Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[Mata Elang]

I believe you misunderstood me. I do not have a problem with the political decision to not respond directly to the US provocation. If anything, I appreciate it. It was a wise decision.
No sane person in the Iranian establishment should wish for a direct conflict with the world's most powerful military power.
But that wasn't my point. My point is that you should never be too confident and take the status quo for granted. It was Khamenei's overconfidence that provoked Trump to assassinate Gen. Soeleimani in Iraq. Trump, being the careless simpleton he is, called out Khamenei's bluff and taught him a historic lesson. Just a few days before Soleimani's assassination, Khamenei claimed that Iran could do anything he wanted in the region and the US could not do a damn thing about it.But oh man, was he wrong! It didn't take the US even 3 days to wait before they assassinated Iran's most important general and took full responsibility for it.

The problem is that I am completely enraged by the level of wishful thinking and naivety that some people are showing here, thinking that a few thousand ballistic missiles can guarantee our national security against the ever-growing threats of the US and her Western/Semitic allies. Right now the US is busy with Russia's growing ambitions and the emerging superpower status of China. That's why we've been left unbothered for a while. Nothing short of mega-tonne nukes would guarantee the national security of Iran at the face of our current situation in the region. Anyone who claims otherwise is either grossly misinformed or a traitor.

First of all I agree with you Iran must have nuclear weapons to guarantee its security. The US 'CAN' be defeated easily (not that it can't, there are many ways. All you need to do is keep your mind one step ahead of the US). It's been 20 years since the US had simulated the 2002 Millennium Challenge ( MC02 ) and the US had not dared to go to war with Iran. The US military has been harassed by Iran too many times and the US has not dared to attack Iran. Soleimani's death was caused by US fear and not the other way around (US with a big mouth Trump has not dared to respond to Iran's ballistic missile attacks). War is not as easy as we say, there are many considerations to think about. Thousands of Iranian ballistic missiles are certainly one that makes the US not dare to attack Iran. In addition to BM, the US is also considering the position of Israel which has been surrounded by Iranian proxies in many directions and is also related to the strategic location of the Persian Gulf. But today what keeps the US from attacking Iran is because the US knows Iran can now strike the US mainland with cheap ICBM missiles (can't you see the signs? Big solid rocket engines, advanced centrifuges and deep underground passages that can holds as many things as you can imagine). And most importantly, the longer the US realizes that it doesn't know anything about Iran's true military might.

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

I have always mentioned here that Iran is always ahead of their announcement processors. I would say at least 4 years and more. I maintain that they will get us out a big suprise on the fighting planes ever unveiled. I maintain this affirmation

 

[scimitar19]

It could be interesting if we had something like this Indian developed missile among our missiles.
Truly innovative
View attachment 814638

According to Wikipedia it carries a torpedo inside its Bay and receives data from naval and areial platforms. It must be very interesting to watch its seperation moment and also diving of the torpedo.

IRGC was developing a cruise missile launched from under water capsule. This one could be an awesome addition to IRGC's anti sub arsenal given the fact that IRGC has its Forward base ships capable of launching such a Long range platform. The Indian platform can cover upto 600 KM before reaching its target under water.

Its a good concept but considering you will face an enemy with a potent naval ABM force such as AEGIS its rather questionable if this system can be effective. I lean more towards sea skimming stealth cruise missile variant of a torpedo carrier simply because it is way harder to detect.
1. Low heat signatures due to a lower speeds
2. Possible mid course flight path change or programmable flight path
3. Terrain masking capabilities and sea skimming cruising altitude
4. Radar Stealth, low observable design

Once missile is in close proximity to the ship before it reaches CIWS effective firing ranges ejects the torpedo maybe even undetected and let the fireworks commence.

Only downside to this missile is its speed where you need to keep constant eye on the fleet or ship movement for mid flight course correction.

 

[SalarHaqq]

The problem is that I am completely enraged by the level of wishful thinking and naivety that some people are showing here, thinking that a few thousand ballistic missiles can guarantee our national security against the ever-growing threats of the US and her Western/Semitic allies.

Yes, Iran's military power is deterring all her enemies from military aggression.

No matter the scenario, there is simply no way for the US regime to pursue its goals vis a vis Iran through war: the costs (both in political and economic terms) are prohibitive. Else it would have taken place already. Neither Iraq, nor Libya, nor Syria have been their main targets in the region, Iran was and is; and yet, they haven't dared to attack and are not going to dare for the foreseeable future.

The combination of:

- A few tens of thousands of BM's including extremely advanced ones armed with HGV's or characterized by pin-point accuracy, plus the supporting infrastructure namely 35+ ultra-hardened, self-sufficient and fully equipped missile 'cities' built beneath granite mountains, thousands of buried missile farm launchers and associated decoys, thousands of road mobile TEL's indistinguishable from regular civilian trucks and tens of thousands of associated decoys benefiting from an advantageous, large mountainous terrain of over 1.3 million square kilometers.
- CM's.
- A huge and varied UAV force.
- A very capable integrated air defence and radar network with a strong EW capability.
- Thousands of anti-ship missiles, of both the cruise and ballistic varieties, in addition to dozens of hard to detect midget submarines potentially armed with the Hoot / Shkval torpedo, as well as hundreds of fast attack craft.
- Up to ten million volunteers with very high morale and imbued with Islamic martyrdom culture through and through.
- An extensive network of capable regional allies in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and beyond.
- The zionist entity, which to the US establishment and its underlying oligarchy is of paramount importance from reasons ranging from ideological to esoteric in nature, directly in Iran's cross hairs.
- The ability to disrupt the main jugular vein of global energy flows by mining it into oblivion, and to flatten every production and storage facility of the second and seventh largest oil exporters, as well as the second largest gas exporter in a matter of hours, potentially inducing global economic meltdown.

Means that Washington has no realistic, viable, cost-effective military option against Iran. And their experts and analysts are openly admitting as much.

Right now the US is busy with Russia's growing ambitions and the emerging superpower status of China. That's why we've been left unbothered for a while.

That's not the reason. For the US, the Iranian challenge precedes the present-day ones posed by China and Russia.

More over, that little while is going to last for another handful of decades at least, at the conclusion of which it is US power which might collapse. Because China is not going anywhere, nor is Russia. And the tendency for the past few years has been towards a reduction of the gap between China and the US, with China catching up at a rapid pace.

Nothing short of mega-tonne nukes would guarantee the national security of Iran at the face of our current situation in the region. Anyone who claims otherwise is either grossly misinformed or a traitor.

Time will prove catastrophist assertions to be incorrect, as it did in the past, because they're not based off valid factors.

 

[QWECXZ]

Yes, Iran's military power is deterring all her enemies from military aggression.

No matter the scenario, there is simply no way for the US regime to pursue its goals vis a vis Iran through war: the costs (both in political and economic terms) are prohibitive. Else it would have taken place already. Nor Iraq, not Libya, not Syria has been their main target in the region, Iran is; and yet, they haven't dared to attack and are not going to dare for the foreseeable future.

The combination of:

- A few tens of thousands of BM's including extremely advanced ones armed with HGV's or pin-point accurate, plus the supporting infrastructure namely 35+ ultra-hardened, self-sufficient and fully equipped missile "cities" built underneath granite mountains, thousands of buried missile farm launchers and associated decoys, thousands of road mobile TEL's indistinguishible from regular civilian trucks and tens of thousands of associated decoys benefiting from an advantagous, large mountainous terrain of over 1.3 million square kilometers.
- CM's.
- A huge and varied UAV force.
- Thousands of anti-ship missiles, of both the cruise and ballistic types, in addition to dozens of hard to detect midget submarines potentially armed with the Hoot / Shkval torpedo, as well as hundreds of fast attack craft.
- Up to ten million volunteers with very high morale and imbued through and through with Islamic martyrdom culture.
- An extensive network of capable regional allies in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and beyond.
- The zionist entity, which to the US establishment and its underlying oligarchy is of paramount importance from reasons ranging from ideological to even esoteric in nature, in Iran's crosshairs.
- The ability to disrupt the main jugular vein of global energy flows and to flatten every production and storage facility of the second and seventh largest oil exporters, as well as the second largest gas exporter.

Means that Washington has no realistic, viable, cost-effective military option against Iran.



That's not the reason. For the US, the Iranian challenge precedes the contemporary Chinese and Russian ones.

More over, that little 'while' is going to last for another handful of decades at least, at the outset of which it is US power which might collapse. Because China is not going anywhere, not is Russia. And the tendency for the past few years has been towards a reduction of the gap between China and the US, with China catching up at a rapid pace.



Time will prove catastrophist assertions wrong, as it did in the past, because they aren't based off valid factors.

Yeah, yeah. None of that nonsense you wrote means anything, make it as long as you wish, but it's all nonsense and I didn't even bother to read your propaganda.

Trump does have a high chance of coming back to power in 2024. And he can always take out Gen. Ghaani like he did to Gen. Soleimani. I still remember how scared the IR was of him. Now that he's gone and the US is busy with bigger issues and sleepy Joe is the POTUS, suddenly the IR has become "deterrent". lol I remember how the regime's authorities were scared shitless of him during his last days as the POTUS, trying not to provoke him again.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Yeah, yeah. None of that nonsense you wrote means anything, make it as long as you wish, but it's all nonsense and I didn't even bother to read your propaganda.

Interestingly enough, it's the catastrophist discourse of oppositionists which 43 years of history have consistently proven to be flat out wrong.

Trump does have a high chance of coming back to power in 2024. And he can always take out Gen. Ghaani like he did to Gen. Soleimani.

And much like the martyrdom of sardar Soleimani, it's not going to affect the general geostrategic situation in the least.

I still remember how scared the IR was of him. Now that he's gone and the US is busy with bigger issues and sleepy Joe is the POTUS, suddenly the IR has become "deterrent". lol I remember how the regime's authorities were scared shitless of him during his last days as the POTUS, trying not to provoke him again.

No, the Islamic Republic exercised deterrence under Trump as well. Trump would not have thought of trying to achieve strategic US objectives through what it would have taken to achieve them by military means. What those goals are? Pompeo's 12 demands given to Iran, followed by the balkanization of the country. A miserable failure, just as Trump's lame "maximum pressure campaign".

Upwards of 4000 nuclear weapons and they cannot even prevent Iran from directing her allies to eliminate 600+ US occupation troops in Iraq; from inspiring young Lebanese fighters to blow up an entire Marines barracks. From challenging US and zionist interests across the entire region non-stop for more than four decades. What a joke.

 

[QWECXZ]

First of all I agree with you Iran must have nuclear weapons to guarantee its security. The US 'CAN' be defeated easily (not that it can't, there are many ways. All you need to do is keep your mind one step ahead of the US). It's been 20 years since the US had simulated the 2002 Millennium Challenge ( MC02 ) and the US had not dared to go to war with Iran. The US military has been harassed by Iran too many times and the US has not dared to attack Iran. Soleimani's death was caused by US fear and not the other way around (US with a big mouth Trump has not dared to respond to Iran's ballistic missile attacks). War is not as easy as we say, there are many considerations to think about. Thousands of Iranian ballistic missiles are certainly one that makes the US not dare to attack Iran. In addition to BM, the US is also considering the position of Israel which has been surrounded by Iranian proxies in many directions and is also related to the strategic location of the Persian Gulf. But today what keeps the US from attacking Iran is because the US knows Iran can now strike the US mainland with cheap ICBM missiles (can't you see the signs? Big solid rocket engines, advanced centrifuges and deep underground passages that can holds as many things as you can imagine). And most importantly, the longer the US realizes that it doesn't know anything about Iran's true military might.

Define "defeated".

Do you think Iran can hurt the US mainland? How many ICBMs do you think Iran has? Well, as far as we know, zero. But even if we're wrong, let's assume that Iran has 100 ICBMs that can reach anywhere in the US. That's a big assumption, but let it be.

How many of these ICBMs do you think will reach the US territory? 40? 50? At such a long distance, none of these missiles can achieve anything of strategic or tactical importance except for terrorizing ordinary Americans. And how do you think the US would respond to it? Do you think 330 million Americans will accept to be terrorized by a far weaker nation?!

I mean at the most optimistic scenario, the US can attack Iran's infrastructure like power plants, dams, airports, etc. Nothing would remain functioning in Iran in such a scenario. The whole country will collapse after a few weeks without electricity, water, food, etc. At the worst case scenario, the US will just nuke the shit out of Tehran. The whole idea of attacking a nuclear power with ICBMs is a ridiculous joke.

Iran can NOT attack the United States, ever. Not today, not in 10 years, not even 20 years later. At the pace of Iran's advances, Iran will not be able to attack the US territory even 50 years later. As soon as Iran launches an ICBM towards the United States, the US has a justified reason to nuke Tehran. You cannot tell if an ICBM is conventional or carrying a nuclear warhead. So, they will just nuke Tehran and say they thought it was a nuclear ICBM.

So, the whole idea of touching the US territory is out of question. Can Iran painfully hurt US interests in the Middle East? Surely we can. We can take out their military bases, rain missiles on strategic assets of their allies, block vital energy routes (even though China is not going to like this one), and we can kill tens of thousands of their soldiers at the most optimistic scenario. The US does not want to pay this cost because well, who in their sane mind would accept this? But what if an insane person in the US takes power and finally reaches the conclusion that it is an acceptable price if they send Iran back to the stone age and solve the whole Iran issue for the next decades? And believe it or not, they can send Iran back to the stone age very easily. They have more than enough fire power for that in the Middle East alone.

So, come out of this delusional, ridiculous, childish, immature idea that Iran is in any way capable of defending itself against a nuclear super power like the United States without even obtaining nukes. All Iran can ever hope to do is to stop a US invasion and destroy US assets in the Middle East. That's all that Iran can do for the next many decades. The issue of attacking the US main land is completely out of question for Iran in the foreseeable future, and by foreseeable future I meany several decades later.

Interestingly enough, catastrophists are the ones whose assessments have been proven wrong by 43 years of history.



And much like the martyrdom of sardar Soleimani, it's not going to affect the geostrategic balance in the least.



Trump was scared to try and achieve strategic US objectives through what it would take to reach them by military means. What those goals are? Pompeo's 12 demands given to Iran, followed by the balkanization of the country. A miserable failure, just as Trump's lame "maximum pressure campaign". What a joke.

Trump's lame "maximum pressure campaign" is the reason that Iran is negotiating with the US at this very moment. Have you forgotten Khamenei's bluff that Iran will never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani?

Guess what? We are negotiating with them, albeit indirectly.

And if you had a peanut in your head, you would've realized that just because something has not happened for 43 years, it doesn't rule out that it cannot happen in future. You guys barked all the time about how the US couldn't do a damn thing until finally Trump played tough and ordered to kill Soleimani just because he could. All it took him was a command to shoot Soleimani to one of his soldiers that had a clear sight of Soleimani's vehicle. And then Khamenei had to cry in front of cameras on national TV, claiming that they will take "revenge", but at an unknown time and an unknown place and in an unknown way. LOL

 

[SalarHaqq]

So, come out of this delusional, ridiculous, childish, immature idea that Iran is in any way capable of defending itself against a nuclear super power like the United States without even obtaining nukes. All Iran can ever hope to do is to stop a US invasion and destroy US assets in the Middle East.

How is the US going to achieve its objectives vis a vis Iran without an invasion?

Trump's lame "maximum pressure campaign" is the reason that Iran is negotiating with the US at this very moment.

User Mohsen replied perfectly to this kind of assertion. It'll be quicker to quote him directly:

What Iran is looking for isn't just selling the oil (which even this didn't exist in the JCPOA), Iran is demanding the end of all sanctions, plus the verification and an all aspect guarantee (legal/political and economical), even JCPOA didn't grant us such a thing let alone it's dead corpse, but on the other side we only accept the limitations of the JCPOA which are on the sunset and we have already crossed and are irreversible like the R&D. we are also looking for the compensation, so overall this time it will be a one sided deal in our favor. it's either this or nothing.

I still see no chance for such a deal, but there is no reason to not negotiate for it either. effect of sanctions wasn't beyond 20 or 30 percent, liberal instructions and theories were the real cause of damage, in fact in the very first year of JCPOA implementation, our currency started to collapse, that's the actual evidence which people like you try to ignore.

Besides, how do these negotiations bring about the realization of US strategic goals towards Iran? Because they don't.

Have you forgotten Khamenei's bluff that Iran will never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani?

Guess what? We are negotiating with them, albeit indirectly.

The previous US administration was meant, and Iran never negotiated with them in any shape or form.

And if you had a peanut in your head, you would've realized that just because something has not happened for 43 years, it doesn't rule out that it cannot happen in future.

Certainly, but considering that Iran has gotten more and more powerful over the past 43 years, and that the US empire is on a downward spiral, it only makes it less and less probable. It also shows that to consider the opposite view as a certainty, namely that Iran is defenseless against the US and will therefore succumb soon to the latter's pressures or threats, is far fetched to say the least.

You guys barked all the time about how the US couldn't do a damn thing until finally Trump played tough and ordered to kill Soleimani just because he could.

I still do. Trump couldn't do a damn thing. Shahid Soleimani's martyrdom didn't change a thing. It altered literally nothing in the big picture: Iran's nuclear program expanded greatly, so did Iran's missiles, while Iran's regional presence is as solid as before and Iran's policy of anti-imperial Resistance as adamant as ever.

All it took him was a command to shoot Soleimani to one of his soldiers that had a clear sight of Soleimani's vehicle. And then Khamenei had to cry in front of cameras on national TV, claiming that they will take "revenge", but at an unknown time and an unknown place and in an unknown way. LOL

And then nothing changed in the geostrategic balance between Iran and the zio-American empire.

 

[QWECXZ]

How is they US going to achieve its objectives vis a vis Iran without an invasion?



User Mohsen replied perfectly to this kind of assertion. It'll be quicker to quote him directly:

What Iran is looking for isn't just selling the oil (which even this didn't exist in the JCPOA), Iran is demanding the end of all sanctions, plus the verification and an all aspect guarantee (legal/political and economical), even JCPOA didn't grant us such a thing let alone it's dead corpse, but on the other side we only accept the limitations of the JCPOA which are on the sunset and we have already crossed and are irreversible like the R&D. we are also looking for the compensation, so overall this time it will be a one sided deal in our favor. it's either this or nothing.

I still see no chance for such a deal, but there is no reason to not negotiate for it either. effect of sanctions wasn't beyond 20 or 30 percent, liberal instructions and theories were the real cause of damage, in fact in the very first year of JCPOA implementation, our currency started to collapse, that's the actual evidence which people like you try to ignore.

Besides, how do these negotiations bring about the realization of US strategic goals towards Iran? Because they don't.



The previous US administration was meant, and Iran never negotiated with them in any shape or form.



Certainly, but considering that Iran has gotten more and more powerful over the past 43 years, and that the US empire is on a downward spiral, it only makes it less and less probable. It also shows that to consider the opposite view as a certainty, namely that Iran is defenseless against the US and will therefore succumb soon to the latter's pressures or threats, is far fetched to say the least.



I still do. Trump couldn't do a damn thing. Shahid Soleimani's martyrdom didn't change a thing. Literally, nothing in the big picture: Iran's nuclear program expanded greatly, so did Iran's missiles, while Iran's regional presence is as solid as before.



And apart from that, nothing changed in the geostrategic balance between Iran and the zio-American empire.

I already explained how the US can achieve it. Read it again. They can take out power plants, airports, dams, hospitals, basically all vital and critical infrastructures of Iran. It can cause civil unrest and then they can arm people inside Iran and Iran will be finished off for decades like today's Syria with a long civil war. The only thing that stops the US from doing this is that the US leadership does not think the price they have to pay is worth it. And again, the status quo is in fact in the US favor. Why would the US want tens of thousands of dead soldiers and billions of dollars of collateral damage when it is in fact containing Iran without firing a single bullet and is even benefiting from it economically by seizing over 100 billion dollars of Iranian assets worldwide? It makes no sense to change the status quo and go for a deadly, costly war with a country of 85 million people when all is good for them and Iran is the one that is under pressure. Maintaining a bad status quo while negotiating for sanctions relief is not called deterrence. I know you guys don't get the difference, but this is far from deterrence.

And the rest of your post is nonsense and propaganda. Khamenei said that he would never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani and now they are. What for? It doesn't matter. He said Iran would never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani. Never means never. And now they are sitting there in Vienna, negotiating with the very same people that planned to kill Iran's 2nd most powerful man and executed it. Even the Europeans didn't talk against the US assassination of Gen. Soleimani and urged Iran to calm down!!! We all know Europeans well. Don't we?

Iran's nuclear program hasn't expanded greatly. It hasn't expanded at all. Iran's enrichment capacity continues to remain below 19,000 SWU. Just because we are stockpiling uranium doesn't mean that our enrichment program has expanded in any meaningful way. And even that is in UF6 Kg/year, not U Kg/year. Iran's enrichment capacity is in fact somewhere around 10,000 SWU UF6 Kg/year, which is to be honest with you, embarrassing! Khamenei boasted about reaching 190,000 SWU in a year and a year has passed and we are not even at 10% of what he had bragged about. The people who think Iran's nuclear program has expanded significantly are clearly misinformed. If anything, Iran is pretty much right where it was before the JCPOA in 2013. I wouldn't call returning to your 2013 conditions after losing hundreds of billions of dollars as "expanding greatly".

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

How many US personnel in Iraq have been killed due to these "persistent" attacks in Iraq by Shiite militias? Zero. We read about them almost every week or month. But they are just a few rockets that hit like nowhere. The BM attack on Ain Al-Assad was a farce in terms of revenging Soleimani's death. One should not get overconfident.

Trump was a president. His term ended. Khamenei is a Supreme Leader with infinite term. How can you compare these two?

Well Im comparing the two most absolute powers in the two states. It's not mine or Iran's fault that the US has chosen to have a corrupt dictatorship mascarading as a democracy. Khamenei is the true leader of Iran, and if the true leader of US was Trump it is clear which one of the two came looking like roses. Had Trump had a second term and Iran accepting a bad deal I would have conceaded, but the man got called a domestic terrorist, voted out after one term, refuted by Pompeo and his military brass and left kicking and screaming.

How was it farcicle? It was the first attack of its kind, ever, and the US didnt respond which is rare. What was farcicle was watching a flustered Trump do a press conference and say nobody died, then as the days went on the number increased and these people disappeared from the records and went to UAE and Germany, never to be seen again.

According to US estimates Iranian forces have been responsible for so many US deaths and don't think for a second that Iran has thrown its entire weight in Iraq. Out of consideration of the war wearying Iraqi people and amicable Iraqi government Iran has not given these groups real weapons....yet. So far it's just little loitering drones and katyushas. However that can change. Stop selling your country so cheaply for some peanuts.

Yeah, yeah. None of that nonsense you wrote means anything, make it as long as you wish, but it's all nonsense and I didn't even bother to read your propaganda.

Trump does have a high chance of coming back to power in 2024. And he can always take out Gen. Ghaani like he did to Gen. Soleimani. I still remember how scared the IR was of him. Now that he's gone and the US is busy with bigger issues and sleepy Joe is the POTUS, suddenly the IR has become "deterrent". lol I remember how the regime's authorities were scared shitless of him during his last days as the POTUS, trying not to provoke him again.

Yeah Iran was sooo scared of Trump that they fired a bunch of missiles at his troops and drones, increased enrichment and missile unveilings, started a shadow tanker war with Israel which Israel admitted defeat, began shipping oil to Venezuela without any US piracy merely by hoisting Iranian flags on tankers and not negotiating with US at any point. Bear in mind all this happened with a very weak Rohani government.

Stop brown nosing the enemies of Iran. Iran honesly doesnt need people like you. Your kind need to be rounded up va ba ye dar e kooni az keshvar bendazan biroon.

 

[Blue In Green]

I already explained how the US can achieve it. Read it again. They can take out power plants, airports, dams, hospitals, basically all vital and critical infrastructures of Iran. It can cause civil unrest and then they can arm people inside Iran and Iran will be finished off for decades like today's Syria with a long civil war. The only thing that stops the US from doing this is that the US leadership does not think the price they have to pay is worth it. And again, the status quo is in fact in the US favor. Why would the US want tens of thousands of dead soldiers and billions of dollars of collateral damage when it is in fact containing Iran without firing a single bullet and is even benefiting from it economically by seizing over 100 billion dollars of Iranian assets worldwide? It makes no sense to change the status quo and go for a deadly, costly war with a country of 85 million people when all is good for them and Iran is the one that is under pressure. Maintaining a bad status quo while negotiating for sanctions relief is not called deterrence. I know you guys don't get the difference, but this is far from deterrence.

And the rest of your post is nonsense and propaganda. Khamenei said that he would never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani and now they are. What for? It doesn't matter. He said Iran would never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani. Never means never. And now they are sitting there in Vienna, negotiating with the very same people that planned to kill Iran's 2nd most powerful man and executed it. Even the Europeans didn't talk against the US assassination of Gen. Soleimani and urged Iran to calm down!!! We all know Europeans well. Don't we?

Iran's nuclear program hasn't expanded greatly. It hasn't expanded at all. Iran's enrichment capacity continues to remain below 19,000 SWU. Just because we are stockpiling uranium doesn't mean that our enrichment program has expanded in any meaningful way. And even that is in UF6 Kg/year, not U Kg/year. Iran's enrichment capacity is in fact somewhere around 10,000 SWU UF6 Kg/year, which is to be honest with you, embarrassing! Khamenei boasted about reaching 190,000 SWU in a year and a year has passed and we are not even at 10% of what he had bragged about. The people who think Iran's nuclear program has expanded significantly are clearly misinformed. If anything, Iran is pretty much right where it was before the JCPOA in 2013. I wouldn't call returning to your 2013 conditions after losing hundreds of billions of dollars as "expanding greatly".

Aziz, kheli az harfhot rust-hast valli ma Irooni-ha bayat yazare az khodemoon rosi basheem.

There is only so much Iran can do realistically. I understand your grievances but for me, I take what I can get.

 

[SalarHaqq]

I already explained how the US can achieve it. Read it again. They can take out power plants, airports, dams, hospitals, basically all vital and critical infrastructures of Iran. It can cause civil unrest and then they can arm people inside Iran and Iran will be finished off for decades like today's Syria with a long civil war. The only thing that stops the US from doing this is that the US leadership does not think the price they have to pay is worth it.

The price happens to be an integral part of the equation. It makes no sense to say "they can do it but they consider the price to be prohibitive, so Iran will lose / has lost". Actually, this is in line with what I wrote above: that the US has no cost-effective military option. If it's too costly, then they will not attack. And it's too costly precisely because Iran's military prowess will extract that heavy price from them. This is called deterrence.

And again, the status quo is in fact in the US favor. Why would the US want tens of thousands of dead soldiers and billions of dollars of collateral damage when it is in fact containing Iran without firing a single bullet and is even benefiting from it economically by seizing over 100 billion dollars of Iranian assets worldwide?

It's not containment when Iran's reach has kept expanding for the past four decades. Also, the US's strategic goal is not to simply contain Iran: it is to finish Iran off.

It makes no sense to change the status quo and go for a deadly, costly war with a country of 85 million people when all is good for them and Iran is the one that is under pressure. Maintaining a bad status quo while negotiating for sanctions relief is not called deterrence. I know you guys don't get the difference, but this is far from deterrence.

All is far from being good for the US. The imperial oligarchy does not consider this status quo with Iran as satisfactory. It has no tolerance for independent states, let alone one that is seriously challenging their interests. Hence why they're going out of their way to exploit every realistic means at their disposal to achieve "regime change" in Iran. But are failing at it.

And the rest of your post is nonsense and propaganda. Khamenei said that he would never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani and now they are.

I addressed this above: by killers, the previous administration was meant, those who were directly involved in it. No negotiation took place with the Trump regime, and its attempts to force Iran back to the table were definitely unsuccessful.

Iran's nuclear program hasn't expanded greatly. It hasn't expanded at all. Iran's enrichment capacity continues to remain below 19,000 SWU. Just because we are stockpiling uranium doesn't mean that our enrichment program has expanded in any meaningful way. And even that is in UF6 Kg/year, not U Kg/year. Iran's enrichment capacity is in fact somewhere around 10,000 SWU UF6 Kg/year, which is to be honest with you, embarrassing! Khamenei boasted about reaching 190,000 SWU in a year and a year has passed and we are not even at 10% of what he had bragged about. The people who think Iran's nuclear program has expanded significantly are clearly misinformed. If anything, Iran is pretty much right where it was before the JCPOA in 2013. I wouldn't call returning to your 2013 conditions after losing hundreds of billions of dollars as "expanding greatly".

JCPOA limitations were reversed to a significant extent, and surely that's not what the US was aiming for. So to me that equals another failure of the so-called "maximum pressure" policy of Trump.

Either way, the assassination of martyr Soleimani did really nothing to limit Iran's nuclear program, did it? Iran returning to the negotiation table has nothing to do with the assassination. QED.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Let's hear it from the horse's mouth: US think tank scholars like Barbara Slavin, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and director of the so-called "Future of Iran Initiative", also believe that the killing of shahid Soleimani did nothing to advance US goals towards Iran and if anything, backfired on Washington:

 

[HAIDER]

What will be Iran's strategy if Republicans are back in power which is going to happen soon. This Democrats agreement will be reversed again ............

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

What will be Iran's strategy if Republicans are back in power which is going to happen soon. This Democrats agreement will be reversed again ............

Well, Iran would naturally snap back enrichment back to 60% and beyond, which would be fair in the event of yet another reneging by US...however the reason the deal hasn't been reached yet is because the US doesn't understand that it takes two to tango, and if any future US administration can freely leave a deal due to political games with their domestic opposition then Iran will have to be able to snap back enrichment in response, as a clause in any future agreement.

The deal has a long way to go and probably wont be reached if this impasse can not be ceded by the Americans.