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 Fires Dozens of Missiles

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by DickBinBush
You didn't say it. You implied it.

That wasn't what I was implying...I'm sorry if you misunderstood.

You asked me what are they supposed to do just sit around and wait for Bush to attack? And I asked you how will that increase their chances? I asked that because, what are these war games doing? You're saying they can't sit around and wait, but, what are they actually accomplishing? The Iranian people hate their government. I'm pretty sure they could care less if their government was over-thrown.

It's irrelevant if the Iranian people hate their government... that has nothing to do with it. My point was that the mullahs in power aren't just going to sit around doing nothing, even if they know they're screwed... they're going to try and show their people that they are in control of things and that they will defend their borders. It's a simple concept, not sure why you're having so much trouble with it.

[edit on 3-11-2006 by firebat]




posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Pokey Oats.

So . . . we most save the poor people that are in exile from Iraq, and let decimate the rest of the Iraqi people in Iraq...


I know English is your second language but maybe a little more effort reading my post would have allowed you to pen a response that wasn't so foolish. My friend's family was executed a long time ago, nothing can save him or them. But the removal of such a hideous regime will hopefully save other families in Iraq from such brutality.

The point of relaying my friend's story was to iterate the fact (that many, such as yourself seem to have forgotten) that Iraq was under control of a BRUTAL dictator and his family that had no qualms in executing, raping and torturing its own citizens.

Nice one though! You have managed to avoid the points I raised and just responded with your own inculcation. Ironically, you actually think that you're morally superior but your feigned compassion for the citizenry and people of Iraq is a joke as your opinion is politically based, not humanitarian.

Respond if you wish, but I have no interest in conversing with a propoganda spewing automaton and thus will not answer.

Pokey Oats



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Im not trying to doubt yours or his story but why in the world would ANY man in such a high security position plan an escape and not think about bringing his family with him? That seems pretty selfish that he would escape such a terrible place and not bring his family.


Firstly, he wasn't doing R&D to develop missiles thus it wasn't a high security position. He was just a skilled electrical engineer and was to work in assembling, repairing, modifying PCBs.


Originally posted by ThePieMaN
I would have least stuck around until I was able to plan an escape for everyone and not leave my soul mate and children


He had no children to this woman and nowhere did I imply that in my email. By family I was referring to mother father, brothers/sisters.

Ultimately I cannot answer for him but I imagine there was a VERY good reason that he left his wife behind and he suffers every day for this decision. How interesting that you are so quick to pass judgement on him. You're quite a reprehensible person.


Originally posted by ThePieMaN
It could possibly be that this was the story he used to gain asylum and recieve citizenship


I have encountered you enough times to know that you are one of the most indoctrinated individuals around. Look, if believing that he made this story up to get asylum in Australia helps you sleep at night then good for you.

But it will just be another lie you tell yourself to appease your own abominable morality.

I knew this man personally and he is a wonderful, beautiful human being that has always dealt with me honestly. As I was not the one granting him asylum I cannot see why he would need to propogate a lie to me and I cannot forget the emotion in his voice and the tears in his eyes as he related to me his story.

Nor can I forget how he celebrated the day that Baghdad fell.

Pokey Oats



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Firebat,

Maybe this is just one big mis-understanding because, I believe I have a pretty good understanding of this "simple concept". You clearly aren't understanding what I'm saying either. So let's call it even and walk away from it.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Oh my, clustered, dug out and trenched in positions in the middle of the desert, you have to be kidding right? Also, most of those missiles are SCUD class, I'm sure the test gave us a good indication of just how much our aerial infrared assets can pick up.

[edit on 3-11-2006 by WestPoint23]


Well the US ( and allies ) proved almost completely incapable of preventing Iraq from firing it's scud type missiles even during the last days of the first gulf war.... It's either that or they just pretended that they were unable and in fact wanted Iraqi scuds to land where they did...

Stellar



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Stellar I have no doubt you are aware of the changes that have taken place in 15+ years. As such I'd like to think we are more capable of dealing with mobile scud launchers in open terrain.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Stellar]

Well the US ( and allies ) proved almost completely incapable of preventing Iraq from firing it's scud type missiles even during the last days of the first gulf war.... It's either that or they just pretended that they were unable and in fact wanted Iraqi scuds to land where they did...

Stellar


Actually the scud missiles during the first war were not very reliable and it was many problems with them, some of them could not even work.

When my husband in Saudi Arabia during the first cofflict he say that most of the scud were a failure.

I don't know if the technology now is better and the problems have been fixed.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Does anyone know why the contrails would be different in color? is it different fuel or maybe just from the dirt kicking up that it looks browner?




Pie



Thats becuase they are using 2 different groups of missiles.

The first group are solid fuel missiles and the second are liquid fuel. They are using different types of each for example you can clearly see 3 different types of solid fuel missiles being used. The first one with sparks comming out of the tip and tail are based on a Enhanced version of FROG-7, The second type are similar to SCUD-B with solid fuel motors, And the 3rd type is one that is based on a Syrian missiles that i can't rememer the name of.

Then there are the liquid fuel missiles which are SCUD-B which where imported from North Korea/Russia/China and the second liquid fuel missile is the Shahab-2 which is based on a North Korean Ballistic missile. Oh and they also fired a Shahab-3 missile as well which is liquid fueled.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:27 PM
link   
By the way here are the Missiles Ballistic missiles they imported :

These are the ballistic missiles that Iran imported :



Date country Missile

1980s Libya 30 Scud-B missiles with a range of 300km

1985-1988 North Korea Around 100 Scud-B missiles

1985 USSR Unknown number of Scud-B missiles

1985 Libya and Syria Scud-B missiles

Jan.-Feb. 1985 Libya Two Scud-B transporter-erector launchers (TELs) and approximately 20 missiles

April 1985 Libya Scud-B missiles

1986 Syria Scud-B missiles

1987-1988 North Korea 100 North Korean Scud-B missiles with the range of 320km

1987-1992 North Korea 200-300 Scud-B missiles

Early 1988 North Korea 40 Scud-B missiles

Early 1990 North Korea 20 Scud-B missiles

1990 North Korea 170 Scud-B missiles

1990 China 130-150km-range CSS-8 (converted SA-2) surface-to-surface missiles

1991 North Korea Scud-C missiles

1991 Japan Aviation Electronics (JAE) Gyroscopes

March 1991 North Korea 24 Scud-C missiles

September 1991 North Korea 300 Scud-B missiles

October-November 1991 North Korea 170 Scud missiles

1992 North Korea Scud-C missiles

February 1992 North Korea Scud-B missiles

March 1992 North Korea 20 Scud canisters

May 1992 North Korea 150 Scud-D missiles

June 1992 China M-11 missiles, 90 CSS-8s, short-range, surface-to-surface missiles with anti-ship capability, missile guidance technology

November 1992 North Korea 220 Scud missiles and a few early model Nodong missiles

End of 1992 Russia, China 800 Russian Scud missiles and 200 Chinese Silkworm missiles

1992-1994 North Korea 150 Scud-C missiles

1993 Russia Unspecified number of Scud-C missiles and launchers

1993 Russia 10 Nodong-2 surface-to-surface missiles with a range of 1300-1500km

1994 China 20 M-7 missiles < Very advanced missiles from China

January 1994 China Unknown number of Silkworm M-11 missiles

April 1994 North Korea Scud-B missiles

Mid to late 1994 North Korea Nodong missiles and components

October 1994 China 20 CSS-8 surface to surface missiles

Late 1994, early 1995 North Korea 4 or more Hwasong-6 (Scud-C) transporter-erector launchers (TELs)

June 1995 North Korea 20 Nodong-1 missiles and eight transporter-erector launchers (TELs)

1996 North Korea 12 Nodong missiles

1999 North Korea 12 medium-range ballistic missile engines

1999 North Korea 20 Nodong engines

1999 North Korea Scud-B missiles

April 1999 France (Microturbo, SA) Missile components

2000 North Korea 12 medium-range ballistic missile engines

2000 North Korea 400 Scud-type missiles

June 2000 China Materials for the development of solid rocket fuels and for building a plant to manufacture the NP-110 missile engine and missile components for development of medium-range missiles

June 2000 North Korea Nodong ballistic missiles with a range of about 1000km and the Taepodong ballistic missiles with a range of about 1500km

August 2000 North Korea Unknown number of rockets

March 2001 North Korea Rocket motors and missile airframes

June 2001 North Korea At least four ballistic missile launchers

19 February 2002 Russia Ballistic missile technology

20 February 2002 North Korea Unspecified missiles and related technology to Iran

www.nti.org...

And thats just the missiles they imported into there country they imported something like something like 2000 ballistic missiles that are known also factor missiles that are unknonw that where imported.

Iran also manufactures there own ballisitic missiles too. In fact they manufactured thousands of there own as well.

Here are some of there own ballistic missiles they manufacture themselves :

Mushak-90
Mushak-120
Mushak-160
Mushak-200
Zelzal-2
Iran-700
Shahab-1
Shahab-2
Shahab-3a
Shahab-3b
Shahab-3c
Shahab-3d

Also they imported some long range Balllistic missiles as well as well as cruise missiles :

12 x kh-55 2500km range cruise missiles :
news.bbc.co.uk...

18 x north korean BM-25 2500km ballistic missiles :
www.janes.com...

And they also have Anti-ship cruise missiles that they modifyed to attack land targets LACM which have ranges of something like 280km.

And if you read that list they also have SCUD-D missiles which have digital scence matching and digital guidence which are top of the line missiles. The Iranians imported hundreds of SCUD-D missiles which America has never faced before. They have improved guidedence, motor, warhead, accuracy, re-entry speed.

This is the list of the types of Ballistic missiles Iran has :

Mushak-90 (range 90km) solid fuel
Mushak-120 (range 130km) solid fuel
Mushak-160 (range 160km) solid fuel
Mushak-200 (range 200km) solid fuel

Zelzal-2(upgraded frog-7) range 125km

Iran-700 (range 700km)

Shahab-1
Shahab-2
Shahab-3A
Shahab-3B
Shahab-3C
Shahab-3D

M11 (Chinese) ballistic missiles
M7 Chinese ballistic missile imported
SS2 Chinese Ballistic missiles

Al-Fatah from Syria range unknown possibly under 500km

Nodong
Teopaedong

SCUD-A
SCUD-B
SCUD-C
SCUD-D

BM-25 (2500km Range) Russian


Here is some information about SCUD-D :
Janes SCUD info







.

[edit on 3-11-2006 by iqonx]

[edit on 3-11-2006 by iqonx]

[edit on 3-11-2006 by iqonx]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Stellar I have no doubt you are aware of the changes that have taken place in 15+ years. As such I'd like to think we are more capable of dealing with mobile scud launchers in open terrain.


Thats the problem. Iran is not open terrain.

Only certain area's of Iran are, the rest of Iran is a combination of different terrain such as mountain, snow, jungle/forest etc...

The Ballistic missiles when launched from the other area's will be very difficult to stop especially near the mountinous area's of the country.

Also remember that for troops to move across the land will be much more difficult becuase Iran is something like 3 times the size of Iraq so it will take much longer for them to move to targtes. And also remeber Iran has more ballistic missiles then Iraq. In fact Iran has so many ballisitic missiles that you cannot even compare Iraq to Iran in this area so it's a whole new game. And also Iran has much more Ballistic missiles mobile launch platforms then Iraq did.

And not only that you also have to facotr in that Iran itself has UAV drones which they will use to monitor the area around there own launch platform to check for any ambushes this is something that Iraq did not have the advanctage of.


.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Alot of here seem to be under the impression that iran will be a cake walk like Iraq.

It's a shame that many will probably have to find out they're wrong the hard way.

I have no doubt we could defeat Iran, after all we defeated Nazi Germany, but how much did that cost us in blood and tears?

Let's just pray they sort this out like gentlemen and not cavemen.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Alot of here seem to be under the impression that Iran will be a cake walk like Iraq.

It's a shame that many will probably have to find out they're wrong the hard way.



Funny that you mention that, Iraq was a walk but what is going on Iraq now, is not party on the streets


Our troops are exhausted and tired I wonder what they will say if they are told that they will have to move into Iran.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Well Marg, I meant the intitial invasion.

Looking at Iraq now, I cannot see any attack on Iran being anything short of a bloodbath on both sides.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Looking at Iraq now, I cannot see any attack on Iran being anything short of a bloodbath on both sides.


Exactly with Iraq caught up in the middle.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pokey Oats
I have encountered you enough times to know that you are one of the most indoctrinated individuals around. Look, if believing that he made this story up to get asylum in Australia helps you sleep at night then good for you.

But it will just be another lie you tell yourself to appease your own abominable morality.


If I was so indoctrinated or brainwashed as you put it, I would just believe any old sack that came along on the internet spewing tales of woe in order to make the war in Iraq appear to be one of any particular value. If you believe that killing thousands of people because of the few examples such as your friend was justified then so be it. I on the other hand see it differently. We were spending billions of dollars in order to supposedly spare ourselves from being attacked by Nukes on American soil, not to be saviours of Iraqi freedoms.

BTW is it necessary that you must be so harsh with Marge? She is a woman and a modicum of tact wouldn't be asking too much there Mr. Pokey.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by Pokey Oats
I have encountered you enough times to know that you are one of the most indoctrinated individuals around. Look, if believing that he made this story up to get asylum in Australia helps you sleep at night then good for you.

But it will just be another lie you tell yourself to appease your own abominable morality.




Wait a moment!!!!! this guy is actually insulting me!!!!!!! Well thanks for bringing that to me ThePieMaN.

You know I do not feed trolls and that is what I see when somebody has to result in personal attacks when they cannot get to me.

Guess what Pokey, pokey, I have nothing to say to you anymore. Keep insulting if that is what makes you happy but I will not lower myself to your level.


Thanks ThePieMaN.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Thanks ThePieMaN.


NP Marge, while not feeding the trolls is safe advice, its good to let them know that you can see them down there under the bridge. It shows them that you still have your eyes wide open.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Actually the scud missiles during the first war were not very reliable and it was many problems with them, some of them could not even work.


So does one make your strategic plans around the hope,belief, delusion that the enemy must make mistakes for you to win or suffer fewer casualties? Iraq survived years of sanctions and as my memory goes scuds are second generation missile technology ( directly based on German V's)meaning it's great for tactical nuclear weapons but not so good as conventional artillery if your aiming for battlefield targets; this is once again a system that is not being used in it's primary role design role/technological role.


When my husband in Saudi Arabia during the first conflict he say that most of the scud were a failure.

I don't know if the technology now is better and the problems have been fixed.


Iran have clearly spent more resources on building up their very own military industrial complex and i am rather sure that their scuds will be in better order ( they sure have them en mass considering Jane's research) and generally more useful as deterrent.

Stellar



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Stellar I have no doubt you are aware of the changes that have taken place in 15+ years.


Well apparently not and luckily i am always ready to learn something new. Please proceed....


As such I'd like to think we are more capable of dealing with mobile scud launchers in open terrain.


Well we all like to think certain things for certain reasons but we can only alter reality that much by our perception and wishes; wishing the bus away wont prevent it from running you over...

I personally can not imagine how the US could 'lose' ( meaning take significant casualties) against a field army deployed by Iran but that does not mean that Iranian weapons or training are just 'bad' and that US systems are invariable good or superior....

Bit off topic but anyways...

Stellar



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I have posted this post first on another thread but think it could be relvant to this one also. Hope its cool to post it

It's strange but reading these threads nobody hardly mentions Israel and the impact that the Arab states around it acquiring nuclear weapons will have to the very existence of the fairly new established nation.

Not sure if you heard on the news recently but the president of Iran is threatend publicly that Israel should be wiped of the pages of history and a few days ago even repeating that talk by saying "Israel will soon disappear" and many anti-Semitic remarks. I guess that's fair enough, but then for a nation who is building (but according to Iran, they are not) nuclear weapons in its program, Israel is seeing his remarks as a real threat.

If you had a friend or neighbour who threatens to destroy you day after day publicly to other people and to you and is building the weapon that will in many aspects do it... well you can let them alone and sit back and do nothing and wait for a presidents threat of annihilation or you can make the first move and set back and destroy their plans of making the weapon which will destroy you.

Well if you look at the past about 25 years ago when Iraq was on the brink of getting nuclear weapons, Israel acted and destroyed their reactors and facility's although condemnation from all nations would follow.

So my theory is from what ive learned is that Israel will by no means allow Iran to build a bomb which would most likely be used against the nation but will act first to set-back or destroy altogether its nuclear program by taking out key targets in Iran. I watched a documentary about this on BBC and it said Iran will reach the point of no return no later than summer 2007.

Then from that point if Israel attacks first then it truly is conspiracies and theory's as to what it would lead to. My theory for what its worth will go something like this :

Israel will attack Iran's nuclear plants within the next year by surprise if they don't stop enriching and UN talks fail...then the back lash would be condemnation from the rest of the world and then Iran's retaliation following quickly after, with maybe even other arab country's joining Iran's retaliation against Israel, cause if truth be known Israel is hated by all its neighbours. The price of oil will sky-rocket as the middle-east enters into chaos.

Then maybe even super-powers getting involved to sort it out - but then from that point i can only blindly guess, but 1 good thing about all this (if it does happen) is that bible prophecy will be being fulfilled in that Israel will be center of the whole mess, with what then according to the bible a anti-christ (new world leader) will cease power in Israel and make peace and rebuild the temple (which in prophecy, has still yet to be destroyed)

Then i suppose whatever way you look at it or examine it...there is gonna be trouble in the middle-east very soon if Israel acts because of Iran's threats.

Happy Days



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join