What's new

Iranian Chill Thread

Not building, but transferring Ghadr/NK engines to Houthis from old stocks. I wonder how they get their fuel though.
The fuel is just good old kerosene,I`d think that even the yemenis could produce more than enough of that without any problems.As for the RFNA [red fuming nitric acid] oxidiser,if you can produce nitrogen fertilizer [and explosives] then you should be able to produce that as well.
The yemenis got their original scud force from the soviets waaay back in the 70s,so they likely either would`ve been supplied with the necessary logistics support infrastructure or would have been able to adapt local industrial production capabilities to meet their needs,plus you had the dprk supply some hwasongs back in the early 2000s,so they either still had functional support infrastructure or the dprk supplied them with some.
 
without threatening to destroy Israel we will not have US and Israel attacking us ....hence no need for proxis... hence Iranian $$$ and equipment can be used on Iranian soldiers. "chicken and egg story"..

Iran and Israel have no borders and never had any issues ..they did not steal our land and never attacked any Iranian ..they became Our enemy when stupid Mullahs of Iran decided to make them enemy no 1 and started the "Chicken and egg "story ..Hence the need to have proxy, hence the need to arm them hence the need...... ..you get the picture
Do you think the US would have left iran a lone even if Iran didn’t become hostile towards Israel??!!.

Toppling the shah that’s alone making you enemy in Their eyes.
 
Reposting the below from the Iranian Nuclear Technology thread, after the latest IAEA report on Iran's uranium stockpile:

"Iran's stock of uranium enriched to up to 60% grew by 6.7 kg (14.8 pounds) to 128.3 kg (282.9 pounds) since the last report on Sept. 4, one of the two reports to member states seen by Reuters said. That is more than three times the roughly 42 kg (92.6 pounds) that by the IAEA's definition is theoretically enough, if enriched further, for a nuclear bomb.

The rate at which Iran is enriching to 60%, however, has slowed to around 3 kg (6.6 pounds) a month from 9 kg (19.8 pounds) earlier this year, which diplomats said is the apparent result of indirect negotiations with the United States that led to a prisoner exchange between the two countries in September.

The number of cascades, or clusters, of uranium-enriching centrifuges in operation is also unchanged, the report said."


Iran now has sufficient HEU (60%) for 4-5 nuclear warheads, sufficient HEU (20%) for 3-4 nuclear warheads and sufficient LEU (5%) for 8-9 nuclear warheads (if further enriched to 90%, which would take only a few weeks for the 20%/60% stockpile, a bit longer for the 5% stockpile) --> latent capacity to produce 16-18 nuclear warheads at short notice (assuming 16kg of 90% HEU per warhead, although this may be slightly lower or higher, I have seen 7-26kg as open source estimates)

Iran's stockpile of 60% and 20% HEU is the quickest and easiest path to nuclear capability - within c. 2-4 weeks Iran could produce sufficient 90% HEU for 7-9 nuclear warheads, 2-3 for testing underground and 5-6 for operationalising on Khorramshahr-4/Fattah/Sejjil MRBMs. I am not sure how much work Iran did on miniaturisation of nuclear warheads pre-2003, but in any event co-operation with North Korea could streamline this process. Realistically, this is still too low for Iran to not be vulnerable during the interim period, but it's getting closer (if Iran can produce 10-20 warheads within 1 week, the calculus for intervention starts to shift IMO).

A dual strategy of amassing much more HEU (20% and 60%) and installing more cascades of advanced centrifuges (IR-4/6 suffice for now but ideally IR-8/9 in the coming years) at underground enrichment sites across Iran (for now Fordow is safest, along with the new underground facility at Natanz which is still being built) would be ideal. Unfortunately Iran still uses thousands of IR-1/2 centrifuges and has not yet replaced these with IR-4/6 centrifuges. Hopefully we receive good news on the testing of the IR-8/9 centrifuges (with 24/50 SWU respectively - 2.4x and 5x as efficient as IR-6 centrifuges) soon.

At the current pace of enrichment to 5%, 20% and 60%, Iran is producing c. 12kg uranium / month (once enriched to 90%) = sufficient for one additional nuclear warhead every 1.5 months / 8-9 per year (albeit that it would take longer to enrich this stockpile of LEU to 90% in comparison to uranium enriched to 60% HEU, which is far slower unfortunately - sufficient for one additional warhead every 8-10 months)
 
Do you think the US would have left iran a lone even if Iran didn’t become hostile towards Israel??!!.

Toppling the shah that’s alone making you enemy in Their eyes.
The overlord is very unforgiving of rebellious vassals,plus in this particular case a certain fellow by the name of jimmy carter made some very poor decisions that only made things worse.
He should`ve stuck to peanut farming.
 
The overlord is very unforgiving of rebellious vassals,plus in this particular case a certain fellow by the name of jimmy carter made some very poor decisions that only made things worse.
He should`ve stuck to peanut farming.
You know Iran was invaded both in ww1 and ww2 even when it was neutral because Iranian leadership was naive and stupid to believe that Thor neutrality will save them the same happened with mossadegh he wasn’t communist or soviet ally he wasn’t anti west or anti democracy or anti secular he was the opposite of that yet they overthrow him just because they saw him as threat to their imperial colonial interests.
 
Do you think the US would have left iran a lone even if Iran didn’t become hostile towards Israel??!!.

Do you know Israel sold arms to Iran during the Iran-Iraq war? History is not as black and white as you picture it.

The Palestinian cause while righteous and noble is hypocritical when you suppress the Kurdish movement in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. While you stay silent on China’s purging of Muslims in the west.

That hypocritical stance makes Iran no different than the west. Where they tout freedom in one area (Ukraine) and sovereignty in another (Israel).

So no, I don’t think making Israel the number #1 enemy was necessity, just borne out of religious fervor of 1979 revolution. By the time it abated (natural as movements modernize over time) Iran had boxed itself in a zero sum game.

Iran has the 2nd largest Jewish population. Iran protected the Jews in WW2 by getting them coded as Aryans by Nazi Germany. So this idea we have something against Jewish people is not rooted in reality.

I do think pragmatic approaches could have been taken that would have advanced the Palestinian cause much more efficiently. Iran could have offered attractive gas and oil terms to Israel for 50-100 years and a security guarantee from its side in order to secure Gaza and West Bank as permanent statehood’s in the 90’s. Syria could have offered similar in return for Golan heights and Sheba farms would be shared between Lebanon and Israel.

Israel did approach Iran multiple times since the 90’s for a detente pact. Iran didn’t bother to even respond.

Israel is not an existential threat for Iran. Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism is a greater threat than Israel will ever be as we saw in Syria. The recent rise of Pan-Turkic nationalism across the Middle East is also concerning for Iran. Israel doesn’t have enough population or logistics to challenge Iran. Meanwhile its demographics are undergoing liberalization and arabization. Time is not on its side.

People think a country of 6M (excluding Gaza and West Bank) is going to steamroll across the Middle East if left unchecked. It’s laughable.
 
Do you think the US would have left iran a lone even if Iran didn’t become hostile towards Israel??!!.

Toppling the shah that’s alone making you enemy in Their eyes.
If I'm remembering correctly, Reagen did try to improve relations after the revolution through mutual anti-Communism but was rejected. Although no one could say how long they would have lasted. Once the USSR fell relations may have worsened again.
 
You know Iran was invaded both in ww1 and ww2 even when it was neutral because Iranian leadership was naive and stupid to believe that Thor neutrality will save them the same happened with mossadegh he wasn’t communist or soviet ally he wasn’t anti west or anti democracy or anti secular he was the opposite of that yet they overthrow him just because they saw him as threat to their imperial colonial interests.
Yes,the allies were no better respecters of neutrality than their fascist opponents were.
No big surprises there.😏
 
If I'm remembering correctly, Reagen did try to improve relations after the revolution through mutual anti-Communism but was rejected. Although no one could say how long they would have lasted. Once the USSR fell relations may have worsened again.
Ultimately any iranian government that took its political independence and national sovereignty seriously was ALWAYS going to have problems with the us [and vice versa of course],and short of something like a detente,ie you have your sphere of interest and I have mine,altho that concept didnt last that long even between the usa/ussr,I dont see that being any different.
 
Although Iran already is armed, it has not made it public. Probably the best known secret amongst governments.

So the question is WHEN would Iran declare? What are the criteria that need to be met? Have these criteria been met today? Clearly not.

Regardless, this is an excellent example of Iranian strategic thinking where Iran doesn’t take action solely by singular events.

It seems Iran would declare once things warrant to do so ie the criteria are met. It’s very possible opponents who have gamed this correctly would know what the criteria are and act accordingly.

That would mean the opponents already know Iran has the bomb. If that was the case, why would they want a JCPOA?
 
You know Iran was invaded both in ww1 and ww2 even when it was neutral because Iranian leadership was naive and stupid to believe that Thor neutrality will save them the same happened with mossadegh he wasn’t communist or soviet ally he wasn’t anti west or anti democracy or anti secular he was the opposite of that yet they overthrow him just because they saw him as threat to their imperial colonial interests.
Mossadegh mistake highlighted in red:

Events throughout the 20th century contributed to Iran’s long-held suspicion of foreign powers. During World War II, British and Soviet forces invaded Iran to secure oil resources and protect Allied supply lines to the Soviet Union. Although Iran was officially neutral in the war, the Allied powers considered Reza Shah to be too close to Nazi Germany and forced him to abdicate, installing his son—Mohammad Reza Pahlavi—as shah in 1941. A decade later, the elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, nationalized the British-owned Iranian oil industry. Britain imposed an economic embargo, and a power struggle between the shah and Mossadegh ensued. After the shah fled Iran, the United States and the United Kingdom in 1953 organized a successful coup—called Operation AJAX—with support from Iranian royalists to overthrow Mossadegh and strengthen the power of the shah.5,6


Patience and negotiations are important considerations. China build close ties with the British and was patient with take over of Hong Kong.
 
This looks like a fake

It
Lets analyze potential US-Iran war.

What US conventional military can do to Iran?

US NAVY:

If US Navy stays in the Persian Gulf, with high probability, their ships will experience the fate of Russian cruiser Moskva. In the event of war, US Navy will have to leave the Persian Gulf and operate from the coast of Oman beyond the range of Iranian anti-ship cruise missiles, anti-ship ballistic missiles and drones. Also the Straight of Hormuz will be closed with Iranian mines, missiles and drones.

If US Navy has to operate from the coast of Oman then F-18 can’t reach Tehran. Assuming US Navy concentrates 7-8 aircraft carrier battle groups, that is equal to 700 F-18 combat aircrafts and F-18 has a combat radius of only 800kms.

F-18 will have to fly 900kms from Arabian Sea to Qatari airspace, make aerial refueling there, and then enter Iranian airspace, and with combat radius of only 800kms they can only bomb southern and central Iran. Greater Tehran region which is home to 20% of Iran’s population and 50% of Iran’s industry will be beyond the range of F-18.
View attachment 970254
While making sorties to Iran, F-18s will have to make two aerial refuelings which will put strain on aerial refueling tankers, and also huge distances will reduce the total number of sorties by each F-18.

Iran claims to have 1500km range anti-ship ballistic missile. It is possible that Russian and Chinese satellites and Iranian patrol drones will try to locate US Navy in the Arabian Sea and if US vessels are located, they can be targeted by Iranian 1500km range anti-ship ballistic missiles.

US AIR FORCE:

It will take couple of weeks for US Air Force to deploy to airfields of Saudi Arabia, which has 25-30 airbases and civilian airports. However most of their airfields are located only 300km away from Iran, Iraq, Yemen and are vulnerable to strikes by cheap kamikaze drones and short-range ballistic missiles. These bases must be evacuated and combat aircrafts must be deployed to far away located bases beyond the range of Iran’s large arsenal of short-range ballistic missiles and drones.
View attachment 970262
There are roughly 13-15 airbases and airports in central and western Saudi Arabia which are located 700km-1200km away from Iran and its clients. These airfields will have to house roughly 1500 combat aircrafts, which means 100 combat aircrafts per base.

There are no hardened shelters in Saudi airbases and US aircrafts will be parked like this:
View attachment 970264
These aircrafts will be vulnerable to strikes by ballistic missiles with cluster warheads, cheap kamikaze drones and cruise missiles.

Against 1500 combat aircrafts, Iran can use 1500 medium and long range ballistic missiles, 600-800 cruise missiles and thousands of Shahed-136/Arash-2 kamikaze drones. Even if Iranian strikes will be 30% effective, US will lose hundreds of aircrafts and will not be able to conduct effective air campaign.

Russia and China will provide real-time targeting data to Iran from their satellites.

Most of aircrafts of US Air Force are F-16s that have a combat radius of only 540km. F-16s will have to make multiple aerial refuelings for reaching Western and Southern Iran, while Greater Tehran region and Mashhad will be beyond the range of F-16s.

Iran can use its kamikaze drones/cruise missiles/ballistic missiles to target fuel depots, aerial refueling tankers, transport aircrafts, ammunition storage facilities and runways for the purpose of paralyzing US Air Force (with Russia and China providing precise targeting data from their satellites).

Also both US Navy and US Air Force have to establish air superiority by suppressing Iranian air defense systems. 3rd Khordad is 15 years, 15th Khordad is 10 years and Bavar 373 is 8 years in mass production, so there might be multilayered air defense network in Iran.

US GROUND FORCE AND MARINE CORP:

It can take 3 weeks for Iran to concentrate 200.000 troops and 1500 tanks in Khuzestan province and attack 1-2 armored brigades US has in Kuwait. Iran can invade Kuwait and create threat to Saudi oil fields, while Shias in Bahrain and Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia will rebel against local governments.

In the previous Gulf Wars it took 6 month for US ground force to arrive to the region. However, this time Iran will close the Straight of Hormuz, while Houthis will close the Bab-el-Mandeb Straight with drones, cruise and ballistic missiles.

Since Straight of Hormuz will be closed, while passing through the Straight of Bab-el Mandeb will be dangerous, US will have to deploy its ground force in Western Saudi Arabia via the Red Sea ports and move from there towards Eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula for the purpose of protecting Saudi oil fields.

There are several ports in the Red Sea and Israel that can be used for deployment of US ground force: Port of Eilat in Israel, Port of Yanbu and port of Jeddah in Saudi Arabia.
View attachment 970265
However, Port of Jeddah is only 60km away from Mecca, while Port of Yanbu is 140km away from Medina. Mass deployment of infidel forces who fight on the side of Jews against 5 Muslim states (Lebabon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Iran) near Masjid Al Haram and Masjid an-Nabawi will cause upheaval throughout the Islamic world and completely discredit the Saudi royal family. And it is not clear whether Port of Eilat alone has a capacity to handle mass deployment of US ground force.

But even if they deploy in Western part of the Arabian Peninsula, distance to Ghawar oil field is 1200km and supplying hundreds of thousands of US soldiers at that distances will be a huge logistical challenge even for US.

US Marine Corp can arrive faster than US Ground Force, but they have light equipment.

And then US has 5000 Tomohawk cruise missiles. But most of these missiles are old and unreliable as 2017 Shayrat airbase strike showed. During that strike on Syrian airbase most Tomohawk missiles failed to hit their targets. Assuming US Tomohawk strikes will be 30% effective, US can hit 800 targets in Iran with 1600 Tomohawks (2 Tomohawk missiles are usually launched per each target).

Finally, we have to answer the question - what are the goals of US war with Iran? There can be 2 goals:

1) Fight Iran for the purpose of helping Israel in its war against the Axis of Resistance

2) Punish Iran by weakening it with massive bombing campaign.

But 1) helping Israel by sacrificing Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and entire Persian Gulf oil infrastructure is not a good idea and 2) punishing Iran by bombing campaign is not a good idea either, because Iran’s response in the Straight of Hormuz and against oil infrastructure of the region will devastate global economy in general and US economy in particular.

Conclusion is that US has no good options for fighting Iran and its Axis of Resistance.

1) US Ground Force can arrive only after 7-9 months and they can’t enter the Persian Gulf and if they operate from the ports of the Red Sea, their overland supply line will be 1200km long.

2) US Navy will have to operate from the Arabian Sea and this will reduce F-18 sortie rates, while putting strain on aerial refueling tankers.

3) US Air Force will have limited number of airfields for mass deployment and those airfields will be under massive ballistic missile/cruise missile/drone strikes of Iran with Russia and China using their satellites to provide precise targeting data to Iran.

4) There is multilayered air defense network in Iran with multiple indigenous air defense systems and most US combat aircrafts don't have the range to reach more developed regions of Iran like Greater Tehran region (20% of the population and 50% of Iran’s industry), Tabriz or Mashhad.

5) There are no clear goals of this war, while Iran’s response in the Straight of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb will devastate global economy.

The US has F-35 and F-22, they won't be vulnerable to Iranian AD.

The best action Iran can take is destroy all oil production facilities in the GCC countries. This alone will be a massive victory, in addition to the military action.
 
That would mean the opponents already know Iran has the bomb. If that was the case, why would they want a JCPOA?
It does not serve either side to acknowledge this. Everything you see in this regard is ‘playing house’. They know we know they know we have devices.

…and the charade goes on.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom