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 Test-Fires Long-Range Missile

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Iran Test-Fires Long-Range Missile


www.foxnews.com

Iran test-fired a long-range missile on Wednesday, state television reported, an announcement likely to add further tension to ties with the West

The report described the launch of an "improved Sejil 2 missile" as successful.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Seems like Iran are stoking up the fire thats burning at the moment. So the US announce new sanctions and now Iran test a long range missile.

I wonder how long it will be before Israel finally crack and unleash an attack on the Iranians.

It been posted several times on here that a possible attack will happen before the end of the year.

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



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
hiho its off to war we go



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed

Iran Test-Fires Long-Range Missile


www.foxnews.com

Iran test-fired a long-range missile on Wednesday, state television reported, an announcement likely to add further tension to ties with the West

The report described the launch of an "improved Sejil 2 missile" as successful.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Whats the range on one of those?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
2500km they test these a lot 2yrs ago was last one



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Sejil 2 Missile


[img]
[/img]




Sejil 2 uses solid fuel as opposed to liquid fuel used on Shahab 3. Solid-propellant rockets can be fueled in advance and moved and stored into underground silos. The liquid-propellant rockets need to be fueled and fired quickly





Sejil 2 is a two-stage rocket, allowing it to reach higher altitudes, increasing its range, and to accelerate more efficiently when the first stage drops off





2000-2500 km range for Sejil 2





Sejil 2 uses improved positioning system receivers on the launchers and in the missiles, making them more accurate than Shahab 3


2000 to 2500 km range.




"2000 kilometers." That's the equivalent of 1,250 miles, the distance by air between Israel and Iran's main nuclear and missile sites


Sound like they are in range!! Israel will be sweating.

www.kentimmerman.com...

uskowioniran.blogspot.com...



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:22 AM
link   
Interesting and frightening. However, the only source is Iranian, and therefore not entirely unbiased.
There is no doubt that Iran had significant missile capability. Enough to threaten Israel and it's neighbours, and a lot of Europe and the Arabian world.

However, Israel has this too, even exponentionally bigger, regarding their military proficiency and nuclear assets.

About this missile :

A range of 2000 kms means a lot of Europe and Russia is also within striking distance of this thing.

But bear in mind that range is just one thing. This is test of a relatively new missile and a lot of the specs are not widely known yet. A quick google search left me with more questions than answers. Keep in mind a lot of factors contribute to the level of threat posed by this missile :

- Availability :How many can they field? How do they field them? Do they have mobile launchers like the russians for Topol, do they have hardened silo's, or just the good old fashioned launch pads as seen on the pic. A world of difference in case of conflict. Small numbers in fixed locations can be easily taken out. Mobile or hardened ones not.

- Warhead capacity : What is their payload on what distance, and can they be fitted in the future with nuclear missiles.

- Re-entry capacity and survivability, after all this is a ballistic missile : is it a single warhead, or is it a MIRV? This has great importance of the vulnerability of this missile to ABM systems.
Keep in mind that Israel has improved the American Patriot system considerably.
Nato and some arab countries also posses patriots and Standart missile block III aboard western navy ships in the area can be used in an ABM role, when it is combined with SPY-AEGIS radars, or the new Thales radars. In the unlikely case of a missile heading for Russia this thing will face S400 and S500 systems. An attack on Moscow will have it facing the infamous Moswow ABM umbrellow.

- Accuracy : They say 'improved sensors' What does this mean? How accurate is this thing? Is it 1 km, 500m... This is not really important with nuclear warheads, but it is with conventional explosives.

It is significant that they tested a solid fueled missile. it's one of the first times, and it marks a great step forwards for Iranian missile tech.
Solid fuel missiles are more robust but more tricky to manufacture.

Just look at Russia's solid fueled Bulava


Looking forward to more info about this missile!

Edit : typos

[edit on 16-12-2009 by McFlemish]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   
I just did a post on this exact same thing about 1 hour ago. The difference is mine from the BBC said a Dajjal-2 which was medium to long range around 1,000Kilometers.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Another news story to add to the growing list that war is coming.

Check out my thread and the following links, I'd like to know what people think

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:42 AM
link   
This is completely identical to the "threat of long-range attack" from Iraq and Saddam's chemical weapons. Shortly before the war began, the media started scaring everybody in saying that Iraq could launch a chemical weapon into Europe at the press of a button.

Sure enough, people started lining up rank and file behind the media because they were scared of the long-range missiles. They don't even try hard anymore, people are just so damn ignorant. I've been out of the Army for 2 years now, and there are still loopholes and underhanded rules that would allow them to call me up again, but that's not going to happen. They'll end up having to shoot me, or more likely, I'll shoot them first. (It's still law that the US can shoot "deserters", but I firmly believe the aggressors are the deserters in this case, for deserting the core values of the armed forces.)

No, I'm not going to go out and shoot anyone, but I have my worries that it could get ugly if we start another war. People are not going to line up as fast as they did, and I think the government is going to get violent and oppressive.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by SyphonX]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   
If America deiced with Israel to go war with iran the victor of this war will not be america, but in fact it will be the other side.


If america thinks it win every single war, they are sadly mistaken, the iranians soilders and its army arent the like saddams, army whom just give up without a fight.


This war will make america look like as if america a little kitten lost in the woods.

No offence but if i were you i wouldnt start a war with them, the iranian army is alot differnt from Saddam time or any middle eastern country army.

Dont believe me? just wait and see, but i still pray we wont see a new war, for claims which aren't even true.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:56 AM
link   
reply to post by grantbeed
 


Does anyone know if the US/Israel has tested any new weapons recently? And if so how would you view this information compared to the other.

If really does help if people put their heads in to the story and actually compare and contrast, instead of looking at the situation isolated.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 06:00 AM
link   
I think it is safe to assume that both Israel and the US are testing 'new' weapons on a continuing basis. That's why it doesn't stand out this much. They do this all the time.

The American development of their ABM system in Europa and the continental States is common and much debated knowledge. One thing was not really new, but stands out because they didn't do it in decades : They (US) recently shot down a satelite with a modified Standart missile from a Burke, in reaction the the Chinese, who did the same with one of their old sats.

Israel is on constant alert for rockets from Gaza and Lebanon, so i think their air and other defences are at the ready to. If needed the US will furhter bolster that capabillity.

It's also a remarkable fact that a medium or long range ballistic missile is much easier to defend against and shoot down than the small Quassams and Grads that come out of Gaza and Lebanon. This due to the predictable trajectory of ICBM's.

Whereas Iran now tests a thing that is relatively new to them, Israel and US have had these systems for ages, so for them it's not 'new' tech.

IMO what Iran does is kind of like shooting at a sleeping tiger with a catapult.

Edit : spelling (am at work, need to type fast)

[edit on 16-12-2009 by McFlemish]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I need help with this issue, simply because i cant understand why Iran can't have its own nuclear program? is it not the case the US have one, Israel, the UK, Russia, China well i could go on, as you know, and it that a reason to go to war with a country because they wont be bullied in to doing what the big boys say they have to do. I look at it like this, if my neighbour said to me that i cant have a TV, i know its different, but the principle is the same, I would tell them where to go, and probably say something along the lines of, Who the F@~k do you think you are, telling me what i can and cant do? they say the missile system is as a deterrent , That sounds good enough to me, just another way of saying we wont be bullied. Or am i wrong I? I dont know.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by McFlemish
 


It's funny how Zionists brag about their nuclear "assets", are they familiar with the phrase "sheer hypocrisy". They are threatening to use nuclear weapons to stop a country from getting nuclear weapons?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by McFlemish
 


"If needed the US will furhter bolster that capabillity."

Sorry pal, but not happening. You Zionists only use the US as a convenient tool. You think it's some time of rag-doll puppet? There are more people fed up in America than are willing to die for a puny apartheid state. You're not worth much to us real Americans. You're not worth anything.

For the sake of the victims of the USS Liberty
- American Abroad.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by TSawyer]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by TSawyer
 


Well, I'm not a zionist, an not a Jew, and am no Israeli. I'm Catholicc European, and i'm certainly not happy about bragging with nuclear weapons. I don't like nuclear weapons myself, having a military background
You shoulden't say these kinds of things about someone that you don't know at all.

I'm just trying to give some usefull insights into the situation, making no partizan statements, unlike you. So please don't make this personal.

The fact of the matter is that nuclear weapons are and have always been weapons of detterence. Wether you threaten with their use in order to stop someone else from using theirs, or from obtaining them, it's all the same MAD (mutually assured destruction) doctrine that has been in place since these things were invented. That's how it works, simple. America and USSR invented it.

In this sense you could even argue that nuclear weapons are weapons that prevent their own use, and thus prevent another world war, although that might be a too perverse reasoning IMO.

In this case i have not seen anyone bragging litterally threaten Iran with nuclear onslaught. The shadow of the whole concept is looming heavily, but noone actually said it.

It's not only Zionists who brag with their nuclear weaponry, everyone does. remember the good old communist may day parades in Moscow, showing TOPOL, SS20 etc..., remeber China, North Korea, .... The list goes on. It's part of MAD doctrine, mutual deterrence.
In fact, Israel has always been fairly quiet about their weapons program, for obvious reasons.

IMO noone, no groups, organisations, states, and especially dictatorships and religious theocraties shoulden't have these weapons. In fact, in a perfect world noone should have them. But hey, they exist, and that's just a fact so deal with it. That's why we have military doctrines like MAD.

As for your second post : you an bet your **s of that the US is going to help Israel if it comes to it. Too much political and economical influence from Zionists in the US economy. That's a historical fact. NO personal opinion ogf no American is going to help this, unfortunately.

Think before you write any personally insult.

edit to complete

[edit on 16-12-2009 by McFlemish]

[edit on 16-12-2009 by McFlemish]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Have you ever noticed that a missile is only considered "long range" if it is able to reach Israel??

Makes you wonder where the slant is coming from on the story



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
I hardly see Iran testing a missile as stoking the fires or threatening to their neighbors.

I don’t own a gun but some of my neighbor’s do I am not threatened by the fact that they own guns though.

Sometimes my neighbors even practice shooting with their guns. I know that they do this so they can be relatively proficient with their weapons. I don’t think they do it in preparation to go on a Post Office shooting spree!

One would have to brain dead, deaf, dumb and blind, totally ignorant and pathetically brainwashed to not see Israel as the belligerent nation in this diplomatic farce as it has called repetitively for years now for sanctions and military actions against Iran to prevent it from doing something Israel illegally did herself and that’s to acquire nuclear weapons.

One would have to be equally impaired to not only see the hypocritical paranoia evidenced in those yet to be substantiated accusations.

Yet the sad and bizarre reality is one would have to be virtually mindless to not recognize the very real fact that when ever Western Governments start beating the preemptive war drums to end the threatening menace of unfriendly nations developing weapons of mass destruction that in every case the Western Governments have been wrong.

Nations like Iran are considered by Western Governments to be unfriendly nations for one reason and one reason only and that is they refuse to be dominated by the Western Governments and their corporations.

Where I come from that does not make them unfriendly that simply makes them selective.

Just say no to Government propaganda and the world will be a healthier, safer and more prosperous place!



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo5842
I need help with this issue, simply because i cant understand why Iran can't have its own nuclear program? is it not the case the US have one, Israel, the UK, Russia, China well i could go on, as you know, and it that a reason to go to war with a country because they wont be bullied in to doing what the big boys say they have to do. I look at it like this, if my neighbour said to me that i cant have a TV, i know its different, but the principle is the same, I would tell them where to go, and probably say something along the lines of, Who the F@~k do you think you are, telling me what i can and cant do? they say the missile system is as a deterrent , That sounds good enough to me, just another way of saying we wont be bullied. Or am i wrong I? I dont know.


Basically, it's a messy issue. In your example, your neighbor might be unhappy if you had signed a legally binding document promising you wouldn't get a TV and then he found evidence suggesting you might be getting one. He might ask you to clear things up and put his mind at ease. If you didn't play ball his suspicions would surely increase.

Don't get me wrong here - I'm not saying it's all Iran's fault. To me, all sides are as bad as each other and they're all out for themselves. That's life, always has been.

The bottom line is, rightly or wrongly, Israel and the US will not let Iran develop a nuclear weapon. End of story.

Personally I believe Iran is trying to emulate North Korea's approach. And if I was in charge of Iran that's exactly what I would do as well. And if I was in charge of Israel I wouldn't let them




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join