Iranian Nuclear Doctrine

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

Artillery strikes are precise often enough, and you have no statistics about how often Sukhoi jets fly low and how often they don't. The amount of Sukhoi fighter jets downed by manpads is low.



You provided no evidence, but echoed NATO propaganda.



There's no such thing in the real world, only in the lies spewed by NATO propaganda mouthpieces.

Mariupol stands out in this regard, and that's because a several thousand strong band of nihilistic neo-Nazi fanatics working for zio-American interests entrenched themselves across town including in one of the largest secure fallout shelters built during the Cold War era, and needlessly engaged in a long fight that was lost from the outset, similar to the Wehmacht's 1945 defence of Berlin .



Outlandish assertion.



Only one large combat vessel was downed, the rest were mostly patrol boats. Nothing to write home about.



Demagogy. Ukrainian losses are greater by several orders of magnitude.



Hahaha, I'd love to see hundreds of thousands of western mercenaries replace the Ukrainian army. If they dare take such a step, Russia will escalate brutally and it has many yet unused options to hurt NATO and western interests.



Russia "falling"... one truly needs to be taking a lot of western propaganda at face value to reach this type of conclusion.



Not every strike is filmed, not every UAV recording is published.

---

I'd suggest you familiarize yourself a little bit with the meaning of that slogan: the "no East" part was referring to the Soviet Union and its imperialist policies, not some sort of a declaration of hostility against Russia regardless of the nature of its political system. With the fall of the USSR, ties between Iran and the Russian Federation were reset and entered a new era of increasing cooperation.

In our Supreme Leader's words:

Key points of meeting with the President of Russia

english.khamenei.ir

Does that sound like the way the Leader would talk of a hostile entity?

As for "covering up Moscow's failures" and "essays full of nonsensical statements", I'm yet to to read your "expert" analysis about the supposed military feats of the zio-American proxy army in Ukraine.



Any steback for NATO is in Iran's interest. Any move by independent emerging powers against the US empire as well.

Stoking russophobia and sinophobia amongst Iranians is what the zionists, Americans, their liberal fifth column in Iran as well as the exiled anti-IR opposition are busy attempting. Thus counter-narratives are required in order to neutralize it.



Iran is interested in establishing strategic partnerships with both Moscow and Beijing.

Iranian-Russian military alliance in the Syrian theater did not look like a strict business relation either.

I'm well aware of the slogan and it's meaning, mister. One of the meanings is "We will stand upon a pedestal of progress that is of our own making."

That's a statement of the Supreme Leader upon the signing of a 20 year contract between the two nations. Guess what - every king since antiquity has done the same in similar conditions. You on the other hand want to hitch our carriage to Moscow's and have us travel in whatever ruinous direction they lead us.

You want my opinion on Ukraine's performance? I would say they did the impossible. Theoretically, Kiev should have fallen in three days. Instead, the russians were forced into a retreat we will talk about even a century from now. But that being said, they have little to no hope of winning this war as russia holds the advantage in the conflict and is more than capable of exhausting the Ukrainians until they drop and then moving in for the kill.

Sure, check the bastards who unnecessarily drive in wedges. But don't become a halal cheerleader as you're wont to do.

Lastly, Russia is in Syria because it wants a warm water port (it has a critical lack of those) and a foothold in the eastern Mediterranean. Syria provides both and if it means entrenching there requires them to link up with Iranians, then they'll do it. At the same time, they've been grooming SAA generals with bribes of equipment and support and in turn making them politically pressurize Assad into not throwing his forces into the effort to unitedly confront the americans and turks with the Shia Militias (which you gloss over).

 

[Hack-Hook]

list the remaining ships of black fleet

 

[SalarHaqq]

I'm well aware of the slogan and it's meaning, mister. One of the meanings is "We will stand upon a pedestal of progress that is of our own making."

And how exactly is that supposed to disprove the explanation I gave?

That's a statement of the Supreme Leader upon the signing of a 20 year contract between the two nations. Guess what - every king since antiquity has done the same in similar conditions. You on the other hand want to hitch our carriage to Moscow's and have us travel in whatever ruinous direction they lead us.

Show me where I suggested such a thing.

You want my opinion on Ukraine's performance? I would say they did the impossible. Theoretically, Kiev should have fallen in three days. Instead, the russians were forced into a retreat we will talk about even a century from now.

That's what zionist and NATO propaganda is misleading everyone to assume. The thrust towards Kiev was classical textbook diversion by Russia. It successfully pinned down tens of thousands of Ukrainian forces who would otherwise have been dispatched to defend the territories Russia took control of early on in the war.

If you believe Ukrainians did the impossible, my suggestion would be to keep documenting yourself and preferably from independent sources (Scott Ritter's masterful analyses would be a good start). The de facto monopoly of western propaganda about this conflict is staggering.

Sure, check the bastards who unnecessarily drive in wedges. But don't become a halal cheerleader as you're wont to do.

I don't think it qualifies as cheerleading if one refuses to buy into mainstream media narratives about blatant Russian military failure, or into their accusations of massive and systematic Russian war crimes in Ukraine.

Lastly, Russia is in Syria because it wants a warm water port (it has a critical lack of those) and a foothold in the eastern Mediterranean. Syria provides both and if it means entrenching there requires them to link up with Iranians, then they'll do it.

What did you expect, that Moscow would enter the Syrian fray out of mere altruism? Of course they're after their own interests, but the point now is that their interests and Iran's are aligning more than ever and in a multiple number of ways.

No such thing had ever been the case with the Soviet Union, which Iran considered as an enemy state. The Russian Federation however qualifies as a strategic-level partner to Iran on numerous issues, even if there's no full fledged alliance indeed.

At the same time, they've been grooming SAA generals with bribes of equipment and support and in turn making them politically pressurize Assad into not throwing his forces into the effort to unitedly confront the americans and turks with the Shia Militias (which you gloss over).

Never heard of this, let alone seen evidence for it. Check the news, Russian forces have been overflying the US-occupied Al-Tanf enclave lately, in addition to carrying out air strikes against targets in Idlib province.

Ponder this, the Ukraine conflict has pitted NATO and Russia against each other for an undetermined period of time, which in turn is offering a golden opportunity for Iran to engage in unprecedented mutually beneficial cooperation with the Russians including against the common existential enemy. Even a few additional, limited steps are better than nothing and worthier than many seem to believe.

Guess who's anxious over this, and whose shills are therefore in overdrive mode trying to utterly blacken, demean and demonize Russia with Iranian audiences as we speak? Why do you think a resident, high output account supportive of the USA regime, whom I had never seen posting in the Iranian section before, all of a sudden began flooding the Iranian Chill Thread with NATO-certified updates on the war in Ukraine, tailored to make Russia look weak and incompetent?

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

And how exactly is that supposed to invalidate my explanation?

By showing you that ussr collapsing and the russian federation rising in it's place doesn't make everything hunky-dory.

Show me where I suggested such a thing.

Since you restrict others from viewing your profile, take the time to read your own comments. Your suggestion is evident in each of them.

That's what zionist and NATO propaganda is misleading everyone to assume. The thrust towards Kiev was classical textbook diversion by Russia. It successfully pinned down tens of thousands of Ukrainian forces who would otherwise have been dispatched to defend the territories Russia took control of early on in the war.

If you believe Ukrainians did the impossible, my suggestion would be to keep documenting yourself and preferably from independent sources (Scott Ritter's masterful analyses would be a good start). The de facto monopoly of western propaganda about this conflict is staggering.

Yes, now a 40 km convoy to the capital city that ran out of fuel and food in the middle of their incursion is a classic diversion, kek.

No feint is made with such carelessness or such piss poor logistic planning, nor are such large numbers thrown in. Their goal was a blitzkrieg but their incompetence turned it into a blyatkrieg and that's all there is to it.

Those tens of thousands of tied up Ukrainians you're talking about? They're striking deep into Donetsk and even Crimea now, something they should have been unable to at this stage.

 

[SalarHaqq]

By showing you that ussr collapsing and the russian federation rising in it's place doesn't make everything hunky-dory.

I don't remember advocating Iran should refrain from standing on her own feet. The Islamic Republic's focus on self-sufficiency is one of the policies I have praised most often.

Since you restrict others from viewing your profile, take the time to read your own comments. Your suggestion is evident in each of them.

The search function enables one to look for key words by user. And if it's "evident" in each of my comments, providing a sample should not be a problem now, should it?

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

I don't think it qualifies as cheerleading if one doesn't buy into mainstream media narratives about blatant Russian military failure or accusations of massive and systematic Russian war crimes in Ukraine.

It's not even cheerleading at this point. What you're doing is more akin to whoredom and free of charge at that.

You spout bullshit about "pinpoint artillery strikes" (which do happen but are a handful in a sea of shelling) when the Battle of Mariupol blows that assertion out of the water and indiscriminate use of Russian artillery to reduce 95% of the city to ruins.

What did you expect, that Moscow would enter the Syrian fray out of mere altruism? Of course they're after their own interests, but the point now is that their interests and Iran's are aligning more than ever and in a multiple number of ways.

No such thing had ever been the case with the Soviet Union, which Iran considered as her enemy. The Russian Federation however qualifies as a strategic-level partner to Iran on numerous issues, even if there's no full fledged alliance.



Never heard of this, let alone seen evidence for it. Check the news, Russian forces have been overflying the US-occupied Al-Tanf enclave lately, in addition to carrying out air strikes in Idlib province.

Ponder this, the Ukraine conflict has pitted NATO and Russia against each other for an undetermined period of time, and that offers a golden opportunity for Iran to engage in unprecedented mutually beneficial cooperation with the Russians including against the common existential enemy. Even small steps are better than nothing.

Have some shame. America gives israel full satellite reconnaissance for them to conduct strikes inside Syria.

Those bastard russians meanwhile get a 30 minutes heads-up from tel aviv and leave the Syrians in the dark until the missiles strike. What assistance and strategic overlap is that?

And no evidence? The biggest evidence is the "Tiger Forces" led by Soheil al-Hassan himself who is staunchly anti-Iran despite being an Alawite and in the pocket of the Russians. Iran's sole backer is Maher al-Assad and only because he makes money through the NDF structure pro-Iranian militants are part of.

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

Guess who's anxious over this, and whose shills are therefore in overdrive mode trying to blacken, demean and demonize Russia with Iranian audiences as we speak? Why do you think a resident USA propagandist, whom I had never seen posting in the Iranian section, all of a sudden popped out of nowhere to flood the Iranian Chill Thread with NATO-certified updates on the war in Ukraine, tailored to make Russia look weak and incompetent?

Russia IS incompetent. Their bungling in war is not new - it dates back to before WWI itself.

Hell, in Syria, they were #1 is mooching off the credit of others' hard work (Iran, Hezbollah, NDF etc.) and the last true victory they had was over Georgia in 2008, which was a banana republic and has only recently stood back up on its feet.

In both Chechen Wars, the russians had their balls torn off (4 generals died in the first one and 11 generals died in the second one + the Chechens were retaking territory all the way up to 2004). It was only the late, great Shamil Basayev's death which turned the tide of the war and his killing was a pure fluke (Russia didn't even know he would be inspecting that convoy they rigged).

 

[SalarHaqq]

It's not even cheerleading at this point. What you're doing is more akin to whoredom and free of charge at that.

You spout bullshit about "pinpoint artillery strikes" (which do happen but are a handful in a sea of shelling) when the Battle of Mariupol blows that assertion out of the water and indiscriminate use of Russian artillery to reduce 95% of the city to ruins.

A pity you won't keep this civil. Since you authored a funny tirade before your previous ban, in which you proceeded to assimilate politeness with weakness, even questioning Iranian customs and tradition in this regard, be advised that having a foul mouth isn't a sign of strength by any means, quite the contrary. In situations like these, all it does is to betray the underlying insecurities of he who exhibits such methods.

As for the battle of Mariupol, it seems to me I precisely discussed that specific case, which pretty much stands out as an exception, in one of my above comments.

Ukraine condemns Amnesty report that its army endangers civilians

Ukrainian officials said the report undermined Amnesty International’s credibility

www.businesslive.co.za

The actual indiscriminate thing about Mariupol was the way in which extremist Ukrainian militias were indiscriminately taking up firing position in civilian buildings.

Have some shame. America gives israel full satellite reconnaissance for them to conduct strikes inside Syria.

Those bastard russians meanwhile get a 30 minutes heads-up from tel aviv and leave the Syrians in the dark until the missiles strike. What assistance and strategic overlap is that?

May be you're a tad slow to notice, which is okay, we all have our imperfections. Luckily I'm here to set the record straight though: the strategic overlap resides in the joint effort to crush the zionist- and NATO-sponsored terrorist insurgency, keep the legal Syrian government in place and thereby completely neutralize the zio-American plot against Syria; plot which was to represent the first chapter in the destruction of the Resistance Axis, and was to meet its conclusion on Iranian soil proper.

Only an intellectually dishonest person or an emotive fool would dismiss this as a peripheral, irrelevant matter.

And no evidence? The biggest evidence is the "Tiger Forces" led by Soheil al-Hassan himself who is staunchly anti-Iran despite being an Alawite and in the pocket of the Russians.

Provide evidence about Soheil al-Hassan being staunchly anti-Iran. And also of how Soheil al-Hassan's closeness to Russia implies that Moscow is pressuring Assad not to confront Turkish and the USA occupation forces. These are semantic slips, not valid logical inference.

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

The actual indiscriminate thing about Mariupol was the way in which extremist Ukrainian militias were indiscriminately using civilian buildings as firing positions.

Is that so now? Very similar tactic to what the Red Army used in Stalingrad, fighting out of the city and in civilian homes, forcing the Luftwaffe to bomb non-combatants as collateral and the Heer/Waffen SS to shell the same buildings.

See where that goes?

May be you're slow to notice, which is okay, we all have our imperfections. Luckily I'm here though to set the record straight: the strategic overlap resides in the joint effort to crush the zionist- and NATO-sponsored terrorist insurgency, keep the legal Syrian government in place and thereby completely neutralize the zio-American plot against Syria, which was to represent the first chapter in the destruction of the Resistance Axis, and was to meet its conclusion on Iranian soil proper.

Only an intellectually dishonest person or an emotive fool would dismiss this as a peripheral, irrelevant matter.

Oh, and how are they achieving this? By allowing inbred kike subhumans bomb the Damascus International Airport and render it inoperable for weeks, cutting it off from much needed aid since flights are unable to land anymore?

 

[SalarHaqq]

No feint is made with such carelessness or such piss poor logistic planning, nor are such large numbers thrown in. Their goal was a blitzkrieg but their incompetence turned it into a blyatkrieg and that's all there is to it.

So wait a minute, alleged poor logistic planning is proof that this was no diversion, but at the same time it's evidence for blitzkrieg, only an amateurishly executed one? Where's the logic in this? If they are incompetent as you claim, then by definition a diversion maneuver conducted by them could very well run into fuel shortages.

Those tens of thousands of tied up Ukrainians you're talking about? They're striking deep into Donetsk and even Crimea now, something they should have been unable to at this stage.

I'm talking about infantry. You don't stop an invading ground force with token ballistic missile attacks.

Russia IS incompetent. Their bungling in war is not new - it dates back to before WWI itself.

The army which contributed most to the defeat of Germany during WW2 cannot be weak, nor that incompetent. Same as the military which inflicted a crushing defeat upon the French imperial army of the early 19th century. And so on.

Hell, in Syria, they were #1 is mooching off the credit of others' hard work (Iran, Hezbollah, NDF etc.)

What was that about avoiding to drive wedges between Iran and her partners?

and the last true victory they had was over Georgia in 2008, which was a banana republic and has only recently stood back up on its feet.

In both Chechen Wars, the russians had their balls torn off (4 generals died in the first one and 11 generals died in the second one + the Chechens were retaking territory all the way up to 2004). It was only the late, great Shamil Basayev's death which turned the tide of the war and his killing was a pure fluke (Russia didn't even know he would be inspecting that convoy they rigged).

The catastrophic state of Russia at the time of the first Chechen war is common knowledge.

As for the second Chechen war, if the mere elimination of a commander leads to a party's defeat, then that party isn't as solid as you appear to believe.

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

Provide evidence about Soheil al-Hassan being "staunchly anti-Iran". Also of how Soheil al-Hassan's closeness to Russia implies that Moscow is pressuring Assad not to confront Turkish and the USA occupation forces. These are semantic slips, not logical inference.

Here's the kicker - my articles are all from media houses you would object to and dismiss as slander. Where would that leave us?

So wait a minute, allegedly poor logistic planning is proof that this was not a diversion, but at the same time it's evidence for blitzkrieg, only an amateurishly executed one? Where's the logic in this? If they are incompetent as you claim, then by definition a diversion maneuver conducted by them can very well run into fuel shortages.

KEK, "logic" and the russian military don't really meet. Yes, logistic planning was poor. They used tires made in the USSR, sent troops lacking plate carriers, expired rations, some armoured vehicles were lacking ERA and even composite armour and the commanders sold off the fuel in Belarus (more common than you think).

 

[SalarHaqq]

Is that so now? Very similar tactic to what the Red Army used in Stalingrad, fighting out of the city and in civilian homes, forcing the Luftwaffe to bomb non-combatants as collateral and the Heer/Waffen SS to shell the same buildings.

See where that goes?

Yes, and? Did I complain that the German military was especially indiscriminate in its shelling of Stalingrad or something?

Oh, and how are they achieving this? By allowing inbred kike subhumans bomb the Damascus International Airport and render it inoperable for weeks, cutting it off from much needed aid since flights are unable to land anymore?

No, by assisting the Resistance in putting a stop to the zionist- and western-engineered insurgency. Those Isra"el"i air strikes have not and will not dent the strategic balance, nor are they yielding meaningful political gains for the zionists.

It's plain obvious which of these two occurrences is weighing more in the big picture. Try to see things in their actual proportions.

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

I'm talking about infantry. You don't stop an invading ground force with token ballistic missile attacks.



The army which contributed most to the defeat of Germany during WW2 can't be weak, nor that incompetent. Same with the French imperial armies, and many others.



What was that about refraining from driving wedges between Iran and its partners?



The catastrophic state of Russia during the first Chechen war is common knowledge.

As for the second one, if the mere elimination of a commander leads to a party's defeat, then that party isn't as solid as you seem to believe.

#1 They are eviscerating Russian aviation without even scrambling a jet. 40 planes were lost in the strike on Crimea and 12 of those were air superiority fighters.

#2) America's lend lease saved the USSR's neck. The staggering amount of equipment and logistics supplied manages to make the Red Army return to full strength otherwise it nearly died when the Germans reached Moscow's outskirts.

#3) I'm not. I'm just not going to let them steal the credit for Iran's hard work on the ground.

#4) It wasn't Basayev alone. Arbi Barayev, Ruslan Gelayev, Aslan Maskhadov, Rizvan Chitigov - all of them variously fell victim one after the other, many due to treachery. It wasn't just one commander dying but more or less the entire leadership was lost to assassinations. On the field, the situation had been quite different - many russian soldiers captured by the Chechens turned and joined them to the extent of suicide bombing OMON and Russian Army positions.

Yes, and? Did I claim the German military was especially indiscriminate in its shelling of Stalingrad?

You are implying the tactics of Ukraine fighting out of houses was wrong. When confronted with the russians having done the same in Stalingrad, you suddenly shoehorned that you never made any remarks on German tactics which has nothing to do with the situation.

And frankly, the more you open your mouth, the more I'm beginning to understand why people like @Hack-Hook exist; how can they not when confronted with blockheaded defence of a nation whose standing is still uncertain?

No, by assisting the Resistance in ending the zionist- and western-engineered insurgency. Those Isra"el"i air strikes have not and will not dent the strategic balance, nor are they yielding any meaningful political gains for the zionists.

It's plain obvious which of these two occurrences is weighing more in the big picture! Try to see things in their actual proportions.

Well news to you, the russians are forcing the Syrian government to make peace with these factions instead of stamping them out.

One example is Daraa where after several failed negotiations, there was finally a breakthrough but it collapsed and the sunnis attacked the SAA again. Aleppo is the other example where the governate was won back but the russians prevented the SAA/NDF from finishing off surrendering insurgents and now there are assassinations and attacks everyday there.

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

It's plain obvious which of these two occurrences is weighing more in the big picture! Try to see things in their actual proportions

Anyway, I'll can this debate since there's an american pig lurking here reading all this and no doubt rubbing his hands in glee over our disagreement (may his mother be f-u-c-k-e-d up her rotten cunt).

Amend your outlook - you're headed for disaster while whistling a merry tune.

 

[SalarHaqq]

#1 They are eviscerating Russian aviation without even scrambling a jet. 40 planes were lost in the strike on Crimea and 12 of those were air superiority fighters.

It doesn't invalidate the notion that the initial thrust towards Kiev was a diversion.

Not exactly eviscerating, Russia can live with a loss of this order - its air force is fielding over 1300 fighter jets (not counting the >180 bombers).

#2) America's lend lease saved the USSR's neck. The staggering amount of equipment and logistics supplied manages to make the Red Army return to full strength otherwise it nearly died when the Germans reached Moscow's outskirts.

Still, all the fighting was done by Soviets.

#4) It wasn't Basayev alone. Arbi Barayev, Ruslan Gelayev, Aslan Maskhadov, Rizvan Chitigov - all of them variously fell victim one after the other, many due to treachery. It wasn't just one commander dying but more or less the entire leadership was lost to assassinations.

Thence Russia was not as incompetent as you first claimed. Treachery or not, the fact that the FSB and/or other Russian agencies managed to suppress as many key commanders amongst their opponent's ranks in the midst of a shooting war is a testament to Moscow's abilities.

On the field, the situation had been quite different - many russian soldiers captured by the Chechens turned and joined them to the extent of suicide bombing OMON and Russian Army positions.

In war, it matters not how you achieve victory - except for war crimes and violations of Shar'i law, everything else is valid.

Otherwise we would also have to endorse petty excuses of Americans claiming they "won every battle in Vietnam"... What use is it to "win every battle" (supposedly), when in the end your last remaining personnel is forced to flee by boarding helicopters on the roof of your embassy?

You are implying the tactics of Ukraine fighting out of houses was wrong. When confronted with the russians having done the same in Stalingrad, you suddenly shoehorned that you never made any remarks on German tactics which has nothing to do with the situation.

What's your point, do you want me to condemn the Red Army's use of civilian amenities ? I've no problem with that. You're all over the place simply making implications as to my thoughts on issues I never actually addressed.

The sole reason I mentioned Ukrainian forces taking position inside civilian edifices is because this explains why Mariupol suffered more extensive destruction compared to other cities.

It was not just their tactic specifically that was wrong (from a legal and ethical point of view); the very fact that they engaged in battle to start with was irrational from ground up, given that they should have known about the perfect futility of their effort. The same can't be said of the Soviets in Stalingrad, as history showed.