

Russia is giving everyone everything.

To Iran, their nuclear tech, reactor, scientists, training.
To China their space tech, cosmonauts, training
Rusia is selling aircraft carriers....

So it's really not developed by Iran, but rather gained from their partnership with Russia.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by proprog
Iran has supplied Hizbollah with a new tank system, many suspect it is an exact replica of the Merkava MBT.

Wait! sarcasm on I thought Iran was not connected to terrorism? I thought Iran was not connected to Hezbollah, a recognized terrorist organization? sarcasm off






Iranians proved to be far more advanced than expected in nuclear technology when IAEA inspectors went into Iran.

So? Still for peaceful use, huh?




I was just wondering if they have more sophisticated undeclared weapons systems ?

Hardly.




Are we under-estimating iranian military capabilities when it comes to military hardware?

Neither the EU, US, or Israel is under-estimating nothing concerning Iran's military. This crap reminds of the same over-hyping of Saddam's and Iraq's vaunted military machine prior to the run-up of the 1st Gulf War.





Could they one day catch up with US/ China/ Russia in terms of military hardware?

Hardly.





Could they create an upset in case of US invasion?

Anyone can create an upset of anyone in military terms.





btw, how did they smuggle a tank into lebanon?


Umm, probably the same way that suicide bombers smuggle in their suicide belts?




This DEBKA story has not been substantiated by any media news source, including Israeli news media sources. If true, I am sure that Israel will dispense with this Iranian copy in short order.







seekerof

[edit on 16-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 06:23 AM
link   
good for Iran it seems to be doing what the US does best and that supply and train militant groups that appose goverments that it doesnt like


Sep

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Wait! sarcasm on I thought Iran was not connected to terrorism? I thought Iran was not connected to Hezbollah, a recognized terrorist organization? sarcasm off


Can you by any chance provide me with the list of countries that recognise Hazbollah as a terror organization?




So? Still for peaceful use, huh?


If there no bomb is found, and no advance technology is found to be used for developing nuclear weapons then yes, it is used for peaceful purposes.





Neither the EU, US, or Israel is under-estimating nothing concerning Iran's military. This crap reminds of the same over-hyping of Saddam's and Iraq's vaunted military machine prior to the run-up of the 1st Gulf War.


Dear Seekerof, I have great respect for you and I didn’t expect to read aggressive remarks like this being written by you. Gulf war.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Can you by any chance provide me with the list of countries that recognise Hazbollah as a terror organization?

Britain, the US and that seems like thats all. Well besides Israel. EU wont claim Hezbollah as Terrorist Org.

The EU is wierd on how they distinguish groups though.



Earlier this month, Dutch Foreign Minister Bernard Bot called for the organization in its entirety to be placed on the EU's list of terrorist organizations in a bid to dry up its financing from Europe. The EU requires a unanimous vote to place any organization or individual on the terrorist list, and five EU states -- Belgium, France, Greece, Spain and Sweden oppose deeming Hezbollah a terrorist group. Only the United Kingdom officially recognizes Hezbollah as a terrorist organization




If there no bomb is found, and no advance technology is found to be used for developing nuclear weapons then yes, it is used for peaceful purposes.

Explain to me why an oil rich country would need nuclear power? Just because something isnt found does not mean it isnt there and it surely dont mean its advances in nuclear research are being used for peaceful purposes.



Dear Seekerof, I have great respect for you and I didn’t expect to read aggressive remarks like this being written by you. Gulf war.

Truth be told Iraq had the 4th largest military int he world leading up to the Gulf War in 91'.





[edit on 16-12-2005 by Dreamz]


Sep

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dreamz
Britain, the US and that seems like thats all. Well besides Israel. EU wont claim Hezbollah as Terrorist Org.

The EU is wierd on how they distinguish groups though.



Earlier this month, Dutch Foreign Minister Bernard Bot called for the organization in its entirety to be placed on the EU's list of terrorist organizations in a bid to dry up its financing from Europe. The EU requires a unanimous vote to place any organization or individual on the terrorist list, and five EU states -- Belgium, France, Greece, Spain and Sweden oppose deeming Hezbollah a terrorist group. Only the United Kingdom officially recognizes Hezbollah as a terrorist organization


So would you or seekerof agree that Hezbollah isn’t exactly a globally recognized terror group, since only (according to you, I haven’t checked myself) only three countries recognize Hizbollah as a terror group.


Originally posted by Dreamz
Explain to me why an oil rich country would need nuclear power?


Perhaps you should ask the former US President, Gerald Ford, who made clear that in order for Iran to progress Iran needed nuclear technology. Because of this advice, Iran planned to build one of the largest nuclear industries in the world in Iran. It was only stopped as a result of the revolution. Nothing has changed since then, except that Iran's need for electricity has risen sharply due to the doubling of Iran's population during the 80s from 30 million to over 60 million and the further industrialization of the country. In order for Iran to keep up with the electricity consumption demands of the people they have to produce electricity and that is what they have been doing. During the course of the 20 year plan Iran has the goal of increasing its electricity production by introducing wind farms, building dams, making use of solar energy and most importantly of all, utilizing Iran's uranium ores by providing the country with nuclear energy. Most other projects have advanced rapidly during the administration of Khatami and it is only the nuclear sector that is lagging behind due to international pressure, which will hopefully cease soon enough.


Originally posted by Dreamz
Just because something isnt found does not mean it isnt there and it surely dont mean its advances in nuclear research are being used for peaceful purposes.


Well recent record of US intelligence, I have trouble believing that the leaders of Iran are perusing a nuclear weapons program. The intelligence provided by the US is very similar to the intelligence provided before the Iraq war and as Bush said this week they proved to be incorrect. Hence unless solid, concrete evidence can be put forward to prove that Iran is making nuclear weapons, then the international community as well as some sections of the US population would not go along with the US.


Originally posted by Dreamz Truth be told Iraq had the 4th largest military int he world leading up to the Gulf War in 91'.


Iraq had a large number of poorly armed infantry at the time. They had low moral and were ready to crack under any pressure. Even Saddam himself didn’t put up much of a fight and sent his best planes to neighbouring countries. Iran would be different in that it has great political influence all throughout the middle east. Iran has good relationship with powerful groups in Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran's current missiles are far superior to the Iraqi ones in the 91 war. Iran actually has a navy, which may give the US a bloody nose in case of any invasion as well as powerful anti-ship missiles (better than anything Iraq ever had). Iran's infantry is better armed. They have anti-tank and portable anti-aircraft missiles, which are superior to anything in Iraqi possession in the 1991 war. The helicopter fleet of Iran is one of the biggest in the world, and its quality is far more advance that its Iraqi counterparts in the 90s. So over the comparison is in my opinion invalid.

Having said all this, it was not what he said that I objected to, because I know Seekerof has greater knowledge of the defence forces than I ever will, it was the way he said it, which was out of character for him.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 11:03 AM
link   
So would you or seekerof agree that Hezbollah isn’t exactly a globally recognized terror group, since only (according to you, I haven’t checked myself) only three countries recognize Hizbollah as a terror group.
I would. But its not only these three nations. Its the way the EU recognizes terrorist groups that is kind of odd. (Refer to link in previous post). In all actuality these nations do not put Hezbollah in a class of terrorist org. Belgium, France, Greece, Spain and Sweden.


Originally posted by Dreamz
Explain to me why an oil rich country would need nuclear power?


Perhaps you should ask the former US President, Gerald Ford, who made clear that in order for Iran to progress Iran needed nuclear technology. Because of this advice, Iran planned to build one of the largest nuclear industries in the world in Iran. It was only stopped as a result of the revolution. Nothing has changed since then, except that Iran's need for electricity has risen sharply due to the doubling of Iran's population during the 80s from 30 million to over 60 million and the further industrialization of the country. In order for Iran to keep up with the electricity consumption demands of the people they have to produce electricity and that is what they have been doing. During the course of the 20 year plan Iran has the goal of increasing its electricity production by introducing wind farms, building dams, making use of solar energy and most importantly of all, utilizing Iran's uranium ores by providing the country with nuclear energy. Most other projects have advanced rapidly during the administration of Khatami and it is only the nuclear sector that is lagging behind due to international pressure, which will hopefully cease soon enough.

For one Gerald Ford is not the smartest of Presidents we ever had and during his tenure we had "decent" relationships with Iran. The Shah was largely supported by the US government and during that time Iran was far less extreme in terms of Political heads of state. So his comments are moot to me. They have other options as you have pointed out and that is without mentioning coal. This is a quote from the IAEA with link provided.....



Iran obtained detailed instructions on how to set up the complicated process of enriching uranium, which can used to make nuclear arms, from the black market network run by a Pakistani scientist, the U.N. atomic monitoring agency said Friday.


Chinese Newspaper ( Trying to Keep American Bias out)

Originally posted by Dreamz
Just because something isnt found does not mean it isnt there and it surely dont mean its advances in nuclear research are being used for peaceful purposes.


Well recent record of US intelligence, I have trouble believing that the leaders of Iran are perusing a nuclear weapons program. The intelligence provided by the US is very similar to the intelligence provided before the Iraq war and as Bush said this week they proved to be incorrect. Hence unless solid, concrete evidence can be put forward to prove that Iran is making nuclear weapons, then the international community as well as some sections of the US population would not go along with the US.

I agree our intelligence is wrong and often is, not only with us but the international community all together. But from comments made out of Iran that they are indeed pursuing Nuclear Weapons to the article I linked above, everything points that they are trying to get weapons. Do you not agree that the IAEA is the best source for knowing what Iran is doing outside of Iran itself?



Iraq had a large number of poorly armed infantry at the time. They had low moral and were ready to crack under any pressure. Even Saddam himself didn’t put up much of a fight and sent his best planes to neighbouring countries. Iran would be different in that it has great political influence all throughout the middle east. Iran has good relationship with powerful groups in Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran's current missiles are far superior to the Iraqi ones in the 91 war. Iran actually has a navy, which may give the US a bloody nose in case of any invasion as well as powerful anti-ship missiles (better than anything Iraq ever had). Iran's infantry is better armed. They have anti-tank and portable anti-aircraft missiles, which are superior to anything in Iraqi possession in the 1991 war. The helicopter fleet of Iran is one of the biggest in the world, and its quality is far more advance that its Iraqi counterparts in the 90s. So over the comparison is in my opinion invalid.

Having said all this, it was not what he said that I objected to, because I know Seekerof has greater knowledge of the defence forces than I ever will, it was the way he said it, which was out of character for him.

Understand your sentiment and agree with you, I also think you are leaving out the fact of the advances we have made as well.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Knowing the degree to which the Israeli Defense Force enjoys their superiority to all other MBTs (and that is very arguable), I doubt the Iranians would have an exact copy. If they did, they could produce it for their own, as their T-55 copy is horribly outdated. The Merkava is possibly the best tank in the world.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a couple of observations - IMHO its more likley that IF anything , and thats a big IF , then the IRANIANS built a realistic training target - to teach thier terrorist clients how to engage the MERKERVA most efficiently .

such a trauingy dummy - could be macde in hollow sections that would fold flat

thats an entire different ball game to " reverese engineering " a copy oof a MTB

the story is i feel deceptivly written propaganda , AND FAILS TO ADDRESS HOW THEY GOT HOLD OF any DETAILS OF THE ISREALI TANK , THAT ARE NOT DECUCABLE FROM OBSERVERS / PICTURES / OPEN SOURCE LITERATURE

the isrealis have never lost a tank to enemy action - and besides if the iranians did have it - what would one unit in hezzbolla hands achieve ???



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sep
So would you or seekerof agree that Hezbollah isn’t exactly a globally recognized terror group, since only (according to you, I haven’t checked myself) only three countries recognize Hizbollah as a terror group.

Sure Sep, I can go with Hezbollah not being gloabal, but they certainly are regional.






Perhaps you should ask the former US President, Gerald Ford, who made clear that in order for Iran to progress Iran needed nuclear technology. Because of this advice, Iran planned to build one of the largest nuclear industries in the world in Iran. It was only stopped as a result of the revolution. Nothing has changed since then, except that Iran's need for electricity has risen sharply due to the doubling of Iran's population during the 80s from 30 million to over 60 million and the further industrialization of the country. In order for Iran to keep up with the electricity consumption demands of the people they have to produce electricity and that is what they have been doing. During the course of the 20 year plan Iran has the goal of increasing its electricity production by introducing wind farms, building dams, making use of solar energy and most importantly of all, utilizing Iran's uranium ores by providing the country with nuclear energy. Most other projects have advanced rapidly during the administration of Khatami and it is only the nuclear sector that is lagging behind due to international pressure, which will hopefully cease soon enough.

You know, Sep, that is all well and good, but can you assure the world and those of us within ATS that Iran will never use thier nuclear program to build and equip itself with a nuclear arsenal? See, that is the beef here; it is not Iran having a peaceful nuclear program for energy uses, but that Iran is using the excuse of peaceful nuclear intent to cover their seeking to build a nuclear arsenal. Let me know if I am wrong here, cause then that would make half the world wrong, as well.






Well recent record of US intelligence, I have trouble believing that the leaders of Iran are perusing a nuclear weapons program. The intelligence provided by the US is very similar to the intelligence provided before the Iraq war and as Bush said this week they proved to be incorrect. Hence unless solid, concrete evidence can be put forward to prove that Iran is making nuclear weapons, then the international community as well as some sections of the US population would not go along with the US.

Sep, heads up, friend. This is not solely a US issue: the EU is the one that has been pushing Iran on this issue, it is the EU that was the first to address Iran over this, etc. The IAEA has outright said that Iran has been lying about their peaceful intent nuclear program. The US has simply been there as backup and as a secondary voice. Again, can you assure the world and the members within ATS that Iran is not seeking to build a nuclear arsenal?





Iraq had a large number of poorly armed infantry at the time. They had low moral and were ready to crack under any pressure. Even Saddam himself didn’t put up much of a fight and sent his best planes to neighbouring countries. Iran would be different in that it has great political influence all throughout the middle east. Iran has good relationship with powerful groups in Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran's current missiles are far superior to the Iraqi ones in the 91 war. Iran actually has a navy, which may give the US a bloody nose in case of any invasion as well as powerful anti-ship missiles (better than anything Iraq ever had). Iran's infantry is better armed. They have anti-tank and portable anti-aircraft missiles, which are superior to anything in Iraqi possession in the 1991 war. The helicopter fleet of Iran is one of the biggest in the world, and its quality is far more advance that its Iraqi counterparts in the 90s. So over the comparison is in my opinion invalid.

Yeah, and prior to the run-up tp the 1st Gulf War, many upon many were saying the same as you are now concerning Iran. Ironic.






Having said all this, it was not what he said that I objected to, because I know Seekerof has greater knowledge of the defence forces than I ever will, it was the way he said it, which was out of character for him.

If I offended you now, in the past, or in the future, you have my sincere apologies, but in all honesty, I can not promise that I will not respond out of character in the future on this issue.






seekerof

[edit on 16-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   

The Iranian instructors have set up base at three farms in the Yanta Vadir al Ashair region of the Beqaa valley, where they are instructing Hizballah operatives. They have obviously studied the Hizballah video shots from the bombardment, which depicted an unmanned Israeli tank taking heavy pounding from Sagger missiles without sustaining damage or bursting into flames. The Iranians decided that the Motemared was the answer for destroying an Israeli Chariot.


Unmanned tank? I didnt know the Israelis had one or some operational for combat. Thats something to look into.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   
I don't see how they could obtain a Israeli Merkava in the first place, but anyhow knowing that the Merkava is one of the best tanks in the world the technology and infrastructure needed to produce one would be far beyond Iran's capabilities. They might have made a tank that has the exact dimensions and form of the Merkava, but its armor, weapons, and electronics would be no where near the same.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   
The "merkava" is probably just an practise target for the missile/rpg training of hezbollah, built from steel plates etc., we had similar ones in use (not merkavas but t-72s) it's more educating to shoot a "real" tank than a sheet of steel...



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Israel sold arms to Iran during the Shah's time and also during the Iran-Iraq war. I don't recall any Merkava's being part of the weaponry sold, but it's possible that it's an older one they copied and not one of the newer ones. I'd imagine it would be pretty easy to copy a MK I by now. As others have already stated, it's more likely that this is not a fully functional Merkava replica, but just a copy of the chassis for target practice.

[edit on 16-12-2005 by koji_K]


Sep

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dreamz
I would. But its not only these three nations. Its the way the EU recognizes terrorist groups that is kind of odd. (Refer to link in previous post). In all actuality these nations do not put Hezbollah in a class of terrorist org. Belgium, France, Greece, Spain and Sweden.


Fair enough, my mistake. I always read that the EU didn't recognize Hizbollah as a terrorist organization and never really looked into the details. Thanks a lot.


Originally posted by Dreamz
For one Gerald Ford is not the smartest of Presidents we ever had and during his tenure we had "decent" relationships with Iran.


Nice way of putting it. I am guessing by "decent" relationship you mean a puppet regime, which did not have a will of its own.


Originally posted by Dreamz
The Shah was largely supported by the US government and during that time Iran was far less extreme in terms of Political heads of state.


He was supported all right. The US destroyed Iran's democratic process in 1953 in his "support". And regarding whether Iran was more extreme or not it is well known that the Shah supported Kurdish terrorists to the extent that it brought the Iraqi government to its knees. So I would not say he was "less extreme" but he didn’t do anything against the US government.


Originally posted by Dreamz
So his comments are moot to me. They have other options as you have pointed out and that is without mentioning coal.


As I mentioned Iran is using other means already, however Iran should, just like all other nations be given the right to use nuclear technology. It makes sense for Iran to make electricity using nuclear technology, because it has uranium mines, and everything needed within its territory to make use of nuclear technology.


Originally posted by Dreamz
This is a quote from the IAEA with link provided.....



Iran obtained detailed instructions on how to set up the complicated process of enriching uranium, which can used to make nuclear arms, from the black market network run by a Pakistani scientist, the U.N. atomic monitoring agency said Friday.


Chinese Newspaper ( Trying to Keep American Bias out)


Yes Iran was forced to buy the technology used for its peaceful nuclear program from the black market, just like it is forced to buy other civilian-used technology because of the sanctions. For example Iran used to buy spare parts for its civilian aircraft from the black market. And it is no secret that the technology CAN be used for military purposes but there is no proof that it IS being used. The link you have provided merely brings up the idea that it can be used but is not saying that it is being used for military purposes.


Originally posted by Dreamz
I agree our intelligence is wrong and often is, not only with us but the international community all together. But from comments made out of Iran that they are indeed pursuing Nuclear Weapons to the article I linked above, everything points that they are trying to get weapons. Do you not agree that the IAEA is the best source for knowing what Iran is doing outside of Iran itself?


Yes I agree, but as I said the IAEA has found no evidence so far which points to Iran making nuclear weapons. If they had, by now Iran should have, by international law, been sent to the Security Council. The fact that they haven’t and it is only through the pressure from the EU and the US that this process was even being considered, should be enough evidence that Iran isn’t pursuing nuclear weapons.


Sep

posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Sure Sep, I can go with Hezbollah not being gloabal, but they certainly are regional.


Perhaps you did not read my sentence. I said it was no a globally recognized terror group. What I meant was that not many countries recognize it as a terrorist organization. This being said it was clarified by our friend.



Originally posted by Seekerof
You know, Sep, that is all well and good, but can you assure the world and those of us within ATS that Iran will never use thier nuclear program to build and equip itself with a nuclear arsenal? See, that is the beef here; it is not Iran having a peaceful nuclear program for energy uses, but that Iran is using the excuse of peaceful nuclear intent to cover their seeking to build a nuclear arsenal. Let me know if I am wrong here, cause then that would make half the world wrong, as well.


Many people make this allegation. But it is not up to Iran to prove that it is NOT building nuclear weapons. In a legal system, the party that is making the allegation is left with the burden of proof. They have to prove beyond any doubt that Iran is making nuclear weapons. If they cannot do this then their case is dismissed in any court.

Now since no proof exists, only allegations and assumptions, there is no legal basis on sending Iran’s case to the UN security council, let alone (as some parties suggest), taking military action against Iran.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Sep, heads up, friend. This is not solely a US issue: the EU is the one that has been pushing Iran on this issue, it is the EU that was the first to address Iran over this, etc.


I believe that the US’s intelligence was also backed by many other countries prior to the war in Iraq. So by saying that the same people, who previously backed you case are doing it again your case will not gain any more legitimate. This is because the intelligence services of neither country is willing to put forth any proof.


Originally posted by Seekerof
The IAEA has outright said that Iran has been lying about their peaceful intent nuclear program. The US has simply been there as backup and as a secondary voice. Again, can you assure the world and the members within ATS that Iran is not seeking to build a nuclear arsenal?


Well, first can you point me to a link, which shows the IAEA saying “outright” that Iran is “lying” about its peaceful intent? If they did say such a thing with proof then the fact that Iran is not before the Security Council and hasn’t had sanctions put against it is meaningless. Also as I said before, I cannot guarantee that Iran will not abuse its peaceful nuclear program in order to gain nuclear weapons, just like I cannot guarantee that Japan or South Korea will not do such a thing. What I am saying is that the accusers of Iran have not put forward any proof to suggest that Iran has plans to make nuclear weapons. Without any proof, what they are doing is called defamation propaganda and rhetoric.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Yeah, and prior to the run-up tp the 1st Gulf War, many upon many were saying the same as you are now concerning Iran. Ironic.


I was not in any western countries during the second Persian gulf war so I cannot make a statement regarding your comment. But what I can say is that this very army of Iraq was defeated by Iran and was sent back to its boarders, during a time when the majority of Iran’s armed forces were disbanded.



Originally posted by Seekerof
If I offended you now, in the past, or in the future, you have my sincere apologies, but in all honesty, I can not promise that I will not respond out of character in the future on this issue.


That is fair enough.



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Well Sep, my current line of thinking is that time will only tell on this matter.
Continue to be well friend.




seekerof



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by northwolf
The "merkava" is probably just an practise target for the missile/rpg training of hezbollah, built from steel plates etc., we had similar ones in use (not merkavas but t-72s) it's more educating to shoot a "real" tank than a sheet of steel...


Why should iran smuggle a fake merkava looking tank into lebanon for training purposes? I bet Hizbollah could distinguish between a Merkava and other types of tanks (T-72, etc.)


Originally posted by WestPoint23
don't see how they could obtain a Israeli Merkava in the first place...




Anyone with a respectable tank building industry, could build one of those.


Originally posted by WestPoint23
the Merkava is one of the best tanks in the world...


after M1A1


Any ideas on how to change image size?


Respect

[edit on 17-12-2005 by proprog]


Sep

posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Well Sep, my current line of thinking is that time will only tell on this matter.


I never think of the future. It comes soon enough.
--Albert Einstein


Originally posted by Seekerof
Continue to be well friend.


You too mate.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join