IRIAF | News and Discussions

[aryobarzan]

The Iranian air force is a joke. Their most modern aircraft is the MIG-29... LMAO! Iran’s air force in total only has 46 4th generation aircraft. In other word’s a junk air force. It has no chance against our air force. Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.

What is it that you are so proud of...having US designed, US manufactured, US funded aircraft should make an American proud not an Israeli.. you just fly their machine and you are chest thumping in Iranian forum....go make one of your own before showing up here....you are good at making good bagels...but there is no bagel thread in PDF..may be you should start one..tell us how good you are in bagel technology..leave aviation to Goyims.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

We are talking about Iran's deterrence after the 8 year war. Saddam did not respond to a single Iranian attack after 1988.

About removing Saddam
Iran had 2 major military objectives. Remove the invading Iraqi forces from its soil and bring the war to Iraq. Both objectives succeeded. Removing Saddam came later in the war and was down the list of priorities. After the defeat of Iraqi army inside Iran the war became somewhat unpopular.. the main objective was always the freeing of Iranian land from the invaders. When that was accomplished there was no real driving force anymore. Remember, majority of the war was fought inside Iraqi territory.

And Iran is not really responsible for the low IQ and lack of political skills from Iraqi leaders. Iraqis destroyed their country with their own hands.

Majority of the war was fought inside Iraq because that was Iraq's plan. from 1984-1987, Iraq used a defensive line strategy. Iranian human-waves stormed into Iraq and walked into killing zones of artillery. You think this is smart, it costed you a lot.

Then this was quickly changed with the 1988 Tawakul ala allah operations in which Iraq's forces regained Al-Faw and took Iranian land within short time, that was when Khomeini realized he is in deep shit and accepted the cease fire of 1982.

As for everything after 1991, that's the work of America, not Iran.

Iranians killed their most competent air force general in the 1979 revolution, human-wave assaults in Iraq are very retarded. All you had to do was not try to invade and occupy Karbala, then you could use your mountains to defend Iran and Khuzestan would allow you to dedicated a major number of your troops for it. But no, you wanted to be on the offensive. This made Iraq use artillery and gas to deal with the human-wave assaults.

As I said before, Khomeini was mentally ill and dragged this on for 6 extra years. You cry about the use of gas, but you refuse the cease fire. Gas was used in 1987 and 1988, oh image the amount of shit and death that could have been prevented if not for your monkey trying to export the revolution to us.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Iran put 2 condition for ceasefire in 1982 they were not met till 1988

Both countries were being armed based on need to keep the war ongoing.

I still can't stress how many life's would've been saved had khomeini accepted the 1982 cease fire.

Had Iranians not ruined their country with the 79 Revolution causing mass diaspora of everyone with a brain.

War could've ended in 1982.

Khomeini was instigating rebellion in Iraq and attacked border posts before the war started.

exactly with what ? proved us with proof on that

 

[Hack-Hook]

And 1982 ceasefire and 1988 ceasefire are basically the same terms. So all that happened during that 6 years was alot more Iranians dead and damage to Iranians economy.

in 1982 there was no talk about going back to international border , it suggested cease fire then talk about going back to international border , in 1982 there was the condition of going back to international border . also in 1988 there was the condition of fact finding by un on who started the war

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Iran put 2 condition for ceasefire in 1982 they were not met till 1988



exactly with what ? proved us with proof on that

Iranian demands were?
Saddam's removal and reparations?

You got neither from him, Saddam was removed by the US many years later.

Iran Rejects Iraq's Call For Cease-fire (Published 1982)

www.nytimes.com

Iraq, apparently near defeat in its war with Iran and faced with Iranian demands for massive reparations and punishment of the ''aggressors,'' volunteered to stop shooting last week if its neighbor would join it in supporting Syria against Israel. Iran found it an offer easy to refuse, even before the shaky cease-fire between Syria and Israel.

''They should have done it before the Israeli invasion,'' Tehran Radio quoted military officials as saying. ''It is too late now and they have to pay for it.'' And besides, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein continued to ignore Iranian demands for his ouster as a peace condition.

Despite Iran's rejection of their offer to withdraw, Iraqi forces on the Persian Gulf front refused to initiate hostilities during the next two days. But on Friday, the Iraqis struck back after an Iranian artillery attack; 37 Iranians were killed, it said.

Iran realising it was doomed in 1988 gave up, had Saddam been like Khomeini he would've continued in 1988 which was a time when Iran was out of equipment having wasted this all in their offensive operations.

--

 

[Hack-Hook]

By "cup of poison", Imam Khomeini is unlikely to have meant the terms of the ceasefire. Rather, he was referring to the very fact of acquiescing to it, given that he would have preferred to continue to resist and that politicians such as Hashemi Rafsanjani pressured him to give in.

Hashemi Rafsanjani must have done the pressure 7 month earlier , he was in control of war efforts ,the war after Iraq accepted the resolution was not necessary

Iranian demands were?
Saddam's removal and reparations?

You got neither from him, Saddam was removed by the US many years later.

going back to international border and recognition of the invader and both achieved in 1988

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Hashemi Rafsanjani must have done the pressure 7 month earlier , he was in control of war efforts ,the war after Iraq accepted the resolution was not necessary

going back to international border and recognition of the invader and both achieved in 1988

Iraq was already at its borders in 1982.

The actual reason Iran refused to comply with the cease fire, is that in 1982 Iran was winning. In 1988 Iran was losing and complied. Saddam could have continued, had he been as evil.

But Saddam was never that smart in his decision making, for instance in 1988 he could have continued grabbing Iranian lands as Iraq went on the offensive. He did not grab that chance.

He also invaded Kuwait and Khafji in Saudi Arabia which is not smart.

What if 600k Iranians could be back to life and their families didn't have to suffer because Khomeini wanted to lick Karbala's floor which he didn't get to do.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Hashemi Rafsanjani must have done the pressure 7 month earlier , he was in control of war efforts ,the war after Iraq accepted the resolution was not necessary going back to international border and recognition of the invader and both achieved in 1988

That's what the "poison cup" metaphor was referring to. If the decision was not taken with a heavy heart, this expression would not have been used by the Imam. We have historical accounts of how certain individuals in talks with the Imam kept insisting that the ceasefire should be accepted.

- - - - -

As I said before, Khomeini was mentally ill and dragged this on for 6 extra years. You cry about the use of gas, but you refuse the cease fire. Gas was used in 1987 and 1988, oh image the amount of shit and death that could have been prevented if not for your monkey trying to export the revolution to us.

There was no plan to export the Revolution through war. The continuation of the war was due to the fact that the ceasefire proposal wasn't satisfactory in its terms, nor fully credible politically speaking.

Iraq was already at its borders in 1982.

But Saddam's 1982 ceasefire proposal did not recognize the border. It was important that Iraq returned to the stipulations of the Algiers Agreement, for as long as it didn't, Iran could not be convinced of Saddam's intentions and of the sincerity of his offer.

in 1988 he could have continued grabbing Iranian lands as Iraq went on the offensive. He did not grab that chance.

That would have caused his fortunes to reverse once more. It's one thing to grab border strips, another to hold land far from away since even a weakened Iranian military would have made this a costly endeavour.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Iraq was already at its borders in 1982.

no it was not at western border only in south west you were back to your border

 

[Iranitaakharin]

The Iranian air force is a joke. Their most modern aircraft is the MIG-29... LMAO! Iran’s air force in total only has 46 4th generation aircraft. In other word’s a junk air force. It has no chance against our air force. Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.

The only joke is your three posts so far.

 

[Ray_Atek]

The Iranian air force is a joke. Their most modern aircraft is the MIG-29... LMAO! Iran’s air force in total only has 46 4th generation aircraft. In other word’s a junk air force. It has no chance against our air force. Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.

Israeli air force not a joke, cause win the war with Hezbollah,
win the war with Ghaza
And so many war

 

[Dariush the Great]

Majority of the war was fought inside Iraq because that was Iraq's plan. from 1984-1987, Iraq used a defensive line strategy. Iranian human-waves stormed into Iraq and walked into killing zones of artillery. You think this is smart, it costed you a lot.

Then this was quickly changed with the 1988 Tawakul ala allah operations in which Iraq's forces regained Al-Faw and took Iranian land within short time, that was when Khomeini realized he is in deep shit and accepted the cease fire of 1982.

Mate, i am not here to recount history with you. All of the information is available at your fingertips. Read more about your country's war. Preferably non-Baathist sources.


There was no ''Iraqi plan to bring the war to Iraqi territory''. That sounds ridiculous as the suggestion itself is. After the Iraqi army got defeated inside Iran they got pushed back all the way to Southern Iraq. Iranian forces were on the outskirts of Basra from 1982 up to the later stages of war. Iranian army literally laid a siege on the city of Basra in 1987 which forced Saddam to use Chemical weapons provided by Europe and the US. Source : http://iraniraqwar.com/about.html

Had Iraq not used chemical weapons Iranian troops would have advanced and took over Um Qasr,Basra and other southern Iraqi cities and advance towards Baghdad.

Iran was not only pushing the Iraqis on the Southern sector but North of Iraq was also taken over by Iran-friendly armed groups. Saddam had no control over Northern Iraq as Iranian-backed groups there were running amok, Southern Iraq was heavily contested. Iraq had just 3,4 large cities left remaining out of enemy's harms. Even these cities were scene of frequent bombing. Saddam was just ''ruling'' Iraq by a hanging thread through a few large cities.

Only when Iraq used chemical weapons they could do some pushback against the Iranian-backed groups in the North. Even then it was not a firm control. Iran was still funding, arming and sending weapons to keep northern Iraq out of Saddam's hands.


At the Southern sector Iraq could not handle the huge number of Iranian troops.. it's only solution was again the WMD weapons which was quite effective as Iran did not expect Iraq to use such weapons and was totally unprepared.

All the later stage ''successes'' of the Iraqi army to free its own territory such as Al Faw were only made possible by the use of WMD's. The war could have gone on for another 10 years, it would have had no effect on Iran as the country was busy with another mass mobilization for the year 1989-1990 and preparing for a long WMD war.



Overall, Iraq was hoping for a swift victory, telling the world it would reach Tehran in 3,4 days. Thinking that a post-revolutionary Iran was too fragile and unorganized. What happened after came as a shock to Saddam and entire Western and Arab world. Not only did the Iraqis get expelled from Iran but due to huge mass mobilization and mass attacks the Iraqis got pushed back and Iranian troops fought the Iraqi army until the end of the war on Iraqi territory.

But, again our discussion initially was the deterrence achieved by Iran after the war. Between 1988 and 2002 Saddam did not dare to respond to any Iranian attack again. In the year 2002 Iraq still had a somewhat formidable army of 400.000 troops.

Saddam even tried to befriend Iran and asked Iran's assistance to help save his air force
Source : http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0071.shtml

So the conclusion is that by 1988 Iran had achieved deterrence.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Mate, i am not here to recount history with you. All of the information is available at your fingertips. Read more about your country's war. Preferably non-Baathist sources.


There was no ''Iraqi plan to bring the war to Iraqi territory''. That sounds ridiculous as the suggestion itself is. After the Iraqi army got defeated inside Iran they got pushed back all the way to Southern Iraq. Iranian forces were on the outskirts of Basra from 1982 up to the later stages of war. Iranian army literally laid a siege on the city of Basra in 1987 which forced Saddam to use Chemical weapons provided by Europe and the US. Source : http://iraniraqwar.com/about.html

Had Iraq not used chemical weapons Iranian troops would have advanced and took over Um Qasr,Basra and other southern Iraqi cities and advance towards Baghdad.

Iran was not only pushing the Iraqis on the Southern sector but North of Iraq was also taken over by Iran-friendly armed groups. Saddam had no control over Northern Iraq as Iranian-backed groups there were running amok, Southern Iraq was heavily contested. Iraq had just 3,4 large cities left remaining out of enemy's harms. Even these cities were scene of frequent bombing. Saddam was just ''ruling'' Iraq by a hanging thread through a few large cities.

Only when Iraq used chemical weapons they could do some pushback against the Iranian-backed groups in the North. Even then it was not a firm control. Iran was still funding, arming and sending weapons to keep northern Iraq out of Saddam's hands.


At the Southern sector Iraq could not handle the huge number of Iranian troops.. it's only solution was again the WMD weapons which was quite effective as Iran did not expect Iraq to use such weapons and was totally unprepared.

All the later stage ''successes'' of the Iraqi army to free its own territory such as Al Faw were only made possible by the use of WMD's. The war could have gone on for another 10 years, it would have had no effect on Iran as the country was busy with another mass mobilization for the year 1989-1990 and preparing for a long WMD war.



Overall, Iraq was hoping for a swift victory, telling the world it would reach Tehran in 3,4 days. Thinking that a post-revolutionary Iran was too fragile and unorganized. What happened after came as a shock to Saddam and entire Western and Arab world. Not only did the Iraqis get expelled from Iran but due to huge mass mobilization and mass attacks the Iraqis got pushed back and Iranian troops fought the Iraqi army until the end of the war on Iraqi territory.

But, again our discussion initially was the deterrence achieved by Iran after the war. Between 1988 and 2002 Saddam did not dare to respond to any Iranian attack again. In the year 2002 Iraq still had a somewhat formidable army of 400.000 troops.

Saddam even tried to befriend Iran and asked Iran's assistance to help save his air force
Source : http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0071.shtml

So the conclusion is that by 1988 Iran had achieved deterrence.

No large city was taken by Iran, not even Basra which is close by you.

Iraq never aimed for the capture of Tehran, not sure where you got that lie from.

Iran was not seeking deterrence, it wanted to have an Islamic Revolution in Iraq as an agressor.

Iran taking baghdad you say, yes which is evident from all the failures of Iranian military leadership against a smaller country. They would've been doomed had they continued after 1988.

 

[Dariush the Great]

No large city was taken by Iran, not even Basra which is close by you.

Iraq never aimed for the capture of Tehran, not sure where you got that lie from.

Iran was not seeking deterrence, it wanted to have an Islamic Revolution in Iraq as an agressor.

Iran taking baghdad you say, yes which is evident from all the failures of Iranian military leadership against a smaller country. They would've been doomed had they continued after 1988.

If it were not for WMD's and massive European and American support your inbred dictator wouldn't have seen another year. In the first 4 or 5 years there was not even a unified military command in Iran yet Iraq struggled badly against civilians armed with AK47's.

Norman Schwarzkopf was right '' As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man, I want you to know that. ''

It takes a special kind of retard to fail against a country without a government and a disbanded army. But perhaps Iran is really unconquerable due to the bravery of its people. Something that Iraqis should learn from, i guess.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

If it were not for WMD's and massive European and American support your inbred dictator wouldn't have seen another year. In the first 4 or 5 years there was not even a unified military command in Iran yet Iraq struggled badly against civilians armed with AK47's.

Norman Schwarzkopf was right '' As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man, I want you to know that. ''

It takes a special kind of retard to fail against a country without a government and a disbanded army. But perhaps Iran is really unconquerable due to the bravery of its people. Something that Iraqis should learn from, i guess.

Norman Schwarzkopf was representing the US superpower when it was in its best shape during your cold war and all the other major European powers.

They would've blown the Iranian military away so save me his quotes.

Iran failed against a smaller country, mostly Shias in Iraq and Kurds.

Be quiet arabised ajami. Attend Arabic classes and enjoy.