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 would use 'smart' bomb on enemies

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I'll point out, so Deltaboy doesn't think I'm picking on the US, that Iraq also had a substantial supply of UK made artillery systems and quite a few Chieftain Tanks, which during the 80's, were the MBT of choice for the UK Armed Forces.

It's not just the US mate, we did our share too.




posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
I was talking about lasers in response to West Coast saying they probably had some on their carriers. Nice way to quote out of context, Shots.


I was not quoting out of context .I simply pointed out there are CIWS systems that shoot down super sonic missles. The phalanx 1A and 1b were specifically designed for that purpose but apparently you were not aware of that.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by shots
 


You were quoting out of context as I clearly was referring to the existence of Laser based anti-missile systems in response to West Coast's assertion that he suspected that Carriers would be equipped with laser anti-missile systems.. No where did I say anything about projectile CIWS. Go back and re-read my post:



posted by stumason


Originally posted by West Coast
I think you would be surprised to discover the americans have an answer to such threats. Lasers are now a reality. I would not be surprised if the USN had such weaponry on there super carriers for defense purposes. And no, a missile can not evade the speed of light.


The only anti-missile system I was aware of was THEL, which was cancelled in 2004. It worked pretty well, by all accounts, but for whatever reason it was shelved. So I doubt you'll be finding it on any carriers.


Fair enough, I left out the word laser ahead of "anti-missile system", please forgive me for a typo, However, it is clear from the post I was responding to that I was talking about LASERS..

I honestly didn't think someone would be so anal as to tell me about phalanx, which is quite clearly not a laser system. But, I forgot about you, shots.

Seriously, people will go to great lengths to "get one over" on another, even if they deliberately ignore a comment's context.

Your really stretching with your attempted "education" of me there, shots.

[edit on 28/8/07 by stumason]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Again my intent was not meant as a quote out of context as you put it.
Here is exactly what I said again


posted by shots
They have anti missile systems which include both missles and high rpm gattling guns, which have proven very effective.


Note I clearly said systems which would include all types.


How can it be out of context if the system can shoot down a missle? (YOU were talking about shooting missles down and that is the part I was talking about)

[edit on 8/28/2007 by shots]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Tis from Wikipedia : en.wikipedia.org...

You may not like Wiki, but it comes with a selection of sources on the bottom of the page you can read through.

Again, I didn't actually say the US supplied them with tanks and artillery (although the sales of Helicopters is a matter of public knowledge), just said that Iraq used US PRODUCED weapons.



How about giving me the direct link from the reference instead of having me to look all of them?



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Here you go, it's a PDF document:

www.gwu.edu...

There is a plain text version also:

www.overcast.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk...

EDIT: that's the Howard Teicher affidavit, by the way. Not sure exactly what you wanted, so assumed you wanted that. If you want something else, please specify.

[edit on 28/8/07 by stumason]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Here you go, it's a PDF document:

www.gwu.edu...

There is a plain text version also:

www.overcast.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk...


First link was bad to read, so I went to your second link...

Now here are some points that are true..

Yes the U.S. provided satellite information to the Iraqis against Iran.

Yes they also provided money to Iraq.

They are public knowledge since I've read scholarly works about U.S. support to Iraq.

But none of them backs the claim about U.S. supplying weapons of some kind to Iraq, and sure as hell from Gulf War and Iraq war you don't see any.

Unless you count French and Russians selling weapons with the backing of American support as some kind of proof.


13. The United States and the CIA maintained a program known as the "Bear Spares" program whereby the United States made sure that spare parts and ammunition for Soviet or Soviet-style weaponry were available to countries which sought to reduce their dependence on the Soviets for defense needs. If the "Bear Spares" were manufactured outside the United States, then the United States could arrange for the provision of these weapons to a third country without direct involvement. Israel, for example, had a very large stockpile of Soviet weaponry and ammunition captured during its various wars. At the suggestion of the United States, the Israelis would transfer the spare parts and weapons to third countries or insurgent movements (such as the Afghan rebels and the Contras). Similarly, Egypt manufactured weapons and spare parts from Soviet designs and provided these weapons and ammunition to the Iraqis and other countries. Egypt also served as a supplier for the Bear Spares program. The United States approved, assisted and encouraged Egypt's manufacturing capabilities. The United States approved, assisted and encouraged Egypt's sale of weaponry, munitions and vehicles to Iraq.




9. The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq. My notes, memoranda and other documents in my NSC files show or tend to show that the CIA knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, munitions and vehicles to Iraq.


Where are these documents? I like to see them.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
But none of them backs the claim about U.S. supplying weapons of some kind to Iraq, and sure as hell from Gulf War and Iraq war you don't see any.


Not sure if you missed it the first 5 times I posted it, but I never claimed that they did, apart from the helicopters.

I NEVER SAID THAT THE US SUPPLIED THE TANKS AND ARTILLERY, MERELY THAT IRAQ HAD IN IT'S INVENTORY US MADE TANKS AND ARTILLERY. TWO ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THINGS

Your really having difficulty with the concept, aren't you?


Originally posted by deltaboy
Where are these documents? I like to see them.


Don't ask me. Ask the chap who signed the affidavit saying that..... Jeebus... I apologise for my lack of CIA documents lying around...


Even if I knew where these documents where, as a non-US citizen, I doubt I could get a FOIA request approved.


[edit on 28/8/07 by stumason]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

I NEVER SAID THAT THE US SUPPLIED THE TANKS AND ARTILLERY, MERELY THAT IRAQ HAD IN IT'S INVENTORY US MADE TANKS AND ARTILLERY. TWO ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THINGS

Your really having difficulty with the concept, aren't you?



What U.S. made tanks and artillery? Where is your proof of U.S. made weaponry??????

Got any pics? Documentary of M47 tanks? M109 Paladins?? M113 apcs?

We are talking about the possiblity of Soviet made weaponry being sold to Iraq in covert, yet you said something about U.S. made weaponry?



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
What U.S. made tanks and artillery? Where is your proof of U.S. made weaponry??????

Got any pics? Documentary of M47 tanks? M109 Paladins?? M113 apcs?

We are talking about the possiblity of Soviet made weaponry being sold to Iraq in covert, yet you said something about U.S. made weaponry?


Christ almighty... This stuff has been in the public domain for years. I kind of assumed everyone knew....

I assume you remember the invasion in 2003, yes?

Ok..

Well, what wasn't blown up in the previous two wars with Iraq is now sitting in junkyards and store houses. In amongst those places, guarded by US troops on the most part, you will find wrecks of Chieftains, M109's and other Western weaponry that Iraq accumulated over time. There was a BBC documentary some years back that showed these scrap yards and the like and they are chock a bokc full of weapons that Iraq acquired from all over the world. They loved the variety, it seems.

They also pinched quite a few tanks off Iran. That's where they got their Chieftains from, as the UK sold over 1000 to Iran pre-Revolution.

Here is one M109, although looking worse for wear:

www.snopes.com...

Here is a good article about Iraqi forces.

Global Security

Below is a pic of a destroyed Iraqi M113:



EDIT: Fixed Links and pic



[edit on 28/8/07 by stumason]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast


Well ask yourself this Mr. vitchilo, what is a democracy? It is what we make of it. I assure you, the US is as free as they come. However, not everyone will be pleased, some will find ways to nitpick this and that.

Its not a perfect system, but nothing is.



Um...well not to nitpick, but :


The U.S. is a democracy -- just not a direct one. Every branch of our government -- executive, legislative, judicial, monetary -- ultimately derives its power from majority rule or approval. By making our democracy indirect instead of direct, the Founders prevented unrestrained mob rule, allowing a more reasonable pace of majority rule, and greater room for compromise.
Source

And yet:


A country which proposes to make use of modern war as an instrument of policy must possess a highly centralized, all-powerful executive, hence the absurdity of talking about the defense of democracy by force of arms. A democracy which makes or effectively prepares for modern scientific war must necessarily cease to be democratic.

Aldous Huxley (1894 - 1963)



IMHO, should it come to war, and that appears to be the way it's heading, Iran will be trounced and the United States will no longer be governed by any form of democracy.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason


Christ almighty... This stuff has been in the public domain for years. I kind of assumed everyone knew....

I assume you remember the invasion in 2003, yes?

Ok..

Well, what wasn't blown up in the previous two wars with Iraq is now sitting in junkyards and store houses. In amongst those places, guarded by US troops on the most part, you will find wrecks of Chieftains, M109's and other Western weaponry that Iraq accumulated over time. There was a BBC documentary some years back that showed these scrap yards and the like and they are chock a bokc full of weapons that Iraq acquired from all over the world. They loved the variety, it seems.

They also pinched quite a few tanks off Iran. That's where they got their Chieftains from, as the UK sold over 1000 to Iran pre-Revolution.

Here is one M109, although looking worse for wear:

www.snopes.com...

Here is a good article about Iraqi forces.

Global Security

Below is a pic of a destroyed Iraqi M113:





Christ I read some of the info and it seems the Iraqis got those Chieftains from the Iranians and M113 from the Kuwaitis.


The UN and Kuwait say Iraq has not returned extensive Kuwaiti military equipment, including 245 Russian-made fighting vehicles, 90 M113 armored personnel carriers, and 3,750 Tow and anti-tank missiles.


Not to mention didn't Kuwait had some Chieftain tanks as well? Not to mention Paladins?

Added info..


Iran and Kuwait retained the .50 Cal MG. The HESH round is used for antitank chemical-energy (CE) antiarmor missions, and for HE effects against personnel and materiel. The Iranians claim to employ a snorkel system on Chieftain, for fording to 5 meters depth. A variety of fire control systems and thermal sights are available for Chieftain.





[edit on 28-8-2007 by deltaboy]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 11:06 PM
link   
There were also unscrupulous arms dealers in the 1980's and 1990's that indirectly sold weapons to Iraq of Western origin.

There is a Canadian version of the M190 that Irag bought quite a few of. Israel also bought some of the same version, which pissed off Saddam:

GC45



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeyJo


Really, would their ageing figher jets even get off the ground??

'smart' bomb, uneducated idea?

Im not sure how this info gets out, either their so called diplomats are not so 'smart' or they have terrible leaks in their security details!

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)


Underestimating is ignorance. If it still can fly, then it is still a threat. Just because it's not a new US made product does not mean it is inferior.



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
Underestimating is ignorance. If it still can fly, then it is still a threat. Just because it's not a new US made product does not mean it is inferior.


Sure, but because its a ' old US made product' does mean its inferior, to a 'new US made product'




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join