What's new

Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,364
1
3,437
Yes,I`d ignore rubbish like that,

What I did find very ironic is that he seemingly completely overlooks the fact that it was the iraqis use of ballistic missiles in an increasingly desperate attempt to bring the war to the iranian capital,that lead iran to at first simply just acquire/purchase scuds of its own so as to have ballistic missiles that it could shoot back at the iraqis with,but this would then ultimately lead to the creation of the modern day iranian ballistic missile forces that are effectively the basis for irans regional deterrent power.

This does pose an extremely interesting question tho,Would iran still have gone down the ballistic missile route if the iraqis had decided not to initiate the war of the cities?,or was it simply always virtually inevitable that iran would`ve had no real choice but to turn to missile power in some form at some point in time during the last 40 years?
I think he meant Saddam became victorious in finally getting Iran to stop slapping him around!

As for who actually won the war any objective person would clearly analyze it like this:

- Saddam (Iraq) started the war and invaded Iran with clear objective of annexing portion of Iranian soil.
- Iran was caught off guard and portions of it's territory was initially invaded, however, Iran succeeded in taking back every inch of it's territory. And won by maintaining it's territorial integrity.

So clearly Saddam failed in it's attempt to invade Iran and lost and clearly Iran succeeded in maintaining it's territorial integrity and at least on paper won. (I say on paper because in a war like that both sides loose.)

Now one can argue that Iran failed to properly punish Saddam, sure that may be true.
It can be argued that Iran made a mistake in choosing not to end the war years earlier. Maybe, it's easy to judge when you don't really know what the long term outcome of different decision would have been.
It can be argued that given the weapons Iran had it's military clearly underperformed. True, but that would be the fault of the Shah who clearly created a fully dependent military. And none of these arguments change the fact that Iran won at least on paper!
 

jauk

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Jul 8, 2016
27
0
45
Country
Anguilla
Location
Anguilla
No, that would be Zahr.
This is Zaheer, I think. I guess it's an Iranian name of some hero from Shahnameh but I'm not sure.
Zaheer can be argued easily to mean 'one that poison's ' (see arabic derivatives: زهر، زهیر، فعل، فعیل). Admittedly an unconventional name BUT it's unlikely a Persian name...

UPDATE/CORRECTION:

Indeed, as Arian noted, Zaheer is a Persian name, based on a warrior in the Shahnameh. Reference:

 
Last edited:

Arian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 21, 2011
2,403
0
4,648
Location
Germany
Zaheer can be argued easily to mean 'one that poison's ' (see arabic derivatives: زهر، زهیر، فعل، فعیل). Admittedly an unconventional name BUT it's unlikely a Persian name...
We're off-topic, but Zaheer isn't really used in Persian with that meaning. Just like many other Arabic templates that don't exist in Persian. Nobody uses زاهر or مزهور either. If it's Zaheer with that construction, it would mean poisonous to be more precise. It's possible. After all the IRGC loves Arabic names because it has millions of supporters among Arabs (probably more supporters than inside Iran).
 

Sina-1

FULL MEMBER
Sep 15, 2016
879
1
2,985
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Sweden
We're off-topic, but Zaheer isn't really used in Persian with that meaning. Just like many other Arabic templates that don't exist in Persian. Nobody uses زاهر or مزهور either. If it's Zaheer with that construction, it would mean poisonous to be more precise. It's possible. After all the IRGC loves Arabic names because it has millions of supporters among Arabs (probably more supporters than inside Iran).
It is most likely the Arabic derivate because IRGC produces them and will most likely use them. However, Navy has talked about placing orders on AShBM, and if that it is the case then your shahname theory is plausible. We’ll have to wait to wait and see.
 

WudangMaster

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2014
509
0
937
Country
United States
Location
United States
It is most likely the Arabic derivate because IRGC produces them and will most likely use them. However, Navy has talked about placing orders on AShBM, and if that it is the case then your shahname theory is plausible. We’ll have to wait to wait and see.
I have a feeling that IRGC-ASF might want to hold onto the big missiles in terms of fielding and using them exclusively. On the other hand I can also see IRGC-ASF creating a specialised naval version of missiles optimized to operate from the larger IRIN vessels, but I think they will still want to be the main party in the armed forces associated with powerful missiles.
Also, if IRIN does get missiles, they would have to create a "missileer" branch first and foremost, probably training and even shadowing IRGC-ASF personnel until they get as proficient as IRGC-ASF.
 

Muhammed45

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 2, 2015
6,390
-4
9,478
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Zahir most probably points to the newly designed engine. With New materials that makes it smaller, faster and lighter than the other ones.
 

Arian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 21, 2011
2,403
0
4,648
Location
Germany
No matter what the name of the missile is, I truly love its carbon fiber casing.

There is an alternative explanation for its name: it is Zohayr which is probably named after Prophet Muhammad's friend.
 

Sina-1

FULL MEMBER
Sep 15, 2016
879
1
2,985
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Sweden
I have a feeling that IRGC-ASF might want to hold onto the big missiles in terms of fielding and using them exclusively. On the other hand I can also see IRGC-ASF creating a specialised naval version of missiles optimized to operate from the larger IRIN vessels, but I think they will still want to be the main party in the armed forces associated with powerful missiles.
Also, if IRIN does get missiles, they would have to create a "missileer" branch first and foremost, probably training and even shadowing IRGC-ASF personnel until they get as proficient as IRGC-ASF.
I don’t think one excludes the other. Navy is going to build bigger and bigger ships. They have expressed the need of AShBM on their ships. God forbid they try to develop them themselves which would be foolish. It would equally foolish trying to purchase them from another country. Besides IRGC has already sold fateh-derivates to other countries such as Syria, so selling them to another branch within the organization wouldn't be a stretch. But you are right that it is most probably for IRGC!
 

WudangMaster

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2014
509
0
937
Country
United States
Location
United States
I don’t think one excludes the other. Navy is going to build bigger and bigger ships. They have expressed the need of AShBM on their ships. God forbid they try to develop them themselves which would be foolish. It would equally foolish trying to purchase them from another country. Besides IRGC has already sold fateh-derivates to other countries such as Syria, so selling them to another branch within the organization wouldn't be a stretch. But you are right that it is most probably for IRGC!
I don't doubt that IRGC-ASF will provide missiles to IRIN and even train the naval missileer forces, but at the same time, they rightly will want to be the ones associated with creating and fielding them in substantial numbers and facilities. Also considering the upscale in sizes of IRGCN ships like the Shahid Roudaki, IRGCN will probably use the same nasalized missiles they provide to IRIN.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 3, Members: 0, Guests: 3)


Top Bottom