What's new

Iranian Chill Thread

If they have integrated a Salman engine or some new engine specifically design for 2nd stage ground attack missiles, it would be (not necessarily game changing) but a serious enhancement of countering latest ABM systems.

I'm expecting something very tactical that can reach at least 1600km ideally and a serious counter to Arrow-3/4 in exo-atmospheric area.
 
.
Egyptian are doing another style of developing Arms industry and it is based on massive amount of "TOT". They are shopping from anyone that gives them TOT..so this is another "SHORT CUT" to arms development..
People really underestimate the advantages of ToT
Even a half decent country can build a formidable industrial work force by TOT deals.
 
.
If they have integrated a Salman engine or some new engine specifically design for 2nd stage ground attack missiles, it would be (not necessarily game changing) but a serious enhancement of countering latest ABM systems.

I'm expecting something very tactical that can reach at least 1600km ideally and a serious counter to Arrow-3/4 in exo-atmospheric area.

One General said Mach 20+

Hajizadeh is saying Mach 13+

I don’t know if there are two HGV projects or someone is lying about performance.

People really underestimate the advantages of ToT
Even a half decent country can build a formidable industrial work force by TOT deals.

People really underestimate war chest and actually being able to “afford” a war. Most countries cannot afford waging a war against a near peer country.

Egypt cannot afford any war without being bankrolled by their Arab brothers.

Pakistan cannot afford any war without being bankrolled by either Arabs or China.

So like I said just because you can build a toy during peace doesn’t mean you can build during war and fight a war.

Russia went to war with 600B war chest….of that 200B was immed frozen by the West to weaken the ability of Russia to carry out long war.
 
.
One General said Mach 20+

Hajizadeh is saying Mach 13+

I don’t know if there are two HGV projects or someone is lying about performance.



People really underestimate war chest and actually being able to “afford” a war. Most countries cannot afford waging a war against a near peer country.

Egypt cannot afford any war without being bankrolled by their Arab brothers.

Pakistan cannot afford any war without being bankrolled by either Arabs or China.

So like I said just because you can build a toy during peace doesn’t mean you can build during war and fight a war.

Russia went to war with 600B war chest….of that 200B was immed frozen by the West to weaken the ability of Russia to carry out long war.
Weapons industry brings new arena of research in the national scientific spectrum and can contribute a lot towards economy
And ToT is the best way for countries like Pakistan, Egypt,etc to start from somewhere.
We started from Raptor 1 by acquiring ToT from S.Africa and now we have indeginized even power pack for our cruise missiles.

Of course we can not indiginize everything like China or US(frankly we don't need to either)
But there are some other areas like Artillery,Tanks,Ammunitions, missiles, Electronic Warfare, Electronic countre measure technologies,Radars, Corvettes,Frigates,Gunboats,mini-submarines, etc where countries with even mediocre economy can do some build up and these are very useful technologies during wartime.
We just need to make sure that we can replenish our artillery loses during war,we can sustain a war.

some years ago,an Indian member on PDF wrote a great post about sustaining a war .I spent some hours to find that but couldn't succeed.
 
.
And ToT is the best way for countries like Pakistan, Egypt,etc to start from somewhere.
We started from Raptor 1 by acquiring ToT from S.Africa and now we have indeginized even power pack for our cruise missiles.

Pakistan has a domestic arms industry that is in part largely relying on Chinese design and suppliers.

However, even in case of Pakistan that has much more domestic arms capability than the Arabs, it is one of the more corrupt and poor countries in the Middle East/Asia. Just look at IMF aid package it needs in peace time. Just look at loans/aid it got from Saudi Arabia.

It cannot sustain a war with India for long. You need gasoline, natural gas, electricity, money, raw materials, and food to feed your army during a war. It magically doesn’t just appear in infinite amounts for free.
 
.
Pakistan has a domestic arms industry that is in part largely relying on Chinese design and suppliers.

However, even in case of Pakistan that has much more domestic arms capability than the Arabs, it is one of the more corrupt and poor countries in the Middle East/Asia. Just look at IMF aid package it needs in peace time. Just look at loans/aid it got from Saudi Arabia.

It cannot sustain a war with India for long. You need gasoline, natural gas, electricity, money, raw materials, and food to feed your army during a war. It magically doesn’t just appear in infinite amounts for free.
i think it depends. If India and Pakistan were involved in a war, then the conflict would certainly not be isolated. I believe that if India were to start a war against Pakistan with the intention of conquest, then Pakistan would certainly not be without the supply of third parties. You can see it in Ukraine.
 
.
i think it depends. If India and Pakistan were involved in a war, then the conflict would certainly not be isolated. I believe that if India were to start a war against Pakistan with the intention of conquest, then Pakistan would certainly not be without the supply of third parties. You can see it in Ukraine.

India is a economic powerhouse —Pakistan is not.

India would immediately be supported by the entire West. The Arabs (mostly Saudi Arabia) would be under pressure by West not to aid Pakistan directly.

China would almost certainly aid Pakistan as they are strategic partners and anything that weakens India is a plus for China in this geopolitical chess game, but China is not an energy giant. It would have to use its own energy imports to feed Pakistan on top of financial and military aid.

This opens up the question how much can China aid Pakistan on its own? NATO aid total to Ukraine has been 100B+ in just a year. China on its own would have a hard time sustaining such a drain on its coffers without sacrificing at home. Which will then open up China to domestic unrest as its population questions why they need to subsidize Pakistan’s war. In the West their populations largely accept that their countries are imperialist war machines. In Iran, Russia, and China the populations are quick to question why they should be paying for someone else’s war. Not so much in the West.

This will also open China up to getting sanction by the West for aiding Pakistan. Which will likely lead to a WW3 or at the very least set the showdown for the start of WW3 over Taiwan.

This is why war between India and Pakistan is unlikely. Because the definition of “winning” is too hard to define (is it Kashmir? Is it half of Pakistan in case of India invading?) and the second and third order effects are so hard to predict. Add in nuclear weapon deterrence and it makes this whole thing a headache for war planners.

This is why neither party has gone beyond border skirmishes for decades.
 
.
So as it turns out, a user who's recently been trolling the section with a comical degree of disconnection from reality, is now posting comments openly supportive of "I"SIS:

i.jpg


Notice the latest diatribe: user's claiming the Syrian government has in fact been "fighting" Iran through "I"SIS... Statements like these have me postulate this is a false-flagging troll account playing dumb.

Readers are invited to report the post in question. Link:

 
.
Pakistan has a domestic arms industry that is in part largely relying on Chinese design and suppliers.

However, even in case of Pakistan that has much more domestic arms capability than the Arabs, it is one of the more corrupt and poor countries in the Middle East/Asia. Just look at IMF aid package it needs in peace time. Just look at loans/aid it got from Saudi Arabia.

It cannot sustain a war with India for long. You need gasoline, natural gas, electricity, money, raw materials, and food to feed your army during a war. It magically doesn’t just appear in infinite amounts for free.
Dear we don't need to sustain war with India for long.
We just need powerful initial strikes on India that can significantly suppress their War fighting capabilities.
For this; Information, precision and stealthness is the key, and in these areas we are making good progress.

We attack India to fight them in Kashmir region
But they stretch war along all Indo Pak border.
Now after Pakistan being a Nuclear Power, Indians do not launch full scale war on Pakistan.
Kargil war
Feb 2019 standOut is a major evidence of Indian policy shift.
 
.

Iranian diplomat in Colombia to discuss political, economic relations

4442684.jpg

The deputy foreign ministers of Iran and Colombia met on Friday to discuss a range of bilateral topics, including how to deepen political connections, commercial relations, and scientific, technical, and cultural collaboration between the two countries.

The two officials also spoke about Colombia’s and Iran’s positions on global issues as well as the most recent developments in Iran’s nuclear negotiations with the involved parties.

Baqeri Kani also discussed ways to strengthen bilateral ties with Colombia’s minister of agriculture.





Screenshot(87).png

Screenshot(88).png

Colombia is also another big country with 52 million population.
 
.
Dear we don't need to sustain war with India for long.
We just need powerful initial strikes on India that can significantly suppress their War fighting capabilities.
For this; Information, precision and stealthness is the key, and in these areas we are making good progress.

We attack India to fight them in Kashmir region
But they stretch war along all Indo Pak border.
Now after Pakistan being a Nuclear Power, Indians do not launch full scale war on Pakistan.
Kargil war
Feb 2019 standOut is a major evidence of Indian policy shift.
Pearl harbor
Iraq strike against iran
Russian invasion of Ukrainian...

All of these were supposed to be powerful initial strike ....
 
.

مدیرعامل ایران خودرو برکنار شد​

به گزارش خبرنگار اقتصادی خبرگزاری فارس، طبق پیگیری از منابع آگاه در ایران خودرو و وزارت صنعت،‌ معدن و تجارت، مهدی خطیبی، از مدیرعاملی ایران خودرو برکنار شد و علیمردان عظیمی عضو هیات مدیره سایپا، جایگزین وی شد.

یک مقام آگاه در وزارت صنعت در اینباره به خبرنگار فارس گفت: در پی واگذاری خودرو خارج از ضابطه به برخی مدیران و سازمانهای دولتی،‌ مدیر عامل ایران خودرو برکنار شد.

هفته قبل هم رئیس سازمان حج و زیارت که برای مدیران خود خارج از ضابطه از یک شرکت خصوصی خودرو بدون نوبت دریافت کرده بود،‌ پس از پایان دوره مدیریت، دوره تصدی وی تمدید نشد و عباس حسینی جایگزین وی شد.

پایان پیام



توی خود بدنه ایران خودرو کسی نبود که از سایپا باید بیان ایران خودرو رو مدیریت کنند؟

این گروه دوستان خودی روز به روز داره کوچکتر می‌شه​
 
.
Pearl harbor
Iraq strike against iran
Russian invasion of Ukrainian...

All of these were supposed to be powerful initial strike ....
Only difference is that India and Pakistan are both a Nuclear Power states.
Kargil war and Feb 2019 standout proves that war will not stretch out and only small conflicts will happen
To come out on top in these conflicts,we need some formidable weapons.
But if situation escalates;then Nuclear Weapons will certainly come into picture and that's a whole different subject.
 
.
توی خود بدنه ایران خودرو کسی نبود که از سایپا باید بیان ایران خودرو رو مدیریت کنند؟

این گروه دوستان خودی روز به روز داره کوچکتر می‌شه​
من وقتی میگم این شرکتها هیچ کدام خصوصی نیستند و وقتی دنباله شان را بگیری همه شان دولتی هستند به من می خندین​
 
.
India is a economic powerhouse —Pakistan is not.

India would immediately be supported by the entire West. The Arabs (mostly Saudi Arabia) would be under pressure by West not to aid Pakistan directly.

China would almost certainly aid Pakistan as they are strategic partners and anything that weakens India is a plus for China in this geopolitical chess game, but China is not an energy giant. It would have to use its own energy imports to feed Pakistan on top of financial and military aid.

This opens up the question how much can China aid Pakistan on its own? NATO aid total to Ukraine has been 100B+ in just a year. China on its own would have a hard time sustaining such a drain on its coffers without sacrificing at home. Which will then open up China to domestic unrest as its population questions why they need to subsidize Pakistan’s war. In the West their populations largely accept that their countries are imperialist war machines. In Iran, Russia, and China the populations are quick to question why they should be paying for someone else’s war. Not so much in the West.

This will also open China up to getting sanction by the West for aiding Pakistan. Which will likely lead to a WW3 or at the very least set the showdown for the start of WW3 over Taiwan.

This is why war between India and Pakistan is unlikely. Because the definition of “winning” is too hard to define (is it Kashmir? Is it half of Pakistan in case of India invading?) and the second and third order effects are so hard to predict. Add in nuclear weapon deterrence and it makes this whole thing a headache for war planners.

This is why neither party has gone beyond border skirmishes for decades.
One cannot make a general statement about the India-Pakistan conflict without considering the specific circumstances under which they are fighting. If India is the aggressor, it would be difficult for the USA to openly support India. Moreover, it is not in the USA's interest for India to dominate Pakistan and claim the entire Indian subcontinent. The West also benefits from this conflict in the region.

It is possible that Pakistan may work with Afghanistan or the Taliban to stop India, but this could potentially lead to Pakistan being infiltrated by Islamist groups, thus strengthening their position. If Pakistan were to be isolated, it may take such a step. Saudi Arabia could support Pakistan, and the USA could do limited things about it unless it was specifically in Pakistan's interest.

However, all of this is subject to a conventional conflict. It would not be the first time that a larger power failed to defeat a weaker one. India would only have the West's support if Pakistan had already become a pariah state and was diplomatically isolated.

Let's assume the following scenario:

  • Extremists overthrow the government in Pakistan
  • Terrorist attacks take place on Indian territory, possibly with chemical weapons
  • Pakistan allies itself with terrorist organizations or gives them shelter to act against India
  • An extremist leader in Pakistan incites against India
  • Pakistan breaks off all relations with the West and builds up the West as an enemy
  • The US embassy is attacked in Pakistan
  • Liberal forces are persecuted and tortured, and secular ideology is completely eradicated. Sharia law is introduced as a result of the Islamist coup, similar to the Taliban.
  • Religious minorities such as the Ahmadiya or Shiites are ethnically persecuted and suffer genocide as a result of the new government.
In such a case, the country would be so far removed from the global community that perhaps only China would support Pakistan out of its own interest. Saudi Arabia would support Pakistan, but only secretly.

It's important to note that this scenario is unlikely. Nevertheless, it is possible that in another scenario in India, a right-wing Hindu party comes to power, which then persecutes Muslims and possibly triggers a large-scale exodus of millions due to genocide. India could also talk about conquering Pakistan, and sporadic air strikes or drone attacks on Pakistan could take place (similar to Israel in Syria).
as a result, pakistan would launch a limited act of defense with the goal of creating a buffer zone in india or securing the muslim areas in northern india, or it could also preemptively defend against india. Pakistan remains passive and India attacks Pakistan with the aim of conquering Pakistan completely.

If a war were to break out in this context, it would be difficult for the West to support India in such a way that it would lose an important ally.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom