PDA

View Full Version : Russia Sends Tor-M1 Missiles to Iran



Agrippa
Saturday, November 25th, 2006, 09:55 PM
Russia sends missiles to Iran

MOSCOW, Russia (AP) -- Russia has begun delivery of Tor-M1 air defense missile systems to Iran, a Defense Ministry official said Friday, confirming that Moscow would proceed with arms deals with Tehran in spite of U.S. criticism.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue, declined to specify when the deliveries had been made and how many systems had been delivered.

Ministry officials have previously said Moscow would supply 29 of the sophisticated missile systems to Iran under a $700 million (565 million euros) contract, according to Russian media reports.

The United States called on all countries last spring to stop all arms exports to Iran, as well as ending all nuclear cooperation with it to put pressure on Tehran to halt uranium enrichment activities.

Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but the United States and its allies suspect Iran is trying to develop weapons.

The U.N. Security Council, where Russia is a veto-wielding permanent member, is currently stalemated on the severity of sanctions on Iran for defying its demand to cease uranium enrichment.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/24/russia.iran.reut/index.html

Kaiser
Saturday, November 25th, 2006, 10:48 PM
I fully support Iran's right to sovereignty and self defense. I appreciate their leader's role in protection from zionism. I appreciate Iran's affinity toward Pan-Aryanism. I appreciate Iran's leader taking a stand on the holohoax. I appreciate many of the beautiful peoples of Iran. Therefore, I fully support Russia's shipping of missiles to Iran without US interference.

SiegUmJedenPreis
Saturday, November 25th, 2006, 11:39 PM
What? Only 29 of the systems? That just wont do! I'd say 50 would have been reasonable.

Pro-Alpine
Saturday, November 25th, 2006, 11:53 PM
I support Iran's defense plan, they have a right to a defense system like any other nation. Their nuclear plan sounds reasonable to me, most of is for peaceful non-military purposes. I highly doubt they would even consider to begin a conflict.

I'm not going to believe in lies about the Persians by some multi cult regime.

Patrioten
Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 12:16 AM
A strong defence is something every nation naturally strives for, so why should Iran be any different? I can't see any reason for worries in countries not wearing the star of david on their flag. If your country happens to do just that though i'd probably be a bit worried if i were you :P .

VseUmnieYaDurak
Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 12:25 AM
A strong defence is something every nation naturally strives for, so why should Iran be any different? I can't see any reason for worries in countries not wearing the star of david on their flag. If your country happens to do just that though i'd probably be a bit worried if i were you :P .

The matter is, that every policeman in the States wears such a star:D LOL!!!

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 06:21 AM
What? Only 29 of the systems? That just wont do! I'd say 50 would have been reasonable.

Each system contains multiple missiles. These are mounted on trucks so that they are mobile and cannot be targeted like static anti-aircraft installations. They are both low and medium level weapons.

The Russians design these anti-aircraft weapons as if they were to be used against the Americans. This is important since Israel IS GIVEN its F-15 aircraft from the USA. F-15s can be used as ground support but not high level bombers. As far as I know the Israelis have no real bombers, so the Russian anti-aircraft missiles should cover every threat from the Israelis.

Of course, since Hezbullah became a house hold word , Israel realizes it cannot possible take on Iran by itself. These missiles should also deter the neo-cons and theo-cons from thinking any air strike on Iran will be easy and cost no lives. The Israelis should also consider the rumor that Iran has offensive Sunburn-type, surface to surface mach 3 cruise missiles and the fact that Iran will probably and rightly consider any strike by the US as a strike by Israel and retaliate against Israel as did Saddam Hussian in the first Gulf War.

Slå ring om Norge
Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 06:30 AM
Does not USA and Israel also have defense plans that implies sending missiles to Iran? :halo

Nicola_Canadian
Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 08:15 AM
TOR-M1

http://www.militarium.net/wojska_ladowe/foto/tor_07.jpg
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-12/06/xin_031202060859929308333.jpg

Carl
Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 12:25 PM
Of course, since Hezbullah became a house hold word , Israel realizes it cannot possible take on Iran by itself. These missiles should also deter the neo-cons and theo-cons from thinking any air strike on Iran will be easy and cost no lives. The Israelis should also consider the rumor that Iran has offensive Sunburn-type, surface to surface mach 3 cruise missiles and the fact that Iran will probably and rightly consider any strike by the US as a strike by Israel and retaliate against Israel as did Saddam Hussian in the first Gulf War.

Saddam Hussain's Skuds were fairly crude and didn't do too much damage last time. There were of course fairly effective US defence batteries in operation as I recall. I assume the new offensive rockets mentioned above are somewhat more sophisticated. Can we assume that they would be a lot more powerful were they ever to be used? ( What is the significance of 'Sunburn' as a name?) Would such new rockets be ?chemical or even in some sense Nuclear ( or radioactive)? I have always believed, rightly or wrongly , that a nuclear strike in the centre of Israel would effective destroy the State itself - especially if there was extensive contamination.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Wednesday, November 29th, 2006, 04:08 AM
Saddam Hussain's Skuds were fairly crude and didn't do too much damage last time. There were of course fairly effective US defence batteries in operation as I recall. I assume the new offensive rockets mentioned above are somewhat more sophisticated. Can we assume that they would be a lot more powerful were they ever to be used? ( What is the significance of 'Sunburn' as a name?) Would such new rockets be ?chemical or even in some sense Nuclear ( or radioactive)? I have always believed, rightly or wrongly , that a nuclear strike in the centre of Israel would effective destroy the State itself - especially if there was extensive contamination.

Well, actually, the "success" of American Patriot missiles was just a propaganda claim made during the Gulf War. First, the Israelis could not be trained to use them properly and so American and German teams had to be brought in. Then, the Israelis began whining about Germans defending them. Then, the kill rate of the Patriots was greatly overblown. Most, we learned later, were failed attempts and some even crashed back into Israel destroying property. The Patriot was not an anti-missile missile, it was an anti-aircraft missile. We only learned of its full capacity when Israel whined for protection. It must have been a top secret until then.

Sunburns are Russian cruise missiles. Some are rocket powered and some are ram-jet powered. They can go mach 2 and new ones to mach 3. They fly low and fast and so cannot be intercepted by Israel's Arrow anti-missile missile. Want to scare an Israeli? Talk about "Sunburns".