Iran unveils 'robot bomber' The Iranian government has unveiled what it claims is a robotic bomber with enough range to - almost - reach Israel. The announcement came amid a flurry of statements promising dire retribution in the event of any attack on Iran. "The Karar bomber drone has numerous capabilities, namely having a long operational radius", …
Clearly the Iranian government has the wrong idea of how to avoid being attacked by Israel and/or the United States.
If they don't want to be attacked, they should be showing that they have no military capabilities which threaten Israel or Europe or the United States, and are not going to acquire any, with inspections verifying that fact. Anything else will cause an attack, and that attack should come sooner rather than later to ensure their capacity to make war is destroyed before anything could reach Israel from the resulting conflict.
If the Iranian regime hadn't been responsible for the taking of American diplomats hostage, and for the support of the terrorist Hezbollah organization, and if their politicians hadn't been talking about getting rid of Israel, they might not have been in the position of being perceived as a threat, so as to be allowed to provide for their national defense in a normal fashion.
John Savard
"Clearly the Iranian government has the wrong idea of how to avoid being attacked by Israel and/or the United States.
If they don't want to be attacked, they should be showing that they have no military capabilities which threaten Israel or Europe or the United States, and are not going to acquire any, with inspections verifying that fact."
Paranoid, much ?
I think we heard all the scenery chewing BS about Saddam.
Err no, the best way to avoid being attacked by the US is to make sure you *do* have the capability to fight back and inflict serious losses on your attackers. This is particularly important if your land contains oil or other valuable resources not readily available in US territories.
Alternatively you could take the Saudi route and carry out major attacks on the US via terrorist groups, or the Syrian route and blow up planes over Lockerbie, both of which also seem to be proven ways to avoid US attacks.
Until the US and israel man up and do something about it, its all talk.
Iran dont trust the US because of its long support of Saddam Hussain's attempts to invade them, and decades of history of US interference dating back to the 1950's, starting with the overthrow of the democratic regime with the Shah's Monachy. Lets not forget this, Iran was originally a DEMOCRATIC regime, that the US didnt like.
the US doesnt trust Iran because there controlled by a bunch of nutters who hate them loudly, and if they had any chance at all probably would take the opportunately to strike at the US and Israel.
In some ways Israel is caught in the middle, although they have to take their own share of the blame.
Sadly, there are no clean hands here, and neither the US, the UK, or the current Iranian regime come close.
1) Australia doesnt have nukes. Never has, never will. You may be thinking of Pine Gap which is one of the worldwide US military bases which has some control over the US nuclear wepaons profile. However, this is a US base and not an Australian base. And just to make it perefctly clear - there are ZERO nukes on Aus soil.
2) The Lockerbie bomber was Libyan not Syrian. Pretty big difference there... Should i draw you a map?
I see some hardcore selective memory/history at work there, maybe if the west hadn't interfered in the iranians internal affairs in 1953 to benefit big biz there wouldn't be a problem with them now.
As for attacking Iran sooner rather than later, hopefully the Americans have more sense than that after the fiasco in Iraq, Iran doesn't have a military crippled by 20 years of sanctions and attacks as the Iraqis were.
The idea that the US overthrew the Iranian govermnet on its own is false. The US needed and had the tacit support of the mullahs. Those same mullahs that later used the US as a great satan to bring themselves to absolute power.
The iranian revolution was executed by intelectuals and religious fanatics working together. When complete the intelectuals put away their weapons but the religious fanatics did not leaving them in power.
The Iranian theocracy is far more guilty for the bad relationship with the world than the US.
You also seem to think that I was talking about the Iranian revolution in the seventies, if you actually READ what I posted there is a fairly obvious clue I'm not , (hint 1953).
I also don't recall the mullahs having anything to do with putting the Sha back in power, though as I am not a scolar of iranian history I'm happy to be corrected on that.
Finally, the US is far more guilty for the bad relationship it has with the rest of the world than the Iranian theocracy, (corrected that for you).
"If they don't want to be attacked, they should be showing that they have no military capabilities which threaten Israel or Europe or the United States, and are not going to acquire any, with inspections verifying that fact."
Afganistan had no nukes - Got invaded
Iraq had no nukes - Got invaded
North Korea had nukes - Got round table talks and a gentle rebuke.
If anything the opposite is true.
"Clearly the Iranian government has the wrong idea of how to avoid being attacked by Israel and/or the United States.
If they don't want to be attacked, they should be showing that they have no military capabilities which threaten Israel or Europe or the United States, and are not going to acquire any, with inspections verifying that fact. "
Oh yes - great piece of advice. After all, that's what everybody does. All countries pretend not to have any sort of defense capabilities, or fire power, or military hardware. Look, it works so great. That's what UK and US is doing - not telling anybody they have nuclear deterrent, or any other type of military deterrent - and everybody is leaving them alone as a result. They sit quietly, invite everybody to inspect their facilities and have already disbanded their entire defense system. That's what keeps everybody safe - getting rid of guns - it works the wold over.
Hmm, let me think about that one. I might have been wrong. Probably the opposite is true. Ooops.
P.S. - Don't get me wrong - I'm not for the arms race or increasing military spending in general or in particular. But passing the above as a piece of advice to Iran when everybody else in the world is doing the opposite is either hypocritical or moronic.
"military payload of rockets to carry out bombing missions"
Personally, I would have thought that a payload of bombs would be more appropriate for a bombing mission.
"seagoing Guard have "substantially boosted our deterrence and destruction capabilities"
So when they next capture some Royal Navy personnel, they can steal their iPads as well as their iPods
Iran wants to be the strongest voice in the Middle east. To do this they have to have the strongest bite. While they probably consider the ability to hit Israel to be a nice to have, i doubt its absolutely top of their agenda at the moment.
However, once they have it in service, they have something to build on.
"This jet is a messenger of honour and human generosity and a saviour of mankind, before being a messenger of death for enemies of mankind," President Ahmadinejad said after unveiling the Karrar at a ceremony with defence officials.
Classy. Can't wait for the Ahmadinejadballs Christmas special.
"It can also gain altitude."
Ohhhh... Good job as there are mountains in the way. Need to able to fly over them.
"Payload of rockets"
Haven't heard that since the point and shoot rockets of WW2.
"Twice as fast as american ships."
Speedboats generally are.
However ships don't kill people. It is mach+ anti ship missiles, or tomahawks etc you have to worry about that get fired at you from 100's of miles away, or their plethora of subs which you can't see or target. Or the US version of robotic planes, which actually work very well. In fact anything the Americans stick on a boat should be worried about. How fast that boat goes is irrelevant. Fast boats still can't outrun missiles. And the Americans have lots of missiles, far more than the "Fast boats".
How fast that boat goes is irrelevant. Fast boats still can't outrun missiles. And the Americans have lots of missiles, far more than the "Fast boats".
Stuff using expensive missiles to hit a attack boat just point your Goalkeeper GAU-8 30mm canon (yes that is the very same fitted to the A-10 Thunderbolt) at them if you can get it to tilt low enough (-25 degrees below horz.). Auto radar tracking 18 targets at once firing at up to 4,200 rounds per minute. It is normally employed as a anti missile defence but I bet it can be taught to select little boats.
Clearly the British and American governments have the wrong idea of how to avoid being attacked by Iran and/or Al Qaeda.
If they don't want to be attacked, they should be showing that they have no military capabilities which threaten Islamic states, and are not going to acquire any, with inspections verifying that fact. Anything else will cause an attack, and that attack should come sooner rather than later to ensure their capacity to make war is destroyed before anything could reach Islamic states from the resulting conflict.
If the American regime hadn't been responsible for overthrowing the democratic Iranian government in the 70s, and for the support of the terrorist Mujahadin organization, and if their politicians hadn't been talking about getting rid of Iran, they might not have been in the position of being perceived as a threat, so as not to be a target for terrorists or other middle eastern nations.
One thing I just realized.
We all assume that if the US had not overthrown the Democratic Iranian government (1953, not "'70's") that it would still be in power today.
The revolution in the 70's that created the current theocracy in Iran could still have happened.
However, the US did mess with Iran, it did support Iraq's war with them, it has titled them as part of "The Axis of Evil" and it's actions in that area of the world have made it an "enemy to Islam" in the eye's of the people there.
The Middle East is likely to end up the Balkans of the 21st Century. (WW1 for you non-history types). Its going to get ugly.
A crappy little Iranian UAV armed with some bomblets, probably not very stealthy and probably doesn't fly very well, versus a Patriot missile (which the Yanks rather kindly gave to Israel)... That should be quite amusing to watch! The Iranians already have a means of delivering eplosives 1000km to Isreal - through ballistic missiles or via dumb suicidal terrorists, both of which have a more proven track record and better odds of gettng through.
As for the Iranian navy, it is nothing that can't be sunk with a bit of correctly applied effort. Their speedboats may be faster than conventional destroyers, but they still cannot outrun a helicopter or plane. Neither can the destroyer, but at least it can shoot back! Iranian swarm tactics are only of any use close to shore and when the other side doesn't just send up a load of heavily armed aircraft.
I don't think the Israelis are too impressed really, but then they have heard this sort of bluster before.
They can probably produce lots of cheap UAVs, but then their aerospace tech quality control is pretty shocking thanks to the US (and other Western countries) banning the export of aerospace tech because the Iranians have the annoying habit of using it to enrich uranium! Never fly Iranian airlines if you value your life!
So maybe they can produce lots of these V1 like things, but the question to be asked is, "How many will reach their targets?" Isreal receives several billion dollars a year in military aid from the US, they can and will despatch $1m missiles for every drone heading towards the homeland. You just don't know what is in them before they blow up!
The average Iranian is pretty decent, articulate and possibly quite cultivated. The people at the top and the bunch in charge of the military, especially the Revolutionary Guards, are a bunch of utter nutters however! Assuming they will make rational decisions about military or nuclear tech is just naive. The Isreali military/leadership may be a bunch of harsh gits, but they are at least rational and are unlikely to give a nuclear warhead to a suicide bomber with instructions to incinerate all the evidence...
All this posturing
NATO and the western allies could wipe Iran off the map in short order the same way they did Iraq.
Then all they would need to do is move into the the enrichment plants and reactor and hold them and let the rest of the country degrade into the stoneage.... Sorry more into the stone age :)
Of course this would be a disaster for the civilians but we would be safe.
"NATO and the western allies could wipe Iran off the map in short order the same way they did Iraq."
What reality is it that you are currently inhabiting?
The Iraq problem isn't solved, the Americans and cronies didn't win, just bought off the enemy so they could declare victory and leave.
As for the overwhelming force argument, that's worked out really well for them in Afghanistan hasn't it?
"The head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval forces also stated that his ships were "twice as fast on average" as American warships"
Faster than bullets and missiles is what you need.
Looks like Revelations will be right. WWIII starts in the Middle East. Soon to be cinder. Mr Dinnerjacket is not so stupid to try something, but Israel, well they will, and fight to the last American. Wonder what will happen if Iran gets the bomb. It has caused outbreaks of peace in the world when opposing forces have it.
I can't see any of this having a happy ending. Stupid Humans.
Looks like some of the commentards need to go read some history as to why Iran is such a prickly customer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Shah's_Men
Of course the usual suspects are at the root cause, the UK & the US, all in the name of oil and colonialism.
It also doesn't help that the US applies one set of rules to Israel and another set for the rest of the arab middle east when it comes to conflict settling.
is the Russia part. OK, maybe more of a big bear, but nevertheless....
Do you really think Putin would let Israel get away with bombing their joint reactor? Apart from the obvious risk to Russian nationals working there and the insult to Russian integrity, there is a lot of money to be made through a working reactor, especially compared to a smoking, vaguely reactor shaped hole in the ground.
Conversely, can you see Obama allowing the Israelis to bomb it either?
As the Russkies are monitoring all the fuel going in and out of the plant, it would be a bit pointless bombing it! It is the ones you can't see that the Israelis want taken out and the Russians will not be present, some North Koreans might happen to be in the neighbourhood though...
The Russians are indeed making a nice penny. Including in selling the Iranians lot of defence kit. They would not want the plant taken out, but if the Israelis started to take out other places, the Russians and maybe the Chinese would be the first in the queue to benefit!
The US don't want the Israelis kicking off WW3 in the Middle East, but they don't want the Iranians calling the shots either. Neither do the Russians.
Iran's claimed justification for uranium enrichment facilities is the need (and alleged right) for domestic commercial/civilian power generation. The Russian facility with spent reprocessing agreement, and the possibility of more, tends to negate Iran's needs and rights claims, and exists as (some) proof Iran's reprocessing efforts are not publicly truthful. Israeli and US interests (and probably Europe's) wouldn't be furthered by attacking the Russian plant; however, the Russian plant gives Israel another excuse to prevent completion of Iran's processing program as it is is more likely intended to be used only in furtherance of a nuclear weapons facility.
The Russian plant(s) together with reprocessing outside of Iran support the rationale for sanctions as well, thus convenient for the UN Security Council to underscore Iran's gamesmanship.
According to the BBC report:
"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the plane could serve as a "messenger of death", but that its key message was one of friendship."
Good job they pointed out that this was supposed to be a friendly gesture, as otherwise the unveiling of a robot drone bomber could easily be misconstrued as, y'know, a bit aggressive.
To make a mess of western economies at the moment they only need to sink a few bulk carriers in the Strait of Hormuz. The sinking of a handful of vessels in the right places would effectively shut the channel down for a rather large percentage of the world's oil supply. Goldman Sach's and the rest of the parasites would then wreck our economies speculating on the price of oil to the point we were all in a pretty major depression. The US will backpedal quite quickly in support of Israel if it has half it's supply of oil cut off. Most Americans are happy to support the mess in the Middle East perpetuating while they can drive their SUV's where they choose.
We should allow Iran to develop nukes, Mr Dinner Jacket can then attack Israel, Israel then attack back, perhaps Syria will get involved too, then before long, in a matter of a couple of weeks we'll be rid of these rotten religiously obsessed middle east countries that all think *their* religion is superior to every body else's.
And the world wil be a much happier place. I mean, who goes to Iran, Israel, Syria for a holiday? We're not missing much then are we?
Israel is a country where a people fights for its very right to survive. Most of its angry arab neighbours do not take kindly to its existence and I would say overtly or otherwise wish it would go away.
I don't see why Israel should not be allowed to exist. I don't see HOW Israel could not be allowed to exist.
Think. How much mischief do the Israeli's do worldwide compared to how much these loving self professed 'peaceful' arabs do?
Jews don't shove their beliefs down your throat and are hardly as demanding as the ever increasing fundamentalist Islamic voices you hear all over Europe these days.
You decide who the trouble makers are. What happened in 1967, 1973 ?
More close to home to the yanks and brits, who's been blowing up your stuff and killing your people recenty?
To Israel! To Life! To Freedom!
Disclaimer: I am not a Jew or Israeli but you can for all intents and purposes, see where my sympathy and support lies.
Some days, some nasty part in the deep recesses of my mind thinks maybe we should give Iran nuclear weapons. Lots of them. Shot from our planes and ships. Show them that whole, "Be careful what you wish for" thing.
Hey, Iraq 1 gave us a way to clear out a bunch of old conventional weapons and dust off the B-52s.
We probably have a bunch of old nukes that are approaching their expiry date...
And No, of course I'm not serious. Nasty little deep recesses of my mind and all that.
Never wanted to go nuclear.
Kept himself to himself.
Only gassed his own Kurds (who seem to be disliked by *all* countries their homeland covers)
No desire to export *any* sort of revolution (although plenty of oil).
Always paid his bills (more or less) on time.
Overthrown by US.
Not really encouraging people to stay out of world affairs, is it?
If you have religious assertions about an omnipotent god then why would you need weapons, Its a bit like an atheist needing to pray that his appendix won't burst, i.e. completely redundant.
The same logic goes for religious nutcase countries such as the US/UK/Iran.
China has some form of fanatical ideals which are just as bad.
Russia? well it depends if you want some KGB trained mobsters with the fingers on the red button.
So I've changed my mind, only the cult of Meh should have weapons, mainly because they can't be bothered to use the,.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
