http://www.albawaba.com/headlines/TheNews.php3?action=story&sid=254598&lang=e&dir=news

Iran's supreme leader on Sunday inaugurated a new ballistic missile that brings Israel within range of the Islamic republic, praising the event as a key moment in the defense of the Palestinian cause.

Yes this would make things rather problematic for Israel , so who's gonna win the race ? Syria or Iran ? Iran comes closer with this one .

this divine force is now doing the same for the Lebanese and the Palestinian people

Thatsa Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad .

Yahya Rahim-Safavi, the head of the Revolutionary Guards, said in his speech during the ceremony in Tehran that his force was now "ready to defend Iran against any threat".

So as timke goes by Iran gets stronger , when will then a decision be made to attack them ? At one point it will seriously be too late , as at one point Israel would actually become dependant on the consequences their actions may bring out . Expending into Yeretz Isroel becomes an issue then ........

What in the world are you blabbing about?

Iran is hardly a threat (or a legitamate one) to Israel. I'm sure the Iranians feel like they're on top of the world: surrounded by US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and with a all too public nuclear weapons program. Not to mention those good ol' protestors in the streets a few weeks ago.

Lots of people have ballistic missiles, its not like they'll ever use them.

And if they do, only two nations in the Middle East has nuclear weapons and a gigantic conventional militaries to match.

The US and Israel.

I can't wait to see the responses on this forum. Imperialism and hypocracy will abound. Fun days ahead!

What in the world are you blabbing about?


yes no clue for you old news

Iran is hardly a threat (or a legitamate one) to Israel

I agree , but Arik Scheinerman and his hordes dont . Hey Iraq wasnt even half the threat Iran is , yet it was enough to deal with .

I'm sure the Iranians feel like they're on top of the world: surrounded by US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and with a all too public nuclear weapons program. Not to mention those good ol' protestors in the streets a few weeks ago.


Those protester would be a very good possibility for Irsael & USA to get Iran dealt with , however as long as Ayatullah leads that land other options are necesarry ...... seeing things from USA & israels perspective that is .

Lots of people have ballistic missiles, its not like they'll ever use them.

They dont like the idea Eretz Yisroel is becoming reality and with the issues their allies and Shia brothers in Palestine & Lebanon have with Israel .

They could eventually use them .

And if they do, only two nations in the Middle East has nuclear weapons and a gigantic conventional militaries to match. The US and Israel.

Anyways Id like to mention you that this thread wasnt a dick-size competition as U like it to be , but a consideration about the time Israel would be giving Iraq untill they release their Yankeehounds on them .

But you had no idea ...... as you were saying at the beginning of your post .

:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
Anyways Id like to mention you that this thread wasnt a dick-size competition as U like it to be Actually it was, as your original post basicly boils down to 'look at our equipment'. And "who's going to win?" You offered no other points of discussion, which is the reason that I, and hopefully most others, will just let this thread die.

You see, this is what Arabs/Muslims SHOULD being doing: staying in their own countries and fighting jews.

Persol :
Actually it was, as your original post basicly boils down to 'look at our equipment'. And "who's going to win?

No , perhaps the article tends to promote that but my post did not . Have you even checked my comments ? DIid I question the power that israel has and that USA have ? No rather I wondered when they will do something about it :

* Yes this would make things rather problematic for Israel

Israel not happy

* so who's gonna win the race ? Syria or Iran ? Iran comes closer with this one .

Who to invade first , Iran or Syria . This says article says Iran .

* Thatsa Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad .

The Iranian motivation against Israel .

End so it goes on . You however rather deny the subject by dismissing it as such a contest it is not because USA and Israel win a million times .

And "who's going to win?"

Winning what ? Iran winning Israel ? LMAO . No the question is when is Israelk considering them a threat when they go on like this , and when will they send their hordes of Amerikans from Iraq to Iran . And weither this affair gets preferance over Syria .

You offered no other points of discussion

So those would be the ones above .

which is the reason that I, and hopefully most others, will just let this thread die.

What should rather die is such 2-lined responses dealing with 100% opinion no arguments and all because of the fact that you want to avoid the subject from its existence .

and to Youkilled etc .... Europe is so much easier :)

Worrying.

Does that mean we wil see U.S troops in Iran soon?

Cos if the Americans don't have a reason to march into Iran then, they do now.

Great news brother.........I hope these missiles will be able to carry nuclear heads soon insha Allah.

Enough is enough.

Originally posted by Drakkon
Worrying.

Does that mean we wil see U.S troops in Iran soon?

Cos if the Americans don't have a reason to march into Iran then, they do now.

No, the US troops must head to the west,to disarm the terrorist state of Israel.

Funny isn't it, Israel being threatened by her secret friend in the ME. Iran has extensive relations with NK, and I think that NK is testing her missiles in Iran (NK is not dumb). Now the Israeli's can attack Iran but I think it was P.S who said that the Jericho's weren't that accurate. Here is some info on the Shahab-3:


The Iranian Shahab-3 [alternatively designated Zelzal (Earthquake)] missile is said to be a derivative of the 1,000-1,300 kilometer range North Korean Nodong-1. The Shahab-3 will reportedly have a range of between 1,300 and 1,500 kilometers and be capable of carrying a 750-1,000 kilogram warhead. The Nodong missile was developed by North Korea with Iranian financial assistance.

On 15 December 1997 satellite reconnaissance of the Shahid Hemat Industrial Group research facility, just south of Tehran, detected the heat signature of an engine test for this new missile.

On 22 July 1998 Iran conducted its first flight test of this ballistic missile, which ended about two minutes into flight. The missile was launched at 06:00 from a firing range about 100 miles southeast of At launch, the missile was detected by two or three American satellites. After launch the missile flew approximately two minutes to the south-east. The rocket exploded or was detonated about 100 seconds into the flight, either because of a mishap or because the Iranians, satisfied with its performance, detonated it by remote control

Due to the missile's mid-air explosion, which was picked up by American satellites, it was initially believed that the test was at least a partial failure. However, following careful examination of the initial technical data, some experts reportedly concluded that the test was in fact successful.

It is believed that Iran may have purchased up to 10 of these NoDong missiles from North Korea.

There have been only four test firings of the Nodong missile and its improved Pakistani and Iranian descendants. The first test in North Korea was on 22 May 1993. The second was in Pakistan in April 1998, the third was the Shihab-3 in Iran on 22 July 1998, and the last test was in Pakistan on 14 April 1999. As of early 2000, no additional flight tests had taken place in Iran, or elsewhere.

the Iranian Defense Ministry told Iranian State television that the Islamic Republic had no intention of using its missiles to attack other countries.

Iran carried out a successful test of the Shahab-3 on 23 May 2002.

In May 2002, it was reported that Iran had decided to start production of the Shahab-3 missile, according to Turkish intelligence. The report said that Iran tested the Shihab-3 last month. Iran now plans to produce at least 150 of the missiles, which are capable of delivering a 1.000kg warhead to 1.300 km range. Israeli officials estimated Iran had so far been able to amass an arsenal of at least 20 Shihab-3s.

On 04 July 2002, the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz reported that Iran had successfully tested the Shahab-3 intermediate-range ballistic missile in previous days. The test was described as the most successful of seven or eight launches over the previous five years.

on July 7, 2003, Iran confirmed that it had conducted a final test on the Shahab-3. The missle has a reported range of 1,300 kilometers, bringing Israel within its reach.



Well it seems Iran is well on her way to getting this baby up and running, NK will benefit as well. I believe that Iran and NK have a special relationship in the sense Iran gives oil and NK weapons. Iran is also IMO on her way to developing a nuke, espeically after the war in Iraq. I would not be surprised if NK would help Iran in her nuke ambtions as well.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/images/map-long.gif

If Iran gets more NK missiles then London is even threatened. Don't laugh Iran could I stress the word could pose a signfigcant threat.

Boo whoo! Now the opressed Palestinian is calling this a dick size contest.

This is why your cause has no support outside of the idiotic and self-absorbed Arab/Muslim world: you keep insulting instead of inculding people.

Bashing your critics, especially with such childish rhetoric will never help.

Hey Proud Syrian, for starters the Irianians will not have nuclear weapons as long as we're around and second of all they aren't that stupid.

The Iranians don't care enough about the plight of the Palestinians to destroy Israel and themselves to liberate you guys.

Wake up.

Maybe someone should disarm the terrorist sitting in a Ramallah compound.

You guys should know how lucky you are just to have Abbas there now.

Boo whoo! Now the opressed Palestinian is calling this a dick size contest.

Whoa Pals. are Iranian, and Iranians are Arab, and Iranians are Sunni too. Wow the similiarities.

This is why your cause has no support outside of the idiotic and self-absorbed Arab/Muslim world

Actually quite the opposite there is Great support for the Pals. cause outside the Israeli-US alliance.

I'm saying that a lot more people may be inclined to not look at the Palestinians as terrorists, which they are not, and as opressed people if they could only fram the argument in a proper manner.

The closer you all associate yourself with whiping Israel off the map and using violence and murder, the farther you will move from peace and the reasonable people in the world.

P.S. Having Americans, who have witnessed a lot of terrorism recently, on your side, instead of indifferent would help your cause a lot.

Just trying to help. I want there to be two peaceful states, and not one whole Jewish or one whole Palestinian covering everything from Jordan to the Mediterrianian.

israel has the Arrow missile system to protect it against the Shihab-3. the defense minister said israel has nothing to worry about. i'm sure israel also has missiles that reach iran...which are probably better (israelis are geniuses, u know:D )

also, if iran gets real close to getting nuclear weapons, remember what we did to the iraqi nuclear reactor in the 80's (oh, no need to thank us for that :rolleyes: )

iran, a threat? puhhh--leeze

israel has the Arrow missile system to protect it against the Shihab-3. the defense minister said israel has nothing to worry about. i'm sure israel also has missiles that reach iran...which are probably better

The Arrow is good but A scud which the Arrow was designed to attack is a huge one staged missile, the No Dong is two stages, and is faster, and is harder to get. Unless I see a real missile test in real world conditions I doubt that the Arrow will work against the S-3.

, if iran gets real close to getting nuclear weapons, remember what we did to the iraqi nuclear reactor in the 80's

That time is now. Get those F-16's ready, with some F-15I's. That would cause a HUGE P.R diaster with the Shi'a community in Iraq, and the political ramifications with Russia could be great.

iran, a threat? puhhh--leeze

Who has been funding Pal. terror? Iran is very much a threat.

they're no more a threat as they were before the introduction of the Shihab-3

i wonder what would happen if they actually launched one and it caused some casualties inside Israel...

they're no more a threat as they were before the introduction of the Shihab-3


Only one response to that: :bugeye:

i wonder what would happen if they actually launched one and it caused some casualties inside Israel...

You mean you don't know? Nuke war with Israel, and really a huge nuke over Israel would be counter productive, many Pals. would also die. Iran should be investing in dirty bombs if she wants to do real damage.

are u for real?
man, u must think there are fanatics in the Israeli gov't.

no nuclear war.

if iran shoots an S-3 @ Israel it's committing suicide.
the iranian gov't is very fragile... do u know that half of the iranian population is ethnic Uzbek? (or one of those ex-soviet republics). and they HATE iran because they annexed their oil-rich land.

if someone was to attack iran, do u think Uzbeks will protect Iran?
and Iran will definitely be attacked. planes, rockets (israeli, american, nato possibly, even israel-hating UN would send some help.)
iran could be cut in half, lose those precious oil fields, regime change, etc. etc.
iran does NOT want to go to war.

That where you are otheadp seriously.

are u for real?
man, u must think there are fanatics in the Israeli gov't

Likud is a good start.

no nuclear war.


Your telling me that if Iran nukes Israel Israel will not nuke back? :bugeye:

if iran shoots an S-3 @ Israel it's committing suicide

How if there would be : no nuclear war? Frankly IMO the clerics would be 100% popular in Iran if they did that.

the iranian gov't is very fragile... do u know that half of the iranian population is ethnic Uzbek?

:confused: Ethnic groups:
Persian 51%, Azeri 24%, Gilaki and Mazandarani 8%, Kurd 7%, Arab 3%, Lur 2%, Baloch 2%, Turkmen 2%, other 1%

Uzbek? Iran dosen't even border Uzbekistan, what are you saying?

and they HATE iran because they annexed their oil-rich land.


Whom? Uzbekistan? LMFAO! They hardly have oil themselves, and most of Iran's oil is in the Abadan region where the Arabs are.

if someone was to attack iran, do u think Uzbeks will protect Iran?


Ok.... slowly walking away now. This Uzbek thing scared me a bit.

my uzbek info came from my ex-land lord who's Uzbek. (or from one of the ex-soviet republics, as i said). that's from his mouth.
i didn't verify this info...so u might be correct on this one.

but anyway.

iran sending a nuke @ israel, unlikely as they know that'll be the end of the current iran gov't. also, their means of delivery.... how are they gonna do it without being detected? also the risk of hurting neighbouring states is too high.

as for S-3 launch, they'll open a big fat pandora's box.
the avg. citizen in iran or any arab country couldn't care less about the evil zionist entity. it's fun to talk dirty about it, but when it comes to real war, the ordinary ppl (not muslim fanatics) want nothing to do with fighting some faceless far-away enemy to satisfy their oppressing government.

iran sending a nuke @ israel, unlikely as they know that'll be the end of the current iran gov't. also, their means of delivery.... how are they gonna do it without being detected?

I think by that point in time Iran could really care less about if she is going to be detected. Iran has extensive Shi'a connections in Lebanon also, so dirty bombs could used in tandem. Israel has around 300 nukes, even thermo, and neutron! But Still Iran is too large to completely destroy. For Israel all you need is one missile and the Zionist state is goners.

also the risk of hurting neighbouring states is too high.


Again... Iran cares?

as for S-3 launch, they'll open a big fat pandora's box.


Iran has already test launched many missiles, *provided the info.

the avg. citizen in iran or any arab country couldn't care less about the evil zionist entity.

Now O you have to think for a minute here. Does Iran give a shit? No, it's that simple the ppl in Iran are going to do as is told. And also a war with Israel would be VERY popular throughout the Muslim world, from Morroco to Indonesia. O the ppl of these countries don't matter you have to understand this.

i just remembered - my ex landlord was from Azerbaijan (Azeri)...which, if i'm not mistaken, is not hostile towards the evil zionist entity.
so [at least] 25% of iran's population hate iran's gov't.

as for "muslims unite" to destory israel, i have great respect for persians. yes, the gov't is fanatical in nature, but they're also very very smart. they're not the freakin Taliban to say to the US "You have no guts to attack us" (Mullah Omar (c) )
same goes for certain snakes and toads that hate the US but dare not declare "Jihad". cause when it comes to war, a little peepsquack and they're off the map.

in a world where only the Middle East exists, Iran attacking Israel would be very likely. but it's a different world. so it's extremely unlikely.

as for,
Again.... Iran cares?
oh yes. if they miss their spot it could ignite an inter-arab crisis. also, if they use nukes they'd be ostracized by the entire world. especially Russia, their most important ally.

So I would imagine that you now basicly agree with me. Great thanks. :D

your wording was perfect. "i would IMAGINE"..
:rolleyes:

umm what are we agreeing on, exactly?

Well since that post had zero value in terms of rebuttal, I thought you were basicly agree with me on most things.

oh yes. if they miss their spot it could ignite an inter-arab crisis. also, if they use nukes they'd be ostracized by the entire world. especially Russia, their most important ally.

Iran is not Arab so what inter-arab conflict do you speak of? Iran uses nukes she knows she is also nuked to kingdom kom, the US, and Israel would make sure of that. So again Iran....cares?

Drakkon

Does that mean we wil see U.S troops in Iran soon?

Thank you for noticing my point :)

Cos if the Americans don't have a reason to march into Iran then, they do now.

Well America still doesnt have a reason as Iran doesnt endanger them , but again it does endager Israel . Iran is Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad allied and is #1 serious enemy (now that Saddam is gone) if Israel behaves expansionist .

Syrian
Great news brother.........I hope these missiles will be able to carry nuclear heads soon insha Allah.
Enough is enough.

Come down from the clouds dreamer , if Iran would use nukes Iran no longer exists . Conventional country warfare against Israel is simply not optional and suicide .

Nico :
Well it seems Iran is well on her way to getting this baby up and running, NK will benefit as well. I believe that Iran and NK have a special relationship in the sense Iran gives oil and NK weapons

I agree , and this might make NK interesting in Israels eyes ....

Well not directly but ..... eventually .

Curly :
Boo whoo! Now the opressed Palestinian is calling this a dick size contest.

which they are not, and as opressed people if they could only fram the argument in a proper manner.


Oh please dont make it into an dialogue issue ok ?

Anyways it isnt a dicksize contest , but hey you dont read what is responded to you so I cant help you .

the farther you will move from peace and the reasonable people in the world.

from the reasonable people ? Like who ? you ? lol

Having Americans, who have witnessed a lot of terrorism recently, on your side, instead of indifferent would help your cause a lot.

Americans on our side ? I think we might get Jewish tewrworwrist on our side much sooner then Americans .

no really ..... are you joking me here ?

Othead
israelis are geniuses, u know

Unlike you :D

Really they should you for their main anti-conspiracy argument .

cus here we go again , another nominy for most hilarious sentence of the week :

man, u must think there are fanatics in the Israeli gov't.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHJAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

nono ........ its .... its........its THE UZBEKS

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAHJAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Nico this man is a winner I tell ya

But he did have a point , the government is fragile there is ethnic difference awareness (thus pariah potential) , and they do whine about reforming .

I wonder if that would drive Iran into a more fascist approach or rather will allow it to remain in controll of the powers .

otheadp

info came from my ex-land lord

U have a land-lord ? lol

Damn thats feudal shit right there where the hell is that from ?

No not Canada , is it ?

the avg. citizen in iran or any arab country couldn't care less about the evil zionist entity

ehm ....... yes they do

it's fun to talk dirty about it, but when it comes to real war, the ordinary ppl (not muslim fanatics) want nothing to do with fighting some faceless far-away enemy to satisfy their oppressing government.

Hey nobody likes to fight wars , but that doesnt mean they just like to talk about it .

snakes and toads

nono u got the toad dude

[QUOTE]Originally posted by thecurly1

Hey Proud Syrian, for starters the Irianians will not have nuclear weapons as long as we're around and second of all they aren't that stupid.
==================================
P S:

If you really think they give a monkey about you or being near to them, then you are too naive....the fact that you are near them give them more incentive to hurry up with their nuke programe.

===========================

The Iranians don't care enough about the plight of the Palestinians to destroy Israel and themselves to liberate you guys.

Wake up.
================================
P S:

You are sleeping and waking up on FOX JEWS....have ever heard of Hizbollah and who support it ??????????

=================================

Maybe someone should disarm the terrorist sitting in a Ramallah compound.

You guys should know how lucky you are just to have Abbas there now.
==================================
P S:

If the American terrorists attack Syria or Iran, Israel will be destroyed, this is not a threat but a promise.

So, we likely starting to get into a similar Mutual Assured Destruction stand-off like we had with Russia and America during the cold war, with an important difference:


Allthough Israel has a really large amount of nukes and delivery systems to effectively discourage the surrounding muslim countries, should it ever come to a nucleair exchange, Israel suffers from being a small densely populated country while it is unlikely to bath every small muslim village in radioactivity.

Sure, not too many people are looking forward to millions of deaths in Theheran, Tripoli, Damascus, Cairo, Riaad etc,,,,, but should a really ruthless person get access to some red button he would think that in the end there will be millions of muslim survivors in rural places, or far away like indonesia, while Israel no longer exists....

Do such persons exist ? I can imagine that persons like Bin Laden would be capable to sacrifice (buying one-way tickets to paradise in the name of Juhad) large numbers of muslimbrothers and sisters, while watching the show on tv. Also we have seen that self-sacrifice / suicide bombings etc. are anchored in religion and thus something to worry about.

The argument: "nobody would be mad enough to push there button...."

I wouldn't count on it

The argument: "nobody would be mad enough to push there button...."


That's the hope but not the reality, Israel is more at threat by terrorists still more than Iran. If you want to do real damage to Israel u have to nuke it, but with a dirty bomb. Surely if Iran can make nukes (which I suspect she soon can) she will give some to Hezbollah. Israel wouldn't know where to nuke, so she would go bonkers. If Israel nukes Saudi Arabia, Pakistan has to nuke Israel. Then Iran... if she has the bomb then maybe Israel may avoid a overt nuke war.

The Arrow is a point defense terminal phase intercept ABM system with a lateral range of about 40km and a service ceiling of over 100,000 feet. You need a few batteries to protect a capitol-sized city. However, if implemented in such a manner, its capacity exceeds that of the PAC-3 Patriot - which has a 10/10 engagement/kill ratio against Iraqi Ababil-100s and Al Samoud-2s. Arrow has a lot going for it. The only thing it doesn't have is a successful combat intercept, which has never been tried.

As far as Iran becoming a nuclear power goes, I'm pretty skeptical they'll be allowed to. All the cool kids wage preemptive wars these days.

Since u are the engineer, (put also working for Raytheon) if u are going to become a propagandist on this don't bother answering. But can the Arrow actually shoot down a mutli-staged rocket like the S-3? I highly doubt it, Scuds and a No Dong are different in size and I would say also in speed, and altitude.

While GK didn't answer my post in a different thread, this sounds like a good thread to bring up my point again.

Let's say Iran does the bomb. Israel has had it for about 30 years (late 60s/early 70s) and has used it exactly ZERO times. How many days will it be before a nuclear pro-Palestian Muslim country uses its weapon? (Pakistan can't spare any because of its issues with India. Pakistan as a country hates India more than Pakistan as a people hate Israel.)

So here is what the world thinks about the area:

Israeli's over pro-Palestians, lots of dead pro-Palestians, some dead Israelis. No nukes.
Pro-Palestians over Israelis, every Israeli dead, most pro-Palestians dead too. Nukes will most likely be used.

I am not trying to say Israeli's lives are more valuable than pro-Palestian lives, I am saying that until pro-Palestians let go of their hate and really really try peace in the face of anger, the world will tend to side against them because the world will have a hard time sitting by as another holocaust happens. I think that Israeli fights so hard in the several wars they have had because they understand its the survival at stake. Not of there country, but of there people. To loose in an attack on Israel is to loose every Jew in Israel is their way of thinking.

One wrong is already happening, two wrongs doesn't make anything better. And once every Israeli is dead, how will their culture survive? Who will they hate then? If hate is all that propels you, it won't stop until it eats the society apart. Or until the hatred ends.

Which will it be for pro-Palestians?

(Pakistan can't spare any because of its issues with India. Pakistan as a country hates India more than Pakistan as a people hate Israel.)


Partially true, but you neglect the simple fact that Pakistan can't attack Israel. Her missiles don't have the range.

Pro-Palestians over Israelis, every Israeli dead, most pro-Palestians dead too. Nukes will most likely be used.


That is not true, if you are talking about a conventional nuke surely u are correct. But chances are that Iran and the whole lotte have nukes for this penis thing (mines bigger biz). But dirty nukes and even tactical nukes are more likely to be used. I mean u can do some damage in a settlement with a dirty nuke. So I have to disagree with that statement.

That last post probably won't get any action, since I mean who wants peace in the middle east? :rolleyes:

As I did a little more poking around this site: http://www.wisconsinproject.org

I found interesting little tidbits about China helping Iran. Wait, China helping Iran to develop bombs? China is helping NK, Iran, and probably others, but the big question is why?

Here's a theory: China is seeding nuke programs all over the world to become the barbarians at the gates of the US. Once the US is tied up in a limited nuclear exchange/war with a ME country or NK, China invades Taiwan. Nature abhors a vacuum, and that's exactly what China is trying to make. It will be for China to fill that vacuum. Only then will China find out its lonely at the top.

BTW any nuclear explosions in Israel means lots of fallout for Jordan and others, so Iran with nukes may not mean much. Its the billion dollar weapon you can't really use. Ask the US, Russia, China, India or Pakistan. South Africa realized the cost of keeping it safe outweighed the perceived safety it brought. South Africa assessment was that a nuke was more likely to be used on SA than against its enemies. Imagine if Hezbollah got control of the Iranian missle and launched it at Israel. Who pays for that? All of Iran. Iran as much as it talks, probably doesn't want to find out how many nukes Israel does have (about 300 small ones I hear) and Israel has the weapons to deliver them to Tehran.

Either you won't use them and they do nothing but waste your resources, or you do use them and you end up dead.

As I did a little more poking around this site: http://www.wisconsinproject.org


Great website.

I found interesting little tidbits about China helping Iran. Wait, China helping Iran to develop bombs? China is helping NK, Iran, and probably others, but the big question is why?


Did this actually shock you? LOL, common China is doing for one simple reason. To counter the US, proxy vs. proxy. I mean the US did no different with Israel, the UK, etc. The obvious answer to your question has little to do with Taiwan, albeit it may be a small facotr. But it is so that China gains allies in regions where she has none. If you notice China is picking the Pariah states, Nk, Iran, Pakistan. Now Russia is helping Iran more than China, so what does that tell u? Money.

BTW any nuclear explosions in Israel means lots of fallout for Jordan and others

:bugeye: a dirty bomb? it can;t even destroy a city, it can cause massive damage but in a small area.

Ask the US, Russia, China, India or Pakistan

Funny because the only states that are decreasing there stockplies are the US and Russia. The rest are on the up and up!

South Africa assessment was that a nuke was more likely to be used on SA than against its enemies.

Some say that SA got rid their Nukes because they didn't want the blacks to have it. Funny they gave it up in 1994.

Either you won't use them and they do nothing but waste your resources, or you do use them and you end up dead.

Of course that is foolhearty to say if that were true, then why didn't the US and the USSR go to war? Nukes are just as much peacemakers as killers.

Originally posted by nico
Since u are the engineer, (put also working for Raytheon) if u are going to become a propagandist on this don't bother answering. But can the Arrow actually shoot down a mutli-staged rocket like the S-3? I highly doubt it, Scuds and a No Dong are different in size and I would say also in speed, and altitude. You're right, to an extent. The altitude and speed of an IRBM versus a SRBM is radically different in the midcourse phase, where the stages have finished burning and all that remains is the post-boost vehicle (usually the nose cone/reentry shroud and warhead).

Arrow and PAC-3 are terminal phase intercept systems though. They are designed to destroy an incoming warhead in a kinetic impact, as it falls from the exosphere almost straight down. In this phase the differences between a SRBM and IRBM PBV's trajectory are imperceptible.

They will work against IRBMs just as well as they'll work against SRBMs, as long as the warhead impact point is within their lateral footprint.

I know that the Arrow doesn't actually hit the incoming missile it expoldes near it. But the No Dong could be roaring in a Mach what? 12, 18? While the Arrow is going at Mach 9, I highly doubt that the Arrow can destroy a small and fast target like the S-3. But also let's say that there are decoys even the NMD (joke) can't do anything about that. I think the Arrow is a excellant missiles (better than the PAC 3), but against a IRBM like the S-3, or a ICBM it is fruitless.

The decoy issue is a myth used by pundits to discredit ABM research. Decoys are a non-issue with unitary missiles like the Shahab-3 or No Dong-1, which are designs too crude to be able to afford space for onboard countermeasures. You need a MIRV-capable airframe for that, and even then, there are no existing methods designed to obfuscate ground or weapon sensors. The Soviets had been working on countermeasures at the end of the Cold War as a reflexive response to the American SDI, but they never got off the ground, so to speak.

A Shahab-3's PBV falls anywhere between mach 12 and 14, roughly, depending on its trajectory on reentry. Sure, the closure rate is fast, but it's designed to be. There are limits to the Arrow's projected capacity. I wouldn't put it up against the RV from an ICBM, since they're hardened and fall faster/steeper. However, the Iranian IRBM thread is precisely what it was designed to mitigate.

ABM is discredited enough, no one actually believes it can work. Also many members of the US military don't want NMD, it's sucking up $60 Billion! For a system that fails under the most favourable of circumstances.

There are limits to the Arrow's projected capacity. I wouldn't put it up against the RV from an ICBM, since they're hardened and fall faster/steeper. However, the Iranian IRBM thread is precisely what it was designed to mitigate.

So what are u really trying to say, that the Arrow can shot down a S-3? I don't think so, maybe a scud, or a frog (lol) but not a IRBM i doubt it. Also since Iran is farther away wouldn't the missiles have to higher and essentially faster than if it were launched in W.Iraq?

I said what I said. Period. If the Shahab-3's RV falls within the Arrow's engagement bubble, then the Arrow is designed to be able to destroy it. Make whatever guesses you will, but all they amounts to are poorly informed conjecture at this point. Nobody is forecasting what the Arrow can do (I'm not, at least), because that data is tenuous to nonexistent. All I am saying is that the Arrow is designed in concept to intercept these types of missiles.

Furthermore, that the RVs of SRBMs and IRBMs look very similar in their terminal phases of flight. Thus, a weapon that works functionally well against one should presumably work well against the other.

As for NMD, I'm not a big fan of it. I like the idea because it's fantastic, and I support it insofar as I do all forms of research, but that's about it. Current ballistic missile threats are regional and a robust concert of theater-based systems can contain a threat nicely. Plus, TMD technology is more mature than NMD is. Pragmatically the money being spent on NMD would accomplish more in the pursuit of TMD technology, and sooner.

Make whatever guesses you will, but all they amounts to are poorly informed conjecture at this point.

How so? and you are telling me that a Scud is just as easy as a No Dong? Further more you and me don't know enough about the No Dong missile to actually dissect the situation. We assume that it has no counter-measures. I remeber watching a doc on NMD, and a expert said that is it likely if a nation can launch a missile that she can put some ballons in it as well,or even chaff.
Now I am not saying that NK has counter measures, but surely it can.

Arrow

If you were the defence minister of India, would u purchase the Arrow. (India is a potential customer)?

Originally posted by nico
and you are telling me that a Scud is just as easy as a No Dong?In its terminal phase, RVs from the two are strikingly similar. Almost as easy, yes. Midcourse intercept, on the other hand, is where a No Dong-1 is hard to touch compared to a Scud-C derivative.
Now I am not saying that NK has counter measures, but surely it can. They can't at their current state of refinement. I can elaborate on this if you'd like me to.
If you were the defence minister of India, would u purchase the Arrow. (India is a potential customer)? That depends on a great many things of course, but for the sake of discussion, sure I would. New Delhi is at the edge of the Pakistani M-11's operational range.

ps- It would behoove you to stop trolling and not label benign and informative postings as arrogant.

For it was not your post it was this:

Make whatever guesses you will, but all they amounts to are poorly informed conjecture at this point.


If that isn't arrogance... then I don't know what is. I don't know u've always gave me the impression of a person I wouldn't like in real life. Sorry, I just don't like you. So end of our conversation. Sorry.

:(

Originally posted by nico
If that isn't arrogance... then I don't know what is. I don't know u've always gave me the impression of a person I wouldn't like in real life. Sorry, I just don't like you. So end of our conversation. Sorry.That's a rather sorry excuse for justifying inaptitude for rational discourse, on an internet message board of all places, but I guess it's all you've got, so I'll give it to you.

plz dnon stp talknig 2 me dood :( :( :(

So, does your little arrow stop smuggled nuke in a truck supposedly carrying vegetables???

Originally posted by Vortexx
So, does your little arrow stop smuggled nuke in a truck supposedly carrying vegetables??? Read -> Comprehend -> Post. The Arrow is an Antiballistic Missile. kthxbye.

Inepititude? That's on your side because u seem to have a hard on, on yourself ,and u don't seem understand how much of a arrogant shit u sound like. Don't bother me man u make me sick.

The political implications are far more interesting than the ballistic mumbo jumbo regarding some wannabe big little arrow, we got our tecforums for that...

I'm saying all this because it could be that a nuclear war in the middle-east is not initiated by an arab country/government launching missiles, but rather a terrorist group for instance, smugling a bomb into israel (a bit like "the sum of all fears"), hoping to provoke some outrage nuclear response from israel towards other arab countries, wich in turn have to declare full scale war.

What do you think, in the terrible event a smuggled nuclear bomb explodes in Tel Aviv, you think the shocked israeli can keep their cool and take their time to figure out the exact responsible before action is taken ???

Originally posted by Vortexx
So, does your little arrow stop smuggled nuke in a truck supposedly carrying vegetables???

If the truck files then yes ;)

Still, the vegetables would cause some serious fall-out hazard when they shoot down the truck, incoming tomtatoes...!!!:p

Originally posted by Vortexx
The political implications are far more interesting than the ballistic mumbo jumbo regarding some wannabe big little arrow, we got our tecforums for that...Yeah, I know. And I'll be happy to move a discussion of this subject there where we can be free of its obnoxious political connotations (which I so despise). Although most in this section probably wouldn't find it as interesting, I suppose.

The truck bomb argument is used often in attempt to discredit various ABM systems, but it's basically a red herring in that it just goes to show there's more than one way to skin a cat. Not that missile defenses are useless in concept. Surreptitiously delivered weapons are indeed a plausible scenario that no extense of gee-whiz technology can do much about, but they're only one method of delivery out of many, and a method that's largely unquantifiable. Not to mention it's much less likely to be used in an overt attack because of its low reliability and large time window tolerance.

As for your question, I don't know. I'm an engineer, not a political scientist, and missile defense happens to be my field of work.

nico snuck out of his playpen to whimper
lol omg u r dum hur hurr droolcarry on, young troll. gg.

U do realize I am the only one giving you the time of day. So don't be coy, go kill more children with your death weapons.