Russia Confirms Sale of Missiles to Iran

[tocqueville]

8 minutes ago

MOSCOW - Russia has struck a deal to provide Iran with Tor M-1 missiles, Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Monday, news agencies reported.

"This unequivocally does not change the balance of forces in the region," Ivanov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. Tor M-1 missiles are short-range, surface-to-air missiles.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051205/ap_on_re_eu/russia_iran_arms

[JPZenger]

1. Meanwhile, Israel has been selling High Tech Weapons to China

A recent article in Atlantic Monthly described how Israel has been cooperating with China in high tech weaponry, including avonics. This was a particular concern because the Israeli technology had been developed with US foreign aid.

As Khruschev said, the capitalists will sell us the rope we will use to hang them.

[ixion]

2. not to pick nits, but that quote is from Karl Marx

later borrowed by Khruschev.

In any case, the sentiment still stands. :hi:

[cliss]

3. As if Washington didn't have enough to sweat about....

here comes the biggie. This is major news, and if anyone has been following this development, we know this is Russia holding up its middle finger to the U.S.

The Bush admnistration absolutely does not want Russia or anyone else to sell missiles to Iran. The U.S. wants to see them helpless, unarmed, unable to defend itself.

However, other countries have been selling weapons to Iran.

This is how the balance of power is maintained.

[bemildred]

4. It's interesting (to me).

Says these are for cruise missles, which is what one would expect to be used to take out nuke facilities or to soften up air defenses, so it would seem to bolster the case against a pre-emptive strike. Since Iran has the means to reply, at least within the Middle East, it raises the prospect of provoking Iran (and it's allies) while failing to destroy the intended targets.

A couple days ago the Israelis ran a test of their Arrow counter-missile system against an air-launched missile, which was of course a "success", which I found odd because the Arrow is (I thought) an anti-ballistic system, and any attack from Iran would also be ballistic, the Shahab-3 I think, so I assumed it was a propaganda exercise intended to spook the Iranians about the effectiveness of their ballistic system.

The BBC Version:

Israel has carried out a successful test of its Arrow missile defence system, military officials have said.

An Arrow missile intercepted and destroyed a target similar to Iran's long-range Shahab-3 missile.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4492212.stm

And the interesting additional bit in Haaretz:

The simulated enemy missile used in the test resembles the Iranian Shahab-3 and is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. The test enemy missile was fired from an airplane over the Mediterranean Sea, from the west. The Arrow anti-missile missile was fired at 10:28 A.M. from an Israel Air Force base in the center of the country, and hit the target.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/653023.html

Things are becoming strange.

[Pavulon]

5. We will wipe Israel off the map

probably fits in here somewhere.

The weapons sold are not man portable and do not pose a threat to US aircraft. Looks like a tank but launches missiles.

Easily picked up by air to ground radar, and avoided or killed by black jets.

Israeli aircraft are another story.

[bemildred]

6. I don't undertand your comment about Israel?

Where is the "here" that if fits into? The only thing I can think of is the comment made by Ahm-an-idjit a while back.

I know it's not a shoulder-launch sort of thing, there were pictures.
Haul them around with trucks I think.

The TOR is stated to be for cruise missile defense. You're saying, if I understand, it won't be a problem for "stealth" aircraft, but it might be effective against "normal" aircraft.

So, would we (the US and/or Israel) object to Iran getting these? And, why or why not?

[Pavulon]

8. I don't object

They are free to buy and sell arms. I think their money would be better spent on other things.

Iran presents no real strategic threat to the US. We can respond to any nuclear problem from Iran.

Israel has made comments about removing Iran's nuclear capability. Iran's president and others have made comments about wiping Israel off the map. To me that means killing them all. Most countries use nuclear weapons to do this.
Israel is more likely to strike, they do not fly f-117, b2 aircraft. They could have a cruise missile that has a low radar profile.

The arrow test limits a second strike by Iran. Don't know if they have sub launched missiles, think not.

It could be effective against an exposed F15 as well as a Tomahawk.

[bemildred]

9. Israel has nuclear capable sub-launched Harpoons.

Range a couple hundred miles, opinions vary on that.
Three subs, a couple more on the way, I believe.

There is indeed a good deal of public threat and counter-threat.

It seems to me either side would be foolish to go beyond talk, unless forced, it won't come out well. There seems to be a credible level of deterrence on both sides, but very little time to make up ones mind once the action starts, use it or lose it, as they say.

Thank you for your response.

[Megahurtz]

7. Yup, scary stuff indeed. n/t

[flaminbats]

10. who can blame Iran for buying, especially after what happened in Iraq?

If you lived in South Korea and China launched a military invasion of North Korea, wouldn't you want your government to buy some missles from the U.S.?

Saddam used to be our ally against Iran, just like China was once North Korea's ally against the U.S.! :eyes:

What great governments we and Russia have, governments that sell weapons funded with our taxes to countries like Iran and Iraq. :sarcasm:

Pat Buchanan 30 years ago.."If there is a role for the Republican Party, it is to be the party of the working class, not the welfare class. It is to champion the cause of producers and taxpayers, or the private sector threatened by the government sector, of millions who carry most of the cost of government and share least in its beneficence." :rofl: