T Nation

France Alarmed at Obama's Iranian Capitulation


#1

Unbelievable. Even the leftist regime in France is alarmed at Obama's recklessnes...

Obama's antagonism towards Netanyahu deepens:

Well I'm sure I don't have to tell you what I think about all this. I'm going to bow out of PWI for a while now. Good talking to some of you. Au revoir.


#2

Well he did say the France had the leading role in the world.

This is a no brainer. Iran already has missiles that can reach Paris. Much like the Israelis they can’t afford to bullshit around.


#3

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Well he did say the France had the leading role in the world.

This is a no brainer. Iran already has missiles that can reach Paris. Much like the Israelis they can’t afford to bullshit around. [/quote]

And France already has missiles–with nuclear warheads attached-- that can reach Teheran.

Or Tel Aviv, or Tokyo, or Toledo.

Or any other major city in the world, whether it begins with T or not.

Sounds kind of like a police department that has Blackhawk helicopters with mounted M60 machineguns worrying that the criminals might now have Saturday night specials with “cop-killer” Teflon-coated bullets.


#4

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Unbelievable. Even the leftist regime in France is alarmed at Obama’s recklessnes…

Obama’s antagonism towards Netanyahu deepens:

Well I’m sure I don’t have to tell you what I think about all this. I’m going to bow out of PWI for a while now. Good talking to some of you. Au revoir.[/quote]

Of course, everybody eventually realizes the emperor has no clothes.


#5

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Well he did say the France had the leading role in the world.

This is a no brainer. Iran already has missiles that can reach Paris. Much like the Israelis they can’t afford to bullshit around. [/quote]

The most capable ballistic missile deployed by Iran is the Shahab-3, which has a range of 1,300-1,500 kilometers. The Ghadr-1 and Sajjil BM programs are still in the research and development phase, and will have an estimated range of 1,600 and 2,200-2,400 kilometers, respectively. All fall far short of Paris. You are either nescient of Iran’s BM programs or being deliberately disingenuous. I’m inclined to believe the former conclusion.


#6

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Well he did say the France had the leading role in the world.

This is a no brainer. Iran already has missiles that can reach Paris. Much like the Israelis they can’t afford to bullshit around. [/quote]

The most capable ballistic missile deployed by Iran is the Shahab-3, which has a range of 1,300-1,500 kilometers. The Ghadr-1 and Sajjil BM programs are still in the research and development phase, and will have an estimated range of 1,600 and 2,200-2,400 kilometers, respectively. All fall far short of Paris. You are either nescient of Iran’s BM programs or being deliberately disingenuous. I’m inclined to believe the former conclusion.[/quote]

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.


#7

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Well he did say the France had the leading role in the world.

This is a no brainer. Iran already has missiles that can reach Paris. Much like the Israelis they can’t afford to bullshit around. [/quote]

The most capable ballistic missile deployed by Iran is the Shahab-3, which has a range of 1,300-1,500 kilometers. The Ghadr-1 and Sajjil BM programs are still in the research and development phase, and will have an estimated range of 1,600 and 2,200-2,400 kilometers, respectively. All fall far short of Paris. You are either nescient of Iran’s BM programs or being deliberately disingenuous. I’m inclined to believe the former conclusion.[/quote]

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

It should be a “no brainer” for him.


#8

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

Considering the you’re all idiots line it started with, that is my favorite slow-motion faceplant of the current fiscal year.


#9

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

Considering the you’re all idiots line it started with, that is my favorite slow-motion faceplant of the current fiscal year.[/quote]

It was indeed not Sifu’s finest moment on PWI.


#10

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

Considering the you’re all idiots line it started with, that is my favorite slow-motion faceplant of the current fiscal year.[/quote]

It was indeed not Sifu’s finest moment on PWI.[/quote]

Sifu’s claim is not totally unfounded:

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/irans-ballistic-missile-program

Now of course there is a lot of conflicting information with respect to Iran’s surface to surface missile program, but the claims that they have missiles that can reach Europe are not totally unfounded. They are not totally founded either. Most indicators suggest that they have missile technology that can make the distance, but are to inaccurate to be useful militarily. And we do not know everything about their development.
What specific capabilities are nobody seems sure, but that they are a rapidly increasing threat is not in doubt by anybody save obama’s faith in the mullahs.


#11

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

Considering the you’re all idiots line it started with, that is my favorite slow-motion faceplant of the current fiscal year.[/quote]

It was indeed not Sifu’s finest moment on PWI.[/quote]

Sifu’s claim is not totally unfounded:

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/irans-ballistic-missile-program

Now of course there is a lot of conflicting information with respect to Iran’s surface to surface missile program, but the claims that they have missiles that can reach Europe are not totally unfounded. They are not totally founded either. Most indicators suggest that they have missile technology that can make the distance, but are to inaccurate to be useful militarily. And we do not know everything about their development.
What specific capabilities are nobody seems sure, but that they are a rapidly increasing threat is not in doubt by anybody save obama’s faith in the mullahs.[/quote]

Your first and third links are yellow journalism, and your second merely corroborates the data I introduced in my post.


#12

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

Considering the you’re all idiots line it started with, that is my favorite slow-motion faceplant of the current fiscal year.[/quote]

It was indeed not Sifu’s finest moment on PWI.[/quote]

Sifu’s claim is not totally unfounded:

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/irans-ballistic-missile-program

Now of course there is a lot of conflicting information with respect to Iran’s surface to surface missile program, but the claims that they have missiles that can reach Europe are not totally unfounded. They are not totally founded either. Most indicators suggest that they have missile technology that can make the distance, but are to inaccurate to be useful militarily. And we do not know everything about their development.
What specific capabilities are nobody seems sure, but that they are a rapidly increasing threat is not in doubt by anybody save obama’s faith in the mullahs.[/quote]

Your first and third links are yellow journalism, and your second merely corroborates the data I introduced in my post. [/quote]

I suppose you didn’t understand what I meant when I said his remarks were ‘not totally unfounded’ and ‘not totally’ founded.


#13

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I want Sifu to tell us the killing radius of the warheads carried by these missiles as well. Just to see if he has learned what the term means.
[/quote]

Considering the you’re all idiots line it started with, that is my favorite slow-motion faceplant of the current fiscal year.[/quote]

It was indeed not Sifu’s finest moment on PWI.[/quote]

Sifu’s claim is not totally unfounded:

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/irans-ballistic-missile-program

Now of course there is a lot of conflicting information with respect to Iran’s surface to surface missile program, but the claims that they have missiles that can reach Europe are not totally unfounded. They are not totally founded either. Most indicators suggest that they have missile technology that can make the distance, but are to inaccurate to be useful militarily. And we do not know everything about their development.
What specific capabilities are nobody seems sure, but that they are a rapidly increasing threat is not in doubt by anybody save obama’s faith in the mullahs.[/quote]

Your first and third links are yellow journalism, and your second merely corroborates the data I introduced in my post. [/quote]

I suppose you didn’t understand what I meant when I said his remarks were ‘not totally unfounded’ and ‘not totally’ founded.[/quote]

Sifu made asserted that “Iran already has missiles that can reach Paris”, which I demonstrated to be a categorically invalid statement. My argument was not an argumentum ad lapidem, but based upon current open-source intelligence. Your hasty goggle search does nothing to change that. There is no evidence that Iran’s ballistic missile programs have the capabilities that Sifu definitively claims they do.


#14

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#15

Varqanir and Bismark since you both want to come at me like I’m an idiot, I’m going to school you fools. I have on several occasions discussed this subject at length and gone into great detail.

Just because you believe that only the most advanced and complex technology used by the US can be used to deliver nukes, that’s just not so. There are many different types of missile technologies available but you don’t realize that. You also don’t realize that with resourceful people where there is a will there is a way.

The Iranians have been working on solid fueled rockets for years. The Sejil is a solid fueled rocket. One of the major advantages solid fueled rockets have over liquid fueled is because there is no fuel tanks or rocket motors they are much, much, easier to scale up to larger sizes with greater range. Basically all they are is a jumbo sized bottle rocket.

An important point to understand is they don’t need ICBM’s to reach the other side of the planet and we are not as safe and invulnerable as people want to pretend we are. It has been well known for many years that the Iranians experimented with launching scud missiles from barges and ships at sea. They could put ships a thousand miles off of the East and West coasts and hit hit the entire country with what they have now.

Besides all that there are other ways to skin a cat.

It has been well known for over a decade that in 2001 Iran bought air launched,nuclear capable, kh-55 cruise missiles from the Ukrainians. Those missiles have a range of 1550 miles. Launched from inside Iranian territory they could reach most of Europe. If they had a long range airliner like the Malaysian one that disappeared without a trace, they could reach the US with cruise missiles.

Since buying those missiles they have been reverse engineering them and now they have unveiled their own version that can be ground launched with a rocket motor. It wouldn’t surprise me if that same missile could also be launched from a boat or a ship.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:QETS5FD77HIJ:www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.645898+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


#16

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Varqanir and Bismark since you both want to come at me like I’m an idiot, [/quote]

On the contrary. I try to distance myself from idiots whenever possible, and so have no intention of coming at you.

Outstanding. Continuing your education will do much good. Might want to put a comma after the word “school”, however, just to separate it from the next clause.

Those are impressive credentials. Please continue.

I don’t believe that, have never believed that, and have never made a statement that would imply that I believed that. If you think you can demonstrate otherwise, be my guest.

I do realize that, actually. Again, I apologise if any of my preceding posts indicated to you that I did not.

As a highly resourceful person myself, I am acutely aware of this.

So what you’re saying, essentially, is that the major advantage of a solid-fueled rocket is that it has solid fuel. Astounding. To hear some people talk, you’d think rocket science was hard.

Ah, yes. The SCUD missile. About a deadly as a Cadillac filled with high explosives launched from a catapult. Off a barge.

Maybe they could hit the East or West Coasts. Maybe.

If only we had surveillance satellites and a navy, we might be able to detect and stop them. Alas.

I find that a single incision up the belly from genitalia to jaw seems to work best, but if you’ve found a better method, let me know.

Most of Eastern Europe, you mean. The KH-55 has a range of 2500 kilometers, or 1300 nautical miles. Even if launched from the very north-westernmost corner of Iranian territory, a missile might make it to Hungary. It would never make it to Paris.

But they do. Malaysia Airlines 370 was a Boeing 777, which Iran Air also has.

You mean affix nuclear cruise missiles to a Boeing 777, fly it within range of a major US target, and launch the missiles. Hmmm. Has potential. Better than the barge idea, in any case. And if September 11th is any indication, the Air Force would be powerless to stop a nuclear-armed enemy aircraft from approaching American airspace.

These are all interesting hypotheticals, but it all comes down not to “what can Iran do”, which despite all of what you’ve posted, still amounts to “not much, relatively speaking”, but rather, “what WOULD Iran do, under which circumstances?”

Despite the proclivity of US conservative media to portray the Iranians as “insane”, they are just as cold, calculating and interested in self-preservation as any civilisation that has been around in some form or another for six thousand years.

And even if they were insane, they’re not stupid. To launch an unprovoked nuclear strike against the United States or her allies would be suicide. It would mean immediate retaliation and annihilation. Whether the attacker is Iran, Syria, North Korea, Israel, France, Russia or China, the result would be the same. Immediate retaliation and annihilation.

I, for one, would give the Iranians a bit more credit than to suppose they would invite annihilation on their entire population for no good reason.


#17

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I find that a single incision up the belly from genitalia to jaw seems to work best, but if you’ve found a better method, let me know.
[/quote]

And I have been using vise grips and duct tape…

Go figure.


#18

[quote]2busy wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

I find that a single incision up the belly from genitalia to jaw seems to work best, but if you’ve found a better method, let me know.
[/quote]

And I have been using vise grips and duct tape…

Go figure.[/quote]

I literally choked on my coffee…


#19

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Varqanir and Bismark since you both want to come at me like I’m an idiot, [/quote]

On the contrary. I try to distance myself from idiots whenever possible, and so have no intention of coming at you.

Outstanding. Continuing your education will do much good. Might want to put a comma after the word “school”, however, just to separate it from the next clause.

Those are impressive credentials. Please continue.

I don’t believe that, have never believed that, and have never made a statement that would imply that I believed that. If you think you can demonstrate otherwise, be my guest.

I do realize that, actually. Again, I apologise if any of my preceding posts indicated to you that I did not.

As a highly resourceful person myself, I am acutely aware of this.

So what you’re saying, essentially, is that the major advantage of a solid-fueled rocket is that it has solid fuel. Astounding. To hear some people talk, you’d think rocket science was hard.

Ah, yes. The SCUD missile. About a deadly as a Cadillac filled with high explosives launched from a catapult. Off a barge.

Maybe they could hit the East or West Coasts. Maybe.

If only we had surveillance satellites and a navy, we might be able to detect and stop them. Alas.

I find that a single incision up the belly from genitalia to jaw seems to work best, but if you’ve found a better method, let me know.

Most of Eastern Europe, you mean. The KH-55 has a range of 2500 kilometers, or 1300 nautical miles. Even if launched from the very north-westernmost corner of Iranian territory, a missile might make it to Hungary. It would never make it to Paris.

But they do. Malaysia Airlines 370 was a Boeing 777, which Iran Air also has.

You mean affix nuclear cruise missiles to a Boeing 777, fly it within range of a major US target, and launch the missiles. Hmmm. Has potential. Better than the barge idea, in any case. And if September 11th is any indication, the Air Force would be powerless to stop a nuclear-armed enemy aircraft from approaching American airspace.

These are all interesting hypotheticals, but it all comes down not to “what can Iran do”, which despite all of what you’ve posted, still amounts to “not much, relatively speaking”, but rather, “what WOULD Iran do, under which circumstances?”

Despite the proclivity of US conservative media to portray the Iranians as “insane”, they are just as cold, calculating and interested in self-preservation as any civilisation that has been around in some form or another for six thousand years.

And even if they were insane, they’re not stupid. To launch an unprovoked nuclear strike against the United States or her allies would be suicide. It would mean immediate retaliation and annihilation. Whether the attacker is Iran, Syria, North Korea, Israel, France, Russia or China, the result would be the same. Immediate retaliation and annihilation.

I, for one, would give the Iranians a bit more credit than to suppose they would invite annihilation on their entire population for no good reason.[/quote]

This was directed at you and Bismark because I didn’t care to waste time writing two posts when you both are being similarly foolish.

Judging by his posts Bismark seems to have the impression that only the latest greatest technology used by the US will do and nothing cruder would get the job done adequately.

The advantage of solid fuel rockets over liquid fueled is they only have three major components. The outer skin, the fuel and a nozzle. The fuel helps the skin contain the heat and direct the propulsive force from the fuel burning, so the skin doesn’t have to be extremely complicated. So it’s a much simpler task to make them bigger.

A liquid fuel rocket is much more complex with thousands of parts and only has a limited ability to take bigger fuel tanks before the entire rocket has to be redesigned to take bigger rocket engines and fuel system.

For that reason the ability to produce solid fuel rockets is a major advancement in capabilities because it greatly reduces the amount of time needed to produce bigger, longer range, rockets. Or in other words it becomes much easier to surprise everyone with a new rocket.

Scuds may not be very accurate, but they are cheap to produce and therefore cheap to practice launching at sea. It’s smart to use some cheap shit for proof of concept and practice.

The KH-55 range is 1550 miles not 1300. That extra 250 miles of range goes a long way in Europe. But that is only if they are in the mood to be nice by respecting borders and launch from inside their own airspace.

Oh, Iran Air has Boeing 777’s. Do tell. They must have bought those back when the Shah was still in power. Because that is how long it has been since Boeing has been allowed to sell planes to Iran. Too bad they didn’t make 777’s back then.

Just how would they tell if a commercial aircraft at altitude was carrying a nuclear cruise missile?

The Jews are smart people and they have been around for a long time too. But that didn’t stop the Zealot’s who were a messianic cult like the twelver’s from starting a suicidal war against the Romans.

Even the ayatollah Kohmeini thought the twelver’s were nuts. I would not trust them with nukes. Besides Israel being a target, Pakistan is Sunni and they don’t get along well with shiite’s either.


#20

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Varqanir and Bismark since you both want to come at me like I’m an idiot, [/quote]

On the contrary. I try to distance myself from idiots whenever possible, and so have no intention of coming at you.

Outstanding. Continuing your education will do much good. Might want to put a comma after the word “school”, however, just to separate it from the next clause.

Those are impressive credentials. Please continue.[/quote]

The rest was great too, but these opening maneuvers deserve special recognition.