[quote]Rockscar wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
They’re like a yippy little Chihuahua with a Rottweiller for a best friend.
Pound per pound Isreal is one of the deadliest and most effective military entities in the world.
They have been fighting the Arab states and terrorism before we knew what they were. You are totally wrong to say this.
[/quote]
And they weigh what? 3 ounces?
[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/ats-ap_top15dec05,1,2151544.story?coll=sns-ap-topnews&ctrack=1&cset=true
Russia Agrees to Sell Missiles to Iran
By HENRY MEYER, Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW – Russia has struck a deal to sell short-range, surface-to-air missiles to Iran, the defense minister said Monday, confirming reports that have raised concern in the United States and Israel.
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov didn’t give details. But Russian media have said that Moscow agreed in November to sell $1 billion worth of weapons to Iran, including up to 30 Tor-M1 missile systems over the next two years.
“A contract for the delivery of air defense Tor missiles to Iran has indeed been signed,” Ivanov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency.
“This unequivocally will not change the balance of forces in the region,” Ivanov added. Tor M1 missiles are short-range, surface-to-air missiles already used by several other armed forces, including China.
The reports last week prompted expressions of concern from the U.S administration and Israel, which considers Iran to be its biggest threat. Israeli concerns recently were heightened after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad urged that Israel be “wiped off the map.”
Top politicians in Israel have ratcheted up the tough talk against Iran, led by former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who called for a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear installations. Such a strike would be similar to a 1981 attack, ordered by then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin, that destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor.
“I will continue the tradition established by Menachem Begin, who did not allow Iraq to develop such a nuclear threat against Israel, and by a daring and courageous act gave us two decades of tranquility,” Netanyahu told the daily newspaper Maariv. “I believe that this is what Israel has to do.”
Interfax said the Tor-M1 system could identify up to 48 targets and fire at two targets simultaneously at a height of up to 20,000 feet.
On Saturday, an influential Iranian official played down the deal, telling the official Islamic Republic News Agency that Tehran has been trading arms with many countries and would continue to do so.
The Russian Foreign Ministry, without commenting on the reported missile sale, also said Saturday that all Russian weaponry supplied to Iran is purely for defensive purposes.
However, a senior Bush administration official, who declined to be named because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the subject, said last week that any arms sale to Iran is a source of concern. The official would not say whether Russia had advised the United States of any negotiations with Iran.
The United States and Russia are supporting efforts by the European Union to persuade Iran to halt development of nuclear weapons in exchange for economic incentives, such as trade opportunities.
Russia, which has a long and lucrative relationship with Iran, has offered to try to resolve a key dispute by offering to enrich uranium for an Iranian civilian nuclear energy program as a safeguard against Iran using enrichment for weapons purposes. .[/quote]
No, why? Because Iran wouldn’t use the fucking missile. I wish some people would get a brain. You’re acting like their whole country is full of terrorists who will do nothing but try to destroy western civilisation. My brother just so happens to have Iranian citizenship, (well my half brother.) And I have been there a couple of times and can tell you that it is a B E A Utiful country.
I can also tell you that most of the people I met were exceptionally friendly and accomodating. It would be more in out interests not to alienate them; but to work with them instead. For example in advancing their Nuclear research program, for energy purposes. And remember guys, they are an ELECTED, dictatorship.
They are buying missles not to use them?
Their elected president continues to express his desire to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.
[quote]vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.[/quote]
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.[/quote]
So Iran are not a civilised nation?
How do you define civilised?
[quote]alstan90 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.
So Iran are not a civilised nation?
How do you define civilised?[/quote]
Civilized nations do not call for the destruction of other nations(i.e. Iranian pres. calling for destruction of Israel). Civilized nations do not advocate terrorism or support and harbor terrorists. Iran has proven over and over again it is for the downfall of western civilazation.
Iran is a difficult case because there is overwhelming support amongst the populace for a nuclear weapons program and regardless of regime that won’t change. The people feel their country important enough to have a seat at the big boys table. As much as we don’t want to see nuclear proliferation, the fact that nuclear states are treated with a bit more respect-- in that we don’t tend to force our will on them quite as much-- gives the weapons a definite luster and prestige value.
Ahmadinejad’s rantings don’t mean a whole lot considering that he isn’t the one in control of any weapons. I’d speculate that he’s probably getting on the nerves of the conservative clerics by putting his foot in his mouth so publicly. Regardless of what they believe in private, they have been quieter and more pragmatic than in the days of Khomeini.
The way they’ve handled the nuclear program has been rather smart, moving in a slow methodic path, building up infrastructure to the limit of what is allowed under international law before taking the leap. This is not unlike the state of nuclear research in non-weaponised states like Japan, South Korea and Germany. They have the full civilian infrastructure necessary to cross over into nuclear weapons within a few months time without violating international agreements. That is the model for a modern day nuclear weapons program.
The danger with Iran is that bombing their nuclear sites will make life difficult in Iraq and will put a great deal of Gulf oil-- and our economy-- at risk with while only delaying the somewhat inevitable advent of Iranian nukes. All around a shitty situation.
What ever happened to N. Korea. Last I heard they still have their nuclear weapons and the talks were going nowhere. Why don’t we go threaten them with invasion. Honestly, it is incredibly logical that Iran should purchase short-range surface to air missiles to protect their developing nuclear power program. I don’t think they are going to try and blow up the U.S. anytime soon.
At this point, I’d rather wait for shit to hit the fan than start flinging first. War is horrible and should be avoided at all costs.
[quote]vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.[/quote]
YOU’RE not concerned about defensive missile purchases!!! How nice Vroom!!! How about those Israeli families waiting for those " defensive" missile purchases to fall!!!
Your logic and rationale is amazing!!! And liberals aren’t selfish!!!
[quote]“A contract for the delivery of air defense Tor missiles to Iran has indeed been signed,” Ivanov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency.
“This unequivocally will not change the balance of forces in the region,” Ivanov added. Tor M1 missiles are short-range, surface-to-air missiles already used by several other armed forces, including China.[/quote]
[quote]snipeout wrote:
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.[/quote]
So, nuclear armed short-range surface-to-air missles? Stop and think about the stupidity of suggesting that they would put nuclear warheads on a suface-to-air missle. Who the fuck would they shoot those at? Or maybe they plan on using them for the mother of all fireworks displays over Tehran?
[quote]gonta47 wrote:
vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.
YOU’RE not concerned about defensive missile purchases!!! How nice Vroom!!! How about those Israeli families waiting for those " defensive" missile purchases to fall!!!
Your logic and rationale is amazing!!! And liberals aren’t selfish!!![/quote]
They are air defense missles with limited range. All they would do is hit Iraq if they tried…Hummmm?
[quote]gonta47 wrote:
YOU’RE not concerned about defensive missile purchases!!! How nice Vroom!!! How about those Israeli families waiting for those " defensive" missile purchases to fall!!!
Your logic and rationale is amazing!!! And liberals aren’t selfish!!![/quote]
Well from the original article, unless those Israeli families are in fighter jets 20,000 ft over Tehran it doesn’t sound like they have much to fear from those missles.
[quote]alstan90 wrote:
No, why? Because Iran wouldn’t use the fucking missile. I wish some people would get a brain. You’re acting like their whole country is full of terrorists who will do nothing but try to destroy western civilisation.
[/quote]
It doesnt take a whole country, it takes a couple nut jobs with access to a big red button.
I’m keeping a freakin’ eye on you.
No doubt. That “working together” thing requires two participants.
[quote]
For example in advancing their Nuclear research program, for energy purposes. And remember guys, they are an ELECTED, dictatorship.[/quote]
Yeah, “ELECTED”, just like the truckload of fake ballots that was stopped at the Iranian border was going to help get a few Iraqies ELECTED.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/13/iraq.main/
Nice try though.
[quote]mark57 wrote:
“A contract for the delivery of air defense Tor missiles to Iran has indeed been signed,” Ivanov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency.
“This unequivocally will not change the balance of forces in the region,” Ivanov added. Tor M1 missiles are short-range, surface-to-air missiles already used by several other armed forces, including China.
snipeout wrote:
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.
So, nuclear armed short-range surface-to-air missles? Stop and think about the stupidity of suggesting that they would put nuclear warheads on a suface-to-air missle. Who the fuck would they shoot those at? Or maybe they plan on using them for the mother of all fireworks displays over Tehran?
[/quote]
My mistake jerk off I mistook them for the north korean missiles they purchased earlier this year.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
My mistake jerk off I mistook them for the north korean missiles they purchased earlier this year.[/quote]
No problem jerk off, its called reading comprehension. Maybe they’ll focus on that aspect more next year, when you’re a senior. Hey, I remember what a bitch high school was too.
[quote]vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.[/quote]
Agreed. I wouldn’t sell them a pointy kitchen knife.
[quote]ThumperTX wrote:
alstan90 wrote:
No, why? Because Iran wouldn’t use the fucking missile. I wish some people would get a brain. You’re acting like their whole country is full of terrorists who will do nothing but try to destroy western civilisation.
It doesnt take a whole country, it takes a couple nut jobs with access to a big red button.
My brother just so happens to have Iranian citizenship, (well my half brother.) And I have been there a couple of times and can tell you that it is a B E A Utiful country.
I’m keeping a freakin’ eye on you.
I can also tell you that most of the people I met were exceptionally friendly and accomodating. It would be more in out interests not to alienate them; but to work with them instead.
No doubt. That “working together” thing requires two participants.
For example in advancing their Nuclear research program, for energy purposes. And remember guys, they are an ELECTED, dictatorship.
Yeah, “ELECTED”, just like the truckload of fake ballots that was stopped at the Iranian border was going to help get a few Iraqies ELECTED.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/13/iraq.main/
Nice try though.
[/quote]
My brother just so happens to have Iranian citizenship, (well my half brother.) And I have been there a couple of times and can tell you that it is a B E A Utiful country.
I’m keeping a freakin’ eye on you.
What sort of bullshit response is that? So my brother is a terrorist?
[quote]snipeout wrote:
alstan90 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.
So Iran are not a civilised nation?
How do you define civilised?
Civilized nations do not call for the destruction of other nations(i.e. Iranian pres. calling for destruction of Israel). Civilized nations do not advocate terrorism or support and harbor terrorists. Iran has proven over and over again it is for the downfall of western civilazation.[/quote]
Yes because the U.S has never harbored terrorism. Giving the taliban money to fight the communists and giving sadam hussein money to destroy Iran. If the U.S wouldn’t have fucked about in the first place, 9/11 wouldn’t have happened; and saddam wouldn’t have been in power. Saving hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides of the atlantic. et your so-called civilised nation holds people in awful conditions without trial at guantanomo bay. Despite the fact that only a small percentage of these people will have been terrorists. YOUR civilised nation refuses to sign up for the kyoto agreement and is responsible for just under half the emissions on the planet. If the Day after tommorow does come, it will be mostly your fault.
[quote]alstan90 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
alstan90 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
vroom wrote:
They are buying missles not to use them?
I’m much more concerned about nuclear ambitions and other nonsense than defensive missile purchases.
You make a valid point Vroom. The only problem is that most of the missiles they are buying will be outfitted to carry possible nuclear arms. This is sort of topic for another thread but Irans’ intentions are not good and everyone knows this. I don’t think anyone should have nuclear weapons, but since they exsist they should be taken seriously and any threat of use should be handled acordingly by all civilized nations.
So Iran are not a civilised nation?
How do you define civilised?
Civilized nations do not call for the destruction of other nations(i.e. Iranian pres. calling for destruction of Israel). Civilized nations do not advocate terrorism or support and harbor terrorists. Iran has proven over and over again it is for the downfall of western civilazation.
Yes because the U.S has never harbored terrorism. Giving the taliban money to fight the communists and giving sadam hussein money to destroy Iran. If the U.S wouldn’t have fucked about in the first place, 9/11 wouldn’t have happened; and saddam wouldn’t have been in power. Saving hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides of the atlantic. et your so-called civilised nation holds people in awful conditions without trial at guantanomo bay. Despite the fact that only a small percentage of these people will have been terrorists. YOUR civilised nation refuses to sign up for the kyoto agreement and is responsible for just under half the emissions on the planet. If the Day after tommorow does come, it will be mostly your fault.[/quote]
US didn’t put Saddam in power.
Taliban didn’t exist when US was handing out money.
Your revisionist is wrong.