IRIAF | News and Discussions

[sanel1412]

Here is what they showed, not even Tel, Just ca

nisters

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Dry simply means solid state, it means the molecules are densely organized. Water becomes dry below 0 degrees Celsius in our atomspheric pressure.

It'll never feel dry because our body heat melts it.


It's feels wet because of your body heat melting the outer layer as soon as you touch it

First of all when you ask for water in a restaurant, you dont get a cup of ice. You get the liquid form....hence why we have a seperate word called ice. Had I said to Hack Hook prove to me "ice is dry" then you may have had a point. That said, a solid is solid and dry is dry. They are different words that mean different things. If you run your fingers on some ice your fingers will be wet!

Therefore by your own admission it cannot be dry! But thanks for derailing the thread!

you guys and never looking at the sky , remind me of the movie "Girl with a Pearl Earring" when Vermeer ask Griet , what color is the sky and first she fail first time and he then tell her look again and this time she tell the correct color which is mixture of a lot more colors and then he say to here now you understand.
my advice look again

Tokhm darvordee Israeliye omad nejatet dad? I look at sky all the time and it is NEVER purple....that means you're probably high most times and are hallucinating.

well actually cold is lack of hot not hot is cold , i'm not like you to grasp at straws
about fish is type of dragon , is what you mean by dragon , is it a mythical beast or you mean the fossils people saw of prehistoric creatures (Dinosaurs) and they taught they are dragons . if its the first one unlike you guys i like good literature but i don't fantasize and dream about it its the second one , then you get it wrong again actually dragons are offspring of the fishes

and about oxygen , pure oxygen is actually harmful for your body in long term

Is It Harmful to Breathe 100 Percent Oxygen?

The air we breathe contains 21 percent oxygen. Would we be better off breathing 100 percent oxygen?

science.howstuffworks.com

i begin to think i must charge you for the things I'm teaching you


sort of , but if you take ice in your hand it still feel wet , that is a lot drier


the sky can feel blue even from earth and its in detail explained in my previous post , its all on how our eyes detect colors and how light reflection and refraction can play on it

Youre like a fish out of water now, good to see you finally gave up trying to prove the impossible. You made enough of a fool of yourself.

The only thing you have taught me is how backwards the opposition is and how they have deluded themselves with sophistry. To add to that you taught me all of this for free and will continue to do so lol. Oskol!

"Feel blue"? Definitely high on some stepped on drugs in payeen shahr. Yeah if youre colour blind and see blues as purples, sure, but I am not colour blind alhamdulillah.

 

[SalarHaqq]

you say they have the capacity of long range detection , then according the rule of discussion , prove it
don't try to weasel your way out of it , the burden is on your shoulder

False again. There are credible sources attesting to the induction of the missiles by Hezbollah. It stands to reason Hezbollah wouldn't take delivery of them if they weren't accompanied by the corresponding radar, or if there weren't realistic plans to add such a capability later on.

You then came along claiming the missiles are deprived of any such radars to this date. Burden of proof rests therefore on you, because your allegation defies logic: prove us they don't possess the radar. And now you're projecting, since it's you trying to dodge it here, not me.

the point is that is the only data available

The point is the figures are profoundly unreliable. Much like your conclusion based on them.

And no, it isn't the only data available, as you actually found out after searching online.

you see , the correct one is what i post in first post
"in 2006 370 thank deployed from them 52 hit by atgm , RPG and IEDs . 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).
One of the destroyed MkII and one of the destroyed MkIV were hit by IEDs, the rest were lost due to ATGM fire. by the way during the war 18 Merkava MK4 was hit by ATGM and only one destroyed with no death to the troop inside , the other destroyed MK-4 was hit by an IED and in that case there was loss of troop"

It's the "correct" set of numbers based on what? By making unsubstantiated blanket statements like these, you're simply exposing your favorable bias towards zionist military equipment, while trying to argue that anything Russian made is either defective or useless, which quite frankly is a hilarious thing to believe. As said, this posture is typical of the gutter press in NATO countries which peddle their regimes' propaganda, it doesn't fit into a serious discussion.

51 tank hit , 18 of them mk-4 two of those mk-4 destroyed all tha hit to the front of the mk-4 never penetrated the armor an made any meaningful damage.
those 52 hit 21 were sent back for repair . now its up to you if you want to say 18 mk-4 sent back and 3 of other tanks the reality is something else

The reality is you failed to produce anything of value when it comes to corroborating figures which zionist officials themselves had contradicted earlier on. We both know what it implies as the revised series of data you're illogically clinging to. This is no more no less than your political bias speaking.

Just as you will refuse to take at face value the zionist narrative in regards to the desperate denials of an Iranian hand behind the retaliatory assassination of an Isra"el"i veteran scientist, but yet will happily pass off as fact some gibberish about the 2006 war published by those same zionists for the sole reason that it allows you to take a shot at Russian-made equipment.

The double standard here is quite obvious.

show us alternate data that don't claim all the tanks deployed in 2006 were MK-4, considering MK-4 production started in 2004

I provided zionist-published figures about crew deaths and MBT destructions provoked by the Kornet ATGM. That's onto itself is more than enough to debunk the sugar-coated figures you seem to be buying into.

you can't okay show me any radar on the system we received

Iran was delivered four complete batteries of the S-300PM2 incorporating S-400 elements by the Russian Federation in 2016. These batteries include radars, of which there exist pictures and/or video footage in Iranian service.

literally hundreds of atgm there are videos of then on ******** that show hezbollah fighter firing 5-6 missile toward tanks from different angle

Highly selective scenes. No complete visual evidence for the overall picture, so it's hardly possible to tergiversate on this.

so you can't show anything , and expect people believe your claims on faith ?

You were implicitly assuming that if Hezbollah successfully blasted large numbers of zionist MBT's using ATGM's, then it should necessarily retrieved a considerable proportion of these damaged or destroyed tanks and placed them at the museum dedicated to the memory of the 2006 aggression. It's a mindless supposition, one that doesn't normally deserve to be addressed. Your latest retort now is off-topic, I'm afraid.

again post your different numbers, preferably not from a source that claim Israel had 400 merkava-mk4 at the time

The numbers you produced are decidedly unreliable, and there's little doubt in my mind that you know the reason why. For the foregone statement to be true, alternate figures needn't be thrown in.

so you claim israel had the ability to produce more than 200 mk-4 per year at the first year of production

I very much doubt I did.

If you only bothered to read jeursalem post you had understood that the Palestinian chronicle was not faithful to what it attributed to Jeursalem Post. its Jeursalem post article that tank to internet i could access easily

IDF report card

An in-depth look at the pluses and minuses of Israel's military operations.

www.jpost.com

honestly thousands of atgm fired only 20 managed to penetrate tanks and only 30 killed . that is the source you used first , i didn't use it

Screenshot of the quote you made, relevant part underscored:

"A few dozen" in my book may translate into a number between 30 and 50, more or less. 20 MBT's penetrated out of 30-50 hit ones, represents a respectable score. Also penetration is not a sine qua non condition for disabling. 30 killed crewmen for that same number of successful hits equally qualifies as a military success.

By the way, this shows how I was spot on to assume the author at the Palestinian Chronicle had been mistaken in his reporting of the MBT type, but not about the numbers. So, thanks for proving me right.

As for the "thousands of anti-tank missiles" part, I expected you would admit what you're surely well aware of, namely that this is a totally unrealistic amount. And that it's probably yet another case of a non-specialized journalist, a Jerusalem Post one this time around, mixing up the term "anti-tank missile" with the generic "anti-tank projectile". Because the only way the number could be in the "thousands" (if at all), is if RPG grenades as well as calibre 105 mm M40 recoilless anti-tank rifle rounds (of which Hezbollah is reportedly deploying several tens of thousands) are counted in.

In short, nice demonstration of the sort of spin you're willing to put on information you come across, in hopes of salvaging a rhetoric whose sole purpose is to take aim at any Russian-designed weapons system, most likely due to underlying political preferences.

oh that not working example that never deployed

Examined, inspected and studied in the slightest detail, from which valuable knowledge was gleaned, a procedure Iran is known to submit newly acquired military equipment to, and one which has given an undeniable boost to the Iranian defence industries, similar to the path trod by China. There's no shame in admitting to it, and it doesn't take away from the achievements Iranian engineers.

if you say Bavar-373 is based on that VHF radar

How about you reined in this colorful imagination.

not working nebo-svu ,

Unsubstantiated assertion.

till today there is no nebu radar deployed in iran

Just because you never saw one, doesn't mean there are none. Plenty of equipment was and is deployed without Iran making it public for a variety of reasons.

Moreover even if it wasn't, that wouldn't imply Iran did not draw benefit from it. Iranian decision makers know what they're doing, hence why they purchased the Nebo. Do away with this assumption that they're simpletons who'd gain in banking on your or any other forum user's subjective opinion. The success of Iran's military development isn't up for discussion.

Iran didn't Syrian forces advised by Iranian advisors received them

That's not what the third link shown is stating. It's explicit about Iran having been supplied Krasnopol rounds by a Russian company, and the transaction it's referring to has nothing to do with the war in Syria.

except that they were used in Syria by Syrian

That's not what the third link shown is stating. It's explicit about Iran having been supplied Krasnopol rounds by a Russian company, and the transaction it's referring to has nothing to do with the war in Syria.

no paying milliiards of dollar of needed money for a system but not using them show there is some problem there

Putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.

not no benefit to defence industry and research as at the time we could produce better but benefit to defence

There's no logic in fielding a weapons system one sees no benefit in. If it's deployed and integrated into the IADS, it implies that Iran is considering it has a role of its own to play in the general air defence architecture.

as we still use s-75 in form of hq-2 we recieved from china. so why not use the better system we paid for

Because Iranian planners see a complementary role for the HQ-2. This is why it's still being operated rather than being retired from service.

probably again secret contract that i'm not allowed to knew about them

Reading the press helps, Iran has purchased multiple commodities from Russia since 2016, even invested money in certain projects there.

okay instead of 4milliard 3 milliard ,

36 Su-30SM's can be had for around 1,8 billion USD.

all the budget to increase iran force capability in all branches of army , irgc, and basij is 4 milliard how much of it assigned to air force , i could not find can you tell me

These funds will have to be mobilized independently from the regular air force budget. It'd be an extraordinary investment, the type of which is consented to only once in a decade or so.

the regular air force budget for maintaining current capability and paying wages and ... are separate , those 4 milliard euro is the part that you say most be mobilized independently and is for all of Iran armed force branches and belong to 1401 that it increase , before that it was even less

The suggestion at hand is hypothetical by essence. Nobody is insinuating that Iran has already struck such a deal with Russia, but that it would constitute an acceptable investment should Iran decide to go for it.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Thx
Croatia Got only part of S300, and that was old version 35+ yrs ago, they parade only part of TELs and some canisters, and even those were towed by old Man trucks... That was 1994 or 1995,dont remeber. While Iran paraded and showed new Nebo SVU, now it May happen that aditional Gama was bought with S300 but Iran Got some even before, I mean they overhuled some few yrs ago domesticly. When it comes to Croatia S300 it is BS, local news wrote a lot about after that parade, and latter Israel and other delegatin visited Croatia to inspect what they had, It turns out they never Got whole operational system.

To legitimately criticize Russia for its condemnable past actions such as the delay in the delivery of the S-300 is one thing, and it's pretty sound no doubt.

Another thing altogether is to turn this into an everlasting grudge, which would be disconnected from the current reality of expanding Tehran-Moscow ties, or to deny that next to its disappointing actions Russia has also supplied some useful material to Iran (without obfuscating Iran's domestic achievements, which of course are the main factor and by far), not to mention portraying every Russian defence product as utterly useless junk. These talking points are simply incongrous.

Thanks for setting the record straight, brother. Corrective contributions like yours are most welcome.

Nope, Iran Gamma D Long before, and Croatia S300 is BS, you post a lot of BS lately, I dont Know where you Got all this INFO..

My guess would be, reaction to Iran's ongoing rapprochement with Russia. Reformists and those supporting them are particularly upset because it makes any hypothetical normalization of relations between Iran and the west (one of the strategic goals of reformists) even more improbable.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

That's just semantics honestly kinda stupid to argue about

Ice is water through and through, linguistics aside. So dry water is considered ice.

Not really, it's accuracy and being precise. Something I value.

No, frozen water is ice, there is no such thing as dry water lol water is wet, not dry lol you need to go back to primary school or maybe locked up.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

No, you just don't understand chemistry, there's no such thing as ice molecules, they're called water molecules, regardless if the state is solid or liquid. Solid water = ice = dry water.

There is no scientific term called dry water to describe ice...nor does any sane scientist describe any state of water as dry. Dryness is an absense of moisture, you cretin! Moisture comes from water. You literally just made all that up because you're a pseudo-scientist with small dick energy.

 

[Beny Karachun]

There is no scientific term called dry water to describe ice...nor does any sane scientist describe any state of water as dry. Dryness is an absense of moisture, you cretin! Moisture comes from water. You literally just made all that up because you're a pseudo-scientist with small dick energy.

Dry means absense of liquid lol. If I splash you with pure alcohol are you dry just because it doesn't contain water?

There's also this apparently

Dry water - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Dry means absense of liquid lol. If I splash you with pure alcohol are you dry just because it doesn't contain water?

There's also this apparently

Dry water - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Dry means an absense of moisture. Here, look it up in this thing we humans call a dictionary:

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

Pure alcohol would evaporate before it touches me and would need special containers at really low temperature. 95% alcohol would be the highest purity a noob like you could make, which would get me wet for a few minutes because it has 5% WATER.

Ask yourself, is it the water that is dry or is it the silica that's dry? Obviously it's the silica that's dry, not the water itself because it is still in liquid form. You had a stronger argument with the ice spiel, tbh. Back to google you go lol

 

[SalarHaqq]

Dry means an absense of moisture. Here, look it up in this thing we humans call a dictionary:

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

Pure alcohol would evaporate before it touches me and would need special containers at really low temperature. 95% alcohol would be the highest purity a noob like you could make, which would get me wet for a few minutes because it has 5% WATER.

Ask yourself, is it the water that is dry or is it the silica that's dry? Obviously it's the silica that's dry, not the water itself because it is still in liquid form. You had a stronger argument with the ice spiel, tbh. Back to google you go lol

Brother, just report this continuous nitpicking about the physical characteristics of water, it's needlessly hijacking the thread.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Brother, just report this continuous nitpicking about the physical characteristics of water, it's needlessly hijacking the thread.

Done. Yeah sorry, I've already proven that water can't be dry a few posts back. This is just trolling at this point. On another note, this is indicative of the dire state of our airforce whereby there is no news to speak about and often times this thread turns toxic with over repeated arguments about what route should be taken and trolls coming to release their oghde. I also find it odd that this zio weasel came here the second hack hook was getting it from all angles. Maybe coincidence. Allahualim.

 

[Hack-Hook]

False again. There are credible sources attesting to the induction of the missiles by Hezbollah. It stands to reason Hezbollah wouldn't take delivery of them if they weren't accompanied by the corresponding radar, or if there weren't realistic plans to add such a capability later on.

You then came along claiming the missiles are deprived of any such radars to this date. Burden of proof rests therefore on you, because your allegation defies logic: prove us they don't possess the radar. And now you're projecting, since it's you trying to dodge it here, not me.

the only evidence i saw is kowsar , do you have evidence on something like noor?

The point is the figures are profoundly unreliable. Much like your conclusion based on them.

And no, it isn't the only data available, as you actually found out after searching online.

which basic is the same data , but mistakenly stated all the tanks were merkava-4 , but in all it gave the same amount just 1-2 more or less

It's the "correct" set of numbers based on what? By making unsubstantiated blanket statements like these, you're simply exposing your favorable bias towards zionist military equipment, while trying to argue that anything Russian made is either defective or useless, which quite frankly is a hilarious thing to believe. As said, this posture is typical of the gutter press in NATO countries which peddle their regimes' propaganda, it doesn't fit into a serious discussion.

then provide your data , as the data you showed now is basically from the same source but with mistakes . right now you are saying i don't have any data and can\t provide any number , but i also don't accept your data.
honestly that is childish

The reality is you failed to produce anything of value when it comes to corroborating figures which zionist officials themselves had contradicted earlier on. We both know what it implies as the revised series of data you're illogically clinging to. This is no more no less than your political bias speaking.

the contradiction come from the fact your source changed the data Zionist official provided if you go and look at the place that your source say it get its data , you see what happens here . i looked at the original article , did you do so ?

I provided zionist-published figures about crew deaths and MBT destructions provoked by the Kornet ATGM. That's onto itself is more than enough to debunk the sugar-coated figures you seem to be buying into.

yes the data that your source claimed is from Jerusalem post but at Jerusalem post they are different and your source modified them

I provided zionist-published figures about crew deaths and MBT destructions provoked by the Kornet ATGM. That's onto itself is more than enough to debunk the sugar-coated figures you seem to be buying into.

5 tank destroyed , 21 tank penetrated and 3 soldier died after hundreds of ATGM fired , really extra ordinary performance

Highly selective scenes. No complete visual evidence for the overall picture, so it's hardly possible to tergiversate on this.

as i said there are video on Liv-e-Le-ak that show 5-6 atgm fired at a Tank and they are published by lebanese side not israeli one

"A few dozen" in my book may translate into a number between 30 and 50, more or less. 20 MBT's penetrated out of 30-50 hit ones, represents a respectable score. Also penetration is not a sine qua non condition for disabling. 30 killed crewmen for that same number of successful hits equally qualifies as a military success.

370 tank participated , 52 tank hit and 21 penetrated . 18 of the tanks that were hit was merkava-4 , to penetrated , one of them by IED and the other by ATGM.

As for the "thousands of anti-tank missiles" part, I expected you would admit what you're surely well aware of, namely that this is a totally unrealistic amount.

as i said hundreds because i saw the videos of 4-5 even more atgm being fired toward the tanks

Examined, inspected and studied in the slightest detail, from which valuable knowledge was gleaned, a procedure Iran is known to submit newly acquired military equipment to, and one which has given an undeniable boost to the Iranian defence industries, similar to the path trod by China. There's no shame in admitting to it, and it doesn't take away from the achievements Iranian engineers.

that system is a vhf radar nor bavar , neither 13th of khordad or 3rd of Khordad come with VHF radar
they use s-band and x-band in short they have a lot more in common with Patriot system that we never had access to than s-300 that some journalist claim our system are based on.

Unsubstantiated assertion.

never get deployed , such radar till we built or substantialy different fath radar developed

Just because you never saw one, doesn't mean there are none. Plenty of equipment was and is deployed without Iran making it public for a variety of reasons.

Moreover even if it wasn't, that wouldn't imply Iran did not draw benefit from it. Iranian decision makers know what they're doing, hence why they purchased the Nebo. Do away with this assumption that they're simpletons who'd gain in banking on your or any other forum user's subjective opinion. The success of Iran's military development isn't up for discussion.

and you knew they are deployed or think they are deployed ? or perhaps wish they to be deployed. when we have more powerful fath why build nebu-svu , for god sake its not the advanced nebu-m we are talking about its good old nebu-svu

That's not what the third link shown is stating. It's explicit about Iran having been supplied Krasnopol rounds by a Russian company, and the transaction it's referring to has nothing to do with the war in Syria.

yes the general in syria gave the iranian supported force in syria 100 canon shell because he was impressed by iranian general . the shell is foundamentally different than our guided artillery shell and you claim they are based on russian one that never even given to iranian

Putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.

as i said the need was not the need to study and learn it and no paying money for a system but not use it is the sign of problems.

and if we use s-75 copy why not use s-300 that we have and paid for.?

There's no logic in fielding a weapons system one sees no benefit in. If it's deployed and integrated into the IADS, it implies that Iran is considering it has a role of its own to play in the general air defence architecture.

we use s-75 and its integrated , we use crotal and rapier. how effective are there do we need them.

there is different kind of need . we always need air defense systems and the more advance the better as we lack an effective air-force right now. if tomorrow we find some crotale in a storage be assured we don\t say we are producing herz and ya-zahra let not use them . we will deploy them somewhere

Because Iranian planners see a complementary role for the HQ-2. This is why it's still being operated rather than being retired from service.

show me one system we throw away and said let not use anymore

36 Su-30SM's can be had for around 1,8 billion USD.

without supply facility , weapon and spare part nobody buy airplane in such form

These funds will have to be mobilized independently from the regular air force budget. It'd be an extraordinary investment, the type of which is consented to only once in a decade or so.

this funds will be mobilized from 4.5 billion euro put aside for increasing the power of armed force and thats separate from usual air force budget. now how you want to use that money its up to you , its for all branches of IRGC, Army and Basij

The suggestion at hand is hypothetical by essence. Nobody is insinuating that Iran has already struck such a deal with Russia, but that it would constitute an acceptable investment should Iran decide to go for it.

buying final product from foreigner is not investment . a TOT or investing in domestic product and building the infrastructure for building those products is investment

 

[Hack-Hook]

First of all when you ask for water in a restaurant, you dont get a cup of ice. You get the liquid form....hence why we have a seperate word called ice. Had I said to Hack Hook prove to me "ice is dry" then you may have had a point. That said, a solid is solid and dry is dry. They are different words that mean different things. If you run your fingers on some ice your fingers will be wet!

we have a separate word for cold , but what cold , is it something separate or basically just lack of warm?
we have separate word for dark but what is darkness ? is it something but lack of light ?
what i posted is called Dry water or Empty Water if i wanted to talk about Dry Ice I'd have pointed to something else

Tokhm darvordee Israeliye omad nejatet dad? I look at sky all the time and it is NEVER purple....that means you're probably high most times and are hallucinating.

what saving me i pointed out to the purple sky as i'm interested in painting as a hobby i look around more closely and i see such thing , you wanted to mock me by that post , well we have a verse in Quran for that

Youre like a fish out of water now, good to see you finally gave up trying to prove the impossible. You made enough of a fool of yourself.

that's your situation . i pointed out that pure oxygen is actually harmful . and proved you wrong
i point out and about
about fish is dragon , about i pointed ot if by dragon you mean dinosaurs then they are actually their ancestors, if you mean mythical creatures that breath ice or fire , then you need help.
about hot is cold i pointed out when hotness is low it become cold and they are not separate things .

you see you are grasping at straws , let it go as you re derailing the thread and just make a mockery of yourself.
you see i suggest to look at how salarhaq make his point in a discussion , he knew what he doing , when he say something he is planning an answer for what his opponent might say . you can learn a lot from him . if you use his techniques , they take you more seriously

 

[Hack-Hook]

Nope, Iran Gamma D Long before, and Croatia S300 is BS, you post a lot of BS lately, I dont Know where you Got all this INFO.. I am more or less on different military forums from 2006 and follow Iran military even before, so I Know exactly when and where we discussed about all these radar. In fact Iran recently show domesticly overhuled Gamma D, it came Long before S300. Croatia Got only part of S300, and since I am from Bosnia, I can tell you that Croatia, as Bosnia is US puppet

do you have picture of any Gamma-d in iran before falaq radar was shown

 

[SalarHaqq]

the only evidence i saw is kowsar , do you have evidence on something like noor?

Do you have evidence Hezbollah wasn't operating Kosar before they unveiled a few of them publicly? Negative.

Fact is, Hezbollah never disclosed all its weaponry. At times reports surface about some of these undisclosed armaments when enemy intelligence gets wind of them. Hezbollah's possession of Yakhont ASCM is a widely held belief in military circles.

Hezbollah said to have obtained ‘game-changing’ anti-ship missiles

Russian-made Yakhont would give Lebanese terror group the ability to strike Israeli gas platforms and ships in the Mediterranean

www.timesofisrael.com

The associated radar is nothing bulky. It resembles this, and could easily have been transferred to Lebanon along with the missiles and the self-propelled launcher(s):

In short, absence of visual evidence does not equal proof that Hezbollah didn't obtain them, while there are reports stating it did.

which basic is the same data , but mistakenly stated all the tanks were merkava-4 , but in all it gave the same amount just 1-2 more or less

It paints a successful picture of the Kornet ATGM, with a higher rate of incapacitated tanks as well as 30 killed crewmen, whereas the subsequent data denies this amount of deaths.

then provide your data , as the data you showed now is basically from the same source but with mistakes .

Done already.

the contradiction come from the fact your source changed the data Zionist official provided if you go and look at the place that your source say it get its data , you see what happens here . i looked at the original article , did you do so ?

It's getting the type designation of the tanks wrong. But faithfully reproduces the reported numbers of tanks hit as well as crewmen killed.

yes the data that your source claimed is from Jerusalem post but at Jerusalem post they are different and your source modified them

Hardly.

5 tank destroyed , 21 tank penetrated and 3 soldier died after hundreds of ATGM fired , really extra ordinary performance

No evidence for these sugar-coated, revised zionist figures. But plenty of circumstantial evidence as to their flimsiness (one, they contradict earlier published ones from the same source; two, data published by zionists about their losses is notoriously unreliable due to a military censorship law as well as general propaganda practices).

Another two Isra"el"i analysts confirming Hezbollah's performance in its 2006 anti-tank campaign:

As good as no source other than the zionist regime itself and perhaps some of its western associates is denying this.

as i said there are video on Liv-e-Le-ak that show 5-6 atgm fired at a Tank and they are published by lebanese side not israeli one

Still not the whole picture, merely an isolated example. More importantly, I'm familiar with the footage (Hezbollah fighters were firing from behind bushes from multiple directions), and there's no evidence that the multiple projectiles this particular tank was hit by were Kornets. Could have been Fagots (AT-4), RPG's or something else altogether.

Also here's no video sharing website by the name Live Leak anymore.

370 tank participated , 52 tank hit and 21 penetrated . 18 of the tanks that were hit was merkava-4 , to penetrated , one of them by IED and the other by ATGM.

Zero evidence for these claims, contradicted what is more by an earlier zionist report.

as i said hundreds because i saw the videos of 4-5 even more atgm being fired toward the tanks

No justification for such an inference. And it's extremely unlikely Hezbollah would have fielded enough Kornets in 2006 to fire "hundreds" of them in only 33 days, implying that their overall stockpile was much larger even. They received these from Syria, and Syria itself wouldn't have had enough to part with quite as many.

that system is a vhf radar nor bavar , neither 13th of khordad or 3rd of Khordad come with VHF radar

they use s-band and x-band in short they have a lot more in common with Patriot system that we never had access to than s-300 that some journalist claim our system are based on.

Iran designed and produced VHF radars too, including after taking delivery of the Nebo.

never get deployed , such radar till we built or substantialy different fath radar developed

Substantial difference doesn't preclude some technical finding from examination of the Nebo flowing into the conception of Iranian VHF radars at some point.

and you knew they are deployed or think they are deployed ? or perhaps wish they to be deployed. when we have more powerful fath why build nebu-svu , for god sake its not the advanced nebu-m we are talking about its good old nebu-svu

That's not how it works anywhere in the world. Just because one system has a superior performance to others in almost every or even in every single aspect, this doesn't necessarily translate into the entirety of previous systems being retired from service. Technically inferior systems can be more cost-effective to procure in numbers, can have exponential performance if massed, can fulfill niche roles while more onerous and precious all-rounders will be positioned elsewhere, such as in better protected locations.

yes the general in syria gave the iranian supported force in syria 100 canon shell because he was impressed by iranian general . the shell is foundamentally different than our guided artillery shell and you claim they are based on russian one that never even given to iranian

Have some shame, that's some plain untruth you've now been repeating several times. Show me where in this discussion I suggested Basir is based on Krasnopol, or kindly beat it.

Also, wrong again: the third source I showed is explicit about Iran purchasing Krasnopol rounds directly from a Russian company outside the context of the Syrian war.

as i said the need was not the need to study and learn it

Strawman.

and no paying money for a system but not use it is the sign of problems.

Yes, putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.

and if we use s-75 copy why not use s-300 that we have and paid for.?

Both are fulfilling dedicated roles within Iran's IADS, Iran considers both to be beneficial and to enhance the power of her air defence architecture.

we use s-75 and its integrated , we use crotal and rapier. how effective are there do we need them.

Yes, Iran considers she does need them. Else they'd have been retired from service. They are effective in the niche role they're assigned.

there is different kind of need . we always need air defense systems and the more advance the better as we lack an effective air-force right now. if tomorrow we find some crotale in a storage be assured we don\t say we are producing herz and ya-zahra let not use them . we will deploy them somewhere

They fulfill a need therefore they're being deployed. It's as simple as that and no wordplay could possibly change it.

show me one system we throw away and said let not use anymore

If nothing's gotten rid of, it's that everything's considered useful. Elementary logic.

without supply facility , weapon and spare part nobody buy airplane in such form

It's the price tag of an entire such contract.

this funds will be mobilized from 4.5 billion euro put aside for increasing the power of armed force and thats separate from usual air force budget. now how you want to use that money its up to you , its for all branches of IRGC, Army and Basij

Additional funds to those 4,5 billion Euro may be mobilized. Nothing says they can't or wouldn't.

buying final product from foreigner is not investment . a TOT or investing in domestic product and building the infrastructure for building those products is investment

Investment is defined as an expenditure which enables a benefit or advantage at a later point. The advantage in this case is the additional military capability they grant once the delivery and induction period has elapsed.

 

[Atar god of the fire]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1561987311033786370