Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Ukrainian Cruise Missiles Smuggled Into Iran  
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1103 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article...._id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=13552

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/18/news/briefs.html

OK...we need to ask ourselves...is it still a good idea to allow Iran to develop a nuclear program? Can they be trusted to not develop nuclear weapons?

What dangers could come of this?

Well, here are a couple of problems.

These cruise missiles could be used to reach 3000km and be launched from either ships or land based launchers. They could control not only the straights of Hormuz (already under Silkworm coverage) but they could be used to threaten all the Persian Gulf states as well as Israel and Russia.

For some reasons ($) the Russians are selling the Iranians the nuclear technology to process their own nuclear material and build their own devices using other tech purchased from the Pakistani doctor.

Give a good reason to allow this program to develop.


Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAirlinerfreak From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1099 times:

Is it a good idea no. I think it is a good idea for them to have a strong army but not Nuclear Missiles. They have nothing to really do with it. If they nuked Israel they would be obliterated and wiped off the planet because Israel has America on its back and how many Nukes do we have I must have lost count.

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1063 times:

This revelation certainly brings things to a different light! Iran appears to have a long range missile capability and might be developing nuclear warheads. Does there really need to be another force in the Gulf that is not only destabilizing, but now (perhaps) nuclear weapon capable? I think not.

User currently offlineACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7642 posts, RR: 35
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1062 times:

Quoting Airlinerfreak (Reply 1):
I think it is a good idea for them to have a strong army but not Nuclear Missiles. They have nothing to really do with it.

And why should the USA have nuclear weapons??????????



A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1061 times:

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 3):
And why should the USA have nuclear weapons

So we can protect Canada!  crazy 


User currently offlineACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7642 posts, RR: 35
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1058 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
So we can protect Canada!

Oh! I think our armed forces can handle that pretty well themselves! Oops, I think I just made a funny!  rotfl 



A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1055 times:

Iran could not develop compact nuclear weaponry to fit inside a cruise missile without a lot of testing and refinement. The only potential use the Iranians could put them to within the next twenty years is for a conventional purpose similar to the Tomahawk.

Quoting DL021 (Thread starter):
OK...we need to ask ourselves...is it still a good idea to allow Iran to develop a nuclear program? Can they be trusted to not develop nuclear weapons?

And how do you propose to prevent this without starting a catastrophic war which could potentially drag Russia and surrounding nations in? It may be desirable (certainly) to have a peaceful, non-nuclear Iran but achieving that by force is going to be beyond the military capabilities of any one nation.

Iran is not Iraq.


User currently offlineRussophile From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1043 times:

Quoting DL021 (Thread starter):
For some reasons ($) the Russians are selling the Iranians the nuclear technology to process their own nuclear material and build their own devices using other tech purchased from the Pakistani doctor.

No, the Russians are not. The Russians are developing the Bushehr nuclear power plant and have put in place ways to guarantee that Iran won't be able to use Bushehr to pursue a weapons program.

And the reason Russia is helping Iran isn't just money as you are trying to make out. The relationship between Iran and Russia is quite close and has been for many years. If they weren't so friendly to each other, you can be sure that no amount of money would get Russia to be building Bushehr.


User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1026 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 3):
And why should the USA have nuclear weapons??????????



Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 5):
Oh! I think our armed forces can handle that pretty well themselves! Oops, I think I just made a funny!


Good, I thought you were serious.   

Quoting Russophile (Reply 7):
The Russians are developing the Bushehr nuclear power plant and have put in place ways to guarantee that Iran won't be able to use Bushehr to pursue a weapons program.

What measures are they taking that will conform to the IAEA protocols for ensuring that all spent fuel is accounted for and cannot be used to be reprocessed into weapons grade material? If this is the case, terrific, but we have heard this before.

Quoting Russophile (Reply 7):
If they weren't so friendly to each other, you can be sure that no amount of money would get Russia to be building Bushehr.

And that's why the Russians are selling fighters and other weapons to the PRC?
Money, hard currency, is the only reason they are selling sophisticated systems to their rival in Asia. It isn't as bad as it was during the cold war, but they still have concerns that are being sublimated for the sake of cash.

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 6):
And how do you propose to prevent this without starting a catastrophic war which could potentially drag Russia and surrounding nations in? It may be desirable (certainly) to have a peaceful, non-nuclear Iran but achieving that by force is going to be beyond the military capabilities of any one nation.

I really don't want a war either. If the nations already involved stick together the Iranians will be forced to reconsider their position on accessibility and verification. Economic carrots and sanctions are the way to proceed here, as well as continuing to develop democracy next door, which is truly desired by the younger generation on Iran.

Iran does not currently possess nuclear weapons and is not currently threatening anyone so military action is not necessary, however nuclear weapons changes not only the calculus used in gauging the risk of war, but in the development of local countermeasures as well as the potential of another nuclear arms race with whomever feels threatened by the Iranian nukes. I think we can all agree that this would be very undesirable for the sake of world peace and stability. Is there anyone who thinks Irans possession of nuclear weapons would enhance world stability?

This is a terribly important issue when you consider the stability of the worlds oil flow (I know everyone hates to talk about that, and it makes people think crazy stuff about the people who mention it) but when you consider the nations that depend on a steady stream of oil from the region and what leverage the Iranians could wield over them if they both had the means and desire, then you can see the instability worldwide that could be created by such power. Is anyone here ready to have the Iranians wielding economic power over the Japanese or other Asian nations that rely on the regions oil? Do we want to have the Iranian brand of government expand itself beyond its borders?

Finally the Iranians would be in a position to hammer Israel anytime it wished and would be doing the math involved in deciding the likelihood of a worldwide response. It is difficult to decide what hardline religious figures will think, other than the fact that they do it differently than democratically elected men who have to answer to their constituents and make decisions based on economic advancement and political freedoms rather than how to maintain power and continue to opress people by giving them enough freedom to keep from rioting but suppressing, hard, any dissidents. Thats what I truly think most people seem to be forgetting. The leaders of these countries don't think in the same terms our leaders must. They are on a different plane, and their citizens have been under the thumb of one tyrant or another for time immemorial... Does anyone here think that Israel won't be a prime target for Iran, or that the regional developments toward peace and democracy won't be derailed by a conflict between Iran and Israel?

[Edited 2005-03-20 18:50:33]


Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1718 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1017 times:

Although I’m not wild about Iran having these missiles, it is unlikely that they could be used for any reasonably foreseeable Iranian nuclear weapon because they are too small.

Apparently these missiles are capable of carrying a 410 Kg warhead. Any first generation Iranian nuclear weapon is certain to be much heavier than that and will likely be limited to deployment on larger ballistic missiles or air-dropped munitions.

Here’s a good link to some additional information.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/x-55.htm



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineRussophile From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1012 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 8):
What measures are they taking that will conform to the IAEA protocols for ensuring that all spent fuel is accounted for and cannot be used to be reprocessed into weapons grade material? If this is the case, terrific, but we have heard this before.

The same measures that have been part of the Bushehr contract since nearly the beginning of the Russian-Iranian co-operation on the project. The same measures which monkeys such as Bush seem to overlook when they make their silly accusations. The same measures which have just recently been signed off on by both the Russians and the Iranians (a matter of 2 weeks ago).

The measures being that all spent fuel will be returned to Russia, whereby it will be stored there. The only point which has yet to be agreed on is who will pay for the transportation and the storage. It is likely that the international community could have to put up ($) or shut up in regards to this.

And what do you mean, 'we have heard this before', when it seems like this is the first time you are hearing it?

Quoting DL021 (Reply 8):
And that's why the Russians are selling fighters and other weapons to the PRC?
Money, hard currency, is the only reason they are selling sophisticated systems to their rival in Asia. It isn't as bad as it was during the cold war, but they still have concerns that are being sublimated for the sake of cash.

This is not the 1960s, when Soviet-Chinese relations were at all time lows. It is now the 21th century. Relations between the Chinese and the Russians have been cordial since the early 1990s, and are improving every year. And as such, you have one friend selling weapons to another friend. It's not all about money.


User currently offlineDoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3407 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 1006 times:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 6):
Iran is not Iraq.

In addition to the diffrent spelling of their names, Iran ACTUALY DOES appear to have a functional WMD program.



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 1001 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

"We have been clear from the beginning that there is no grey zone with regard to enrichment," a senior European diplomat said.

"The hang-up is that Iran is refusing to allow the word 'cessation' (of uranium enrichment) to appear in the report, even though the EU3 (Britain, France and Germany who are negotiating on behalf of the Union) points out that using that word would be necessary to characterize accurately what the EU3 has been consistently asking for," a diplomat close to the talks told AFP.

"There has been no progress in the talks," said nonproliferation expert Gary Samore from London's International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think tank.

But he said "that doesn't mean that the talks will collapse" as Iran is "not ready for a confrontation" in the UN Security Council, as the United States would like since the Council could impose international sanctions on Tehran. "They are waiting until their domestic house is in order," Samore said, referring to the June election which will see moderate President Mohammad Khatami step down.

None of this gives many positive vibes.

Quoting Russophile (Reply 10):
same measures which monkeys such as Bush seem to overlook when they make their silly accusations. The same measures which have just recently been signed off on by both the Russians and the Iranians (a matter of 2 weeks ago).

Thats President Bush to you, or do you want this thread to deteriorate into a name calling flame fest? well, of course you do....too bad you can't make your point without resorting to name calling reminiscent of a 7 year old.
...as far as your point, thats pretty inflammatory, are you looking to insult the other leaders who are concerned as well?

Now could you specify the IAEA verification procedures that will ensure the fuel is being properly accounted for, or are you willing to take their word for it as with the DPRK? Oh wait, they had cameras and turned them off and threw the IAEA people out. Whats to say the Iranians wont do the same?

Quoting Russophile (Reply 10):
Relations between the Chinese and the Russians have been cordial since the early 1990s, and are improving every year. And as such, you have one friend selling weapons to another friend. It's not all about money.

Yeah, thats why the Russians still keep a couple of field armies in the border region with PRC. It is all about the money for the Russians, they need it desperately and will sell weapons to pretty much anyone who can pay for it. They cannot even pay to dismantle their own nuclear weapons, how will they pay for the transport of spent fuel to Russia?

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 9):
Apparently these missiles are capable of carrying a 410 Kg warhead. Any first generation Iranian nuclear weapon is certain to be much heavier than that and will likely be limited to deployment on larger ballistic missiles or air-dropped munitions.

I am loathe to count on the inability of the Iranians, who have displayed a talent for reverse engineering aircraft and producing them on their own, to build their own version of this, or their inability to build a small enough weapon to put on one of these weapons. They are not a technologically backward nation, and it has been disclosed that the Pakistani Doctor sold them nuclear weapons secrets. So we really can't assume the best here.

I hope the European leaders who are working on this don't cave in. They are more under the gun than we are.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 999 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 8):
I really don't want a war either. If the nations already involved stick together the Iranians will be forced to reconsider their position on accessibility and verification. Economic carrots and sanctions are the way to proceed here, as well as continuing to develop democracy next door, which is truly desired by the younger generation on Iran.

I agree. For that reason I think that the Russians have an immense role to play here, as they are proceeding from the standpoint of "well the Iranians are working on nuclear power and it's better to be on the inside of the tent with them than trying to influence them from the outside".

Russia is by no means perfect but they can exercise both moderation and accountability upon Iran's nuclear program. They also have a lot to lose with a nuclear engagement virtually on their doorstep should Iran start using those weapons against its neighbours or an invading force. People here seem to forget that a nuke isn't just a big bomb, it's also thousands of years of contamination.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 8):
This is a terribly important issue when you consider the stability of the worlds oil flow

More than just oil. Turmoil in that region could potentially spread as far as Egypt and the Suez. Ten years down the line, the Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Doha airports will be hubbing much of the world's freight. Many vital international routes overfly the region.

Saudi and Kuwaiti interests also hold anything up to ten per cent of the stock value of major bourses. Imagine the turmoil caused if those nations were suddenly overthrown in an uprising with its roots in an Iranian war.

Consider also unrest spreading from Iran to worsen the situation in Pakistan where there IS nuclear weaponry.

All these issues could explode if Iran was to either become belligerent or was attacked. Remember Iran is run by an Islamic Government. Iraq was not. An attack on Iran would be seen as an attack on Islam. Military force against Iran can not be an option whilst Iran remains peaceful and there are the avenues of diplomacy and technical involvement to prevent them obtaining nuclear weaponry.


User currently offlineRussophile From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 984 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 12):
Thats President Bush to you, or do you want this thread to deteriorate into a name calling flame fest?

I didn't vote for the POS, I owe him nothing, one can call him whatever the hell they like. And yes, anyone who says that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program without providing a shred of evidence to back it up, is in my mind a monkey.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 12):
...as far as your point, thats pretty inflammatory, are you looking to insult the other leaders who are concerned as well?

No, other leaders are not concerned. Well they are, but not like Bush is. Bush has made the accusation (without credible evidence mind you, familiar story that huh) that Iran has nuclear weapons and/or is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. All other leaders of other nations have merely stated their opinion that Iran should not develop a nuclear weapon arsenal, and have requested access to verify or for guidelines to be set down and agreed to. There is an inherent difference.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 12):
It is all about the money for the Russians, they need it desperately and will sell weapons to pretty much anyone who can pay for it.

The Russians don't desparately need the money. What drugs are you on my boy? You are talking about the 8th largest economy in the world here. Russia will sell weapons to countries which are 1) friendly to them and 2) are able to pay. And that payment doesn't necessarily need to be in money. The Chinese have bought military hardware from the Russians in recent years with the purchase price being covered by barter trade.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 12):
Yeah, thats why the Russians still keep a couple of field armies in the border region with PRC

Don't know that the Russians moved massive amounts of troops from the Chinese border and re-stationed them in Moscow and St Petersburg, and that China did the same with their troops and moved them to the South China Sea and Taiwan "front line" regions? This was done like 5 years ago now.

Additionally, any troops (from either Russia or China) who are still stationed on the border, are not there for military reasons, but most likely to stop commercial smuggling which is rife between the 2 countries.

I'm not surprised really that you are ignorant to this, because the fact is, the US government (both under Clinton and Bush) were (and are) ignorant to it. China and Russia, for all intents and purposes, are a military alliance. The only reason this isn't a formal military alliance is that they do not have a mutual security agreement in place (yet!).

Quoting DL021 (Reply 12):
Now could you specify the IAEA verification procedures that will ensure the fuel is being properly accounted for

That I can't answer, because I don't know what the procedures are. But I trust that the Russians will ensure the Iranians do the correct thing. Faith which the Europeans have also just affirmed.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 12):
They cannot even pay to dismantle their own nuclear weapons, how will they pay for the transport of spent fuel to Russia?

Who said that the Russians would be paying? If anything, the Iranians would be paying for the transportation (which is what the Russians are demanding). The cost of storage is something which the international community should have to address (seeing as it is the international community making this an issue).


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29799 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 974 times:

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 5):
Oh! I think our armed forces can handle that pretty well themselves!

Did you guys ever get those tanks off that ship that refused to dock, because it hadn't been paid for the trip.

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 9):
Any first generation Iranian nuclear weapon is certain to be much heavier than that and will likely be limited to deployment on larger ballistic missiles or air-dropped munitions.

What about the second generation? You don't expect them to stop? What about other weapons systems. You don't build atomic weapons and then only plan to move them around by barge or truck.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 963 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Russophile...you are in your own world. Ignore facts that don't agree with you all you want (we know where you learned that) and call all the names you want. Your blind faith in the Russians and your serious ignorance as to Russian economic reality is proof enough that further discussion with you is relatively pointless.


Iran with nuclear capability is a serious issue of concern to the world and luckily you aren't in charge of dealing with it.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16259 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 956 times:

If it can be proven that Ukraine knowingly sold missiles to Iran, Ukraine should be put in the same rogue-nation category as Iran & North Korea. The West has been very good to Ukraine; this back-stabbing by Ukraine (if true) is unacceptable.


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 947 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Actually Ukranian officials are the ones reporting this and saying they are investigating how this happened and that they plan on emprisoning whomever is responsible. They are very embarrassed about it being discovered and working to keep their friends in the west still their friends.


Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineRussophile From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 943 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 16):
Russophile...you are in your own world. Ignore facts that don't agree with you all you want (we know where you learned that) and call all the names you want. Your blind faith in the Russians and your serious ignorance as to Russian economic reality is proof enough that further discussion with you is relatively pointless.

Haha fantastic. I'd love to know what so-called 'facts' don't agree with what I have written. And my boy, I would much rather put my faith in Russia, which is acting within international law, than the US. Oh, and didn't you know, the Russian economy is experience above average growth, and is expected to overtake the UK in a couple of years.

I find it funny that you say all this stuff Dl021, when in this thread I have had to counter on numerous occasions to provide you with commonly known info which is over 5 years old.

And as to the actual issue of Ukrainian missiles being sold to Iran. There is nothing wrong with the missiles being sold to Iran, however there is something wrong with the way that this was done.


User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 921 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Insults will get you as far as anything else in your quest to twist or just plain make up facts.

There is an embargo on weapons being sold to Iran, so yes there is something wrong with it.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineRussophile From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 903 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 20):
There is an embargo on weapons being sold to Iran, so yes there is something wrong with it

All comes down to whose embargo. The US embargo? Means absolutely diddly-squat.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 897 times:

Quoting DL021 (Thread starter):
Give a good reason to allow this program to develop.

Nukes don't kill people; people kill people with nukes.

Seriously though, how about we figure out who before the what? I would worry more about who that what. Any country will want nukes, the idea is to make sure, at the very least, that the bad people are not in control of them!

Right now thay claim one and are not fully coperating, hence that means something...we should work with them and not against them. That way if they screw with us, they are done for.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UK Troops Were "forced Into Iran" posted Thu Jul 1 2004 01:04:18 by Gc
Iran, Missiles, And Nuclear Option posted Tue Jan 30 2007 02:34:41 by Connies4ever
Iraq Fires Missiles Into Kuwait posted Thu Mar 20 2003 10:00:40 by Ryanb741
Iran Supplying Arms To Taliban posted Thu Jun 7 2007 01:56:15 by UH60FtRucker
Friday's Stupid Thread - Stepping Into Chewing Gum posted Fri Jun 1 2007 09:35:03 by UTA_flyinghigh
Iran Asks German Company To Build Transrapid Train posted Mon May 28 2007 22:57:29 by LHStarAlliance
Tin Tin To Be Made Into A Movie Trilogy posted Tue May 15 2007 16:54:47 by Emirates773ER
Royal Carribean Cruise Advert Music posted Tue May 8 2007 22:06:58 by AirEuropeUK733
Dell Looks Into Othe Operating Systems posted Tue May 1 2007 20:26:02 by Tmatt95
Good Signs From Iran? posted Mon Apr 30 2007 18:50:12 by AndesSMF