Iran to react if US prevents lifting arms embargo as per nuclear deal: President Rouhani

[QWECXZ]

First learn the difference between a re-entry vehicle and warhead design, then we can continue this. No one is saying nuclear weapons and conventional systems share the same warhead design, we are talking about re-enrty vehicle technology, i.e what contains the warhead. These are completely different issues. Once again, basic missile issues that you cannot comprehend.

Actually, you do have a tendency to comment on topics that are clearly beyond your level of understanding. And yes, you did try to pass some conspiracy claims in the past. This is not something that I have forgotten. Almost all posts you made in this forum show a great level of technical ineptitude. Like I told you before, "stick to what you know". I am not in need of someone like you to question my knowledge in such areas. I mean the fact you cannot comprehend these basic issues such as MIRV vs RV etc is very telling.

A person that calls facts from neuroscience "Alex Jones level conspiracy theory" is not worth my time. Even when he is proven completely wrong word by word from a video lecture at an Iranian academic institute recorded in 2014. lol

You don't know what a reentry vehicle is to begin with. Stop quoting me. Quote me when you have learned what it is and what it does. This could be a starting point for you:
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bunn_tech_of_ballastic_missle_reentry_vehicles.pdf

Once you have finished reading that and you understand what it is, let me know.

The very first page of that article should teach you a lot.

 

[Dariush the Great]

I am a nationalist. Your views are the same as hardcore islamists, but you say you are against Islam in general, so I dont understand why you have these views.

arent you the same guy going back and forth with turkish members over some lowlife in turkey hanging his british underwear on his balcony ?
most of your posts make us ashamed, really.

 

[mangekyo]

Because you are legitimizing the idea of discrimination against Iran by saying things like Saudi Arabia and China can get away with it but Iran shouldn't do those things because it can't. lol You just don't make sense.

It's the reality. Saudi has been bombarding innocent Yemenis for years, they get away with it because they have US support. Israel have been bombarding Palestinians for years, they steal their organs, they have violated more UN resolutions than any other country, but they got away with it because US is supporting them. No one predicted that Trump would leave JCPOA and become anti Iran. He even criticized Obama for being anti Iran.

What sanctions did Obama impose after JCPOA?

I know what US's issue with us is. I am talking about the rest of the world. For instance, I liked Ahmadinejad, but had he still been president, I am certain there would have been UN and EU sanctions on top of the Americans. I know you dont like him, but it is thanks to Zarif that Europeans view us as at least better than before and wont impose sanctions on us. You are saying f you to everyone. The world does not work like that.

 

[Philosopher]

A person that calls neuroscience "conspiracy theory" is not worth my time. Even when he is proven completely wrong word by word from a video lecture at an Iranian academic institute recorded in 2014. lol

No one claimed "neuroscience" is a conspiracy theory but the claims you had made were. There is a large difference here.

You don't know what a reentry vehicle is to begin with. Stop quoting me. Quote me when you have learned what it is and what it does. This could be a starting point for you:
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bunn_tech_of_ballastic_missle_reentry_vehicles.pdf

You went online, quickly found a source and and posted it without even reading it. Using the source that you just posted, explain to me the differences between a warhead design and re-entry vehicle. Quote from your own article and then use it, do not just post a link. You think I am naive enough to assume you actually read this?

Here from page 68 of the very article you posted:

"The RV is coated with material which will burn away at the temperatures encountered during reentry. The process of changing this material from solid to gas uses up most of the heat of reentry, thus preventing the heat from raising the temperature of the warhead inside the RV"

In other words, what I have tried to explain to you. The re-entry vehicle simply contains the warhead. The warhead can be of any nature, whether nuclear or not. The purpose of the re-netry vehicle remains the same regardless.

 

[QWECXZ]

It's the reality. Saudi has been bombarding innocent Yemenis for years, they get away with it because they have US support. Israel have been bombarding Palestinians for years, they steal their organs, they have violated more UN resolutions than any other country, but they got away with it because US is supporting them. No one predicted that Trump would leave JCPOA and become anti Iran. He even criticized Obama for being anti Iran.

What sanctions did Obama impose after JCPOA?

I know what US's issue with us is. I am talking about the rest of the world. For instance, I liked Ahmadinejad, but had he still been president, I am certain there would have been UN and EU sanctions on top of the Americans. I know you dont like him, but it is thanks to Zarif that Europeans view us as at least better than before and wont impose sanctions on us. You are saying f you to everyone. The world does not work like that.

Trump criticized Obama for being anti-Iran? Trump said that he would pull out of the JCPOA as fast as possible. He called it the worst deal possible in his presidential election campaigns.

Read what I wrote earlier. Obama bared citizens with a history of traveling to Iran in the last 5 years from going to the US under the Visa Waiver program. He renewed the Iran Sanctions Act.

My friend, you sound terribly confused. Europe is playing the good guy role now. Otherwise they are complying with all US sanctions on Iran. Your beloved Europe refused to refuel your beloved Zarif's airplane in Germany. Wake up.

I hope the next parliament and the next president will be much more conservative than Rouhani.

No one claimed "neuroscience" is a conspiracy theory but the claims you had made were. There is a large difference here.

You went online, quickly found a source and and posted it without even reading it. Using the source that you just posted, explain to me the differences between a warhead design and re-entry vehicle. Quote from your own article and then use it. You think I am naive enough to assume you actually read this?

Here from page 68 of the very article you posted:

"The RV is coated with material which will burn away at the temperatures encountered during reentry. The process of changing this material from solid to gas uses up most of the heat of reentry, thus preventing the heat from raising the temperature of the warhead inside the RV"

In other words, what I have tried to explain to you. The re-entry vehicle simply contains the warhead. The warhead can be of any nature, whether nuclear or not. The purpose of the re-netry vehicle remains the same regardless.

Seriously, b*tch please. The claims I made were recited word by word by a university professor. Word by word.

I have cited facts from the article I posted several times. The numbers 7,000 m/s I posted earlier was from this article. I have read this article twice in the last month.

That's not an article that you can find by just googling, simpleton. And the part you bolded is what I told you in my very first posts but you were too uneducated to understand it. Not the other way around. You got checkmated, mate. I taught you that part and you didn't read it. And you failed to be a good student. So, now go read it and return when you have learned something and know what you are talking about.

 

[mangekyo]

Trump criticized Obama for being anti-Iran? Trump said that he would pull out of the JCPOA as fast as possible. He called it the worst deal possible in his presidential election campaigns.

Yes, he criticized Obama for being anti Iran before JCPOA was signed.

Read what I wrote earlier. Obama bared citizens with a history of traveling to Iran in the last 5 years from going to the US under the Visa Waiver program. He renewed the Iran Sanctions Act.

We still had access to Swift, international banking, we ordered some 150 Airbus and Boeings, we were free to do business with everyone, and everyone was free to do business with us.

My friend, you sound terribly confused. Europe is playing the good guy role now. Otherwise they are complying with all US sanctions on Iran. Your beloved Europe refused to refuel your beloved Zarif's airplane in Germany. Wake up.

Thats because they have no choice, and Iran isn't exactly their sweetheart that they have to protect. But thanks to Zarif, they have a much more favorable view towards us compared to what they used to. I dont like Europe, I dont like US, but its time we benefit from them like they have been benefitting from us over the past decades.

 

[Philosopher]

And the part you bolded is what I told you in my very first posts. Not the other way around.

This is the question you asked:

"Do you agree that the reentry vehicle of a nuclear warhead must be different from a conventional warhead or not?"

You are basically trying to assert a nuclear warhead uses a different re-entry vehicle compared to a conventional vehicle. Nowhere in that article you posted does it make this claim. Like I said, you just posted an article from google without even reading.

If you type "reentry vehicle vs warhead" on google, it is literally the 4th post.

I am sorry, but you are fooling no one here.

You got checkmated, mate. I taught you that part and you didn't read it.
And you failed to be a good student. So, now go read it and return when you have learned something and know what you are talking about.

These desperate and rather juvenile comments will not hide the facts that elucidated your ignorance in this topic. For example, the reality of your earlier confusing a MIRV vs RV etc. You have not made a single coherent argument so far. You have only tried to muddy the discussion. Like mentioned earlier, you have a rather odd tendency of engaging in topics beyond your understanding.

 

[QWECXZ]

Yes, he criticized Obama for being anti Iran before JCPOA was signed.

We still had access to Swift, international banking, we ordered some 150 Airbus and Boeings, we were free to do business with everyone, and everyone was free to do business with us.

Thats because they have no choice, and Iran isn't exactly their sweetheart that they have to protect. But thanks to Zarif, they have a much more favorable view towards us compared to what they used to. I dont like Europe, I dont like US, but its time we benefit from them like they have been benefitting from us over the past decades.

Trump has contradicted himself a thousand times. What's your point exactly?

No, we never had access to SWIFT. That's in fact one of the issues that the conservatives had with the Rouhani administration. They said that Iran didn't have access to SWIFT after the JCPOA. The issue became so hot that the head of the Central Bank had to invite journalists to convince them otherwise.

We ordered passenger airplanes that we never received. Not to mention that even those orders were stupid and treasonous.

We weren't free to do business with everyone. I remember very vividly that even after the JCPOA we had trouble importing MRI machines.

Man, your Zarif will be thrown in the dustbin soon. And all this mess that your ideas have caused Iran in the last 7 years will change for better or worse after a new president comes to the office.

This is the question you asked:

"Do you agree that the reentry vehicle of a nuclear warhead must be different from a conventional warhead or not?"

You are basically trying to assert a nuclear warhead uses a different re-entry vehicle compared to a conventional vehicle. Nowhere in that article you posted does it make this claim. Like I said, you just posted an article from google without even reading.

If you type "reentry vehicle vs warhead" on google, it is literally the 4th post.

View attachment 641996

I am sorry, but you are fooling no one here.


These desperate and rather juvenile comments will not hide the facts that elucidated your ignorance in this topic. For example, the reality of your earlier confusing a MIRV vs MRV etc. You have not made a single coherent argument so far. You have only tried to muddy the discussion. Like mentioned earlier, you have a rather odd tendency of engaging in topics beyond your understanding.

Look at my earlier posts that are about the same article from before:

Okay. Bear with me.

So, you have a reentry vehicle traveling at a hypersonic speed like 7,000 m/s (i.e. 25,000 km/h). Now your RV will have to tolerate an extremely high temperature during reentry. That requires its coating to be sacrificed to keep the warhead safe. Then during reentry, your RV first experiences the thin air of the upper atmosphere. The flow around your nosetip will be laminar but as it goes down and the air becomes denser, the flow becomes more and more turbulent. And then there will be a bombardment of dust at your RV that wears out your coating further as well as microscopic imperfections of your own nosetip that makes things worse. Now if at any point, your warhead gets damaged, (for example mixing your beryllium and polonium in a plutonium design or causing two separate uranium masses to join each other earlier than planned), your warhead will detonate prematurely or can lead to a fizzle yield or your warhead not working at all.

This is in fact common for plutonium nuclear devices due to their complexity. Almost all countries have had failed nuclear detonations with plutonium bombs due to their sensitivity and complicated engineering. A tiny damage to your warhead can render it completely useless. This is not the case with conventional explosives.

Even if Iran manages to have a positioning system better than the GPS, the accuracy of an ICBM will remain low due to the challenges of the reentry phase. The inaccuracy of an ICBM is not only about guidance. Even with perfect satellite guidance, there are other sources of inaccuracy such as atmospheric variations and asymmetric ablation of the nose of the ICBM. These factors alone can make the CEP of the missile well above 200 meters, rendering it useless for hitting targets.

Asymmetric forces can be stabilized to limited extent by spinning the RV. Atmospheric variations are harder to overcome as they can be unpredictable.

That's why having operational ICBMs without strong unconventional warheads that can affect a large area doesn't make sense.

I wrote this post several days ago. And the other post on page 4 of this thread to explain to you something that was clearly over your head. So, no. I didn't google that article recently. And it's easy to google an article once you know its content and title.

You don't know the difference between warheads and reentry vehicles. You think an ICBM has the same technology as an MRBM only with a longer range LOL You don't know how a nuclear device works. You have no idea about ballistic missile technology. You probably have dementia as your arguments get more and more stupid day by day. Your ad hominem attacks only show how desperate you are.

You claimed you understood neuroscience but your understanding of neuroscience is less than a high school student studying biology. And you were proven wrong word by word but you weren't man enough to admit you were wrong. All you can do is stick different parts of what you find in Iranian newspapers and spew them without knowing what they actually mean.

 

[mangekyo]

Trump has contradicted himself a thousand times. What's your point exactly?

That no one could predict US would elect a President that would pull out of JCPOA less than 2 years after they signed the deal.

No, we never had access to SWIFT. That's in fact one of the issues that the conservatives had with the Rouhani administration. They said that Iran didn't have access to SWIFT after the JCPOA. The issue became so hot that the head of the Central Bank had to invite journalists to convince them otherwise.

We did have access to swift until late 2018

We ordered passenger airplanes that we never received. Not to mention that even those orders were stupid and treasonous.

Because of something no one could predict.

We weren't free to do business with everyone. I remember very vividly that even after the JCPOA we had trouble importing MRI machines.

European companies were waiting in line to do business with us

Let me ask you this then. Do you blame Khomeini and our government back then for the Iran-Iraq war?

 

[QWECXZ]

That no one could predict US would elect a President that would pull out of JCPOA less than 2 years after they signed the deal.

We did have access to swift until late 2018

Because of something no one could predict.

European companies were waiting in line to do business with us

I told you that Khamenei predicted that Trump would win the election. I predicted it. Keyhan, a newspaper close to Khamenei, predicted it several times. Nearly all hardliners in Iran said that the US would violate the JCPOA after Iran fulfills its obligations. What do you mean by no one predicted it?

No, we did not. That's why there were a lot of noise about it.
Mashreghnews: 550 hours passed by Iran was not given access to SWIFT

We could've purchased used but relatively new passenger planes from other countries instead of placing orders that were too risky.

No, they weren't. I remember I had purchased a course from Udemy or Linda after the JCPOA and they blocked my account and never returned my money.

 

[Philosopher]

I wrote this post several days ago. And the other post on page 4 of this thread. So, no. I didn't google that article recently. And it's easy to google an article once you know its content. Sorry, but you are indeed a fool. The idea is to find that article without knowing its content.

Yes sure, then why not posted directly from the article if you truly even began to read it. Do not just post a link. I doubt you read past the title.

You don't know the difference between warheads and reentry vehicles.

Not only have I given you the differences many times, but I even used your own article to illustrate it. Lets try this again. The warhead or "the bomb" is carried within the re-entry vehicle. The purpose of the re-entry vehicle to to carry the warhead to its destination post stage seperation from the missiles. Is this simple enough or will you continue to pretend not to see this?

You think an ICBM has the same technology as an MRBM only with a longer range

Nowhere in my discussion did I compare an ICBM to a MRBM. You are resorting to straw-man arguments.

LOL You don't know how a nuclear device works.

And once again, the inter workings of a nuclear device is not relevant to this discussion. The purpose of the re-entry vehicle does not change depending on the nature of "the bomb" it carries.

You have no idea about ballistic missile technology.

The person that failes to understand the difference between a MIRV and a RV should not make such accusations.

You probably have dementia as your arguments get more and more stupid day by day. .

Now you are resorting to insults, must be getting rather desperate I think.

You claimed you understood neuroscience but your understanding of neuroscience is less than a high school student studying biology. Man, you're a joke. Seriously. All you can do is stick different parts of what you find in Iranian newspapers and spew them without knowing what they actually mean.

You're trying to change topics. Stick to the topic of discussion.

 

[QWECXZ]

Yes sure, then why not posted directly from the article if you truly even began to read it.

Not only have I given you the differences many times, but I even used your own article to illustrate it. Lets try this again. The warhead or "the bomb" is carried within the re-entry vehicle. The purpose of the re-entry vehicle to to carry the warhead to its destination post stage seperation from the missiles. Is this simple enough or will you continue to pretend not to see this?

Nowhere in my discussion did I compare an ICBM to a MRBM. You are resorting to straw-man arguments.

And once again, the inter workings of a nuclear device is completely to this discussion. The purpose of the re-entry vehicle does not change depending on the nature of "the bomb" it carries.

The person that failes to understand the difference between a MIRV and a RV should not make such accusations.

Now you are resorting to insults, must be getting rather desperate I think.

You're trying to change topics. Stick to the topic of discussion.

Why would I post it directly from an article when I understand its content? I am not you to cite others word by word without knowing what they truly mean. I just proved to you that I had read that article several days ago. So, once again you were proven wrong but you're not brave enough to admit it.

No, all you did was to derail the conversation by confusing warheads with reentry vehicles. I told you very clearly about reentry vehicles and you kept talking about warheads, showing that you didn't know the difference.

You talk like an ICBM is just an IRBM/MRBM with a longer range. You said earlier on this thread that Iran has demonstrated ICBM capability, showing how little you know about the whole thing.

You have said times and times again that a reentry vehicle that carries a conventional warhead can carry a nuclear warhead too. You are completely ignoring survivability and safety concerns for an RV carrying a nuclear warhead and you have been told this a thousand times but still fail to understand.

 

[mangekyo]

I told you that Khamenei predicted that Trump would win the election. I predicted it. Keyhan, a newspaper close to Khamenei, predicted it several times. Nearly all hardliners in Iran said that the US would violate the JCPOA after Iran fulfills its obligations. What do you mean by no one predicted it?

No, we did not. That's why there were a lot of noise about it.
Mashreghnews: 550 hours passed by Iran was not given access to SWIFT

We could've purchased used but relatively new passenger planes from other countries instead of placing orders that were too risky.

No, they weren't. I remember I had purchased a course from Udemy or Linda after the JCPOA and they blocked my account and never returned my money.

Bro, EU, the rest of US and Trumps cabinet are literally split about the decision to withdraw from JCPOA. We experienced a 10% economic growth after the implementation of JCPOA, business was booming, tourism was booming. The euros viewed us favorably, everything was booming.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Bro, EU, the rest of US and Trumps cabinet are literally split about the decision to withdraw from JCPOA. We experienced a 10% economic growth after the implementation of JCPOA, business was booming, tourism was booming. The euros viewed us favorably, everything was booming.

Euros are wusses as long as they got US bases and NATO they will bend backward to Washington all the time got to wait till the US Empire breathes its last

 

[QWECXZ]

Bro, EU, the rest of US and Trumps cabinet are literally split about the decision to withdraw from JCPOA. We experienced a 10% economic growth after the implementation of JCPOA, business was booming, tourism was booming. The euros viewed us favorably, everything was booming.

Bro, I can't care less about how the Europeans view us. Of course they viewed us favorably because we were signing deals over 50 billion dollars with them for things we could buy with much less risk and money from other countries. Most of those deals were treasonous, just like the passenger airplanes you mentioned.

We experienced a 15% economic growth. But not because the conditions of our economy had improved, but only because our blocked money had been released. That's a one-time thing. You can't run a country by one-time policies. That's exactly the North Korean style that I was condemning at the beginning.

And you are now contradicting yourself. If you think Europeans care about human rights, Iran was still the same country after the JCPOA. So, why were they viewing us differently? Huh?