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.

 

Irans weaponary

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Where are all these advanced weapons of Irans coming from? They seem to be wheeling out a new one every week, radar avoiding missles, stealth boats. The US may want to think twice about invading, Iran may have much more in the woodwork and could at the least inflict serious damage on the Americans




posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   
They're not really new and the stealth part half the time are baseless claims..
Iran has had most of this stuff for quite sometime and is simply showcasing them all this week in their wargames.

The media is just adding the extra hype just because its Iran which is quite annoying.. The stuff these officials are saying aren't helping either, wheter its the real translation on their claims can also be doubted..



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Still seems they are capable of more damage than the Iraqi`s i look forward to the war to see how it pans out, Also I don`t think the UK will get involved militarily.



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   
You actually believe any of the antagonist wild claim bs coming from Iran? All this stuff can be easily debunked. It's no more indigenous or a threat than a missile laden camel.


Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Where are all these advanced weapons of Irans coming from? They seem to be wheeling out a new one every week, radar avoiding missles, stealth boats. The US may want to think twice about invading, Iran may have much more in the woodwork and could at the least inflict serious damage on the Americans



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Well it clearly is a threat to the serviceman who wil have to perform the operation. Is that more American arrogance shining thorugh?



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Where are all these advanced weapons of Irans coming from? They seem to be wheeling out a new one every week,
-[snip]-


These weapons you mention are “advanced” in certain circles, just none that really are of consequence. Presenting state weapon acquisitions in an applicable time of stress such as Iran is underneath is archaic in origin.


Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
radar avoiding missles, stealth boats.


There are threads already addressing these subjects on ATS.


Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
The US may want to think twice about invading, Iran may have much more in the woodwork and could at the least inflict serious damage on the Americans


Invading…why always invading? In the event of any military confrontation with European states, Israel, the US or a collective of members etc, Iran will be strategically bombed into submission, period.


mg



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Iran will retaliate to any kind of invasion with the supply of nuclear weapons to terrorists. And then..................
US me



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Dont forget about thier spy satellite that they launched.

I think Iran is just showing what it has so it gets average citizens thinking it isnt such a good idea with them having all those toys.

And as far as where they got them from... well guess...lol



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Well it clearly is a threat to the serviceman who wil have to perform the operation. Is that more American arrogance shining thorugh?


I don't think it is arragance. I think it is the hysteria that is on parade lately.

Supercavitation is a cool technology, but it isn't a practical weapon. An underwater weapon without homing capability or a datalink that basically goes straight and has a range of only 7.5km is neat, but is it practical during a conflict when it is very difficult to get within only 30km of an enemy ship, much less 7.5km?

The best missile launched so far is the Shahab-3, which is basically a modernized North Korean nodong-1 missile. Without a nuclear warhead, it isn't a real threat outside of its terror value, similar to the Iraq scuds in Gulf War I. It doesn't have the ability to hit a ship, so it can only hit fixed targets of value likely which are already protected by 1 of the top 3 modern anti-missile systems in the world, namely the UK Rapier FSC, US PAC-3, and Israeli Arrow systems.

The "stealth" plane is clearly not stealth, it is sea skimming. It had practical military value prior to BVR radar systems like AEGIS or APAR was invented, but those days are gone.

The truck mounted kowsar anti-ship missile is basically a C-701R, an anti-ship missile with a range of 25km and a 29 kg time-delayed semi-armour-piercing high-explosive warhead. Is a 29kg warhead going to sink a warship? What about a 35,000 ton double hulled steel tanker? If you look at the pictures posted, it barely sank a 30ft dhow most likely made of wood or plastic.

The exercise itself is basically 1500 fast attack boats between 12ft and 300ft long, with a combined average ship length somewhere around 25ft long. 1500 Sounds intimidating, until you realize it is basically the sea equivilent of 2 Iraqi armor divisions moving in the open desert without air defense.

I believe the best weapons Iran has are the ones they aren't showing, namely the EM-53 bottom mine deployed by their Sang-o class mini-subs or the Houdong FAC with its C-802 missiles. Either of these existing platforms are far more lethal and able to cause far more problems for any potential opponent than anything you have seen on Iranian TV in the past month.

Once you know what you are looking at, it is hard to be intimidated.



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by missed_gear
Invading…why always invading? In the event of any military confrontation with European states, Israel, the US or a collective of members etc, Iran will be strategically bombed into submission, period.

mg


"Why always invading"? What, are you some sort of head-in-the-sand throwback from the 1800s? Do you not really have an inkling why America would, should, or will invade Iran? Are you really that thick, or is it you'd just do anything to 1) try to make yourself look somewhat erudite while 2) denigrating a very pertinent post by Peruvianmonk? Your true colors are showing. And they're kind of blah.

[Mod Edit: Edited the Big Quote relevant to response]
Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 4/7/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 06:17 PM
link   
That was rather rude of you, but i forgive you. America has no need ot invade or bomb Iran, it is illegal, hypoicritical when India Pakistan Israel South africa are allowed to keep there nuclear arsenal it will lead to thousands of deaths of Iranians as in Iraq. I couldn´t give a # about the American deaths. Oh but i forgot it seems American lives are more important than any other in the world. Ha ha. True colours? what that i don´t like the American attitude towards the rest of the world. You are the most hated country in the world, is that a good thing for you?



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Also i don´t like your attitue Dyno, Are you American







Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 4/7/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 06:46 PM
link   
If it ever came to a conflict surely you know that the US would precision bomb for weeks before any other action was taken. The skys would easily be won by the US/Nato and is the most important battle.IMO. I still think the opressed people of Iran have no stomach to support their current regime esspecially in such a losing senario. And Iran doesnt want to resort to nukes. The World has not really seen everything in the US arsenal and trust me Nukes would bring out all the back pocket goodies the US has been sitting on.For instance A couple of well placed EMP's would freeze the country in their tracks. Just Sayin.


[edit on 6-4-2006 by VType]



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
...hypoicritical ..... it will lead to thousands of deaths of Iranians as in Iraq. I couldn´t give a # about the American deaths.

Let me get this straight here: you give a crap about the thousands of deaths of Iranians but do not give a crap about the deaths of Americans, correct?

Hypocritical fits into this equation where again?




seekerof

[edit on 6-4-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 08:13 PM
link   
[Mod Edit: Removed unnecessary quote of entire preceeding post]


Seeker, you have exhibited your apathy for foreign lives taken through your 150% support of all U.S. foreign policy endeavors. Such as?

Hypocritical fits into this equation where again?

[edit on 4/7/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I'm not American (yet). All this new Iranian "capability" both disclosed and undisclosed makes one nervous. I'm not a "war" person either but at some point - boom!. There goes the 'hood. The Yanks and Israeli's will execute. I live in an Arab section of Toronto and many here I chat with seem to feel it is a "done-deal". No one is happy - stuff's bound to happen. The 711 guy thinks Easter - so do I. He says that over the past couple of weeks he's never seen Fridays so busy at the mosque...



posted on Apr, 7 2006 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I want to know Iran land army status quo. Who can post some to tell me?



posted on Apr, 7 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dyno25000
"Why always invading"? What, are you some sort of head-in-the-sand throwback from the 1800s? Do you not really have an inkling why America would, should, or will invade Iran?


There will be no “invasion” and yes I do have some insight, but by all means, please cite tangible facts to the contrary about this 'invasion'.


Originally posted by Dyno25000
Are you really that thick, or is it you'd just do anything to 1) try to make yourself look somewhat erudite while 2) denigrating a very pertinent post by Peruvianmonk? Your true colors are showing. And they're kind of blah.


The only thing “thick” is the plentiful amount of eyeball deep propaganda spewing forth from yet another saber rattling 'ringing gong' of a Middle Eastern state currently known as Iran. Most of these “new” weapons are not secrets and Iran has an affinity toward boasting, chest beating, displays of self assured prowess and making purposeful distortions of fact while labeling other states as arrogant. Furthermore, since when is discounting unfounded and unsubstantiated facts and pointing to cognitive reasoning belittling?


Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
You are the most hated country in the world…


Ok, the US looses the popularity contest and forgoes the Ms. Congeniality crown.
So what?


Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
... hypoicritical when India Pakistan Israel South africa are allowed to keep there nuclear arsenal it will lead to thousands of deaths of Iranians as in Iraq


All of the nations listed by you (with the exception of South Africa) are not signatories to the NNPT; Iran is and therefore Iran is the “hypocrite”. South Africa is also a member of the NSG, sits in the Zangger Committee and the IAEA monitors her under a microscope. (reference link) unlike Iran. Conversely, Iran is the one being told to “shut-up and put-up” and she needs only now to listen and do.


mg



posted on Apr, 7 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   
aircraft can bomb a country , tank can crush a country but it takes boots on teh ground to take and hold a country.


if any action takes place in iran then it has to have boots on the gorund.

but with the situation in vietnam *cough* sorry iraq , then it won`t happen soon



posted on Apr, 7 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Iran will retaliate to any kind of invasion with the supply of nuclear weapons to terrorists. And then..................
US me


If the US launch an attack on iran then it will be because iran is trying to get nukes because they dont already have them. If they dont have nukes how can they supply them to terrorists?

Justin




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join