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.

 

Iranian soldiers pass through moderanization (Pictures)

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:
bih

posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 03:44 AM
link   
wow I can see all the americans jumping how the US will beat Iran
this was the same talk when they wanted to attack iraq and they said that they might lose 300 US soldiers only




posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Remember, in 1991 before the gulf War who would have thought we would roll on Iraq in a matter of days?


Thats what the media wanted us to believe. I bet the militar alreayd knew that most iraqi front line divisions had not recieved supplies in the last few months or had deserted



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Remember, in 1991 before the gulf War who would have thought we would roll on Iraq in a matter of days? .. Iraq was the 4th largest army in the world and rather modern in comparison to other Arab states. They where stronger then, than Iran is now. It is the fighting after we destroy the country that is the concern.


Why, oh why, does this keep cropping up? Using your logic, Germany could beat France now, as they obviously did before, or perhaps Italy could conquer the entire of europe, as it has been done before.

The Iran-Iraq war ended 18 years ago, for crying out loud. An entire generation! Do you not think, especially with all the Oil money Iran gets, that they have done nothing to modernise their Armed Forces?

Also, comparing the 1st GW to now isn't exactly a good analogy either. The Iraqi Army, in 1991, even though large, was poorly led, trained, equipped and supplied. Not to mention the grave strategic errors made in the campaign.

Iran now is far more powerful than Iraq ever was.

Assuming this would be over in a matter of days is dillusional.

Yes, we would win, but at what cost? Thousands, or even tens of thousands, depending on wether we invaded and tried to "install Democracy" (
), would be killed on our side alone. Not to mention the fact you would give every Muslim everywhere another reason to hate the West, not that they need another...

Seriously, how many of you war hawks and armchair generals, who sit here thumping your chests and baying for war, will actually volunteer and go and fight this war? Be honest, who's up for it? For heavens sake, I am going to join the military, but I don't want a war. No one should.




[edit on 8/11/06 by stumason]



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:58 AM
link   
personally I don't think we will have to worry about "allies." To preface this next statement, I do not agree nor disagree it is simply a thought... I think that if a showdown with Iran happens, we will drop some serious bombs and even perhaps THE bomb... This administration is clearly not interested in getting involved in another ground war with too many boots on the ground. I also don't think we will be staying there like we did in Iraq. The military is not a police force. They are there to fight and win wars. PERIOD! Kick ass, get the hell out and let them sort out the mess. That's my opinion...... But seriously, Iran being compared to might of the USA... Let's take a step back and be real for a minute... We could LITERALLY blow up Iran and have it completely paved and our new Middle East parking lot in less than a week... Too bad we have morals and respect human life. Just like the Iranians.. yea right



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Ok isolate Iran and just keep bombing them, sure we'll lose a few planes but after all the surface to air is taken out it will be a cake walk and the people of Iran will starve to death also good training
for the military/airforce, send in the stealths then these! (see link below)

www.youtube.com...

Would you like to be in open desert with a warthog?

Hell Bush is so mad right now after his party loss it might start any min.
Attack before the Dems can stop it is his motto, just guessing.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by HUNTER1967
and the people of Iran will starve to death also good training


Please tell me you are joking. Thats pretty sick in my opinion.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   
I'm sorry I didn't mean to make war sound so sick, truth is we will drop as many food drops as bombs. Do you think the people will get it? With no boots on the ground and sanctions the people will suffer no matter how many food drops we make. WAR IS SICK NUF SAID!



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 06:14 PM
link   
ok why not just end all the wars, and just fricken, unite, with world peace, and become allies. who cares.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Unfortunately, it's never been that easy.

It's always been in human nature to disagree and fight one another.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
The Iran-Iraq war ended 18 years ago, for crying out loud. An entire generation! Do you not think, especially with all the Oil money Iran gets, that they have done nothing to modernise their Armed Forces?


That same logic and thinking also applies to the US, I presume? Eighteen years is a long time indeed, no B-2, no F-22, no DDG, no GPS, etc...



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Anyone have any pics of them actually training? As in firing their rifles at a range, storming a building, or anything like that? Because if they are behind on that, then I would expect the average US rifleman to be worth 4 or 5 of their soldiers in a firefight.

I am not necessarily saying this is the case (it is very likely they have modern training), but if you take normally trained (ie. target practice is shooting at a bulls eye on a range) soldiers into combat, only about 20% of them will fire, and many of those will purposefully miss the enemy. Take western trained infantrymen, and that bumps up tp 95% firing, with most of them actually trying to hit the enemy. Kind of an interesting subject, but the soldiers are actually trained like Pavlov's dog to fire at pop up targets, and in combat they will aim and fire before they can even think.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   
ok this is the exact situation why i think NWO would be great, because no more war. except life would be hell.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PBscientist
Anyone have any pics of them actually training? As in firing their rifles at a range, storming a building, or anything like that? Because if they are behind on that, then I would expect the average US rifleman to be worth 4 or 5 of their soldiers in a firefight.


check that out

www.iranmilitaryforum.com...

also latest war games pics

www.iranmilitaryforum.com...



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jaypeth
Semite Race versus Saxon Horde do we really need to take the guesswork out of this one?


Um, Iranians are persian? ... And Americans are not Saxon? A mix of everything really.. I might be .25% saxon though!



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 01:12 AM
link   
PBScientist
Don't be fooled about the quality of american riflemen, they are good, i admit. But it only takes 2-3 weeks of training to allow a soldier to pass your expert marksmanship tests... so there is no reason to believe Iranians would be inferior...



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by stumason
The Iran-Iraq war ended 18 years ago, for crying out loud. An entire generation! Do you not think, especially with all the Oil money Iran gets, that they have done nothing to modernise their Armed Forces?


That same logic and thinking also applies to the US, I presume? Eighteen years is a long time indeed, no B-2, no F-22, no DDG, no GPS, etc...


Yes, Westy, I agree. But the point I was making is that Iran NOW is nothing like Iraq in `91. For the people assuming that because Iraq in 1991 was easy then this will be too, that is a massively erroneous assumption to make.

As the saying goes, assumption is the mother of all fudge ups.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Here is some of the equipment the Iranians use :

www.network54.com...

And here's a few sales brouchure pictures of some of there wire guided anti-tank missile systems that they make, use and sell :

Raad-t SACLOS guided tandem warhead :
Picture

Toophan 1 and 2 :
Picture

Super Dragon with tandem warhead:
Picture

Here are some of there indignously mass produced shoulder launched generation 2 seeker all aspect SAM's :

Misagh-1 :
Picture

Misagh-2 (improved version):
Picture

.

[edit on 9-11-2006 by iqonx]

[edit on 9-11-2006 by iqonx] helo[/url]

[edit on 9-11-2006 by iqonx]



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by northwolf
PBScientist
Don't be fooled about the quality of american riflemen, they are good, i admit. But it only takes 2-3 weeks of training to allow a soldier to pass your expert marksmanship tests... so there is no reason to believe Iranians would be inferior...


I never said they were inferior. The variable I am talking about is psychological though.

Soldiers trained with classical techniques (ie. go to the prone position and fire at a bulls eye target) will generally not actually fire at the enemy. Look at any pre Korean War army, and you will find a general firing rate of 20% (ie. 80% of people will not fire their weapon at the enemy at all, even in a firefight).

Modern training uses several techniques to raise that rate to 95% of soldiers firing, and it makes them less likely to fire above the enemy's heads.

These numbers are for the average soldier, and can yield an overall casualty ratio of 8-1 (in favor of the modernly trained soldiers). If you take special forces and commando groups, they can often achieve a ratio of 40 or 50 kills per person lost.

Also, I can't view those pictures becuse they appear to need a membership to the forum. Do you mind describing them? (I applied for a membership so it isn't really necessary though)



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Documentally

I doubt weather there is even that rubber boat free to use with all the involvement the US have in illegal wars across the globe.


Perhaps the US involvement in the "illegal" Second World War could have also been avoided and your post would have to be written in German, probably preferable.



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Russia and China have been making weapons and trade deals with Iran. If U.S. bombs Iran say in next 10 minutes, China may or may not respond with a attack on Taiwan. You know China is very dependent on Iran oil.
As a matter of fact China actually has been developing oil plants in some of its fields, since 2004 example .

Anyways a good layout of Irans small arms are listed below.

KH2002

Khaybar KH 2002 assault rifle is a recent development of the Iranian Defense Industry Organization; this rifle was first shown in 2004 and is intended to replace the obsolete 7.62x51 HK G3 rifles of German origin, which are license-built in Iran since the Shah times. Khaybar KH 2002 assault rifle can be best described as a bullpup conversion of the Iranian S-5.56 rifle, which is a direct copy of the Chinese CQ assault rifle.


Heckler G3
The Main weapon used by the Iranian Army, being replaced slowly though by the KH 2002.



here are some you should be able to indetify indentify and these are from defencetalk.com taken during the zolfaqar war games.




BTW I saw these one another forum, forgot where though.

They are S 5.56 which is a copy of the chinese CQ 5.56, which is from my understanding a copy of the M16A1.

Anyways, thats all I will do on the run down of their small arms, tactics and speed and accuracy will win the day.


Finshing this post with missles fired at war game

www.youtube.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join