Iranian Chill Thread

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1460642833992499201

 

[aryobarzan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1460642833992499201

Good move...Iran needs nuclear weapons in hundreds to safe guard all the resources that God has given to this nation...you never know who around Iran might get crazy idea to make run for all those riches..

 

[sha ah]

It's sad that Russian, Chinese companies have the major stake. However if not for them this never would have been discovered. Also Iran currently does not have the capacity to extract it all by itself.

Perhaps under a Liberal government without sanctions Iran could have discovered this by itself but more than likely the US / EU would have the major stake.

I wonder what percentage is owned by whom ?

Another issue is that Iran has no way of selling the natural gas to any national entity.

Pakistan won't because of US pressure and Saudi pressure.

India won't because of US pressure.

Europe, sanctions and Russia, Azerbaijan are already selling to EU. However Russian natural gas at the rate they are exporting will run out in a few decades if they don't make more discoveries.

Atleast Iran's population will have a source of energy for decades to come for its own population.

The resources of the world are finite and the global population keeps growing. Sooner or later the resources will run out. That is when wars will break out.

Iran must be prepared to defend itself at all costs. Iran's military, especially the airforce must strengthen itself.

How Iran has become World's no1 natural gas reserves country:
This recent article (Nov 15) is something all Iranians should read...the Magazine is an anti Iran and wants to show Iran in a negative manner but If you read the the final section it will demonstrate to all that even an anti-Iran publication can not hide the God given merci of nature to Iran.. Chalous gas field will give Iran after its 20 year development something around $ 5 trillion dollars .... I have included highlighted sections.

• A deal finalized last week to develop Iran’s multi-trillion dollar new gas discovery, the Chalous field, will see Russian companies hold the major share in it, followed by Chinese companies, and only then Iranian ones, sources close to the deal exclusively told OilPrice.com.
• As it now stands, though, revealed exclusively to OilPrice.com, following further studies by Russia, the Chalous discovery is now seen as essentially a twin-field site, nine kilometers apart, with ‘Greater’ Chalous having 5.9 trillion cubic meters (Tcm) of gas in place, and ‘Lesser’ Chalous having 1.2 Tcm of gas, giving a combined figure of 7.1 Tcm of gas. Therefore, the new Chalous figures would give Iran a total natural gas reserves figure of 40.9 Tcm
• The Chalous find makes Iran the biggest gas reserves holder in the world.
• Russia has calculated that, using an annual mean average figure of US$800 per 1,000 cubic meters of gas (it has been much higher than this, of course, in recent weeks), the value of exports from Chalous at a comfortable rate of recovery from the site is at least US$450 billion over the 20-year duration of the deal, which coincides with the next 20-year Iran-Russia deal. After the 20-year deal is up, the agreement currently is that the IRGC corporate vehicle Khatam al-Anbiya will take over ownership of Chalous for the next 50 years. Given the likely length of gas recovery at Chalous – and the fact that Russia intends to take less than 10 percent of it out over the course of its 20-year deal - sources close to the deal estimate the total value of the Chalous gas site at US$5.4 trillion.

Russia's Biggest Move Yet To Take Control Of The European Gas Market | OilPrice.com

Russia has secured control of an Iranian gas field that will not only increase its power over European energy markets but will have serious geopolitical consequences in the region

oilprice.com

Excellent move to put more pressure on the west regarding the upcoming nuclear talks.

Iran should anticipate an attack and spread out it's fissile material to 10 or 20 sites with dozens of decoy sites.

Only the most highly trusted, proven loyal individuals should take part in this program.

There is a good chance that if the nuclear deal does not go through, that Iran will develop nuclear weapons in secret but officially remain a nuclear threshold state.

Iran should also unveil a missile with 7000 km range. A modified Khorramshahr can reach London or Beijing.

After all Iran has nothing to lose. However officially Iran will remain a nuclear threshold state.

Iran should also heavily invest in air defenses, hypersonic missiles, UAV technology, it's airforce and defensive ground weapons.

Good move...Iran needs nuclear weapons in hundreds to safe guard all the resources that God has given to this nation...you never know who around Iran might get crazy idea to make run for all those riches..

 

[TheImmortal]

Good move...Iran needs nuclear weapons in hundreds to safe guard all the resources that God has given to this nation...you never know who around Iran might get crazy idea to make run for all those riches..

Nuclear weapons won’t work. Most countries know each side is too “chicken ****” to ever use nuclear weapons first.

Even in cases where Soviets by error thought that US had launched a nuclear first strike against Soviet Union the commanders at the time didn’t order a retaliatory strike. So until a mushroom cloud goes up on a country’s land, nuclear weapons are bluff weapons.

So this fallacy that if Iran gets nuclear weapons somehow its “safe” is not in line with reality. In fact Iran would be more insecure because than Turkey, Saudi Arabia, maybe even Egypt will all go nuclear. Now iran has 4 headaches in the Middle East instead of 1 (Israel).

 

[sha ah]

I respectfully disagree. If Gadafi had not given up his nukes or missiles then his regime would still be standing.

With nukes the US will never invade North Korea. With nukes the US would never invade Iran. The mere thought would be off the table. No nuclear armed nation has ever been invaded. Iraq and Syria never would have been bombed and destabilized had they acquired nukes.

Turkey is not even close to developing unless. They are paying tens of billions to Russia to develop several nuclear reactors to produce nuclear energy but the sites will be administered by Russian technicians and also all the fissile material will be removed and disposed of by the Russians.

Even if Turkey were to kick out Russians they dont have the expertise yet. It will take years if not decades to develop that expertise unless Pakistan sells it to them. But even trying to go nuclear Turkey will experience sanctions from the west.

Honestly Saudis are more likely to go nuclear long b4 Turkey.

Nuclear weapons won’t work. Most countries know each side is too “chicken ****” to ever use nuclear weapons first.

Even in cases where Soviets by error thought that US had launched a nuclear first strike against Soviet Union the commanders at the time didn’t order a retaliatory strike. So until a mushroom cloud goes up on a country’s land, nuclear weapons are bluff weapons

So this fallacy that if Iran gets nuclear weapons somehow its “safe” is not in line with reality. In fact Iran would beore insecure because than Turkey, Saudi Arabia, maybe even Egypt will all go nuclear. Now iran has 4 headaches in the Middle East instead of 1 (Israel).

 

[jauk]

I respectfully disagree. If Gadafi had not given up his nukes or missiles then his regime would still be standing.

With nukes the US will never invade North Korea. With nukes the US would never invade Iran. The mere thought would be off the table. No nuclear armed nation has ever been invaded. Iraq and Syria never would have been bombed and destabilized had they acquired nukes.

Turkey is not even close to developing unless. They are paying tens of billions to Russia to develop several nuclear reactors to produce nuclear energy but the sites will be administered by Russian technicians and also all the fissile material will be removed and disposed of by the Russians.

Even if Turkey were to kick out Russians they dont have the expertise yet. It will take years if not decades to develop that expertise unless Pakistan sells it to them. But even trying to go nuclear Turkey will experience sanctions from the west.

Honestly Saudis are more likely to go nuclear long b4 Turkey.

Correct. If they didn't *work* there wouldn't be such a fuss. Let's not buy into the 'doesn't work' propaganda.

 

[aryobarzan]

I think the Chalose gas field deal is a good deal for iran...the smart part is within the 20 year period of the deal Russia does not extract more than 10% of the field and after that the remaining field and all its income will be all for iran...it also allows Iran to put all her gas resources and capital requirement in the Persian Gulf on the new north pars and kish gas fields (see iran infrastructure thread).
As for nuclear weapons...remember there are lots of crazy duds around Iran that one day might mistakenly calculate an attack and resource grab of iran might be possible....having those A-bombs will ensure his calculus never gives him a chance of successful run..so yes even as a bluff weapon I still love Iran to have many of them..lol

 

[skyshadow]

I finding this to be so funny (way to go )

 

[QWECXZ]

I respectfully disagree. If Gadafi had not given up his nukes or missiles then his regime would still be standing.

With nukes the US will never invade North Korea. With nukes the US would never invade Iran. The mere thought would be off the table. No nuclear armed nation has ever been invaded. Iraq and Syria never would have been bombed and destabilized had they acquired nukes.

Turkey is not even close to developing unless. They are paying tens of billions to Russia to develop several nuclear reactors to produce nuclear energy but the sites will be administered by Russian technicians and also all the fissile material will be removed and disposed of by the Russians.

Even if Turkey were to kick out Russians they dont have the expertise yet. It will take years if not decades to develop that expertise unless Pakistan sells it to them. But even trying to go nuclear Turkey will experience sanctions from the west.

Honestly Saudis are more likely to go nuclear long b4 Turkey.

Indeed. Iran doesn't need to have strategic nukes or use them on her enemies to establish deterrence. Even low-yield tactical nukes that ensure the US will not be able to proceed with a ground invasion of Iran no matter what can give Iran enormous deterrence.

 

[sha ah]

After Afghanistan I don't think the US wants any part of Iran. Iran has mountainous, rugged terrain like Afghanistan but a larger population and much better weapons. Aside from the missile program Iran has AtGMs, manpads and other defensive weapons which would make an invasion hell for the US.

Some claim that the Taliban had the advantage of being an insurgent group whereas Iran has a regular army which can be targeted, therefore Iran will lose.

To those ppl I say, what makes you think Irans military and Basij can't resort to guerilla warfare tactics ? The truth is they can. Even if the US defeats the IRGC and regular army and seizes Tehran, the next phase of the war would be devastating for the US.

Indeed. Iran doesn't need to have strategic nukes or use them on her enemies to establish deterrence. Even low-yield tactical nukes that ensure the US will not be able to proceed with a ground invasion of Iran no matter what can give Iran enormous deterrence.

What percentage do Russia and China initially have in Chalose ?

I think the Chalose gas field deal is a good deal for iran...the smart part is within the 20 year period of the deal Russia does not extract more than 10% of the field and after that the remaining field and all its income will be all for iran...it also allows Iran to put all her gas resources and capital requirement in the Persian Gulf on the new north pars and kish gas fields (see iran infrastructure thread).
As for nuclear weapons...remember there are lots of crazy duds around Iran that one day might mistakenly calculate an attack and resource grab of iran might be possible....having those A-bombs will ensure his calculus never gives him a chance of successful run..so yes even as a bluff weapon I still love Iran to have many of them..lol

 

[Shawnee]

ممکنه بگین چه آدم گوهی
اما گاهی تبعیض و آزردگی موقت چشم آدم رو جوری کور میکنه پسر به پدرش فحش میده

همین آدم فردا برای یک نون سنگک خوردن کنار خاله و عمه پا میشه میاد ایران دوباره

https://twitter.com/x/status/1459933589215358990

 

[aryobarzan]

What percentage do Russia and China initially have in Chalose ?

If I am reading this correctly, In the first 20 years KEPCO which is the Iranian partner will have 25% Russia gets 40% and China gets 28%. After the initial 20 years Iran's share will be 100% and will own everything including the 90% gas left in the reserve.. Looks like China will be doing all the engineering and infrastructure meanwhile Iran will be busy developing the gasfields of the Persian gulf full steam.

Russia’s Gazprom and Transneft will together hold a 40 percent share, China’s CNPC and CNOOC together a 28 percent share, and KEPCO a 25 percent share only. “Gazprom will have overall responsibility for managing the Chalous development, Transneft will do the transportation and related operations, CNPC is doing a lot of the financing and providing the necessary banking facilities, and CNOOC will be doing the infrastructure parts and engineering,” said one of the sources.

 

[TheImmortal]

I respectfully disagree. If Gadafi had not given up his nukes or missiles then his regime would still be standing.

With nukes the US will never invade North Korea. With nukes the US would never invade Iran. The mere thought would be off the table. No nuclear armed nation has ever been invaded. Iraq and Syria never would have been bombed and destabilized had they acquired nukes.

Turkey is not even close to developing unless. They are paying tens of billions to Russia to develop several nuclear reactors to produce nuclear energy but the sites will be administered by Russian technicians and also all the fissile material will be removed and disposed of by the Russians.

Even if Turkey were to kick out Russians they dont have the expertise yet. It will take years if not decades to develop that expertise unless Pakistan sells it to them. But even trying to go nuclear Turkey will experience sanctions from the west.

Honestly Saudis are more likely to go nuclear long b4 Turkey.

There you go thanks for proving my point. “land invasion”

Who is contemplating a land invasion of Iran that would require 500K+ US soldiers? No one.

Iran’s topography is better than any nuclear weapon.

Even Trump in his final days was thinking about air strikes.

So let’s recap:

Nukes wouldn’t prevent:

1. Airstrikes
2. Skirmishes
3. Economic warfare
4. Protection of Iranian forces outside of iran (Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, yemen)

You guys place WAY to much emphasis on nukes to the point you sound like some of the Pakistani keyboard warriors on this Board who suffer from severe Napoleon complex.

Nukes won’t help Iran’s situation in anyway. One of the main drivers for Iran’s nuclear program was Saddam who was projected to go nuclear by 96-98. Hence why the program was severely scaled back after he was disposed in 03

Also comparing Iran to Ghaddafi or Saddam decrepit militaries is a joke.

As for NK, it has 10,000 artillery pieces aimed at Seoul. It could level Seoul in first hour of war with just standard artillery shells. So it too didn’t need Nukes to stay in power.

But even IF nukes prevent land invasions. You are talking about a scenario that is considered blasphemy in the Pentagon. No president would order 500K troops to war with Iran. Might as well kiss your political career goodbye.

Much easier to fire missiles and attack from air, what will Iran do then as a nuclear power? It’s missiles are now ALL considered potentially nuclear tipped. So now it has lost the entire use of its (conventional) missiles.

You think Al-Assad Missile strike could happen if Iran had nuclear tipped Fateh-110s and Qiams? Not a chance.

But let’s say I am wrong, so US attacks Iran by air and CMs but never invades Iran. What will Iran do with its nukes? Nuke a carrier group? I mean like I said US can poke holes in the Iranian Nuclear Umbrella fairly easily. Unless Tehran was about to fall to US troops, nukes are pretty useless.

This is a big reason Iran has stayed threshold nuclear state. It gets WAYYY more benefits playing nuclear blackmail than if it had nukes and was ostracized by the entire world (including Russia and China) and had to watch Saudi Arabia and Turkey go nuclear.

 

[SalarHaqq]

None of the western / zionist vassal regimes in Iran's neighborhood are going to get nuclear weapons: their imperial masters simply will not allow them to. If they do nonetheless, you know these weapons and their triggers won't be under their own sovereign control, but firmly and fully in the hands of those same imperial masters.

_____

If I am reading this correctly, In the first 20 years KEPCO which is the Iranian partner will have 25% Russia gets 40% and China gets 28%. After the initial 20 years Iran's share will be 100% and will own everything including the 90% gas left in the reserve.. Looks like China will be doing all the engineering and infrastructure meanwhile Iran will be busy developing the gasfields of the Persian gulf full steam.

Russia’s Gazprom and Transneft will together hold a 40 percent share, China’s CNPC and CNOOC together a 28 percent share, and KEPCO a 25 percent share only. “Gazprom will have overall responsibility for managing the Chalous development, Transneft will do the transportation and related operations, CNPC is doing a lot of the financing and providing the necessary banking facilities, and CNOOC will be doing the infrastructure parts and engineering,” said one of the sources.

The source for this is OilPrice.com and they claim to have had exclusive access to the information (while their own sources of course remain unnamed). Now it may be truthful, but pending confirmation I'd take anything coming from that website with a healthy dose of skepticism, seeing how they've published fake news about Iran before.

 

[sha ah]

Assuming Iran went nuclear, the US or any other country would think twice before launching any sort of attack on Iran since the risk of escalation leading to an exchange of nukes would always be there.

In the event that the US were to launch missile strikes on Iran, then Iran could still relatiate with conventional missiles against US bases / allies, even if Iran had nuclear arms. After all Iran would only have 50-100 nukes at the most and still retain its conventional missile arsenal.

Yes you could argue that Iran is better off playing games with nuclear blackmail but again no nuclear armed nation has ever been invaded.

Regardless of Iraq and Libya having weak army's, neither would have been invaded had they possessed nuclear weapons or if Gaddafi would have retained his missile arsenal which could have easily threatened mainland Europe.

Another issue is that the way the world is progressing and Iran is exporting minimal amounts of energy, in the next decades, there won't be enough resources to go around on this planet.

Nations will become increasingly desperate but Iran will likely still be sitting on massive reserves of oil and gas. At that point several powerful nations or even regional countries out of desperation might decide or really have no other choice but to try and take what they need to survive.

In such a scenario nuclear arms will be the best deterrent. The risk of losing tanks or jets or soldiers is one thing but the risk of losing an entire city is too much for any nation to bare.

There you go thanks for proving my point. “land invasion”

Who is contemplating a land invasion of Iran that would require 500K+ US soldiers? No one.

Iran’s topography is better than any nuclear weapon.

Even Trump in his final days was thinking about air strikes.

So let’s recap:

Nukes wouldn’t prevent:

1. Airstrikes
2. Skirmishes
3. Economic warfare
4. Protection of Iranian forces outside of iran (Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, yemen)

You guys place WAY to much emphasis on nukes to the point you sound like some of the Pakistani keyboard warriors on this Board who suffer from severe Napoleon complex.

Nukes won’t help Iran’s situation in anyway. One of the main drivers for Iran’s nuclear program was Saddam who was projected to go nuclear by 96-98. Hence why the program was severely scaled back after he was disposed in 03

Also comparing Iran to Ghaddafi or Saddam decrepit militaries is a joke.

As for NK, it has 10,000 artillery pieces aimed at Seoul. It could level Seoul in first hour of war with just standard artillery shells. So it too didn’t need Nukes to stay in power.

But even IF nukes prevent land invasions. You are talking about a scenario that is considered blasphemy in the Pentagon. No president would order 500K troops to war with Iran. Might as well kiss your political career goodbye.

Much easier to fire missiles and attack from air, what will Iran do then as a nuclear power? It’s missiles are now ALL considered potentially nuclear tipped. So now it has lost the entire use of its (conventional) missiles.

You think Al-Assad Missile strike could happen if Iran had nuclear tipped Fateh-110s and Qiams? Not a chance.

But let’s say I am wrong, so US attacks Iran by air and CMs but never invades Iran. What will Iran do with its nukes? Nuke a carrier group? I mean like I said US can poke holes in the Iranian Nuclear Umbrella fairly easily. Unless Tehran was about to fall to US troops, nukes are pretty useless.

This is a big reason Iran has stayed threshold nuclear state. It gets WAYYY more benefits playing nuclear blackmail than if it had nukes and was ostracized by the entire world (including Russia and China) and had to watch Saudi Arabia and Turkey go nuclear.