Iran

[juanesky 0]

Clicky

Quote

Iran Says Its Missiles Can Now Reach 1,250 Miles

1 hour, 50 minutes ago World - Reuters


By Parisa Hafezi

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran has developed a missile with a range of 1,250 miles and is determined to make its armed forces stronger still, a senior official was quoted as saying on Tuesday.



The announcement of a substantial increase in the range of the Islamic Republic's missiles, which could now reach southeast Europe, follows accusations by Washington and Israel that Tehran is secretly developing nuclear weapons.

Iran insists its nuclear program is aimed only at generating electricity.

"Now we have the power to launch a missile with a 2,000 km (1,250 mile) range," the news agency IRNA quoted influential former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani as saying. "Iran is determined to improve its military capabilities."

"If the Americans attack Iran, the world will change ... they will not dare to make such a mistake," Rafsanjani was quoted as saying in a speech at an exhibition on "Space and Stable National Security."

Tehran says its missiles are for defensive purposes and would be used to counter a possible Israeli or U.S. strike against its nuclear facilities.

In recent months, Iranian officials have frequently trumpeted their ability to strike back at any aggressor, and in August they announced they had successfully tested an upgraded version of the medium-range Shahab-3 missile.

Military experts say the unmodified Shahab-3 had a range of 810 miles which would allow it to strike anywhere in Israel. Shahab means meteor in Persian.

Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani said last month that a new "strategic missile" had recently been delivered to the armed forces, but did not give its range.

Israel has long accused Iran of working on a long-range missile, the Shahab-4, which would be able to reach Europe. Iran denies any plans to build a Shahab-4 missile.

Tehran recently announced plans to launch its own satellite into space next year. Military experts say a satellite launch rocket could easily be adapted for military purposes.

"We are very happy that our Defense Ministry ... will take us to the stage that we are able to use independent satellite technology in the fields of building, launching, positioning and receiving," Rafsanjani said.

So much for professing peace

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[billvon 2,427]

>So much for professing peace

We have shown them that we invade countries that don't have WMD's and negotiate with countries that do. If you were Iran, what would you do if you wanted to avoid an invasion?

[TheAnvil 0]

Iran is quite industrialized in many, many respects. They've been developing advanced missile technology for quite some time and I'm sure they will continue to do so.

One wonders how accurately they can get to such a distance.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[Darius11 12]

Here we go again one sided.

If you knew there is a country much stronger then you who has attack your neighbor for reasons that do not exist would you want a stronger military?

And also we have the strongest military in the world by far have we stooped developing new ways to wage war?

Open mind my friend, the ability to see both sides is a wonderful gift you should try it some time.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[TheAnvil 0]

Reasons that do not exist? I think not, but that's arguable. The US has actually attacked TWO of Iran's neighbors. Afghanistan and Iraq. I should think that one of the driving factors for Iran's military buildup would also be the Pakistani buildup as well.

I think our future relationship in Iran will be largely affected by how the US implements foreign policy in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The horrible memories of Pahlavi and SAVAK are still fresh in the minds of many middle aged and influential Iranians - a stain on the reputation of the US from the Cold War that will never be entirely washed away. Though the mullahs are tenuously holding to power against a pro-Western reformist movement with large popular backing, should the US make the mistake of supporting a brutal dictator in either Iraq or Afghanistan as we did with Hussein (for a time) or Pahlavi our relationship with Iran will be most rocky and confrontational.

Israel's actions with regard to the Iranian reactor will also have a large effect on US-Iranian relations. Though one can form a strong argument in favor of an Israeli strike on any reactor in Iran, any such strike will be considered by many - if not most - Iranians as Israel implementing the preferred US course of action. The political fallout for the US could be catastrophic.

Difficult situation over there. T'will be interesting to see how it turns out.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[juanesky 0]

Well, the irony in your post, is laughable.

The "we" you are referring to is most likely (in your case) to become a "them" if the US ever goes to war with Iran. You have made that clear.

It is a sad irony that muslim extremists are in war with america, but if we hit hard on terrorists that are muslims, we are damned for doing so.

Try for once to look at uneskewed facts of the israel-palestinian conflict, provided that you will actually see it in depth, and many issues in the middle east will come clear of an explanation..

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[juanesky 0]

Well Anvil, but let him explain these things, it is apparent that only he knows the answer...

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[billvon 2,427]

>It is a sad irony that muslim extremists are in war with america, but if we
>hit hard on terrorists that are muslims, we are damned for doing so.

I don't see anyone losing much sleep over the terrorists we kill. It's the innocent people we are killing that's drawing criticism. (Despite some people's opinions, not all muslims are terrorists.)

[beowulf 1]

Quote

>It is a sad irony that muslim extremists are in war with america, but if we
>hit hard on terrorists that are muslims, we are damned for doing so.

I don't see anyone losing much sleep over the terrorists we kill. It's the innocent people we are killing that's drawing criticism. (Despite some people's opinions, not all muslims are terrorists.)

I am willing to bet that the terrorists have killed more innocent people then the US has.

[Darius11 12]

Here is an idea lets stick to the issue in your post.
We have discussed by we I don’t mean me and you, but me and others including you have discussed the Palestinian and Israeli conflict to death.

But I think you are fooling your self and lying to every one and your self if you tell me that you would not do the same as Iran. By do the same I mean build your military when there is a strong military right next door who calls you an axis’s of evil. So explain what you would do if you were Iran?

That’s what it means to see both sides. What would you do if you were them?

I don’t have all the answers but because of being brought up in the US and Iran I don’t really have a home. I also don’t have the same Prejudices that many get by just growing up in an environment. So I can see both sides of an issue. As I have told you in other posts you seem to be 100% sure of your ideas. That is sad there is nothing that’s 100% in this world. Your inability to see that tells me you are very sure of your views witch makes your views one sided and not logical.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 2,427]

>I am willing to bet that the terrorists have killed more innocent people
>then the US has.

We killed approximately 350,000 innocent people during WWII by dropping atomic bombs on civilian cities. We killed around 220,000 during the firebombing of Dresden. Now, we may well have had good reason to kill all those innocent people (war is used to excuse a lot of bad behavior) but the terrorists have a long way to go before they reach those numbers.

[falxori 0]

Quote

Iran insists its nuclear program is aimed only at generating electricity

hmmm, yeah ok.

my biggest fear is not that Iran will openly attack, almost no one start open wars these days, and you can say a lot of things about Iran, but you can't say they are stupid.

i fear the day where a terror group will gain control of a nuke (or even radioactive waste).
and pretty much like 9/11, there will not be a "direct" target to go after...

they already back up many terrorist groups (freedom fighters as some of you prefer calling them) like hamas and hezballah and most of the weapons in lebanon and the gaza strip arrives from there (along with syria)

and Darius, from what i know of you, i'm pretty sure you would prefer a free Iran where you can do whatever you want. but i know you'd prefer seeing it happen naturally and not by force. so would I...

O

"Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

[beowulf 1]

Quote

>I am willing to bet that the terrorists have killed more innocent people
>then the US has.

We killed approximately 350,000 innocent people during WWII by dropping atomic bombs on civilian cities. We killed around 220,000 during the firebombing of Dresden. Now, we may well have had good reason to kill all those innocent people (war is used to excuse a lot of bad behavior) but the terrorists have a long way to go before they reach those numbers.

I wasn't referring to the grand total. Just the current war on terror, including Iraq,(since that is the terrorists current battle ground).

[billvon 2,427]

>Just the current war on terror, including Iraq,(since that is the terrorists
>current battle ground).

Well, let's see. We killed around 7000 innocent people during the Iraq war. (12,000 have been killed since the war began, but almost half of those people were killed by insurgents rather than by US action.) Terrorists have killed 3000 americans, 1000 US servicemen and around 100 US contractors. So looks like the score is 7000 to 4100, advantage US.

[falxori 0]

this kind of arithmetics on human lives makes me sick...

"Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

[juanesky 0]

Iran could do as Lybia did. Let inspectors come in and make sure that they are not trying to develop atomic weapons.

Since the fact that the war I see it is against terrorists (regardless of creed), you say it is ok to kill innocents, by strapping bombs and exploding where most civilian casualties will be inflicted, is ok with you. You conndone it. Yet in the other hand if any country does indeed kill these people or their leaders, you are the first one to protest about how murderous they are.....

I guess we don't have the same set of values.

I have seen both sides of the coin, what you fail to see is when arabs kill arabs, no condemnation is made, it is just swept under the rug, like nothing happens, it is useless for their skewed propaganda since not an israeli nor US was a party involved.

Until you don't see that can happen, then I think it is futile for us to discuss any further. As I still think any government, religion or people who think that woman are to be subjugated, with no rights, an under the will of men, is wrong (and this is not the only thing i see wrong).

Why don't you speak up against these injustices, since you were brought up here?

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[Darius11 12]

Edit: First I should tell you to stick to the issues. It seems you just want to say stuff for the sake of saying it. I also don't understand the difference in our values when you don't have a clue what my values are. Another point witch shows your blindness.

In Iran Woman have most the same rights as men.
They are allowed to vote, drive, own business, and about 50% of people in the universities are female. Yes they are not as free as woman in the US I wish they were..

You seem to bring allot of issues and assumptions witch I don't appreciate. I think any one who knows me knows I am a very peace loving person who sympathizes with all people. I value all life not just the people in my hometown or country.

I also don't like people who put words in my mouth.
I have NEVRE said it is good that suicide bombers kill innocent people and it is a low and stupid move for you to say I have.

I have always said I can understand the desperation of a suicide bomber. If you can't see the difference between what I said and what you imagined I said that’s your problem.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Michele 1]

Quote

As I have told you in other posts you seem to be 100% sure of your ideas. That is sad there is nothing that’s 100% in this world. Your inability to see that tells me you are very sure of your views witch makes your views one sided and not logical.

Darius, I don't really think you meant that. What about me? I look at many - not just "both" - sides, and see their positions fairly clearly. I have an opinion and a view...does that make my view one-sided and illogical?

I think that considering all opinions and views, as best as I can, has given me a pretty good handle on things. Do I understand why Iran is doing this? Sure. Do I like it? No. Do I think it creates another significant difficulty for both Iran and us to face? Sure. Do I think Iran is doing this simply for "electricity," as it is persistently claimed? No.

Do I understand the wider implications of Iran's action? Yes, as best I can given limited education but much research via credible sources. Do I understand the wider implications of the US action in Iraq? Yes, again given the same situation.

Saying someone who has a view that is clear and dearly held does NOT mean they haven't considered other perspectives. It may be that they have considered other perspectives, and have the view that they have. Perhaps that view doesn't agree with yours, but that doesn't make it wrong...it makes it another view to consider.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[beowulf 1]

[email]

Quote

>Just the current war on terror, including Iraq,(since that is the terrorists
>current battle ground).

Well, let's see. We killed around 7000 innocent people during the Iraq war. (12,000 have been killed since the war began, but almost half of those people were killed by insurgents rather than by US action.) Terrorists have killed 3000 americans, 1000 US servicemen and around 100 US contractors. So looks like the score is 7000 to 4100, advantage US.

While I question the validity of those numbers, even if they are correct the US Gov. does not target civilians, the terrorists do. They don't care who they kill even if it is one of their own. Life is very cheap for the terrorists.

[wmw999 2,147]

I don't think Darius is saying that you have to agree with him. I do think he's saying that you have to be able to see the reason behind some answers that oppose you to be able to counter them well, or to really say that you've considered your own answer.

You address issues rather than personalities. That's the difference, at least to me.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Darius11 12]

Do I understand why Iran is doing this? Sure***



that alone shows that you have considered the other side. I am not asking for every one to agree with me. I am just asking for every one to keep an open mind. You might be sure of your idea but it is not 100% right. Neither is mine.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 2,427]

>Let inspectors come in and make sure that they are not trying to
>develop atomic weapons.

Well, except last time we did that, we didn't believe the inspectors and invaded anyway - after the inspectors passed information to the US military. Would you allow inspectors in to your country if they were going to pass information to your enemies?

[billvon 2,427]

>even if they are correct the US Gov. does not target civilians, the terrorists
> do.

I agree; our motives are better than theirs. Nevertheless, we kill more innocent people than they do - even if our intentions are better.

[juanesky 0]

First time I ever heard you say anything about the women in Iran. Kudos for you.

"It seems you just want to say stuff for the sake of saying it."

I feel the same way, when you factually state that I perceive myself as 100% infallible and close minded, thank you for understanding....


"I also don't like people who put words in my mouth."

I think it is all about perceptions. Still waiting to hear on arabs condemning arabs for killing arabs. You don't hear that too much, it is most about what US-Israel does to palestinians. My point, which you are missing, is that for the last year or so, everything is only the fault of one person, or one country.

As you, I am not a natural US citizen, but will stand in what I believe in. I believe terrorists are a threat, and that the ones we are fighting are just trying to end the world as we know it.

Perhaps I could recommend of writers such as Naguib Mahfouz, Nawal El-Sadaawi, Gamal Al-Ghitani Sonallah Ibrahim, and actual history from the WWI and WWII era.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[beowulf 1]

Quote

>even if they are correct the US Gov. does not target civilians, the terrorists
> do.

I agree; our motives are better than theirs. Nevertheless, we kill more innocent people than they do - even if our intentions are better.

Not just intentions, but also tactics. The terrorist like to use civilians as human shields just so that it forces the US military to incur civilian casualties. Even if the US backed down to their demands and pulled out of all Islamic countries and desolved the Isreali state they would not be satisfied. Their goal would then be the conversion of all countries to Islam. Make the world Islamic.