How dangerous are Iran’s missiles?

[Mav3rick]

Why doesn't Pakistan just give Iran a couple dozen Nuclear warheads so that everybody stays in their limits? Status quo/MAD is the reason nations do not want any Nuclear war. But if 1 terrorist country is equipped with the Nuclear Weapons and has used them in the past on 2 cities, should not other nations acquire that same technology to ensure survival as in security against being attacked with Nuclear Weapons?

Hell, while we are at it, we must give some to Syria, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Turkey and North Korea too so that they don't feel left out.

 

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

^^

dude Iran made the bomb long time ago, Iran has some top centrifuges now, who know here else they have enrichment facilities hidden...

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

Iran has some sea skimming missile which would be very difficult to shoot down, normally a battery will have 50 to 70 missile and it can fire upto 7 to 10 missile a minute and the time taken to reach the target would be less than 3 mins... so when a you receive a fire from 5 batteries so it will be around 35 to 50 missile that need to be shot down along.... it will be a Manmoth Task for CBG group in that narrow strait.

People say's they can Jam the missile, the oppent has shown them that they too JAM their drones and land them safely in their soil.

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

Why doesn't Pakistan just give Iran a couple dozen Nuclear warheads so that everybody stays in their limits? Status quo/MAD is the reason nations do not want any Nuclear war. But if 1 terrorist country is equipped with the Nuclear Weapons and has used them in the past on 2 cities, should not other nations acquire that same technology to ensure survival as in security against being attacked with Nuclear Weapons?

Hell, while we are at it, we must give some to Syria, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Turkey and North Korea too so that they don't feel left out.

Why we give nuclear bomb to Iran?? They were Ally with India, when we were in cold war .
Infect this is only for Pakistan safety, we will not give this to anyone. Never. I again say. Never.
And about Missiles. Iran has currently no missile which can penetrate to USA.
Ballistic and these anti ship missile are now anti destroy Practice for USA Defense system.
Iran has no indigenous Cruise missile accept they bought some Short-range subsonic C-802/Noor and Silkworm from china. (Range<150KM).

 

[Chogy]

We dont know how many ballistic missiles Iran has, and while their number obviously not limitless, but much greater than US Navy and bases number in the region I personally dont even think Iran will use many ballistics against Navy in the 1st place - they have loads of other cruise/torpedoes/etc. specifically meant for warships. Ballistics would be overkill, unless used for AC.

You are possibly overthinking the destructive power of a conventional ballistic missile. Again, it's a nose cone with some amatol or TNT equivalent on it. Like an iron bomb. Do you think ONE iron bomb dropped on a U.S. military installation is going to cause them to simply fold and stop fighting? "Oh no! A bomb exploded! We are defeated!"

In the mean time, an F-15E can drop the equivalent of TEN medium range ballistic missiles in a single sortie.

It's a bomb. It's not magic. And extremely expensive to boot. There is no possible way Iran has anywhere close to the numbers mentioned. At the height of the cold war, the USSR and the USA never pointed even 1/3 that many (10,000?) at each other.

Let me pose this question - if MRBM's, conventionally equipped, are such awesome, war-winning weapons, why has every other country on earth emphasized fighter-bomber aircraft as the primary conventional weapon vs. expensive missiles? Why does America have thousands of fighters rather than thousands of missiles?

Simple answer - aircraft can execute multiple sorties, are more accurate, carry a heavier payload, and do it at 1,500th the cost per ton delivered, at the expense of speed and vulnerability.

 

[Safriz]

I dont know and dont care if in this conflics USA wins or Iran...Alli know is that i will pay a lot more at filling stations than i am paying now...just because USA doesnt want Iran to have nuclear weapons although herself sitting on many gigaton yeild of nukes...

 

[500]

It's a numbers game. Conventional Ballistic missiles are extraordinarily expensive way to deliver 500 kilos of explosive to a target. Consider one F-16 sortie can put more HE on a target than 5 typical ballistic missiles. Iran doesn't have enough of them to tip the balance.

History repeats itself: German V2 vs. allied bombings.

 

[Safriz]

dont forget the german bombings on Europe...in addition to V2

 

[Mav3rick]

^^

dude Iran made the bomb long time ago, Iran has some top centrifuges now, who know here else they have enrichment facilities hidden...

Honestly my friend, lets not get carried away.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

You are possibly overthinking the destructive power of a conventional ballistic missile. Again, it's a nose cone with some amatol or TNT equivalent on it. Like an iron bomb. Do you think ONE iron bomb dropped on a U.S. military installation is going to cause them to simply fold and stop fighting? "Oh no! A bomb exploded! We are defeated!"

In the mean time, an F-15E can drop the equivalent of TEN medium range ballistic missiles in a single sortie.

It's a bomb. It's not magic. And extremely expensive to boot. There is no possible way Iran has anywhere close to the numbers mentioned. At the height of the cold war, the USSR and the USA never pointed even 1/3 that many (10,000?) at each other.

Let me pose this question - if MRBM's, conventionally equipped, are such awesome, war-winning weapons, why has every other country on earth emphasized fighter-bomber aircraft as the primary conventional weapon vs. expensive missiles? Why does America have thousands of fighters rather than thousands of missiles?

Simple answer - aircraft can execute multiple sorties, are more accurate, carry a heavier payload, and do it at 1,500th the cost per ton delivered, at the expense of speed and vulnerability.

It's much cheaper to build missiles than aircrafts. How many F-15s does the USA operate? How many fighter/ground attack aircrafts does the USA operate in total? Compare this with how many missiles the Russian Federation, PR China or Iran may operate (the real numbers are bound to be secret). Most fighter aircrafts also require at least one pilot, which means tens of thousands of trained pilots need to be well prepared for an attack. With ballistic missiles, there is no need to train pilots over the course of years on one or more platforms.

The same question can be asked to you. Why do you think "protectorates" of the USA are allowed to purchase F-15s (like Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Japan) but not allowed to test ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs? Why did USA not restrict itself to fighter aircrafts and bombers alone at the height of the cold war?

---------- Post added at 10:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 AM ----------

History repeats itself: German V2 vs. allied bombings.

You mean, Holocaust?

 

[Roybot]

It's much cheaper to build missiles than aircrafts. How many F-15s does the USA operate? How many fighter/ground attack aircrafts does the USA operate in total? Compare this with how many missiles the Russian Federation, PR China or Iran may operate (the real numbers are bound to be secret). Most fighter aircrafts also require at least one pilot, which means tens of thousands of trained pilots need to be well prepared for an attack. With ballistic missiles, there is no need to train pilots over the course of years on one or more platforms.

You talk like America has no missiles in its inventory and solely relies on fighter aircrafts. America probably has 50 times more missiles than Iran.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

You talk like America has no missiles in its inventory and solely relies on fighter aircrafts. America probably has 50 times more missiles than Iran.

I did not talk (write) anything that would imply that. It's you who inferred that because you failed to comprehend my post. Just re-read my post if you fail to understand it at one go.

NB: America (USA) having 50 times more missiles than Iran? Highly questionable. Probably as likely as India becoming the pharmaceutical superpower by 2020 as Indian media propaganda states.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

USA not only has a missile defense system but a system that will detect the missile, hack the **** out of it and change it's course in mid air back to Iran lol

Yea... but Super Man (Christopher reeves died) so no way to change incoming ICBM
Only other air defense is , hot air and news spins lol


A good ole slap works only in movies

 

[Roybot]

I did not talk (write) anything that would imply that. It's you who inferred that because you failed to comprehend my post. Just re-read my post if you fail to understand it at one go.

NB: America (USA) having 50 times more missiles than Iran? Highly questionable. Probably as likely as India becoming the pharmaceutical superpower by 2020 as Indian media propaganda states.

I can't deduce any alternative conclusion after re reading your post. So why don't you tell me what you were trying to say.