Iran's New Satellite "Khayyam" Launched into Orbit from Kazakhstan Station

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

Bakhtiar commanded the basij and comitee members to do the sabotage ? that's a new one ?

I didn't know gabar Bakhtiar was a Basiji. What's this new "But Muh Basiji Bakhtiar!" you came up with?

who gave you such impersion

People whose fathers were given the proposal, of whom I'd known two.

 

[Hack-Hook]

I didn't know gabar Bakhtiar was a Basiji. What's this new "But Muh Basiji Bakhtiar!" you came up with?


People whose fathers were given the proposal, of whom I'd known two.

you just now claimed he ordered destruction of Army equipment . ,that destruction was done by basij and committee members , the natural conclusion is he commanded those force

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

you just now claimed he ordered destruction of Army equipment . ,that destruction was done by basij and committee members , the natural conclusion is he commanded those force

Incorrect. That sabotage was done by his rogue officers and personnel in Artesh, a plan he'd brought into effect over several months, including after contacting a former general living in exile in Paris at the time (he was the one who used his contacts to reach out to sympathetic officers on the ground who drew up men disgruntled with the IRI).

Doing damage control for filthy gabars now, are we? Heh, your kind really are sewer-tier filth.

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

We are in the same boat now, like it or not. No point in fighting or looking in the past.

Heh, is that what you said to Castro decades after the betrayal in '62 and to Pyongyang recently?

The cowardice your kind has been displaying ever since the korean war makes me spew.

 

[SalarHaqq]

that's not the question if Islamic republic did its share to produce the parts or not as a matter of fact Islamic republic before the start did its most to sabotage army equipment .

The Islamic Republic didn't do "its share", it was the one which built the entire infrastructure from scratch.

As for sabotage, that was the final "favor" offered to Iran by US military personnel before they fled the country with their tails between their legs.

to the extent that commander of army in khuzestan left his post and went directly to mr. khomeyni and directly explained to him have basij and committees with the support of officials in western province are are destroying army equipment and if it continue the army can't defend the country in case of war and this sabotage continued till mr khomeini put an end to it.
i knew you probably deny it , but its the fact that around the half of army fighting capabilities in khuzestan were destroyed by those basij and committee force in 58-59 .

So the Army does not represent the Islamic Republic? Only the Basij does?

Yes I know, some counter-revolutionary elements had covertly staid behind in the Army after 1979, attempting not one but several coups in order to sabotage the Iranian people's Revolution and reimpose zionist-American rule on Iran. But still.

@mohsen

but that aside what is important is usa force left iran after revolution but iranian technician managed to use and maintain those equipment you guys claim USA advisors and technician didn't allowed Iranian go near them . how its possible.

You didn't read carefully enough, it would seem.

So let's reiterate: absent American assistance, Iran would not have been able to operate them after a while if it wasn't for the Islamic Republic's efforts to indigenize maintenance capabilities.

No matter how one will spin it, any attempt to legitimize USA imperial patronage over Iran during the Pahlavi monarchy will fall flat.

A first hand account was given right in this thread by a former member of Iran's armed forces confirming the state of affairs prevailing at the time, and you're still rejecting it?

when at the time of Karim-Khan Zand ?
at the time 2/3rd of Caspian sea belonged to us

No, at the time when Islamic Iran began negotiating with other littoral states about the legal status of the sea. Try to stay focused, the above quoted response is beside the point.

under the shah he took the islands of Persian gulf , he could not get bahrein back and bahrein was not part of Iran for around 180y at the time

Ditto, it's unrelated to the discussion at hand.

its the history of it if you are interested we ruled Bahrain at the time of safavide and afsharide we lost its control over Bahrain to Bani Utbah Arabs of Zubarah from the Qatar coast in 1783 . in 1822 Shiraz Vali come to an agreement with them to Bahrain be part of Iran and they be under Iran protection but in 1851 British empire took the island and made it their protectorate tanks to qajar inactivity , by the way we had two sit in parliament for bahrain but i wonder when was the last time they occupied

Certainly, but again none of this establishes an analogy between Bahrein and the Caspian Sea.

 

[Dariush the Great]

Funny Russophiles will even deny the fact that Russia is the only country on earth that literally invaded Iran and annexed Iranian territories to their empire. Russia is the reason we have subhumans like Aliyov threatening us with his zio masters at the border.

Iranian Russophiles are the scum of the earth. Badbakhts will do everything to piss of the US, perhaps even an alliance with Saddam if he was alive today and anti US-zio.

 

[drmeson]

Iran and Russia are not strategic allies and never have been. They are the reason our land got divded in NW. Republic Azeris did not fight a war to leave Iran, they did not want to but Russia took it away. The damage they inflicted on Iran is something that no Greek, Arab, Turkish has ever done to Iran.

I am not against Russia or Russians, as a matter of fact I have a deep connection to that country but Iran and Russia are allied at few fronts and that is it. I respect them but I would not count on them for anything. We need to understand we are alone with regional shia allies and that is it.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Laughable how shahis and other anti-IR oppositionists will lash out at past Russian aggressions against Iran to cover up their shameless defence of a regime which literally sold Iran's independence to the USA and the zionists.

This is while two regime changes (1917, 1991) have taken place in Russia since the Tsarist empire invaded and annexed Iranian territories (not least thanks to the weakness and incompetence of the then ruling monarchy in Iran).

The regime in Washington however is still the exact same as the one which reduced Iran to the status of a humiliated vassal and banana state prior to the glorious Islamic Revolution.

The regime in London is still the same as the one which murdered 10 million Iranians in 1917-1919 by starving them to death in an actual genocide, a crime whose intensity makes anything the Russians ever did to Iran, absolutely pale in comparison. Quite significantly, the anti-IR crowd and shahis are hardly seen mentioning this crime of all crimes, let alone lambasting its authors with the same violent terms they reserve for patriotic revolutionary Iranians.

Then again, what to expect from exiled oppositionist keyboard warriors and their typically uninformed emotive rants and ad hominems?

Also, someone seems to be experiencing quite the delusions, given the baseless claim that Iranians who refuse to tow the NATO line on Russia, are "denying" the 19th century Tsarist invasions and annexations of Iranian lands. Any person making this claim ought to seek medical help, now!

 

[SalarHaqq]

Iran and Russia are not strategic allies and never have been. They are the reason our land got divded in NW. Republic Azeris did not fight a war to leave Iran, they did not want to but Russia took it away. The damage they inflicted on Iran is something that no Greek, Arab, Turkish has ever done to Iran.

Forget about Greeks (which are peripheral to Iranian affairs nowadays), Arabs and Turks. Let's rather talk about Anglo-Saxon imperialists. About how they savagely killed off one out of two Iranians in the early 20th century, a crime comparable in extent and violence to the medieval Mongol atrocities alone. This is for the historic part.

Moving on to contemporary issues, the current Russian regime (which isn't the same as the one that invaded and stole Iranian lands in the early 19th century) is not treating Iran as a vassal, nor stripping Iran of her sovereignty. As opposed to the regime in Washington, which was doing just that priot to being kicked out of Iran by Islamic revolutionaries in 1979.

I am not against Russia or Russians, as a matter of fact I have a deep connection to that country but Iran and Russia are allied at few fronts and that is it. I respect them but I would not count on them for anything.

To my knowledge no one here is dwelling under the impression that we should. Rejoicing over whatever cooperation is taking place between Iran and Russia is simply not the same as believing that Moscow can be blindly counted on.

But boy does it hit a nerve with the anti-IR, shahi, and western-apologetic crowd. Look at them losing it, literally making stuff up and resorting to blatant lies and slander (namely the baseless suggestion that Iranians who do not harbor hatred against today's Russia are "denying" the 19th century invasions of Iran by the Tsar regime - if you see anyone denying the mentioned events, do call me, because I've never met such a person anywhere).

This onto itself makes it a worthwhile undertaking.

 

[drmeson]

Forget about Greeks (which are peripheral to Iranian affairs nowadays), Arabs and Turks. Let's rather talk about Anglo-Saxon imperialists. About how they savagely killed off one out of two Iranians in the early 20th century, a crime comparable in extent and violence to the medieval Mongol atrocities alone. This is for the historic part.

Moving on to contemporary issues, the current Russian regime (which isn't the same as the one that invaded and stole Iranian lands in the early 19th century) is not treating Iran as a vassal, nor stripping Iran of her sovereignty. As opposed to the regime in Washington, which was doing just that priot to being kicked out of Iran by Islamic revolutionaries in 1979.



To my knowledge no one here is dwelling under the impression that we should. Rejoicing over whatever cooperation is taking place between Iran and Russia is simply not the same as believing that Moscow can be blindly counted on.

But boy does it hit a nerve with the anti-IR, shahi, and western-apologetic crowd. Look at them losing it, literally making stuff up and resorting to blatant lies and slander (namely the baseless suggestion that Iranians who do not harbor hatred against today's Russia are "denying" the 19th century invasions of Iran by the Tsar regime - if you see anyone denying the mentioned events, do call me, because I've never met such a person anywhere).

This onto itself makes it a worthwhile undertaking.

Changing the government does not change people. Tsar Royal Russia took Armenia and Azerbaijan from Iran. Communist Russia some 120 years later tried its best take Kurdistan and rest of the Azerbaijan. Federalist Russia is openly eyeing Caspian Sea now ... Azeri Qizilbash have been fighting with these Russians for centuries to save Iran and they took away half of our people/tribes, they broke Iran that Ottomans, British failed to accomplish. As a said before I respect Russians because from their angle they hurted Iran for their own national gains. They are very sophisticated patriotic people, cold calculating types but deeply patriotic. As a nation they neutralized the Iranic threat in the south that was nauseating to them for centuries. Americans to this day are opposed to any territorial change in Iran, they just want Regime change to something like Persian Gulf Arabs. There are some Neocon Thugs and Zios in the US administration that keep blabbering BS against Iranian territory but their deep state (actual controllers) never took any action of that sort against Iran otherwise they would have crushed Iran in early 2000s when we had 8 x F-14, some Shahab-1/2 and S-200. The invasion was impossible but they could have destroyed the entire military-industrial complex of Iran that was taking shape at that time along with military infrastructure (naval dockyards, ports, AF bases etc), a repeat of first Persian gulf war. They did not do that. Does this mean we should worship Russians or Americans ? No Internationally no one is anyone's ally, it's all about business and symbiotic gains. Russia and Iran are aligned for now and will stay that way for some time. A strategic alliance does not exist though and to be honest Iran should not trust anyone.

 

[mohsen]

Yes I know, some counter-revolutionary elements had covertly staid behind in the Army after 1979, attempting not one but several coups in order to sabotage the Iranian people's Revolution and reimpose zionist-American rule on Iran. But still.

@mohsen

What he said is a BS. at that time US had activated all separatist groups in western and southern provinces, from Turks and kurds in north west, to arabs in Khuzestan and Hurmozgan. everyday a plot.

in Khuzestan, basij forces and army were actively fighting against these separatist groups, these groups were sabotaging the aramy, not basij.

درگیری‌های خرداد ۵۸ خرمشهر - ویکی‌پدیا، دانشنامهٔ آزاد

fa.wikipedia.org

 

[SalarHaqq]

Changing the government does not change people. Tsar Royal Russia took Armenia and Azerbaijan from Iran. Communist Russia some 120 years later tried its best take Kurdistan and rest of the Azerbaijan. Federalist Russia is openly eyeing Caspian Sea now ...

The status of the Caspian has been legally undetermined for ages. Incrementally challenging Iran's proposal for a division of the Sea is therefore different from trying to annex internationally recognized sovereign Iranian lands.

Azeri Qizilbash have been fighting with these Russians for centuries to save Iran and they took away half of our people/tribes, they broke Iran that Ottomans, British failed to accomplish.

At the end of the day, the British exterminated 50% of the Iranian population in 1917-1919 in one the most horrible ways imaginable. Nothing the Russians did to Iran comes close, although we did have our conflicts in the past, no doubt.

Also when it comes to taking away parts of Iranian tribes and sub-groups, let's not forget how the British severed a portion of Baluchestan, as well as large swathes of Greater Khorassan (the three westernmost provinces of present day Afghanistan) off Iran.

The sense of proportions is important when drawing comparisons.

Americans to this day are opposed to any territorial change in Iran, they just want Regime change to something like Persian Gulf Arabs. There are some Neocon Thugs and Zios in the US administration that keep blabbering BS against Iranian territory but their deep state (actual controllers) never took any action of that sort against Iran

The US regime and its zionist patrons are definitely pursuing an agenda of "ethno"-linguistic dismantling of Iran.

Their concrete Iran-policy is evidence to this. It's not confined to rhetoric, but consists in a significant array of actions which illustrate their intentions. Indeed every single separatist organization is enjoying heavy political, financial, logistic and intelligence backing from the west, the zionists and from some of their regional client states. Iranian intelligence published a photograph of Abdolmalek Rigi at a US military base in Kyrgyzstan, Kurdish armed separatist grouplets are being backed by the zionists in northern Iraq, the main theoretician and background planner of anti-Iranian pan-Turkism is a female scholar from Isra"el", and so on.

Moreoever these same existential enemies of Iran have been lending enormous support to separatism and separatist ideas in the propaganda department. They are also engaged in intense social engineering to cultivate these notions in the minds of Iranians, something that can clearly be observed on "social media" etc. This tendency has been uninterruptedly rising ever since the neocon cabal initiated the remodeling project for West Asia and North Africa in 2001.

Perhaps more importantly even, the fact is also that every other opposition group the US regime and the zionists are banking upon for "regime change", has been directed by Washington and Tel Aviv to actually endorse the territorial break up of Iran in case of a downfall of the Islamic Republic. Hence the noticeable shift in the discourse of these classic opposition groups, from monarchists and Reza Pahlavi himself (who is now holding meetings with the secretary of Komalah, participating at pan-Turkist events sponsiored by the embassy of the Republic of Azarbaijan etc) to secular liberal nationalists and democrats, leftists, MKO and so on.

While much of the left-wing opposition had always exhibited some tolerance or even actively cooperated with "ethno"-separatist organizations, this wasn't holding true of the secular nationalists and monarchists, until their western and zionist sponsors requested them to subscribed to the agenda for "ethno"-linguistic federalization of Iran as well as to cooperate with separatist groups, which they complied with.

The late Dariush Homayun and Ardeshir Zahedi, both leading monarchist figures and holders of high government offices under the regime of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, explicitly warned of and denounced this development.

otherwise they would have crushed Iran in early 2000s when we had 8 x F-14, some Shahab-1/2 and S-200. The invasion was impossible but they could have destroyed the entire military-industrial complex of Iran that was taking shape at that time along with military infrastructure (naval dockyards, ports, AF bases etc), a repeat of first Persian gulf war. They did not do that.

I don't believe they could have achieved it all the while of keeping costs and fallouts of such an endeavour within politically and financially acceptable boundaries. Not after they got seriously bogged down for years in Iraq, in no small part thanks to Iran's asymmetric response via the Iraqi Resistance. But the plan of the US regime was to crush Iran next.

Besides, even so-called "regime change" without territorial modifications would have required the use of military force against Iran, for it would have been unrealistic otherwise.

Does this mean we should worship Russians or Americans ? No Internationally no one is anyone's ally, it's all about business and symbiotic gains. Russia and Iran are aligned for now and will stay that way for some time. A strategic alliance does not exist though and to be honest Iran should not trust anyone.

View attachment 869827

On this I can agree without hesitation.

 

[Hack-Hook]

What he said is a BS. at that time US had activated all separatist groups in western and southern provinces, from Turks and kurds in north west, to arabs in Khuzestan and Hurmozgan. everyday a plot.

in Khuzestan, basij forces and army were actively fighting against these separatist groups, these groups were sabotaging the aramy, not basij.

درگیری‌های خرداد ۵۸ خرمشهر - ویکی‌پدیا، دانشنامهٔ آزاد

fa.wikipedia.org

so you now deny who destroyed tanks in khuzestan , yes some separatist group entered into barracks and begin destroy electrical system of the tanks.

this time again you try to defend the undefendable and make a shoddy job of it. people knew who says bs