What does iran gain by denying the explosion at the military base?

Originally posted by St Udio
i will see if i can find the aarticle i read on Monday (14 nov)

it was about the explosion which killed the leading Iranian missile scientist as he was adapting the nuclear warhead to separate from the launch vehicle. this is new technology to them and they are experimenting,

i do not believe there are Army Manuals available for the nose cone separation on ballistic missiles

This is only believable if they had nukes, which they don,t so why have a nuke warhead if you don.t have nuclear material which they dont. Plus the accident was caused by ammunition being moved not a nuke war head.

Originally posted by filosophia
Other than making the u.s. And israel mad, what real gains does iran make by ignoring an attack on their military base?

If the US or Israel is responsible (my guess is Israel), then Iran is playing right into their hands by ignoring the attack. I'm actually surprised that Iran hasn't been more vocal about Stuxnet, Duqu and the "mysterious" assassinations of their top scientists. These are all direct attacks on them and you would think they'd be very vocal about wanting the International community to help them ferret out the responsible party/ parties. Instead they act like nothing is happening, thus leaving themselves open to continued attacks. As I've mentioned in other threads I don't see Israel ever overtly launching a traditional military attack on Iran, they don't need to. They can do far more damage through these covert attacks.

Originally posted by chapterhouse
reply to post by filosophia

 

Garduian is part of MSM

Yes I know this and even mentioned it why are you telling me this?

reply to post by chapterhouse


Now listen was 2 bases that went poof anyone out there going to say was an accident period

Could denial mean that Iran does not have to make a military response?

If they admit the explosion was caused by an outside party then they would be duty bound to respond which is probably the reason for it.

If it was an accident and they did not use it to rattle sabres it shows they dont want war.

So accident or attack it tells me that Iran does not want a war.

On ther other hand if it was an attack it tells me the West do. Expect more soon.

reply to post by filosophia


well I would agree that some covert attack would garner more attention...although I'm not sure the news likes to sensationalize things...

Link


Bottom line I guess that anything is possible

Originally posted by SavedOne

Originally posted by filosophia
Other than making the u.s. And israel mad, what real gains does iran make by ignoring an attack on their military base?

If the US or Israel is responsible (my guess is Israel), then Iran is playing right into their hands by ignoring the attack. I'm actually surprised that Iran hasn't been more vocal about Stuxnet, Duqu and the "mysterious" assassinations of their top scientists. These are all direct attacks on them and you would think they'd be very vocal about wanting the International community to help them ferret out the responsible party/ parties. Instead they act like nothing is happening, thus leaving themselves open to continued attacks. As I've mentioned in other threads I don't see Israel ever overtly launching a traditional military attack on Iran, they don't need to. They can do far more damage through these covert attacks.

They are vocal about the scientists
www.presstv.ir...

They don.t hesitate to blame the mossad so it seems like if they have no reason to deny a attack it was probably just an accident.

Originally posted by filosophia
My guess is the msm is saying it was a mossad attack to make U.S. More competent and make iran seem more dishonest.

Mossad, US?

Originally posted by colin42
Could denial mean that Iran does not have to make a military response?

If they admit the explosion was caused by an outside party then they would be duty bound to respond which is probably the reason for it.

If it was an accident and they did not use it to rattle sabres it shows they dont want war.

So accident or attack it tells me that Iran does not want a war.

On ther other hand if it was an attack it tells me the West do. Expect more soon.

Right, either way it shows they dont want an attack. And since they usually catch "hitchhikers" its difficult for the cia to slip in. maybe they did, anything is possible, I can see why they would hide their security flaws but if the msm is posing the mossad theory ill reserve my judgement.

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Originally posted by filosophia
My guess is the msm is saying it was a mossad attack to make U.S. More competent and make iran seem more dishonest.

Mossad, US?

U.s./israel they are on the same team right? Maybe not I certainly dont trust either.

reply to post by chapterhouse


No one gets this? last time any explosions ever happened like this was bombing of germany in ww2. This just doesnt happen. Pull a clue here!

Originally posted by chapterhouse
reply to post by chapterhouse

 

Now listen was 2 bases that went poof anyone out there going to say was an accident period

Got a link for that? I hear it was two exosions at the same base.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

No mention of two bases.

Iran would never admit to being struck by an Isreal IMO, what would Isreal say? "so what are you going o do about it?" Iran would be placed into a situation whereby if it responded it would be seriously attacked (which it doesnt want), if it didnt respond it would look like a really weak player on the islamic world scene. Hense better to claim accident.

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Originally posted by filosophia
My guess is the msm is saying it was a mossad attack to make U.S. More competent and make iran seem more dishonest.

Mossad, US?

U.s./israel they are on the same team right? Maybe not I certainly dont trust either.

edit on 15-11-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)

What does it matter that you don't trust them? The Mossad is Israeli, how would it's actions make the US look more/less competent?

Originally posted by TheMindWar
Iran would never admit to being struck by an Isreal IMO, what would Isreal say? "so what are you going o do about it?" Iran would be placed into a situation whereby if it responded it would be seriously attacked (which it doesnt want), if it didnt respond it would look like a really weak player on the islamic world scene. Hense better to claim accident.

Except they do admit when one of their scientists are killed by the mossad or that israel is behind stuxnet so they do admit when they are attacked.

reply to post by filosophia


MSN could be pointing to mossad to deflect the real force behind it and to goad Iran further. MSN like all mainstream report what they are told.

I had my doubts about the rumours that the Wests next target head of state to be removed was Irans but it looks more and more likely everyday.

Get ready to donate more bodies on both sides to corperation earth because it certainly is not for home defence.

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Originally posted by filosophia
My guess is the msm is saying it was a mossad attack to make U.S. More competent and make iran seem more dishonest.

Mossad, US?

U.s./israel they are on the same team right? Maybe not I certainly dont trust either.

edit on 15-11-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)

What does it matter that you don't trust them? The Mossad is Israeli, how would it's actions make the US look more/less competent?

Look if you think u.s. And israel have no connection thats fine but I dont see it that way.

reply to post by filosophia


It does not matter what Iran does. The agenda is set. They are going down and people are going to die. I pray for the innocent people of Iran. What is coming is a crime, but not unexpected.