Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards fired 14 missiles in an exercise Tuesday, one of them a medium-range weapon capable of striking Israel or US targets in the Gulf, state media said.
The Guards' aerospace commander, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, insisted Iran's missile programme posed no threat to European nations but was merely intended to provide defence against Israel and US forces in the Gulf.
"Today, on the second day of the exercise, we fired Zelzals (Quake), Shahabs (Meteors) 1 and 2, and the Ghadr (Power)," a medium-range missile which is a modified version of the Shahab-3, Hajizadeh told state television.
He said the missiles were not a threat to European nations.
"Iran's missiles have a maximum range of 2,000 kilometres (1,250 miles) and are designed to reach US targets in the region and the Zionist regime," the official IRNA news agency quoted him as saying.
"The Zionist regime is 1,200 kilometres away from Iran and we are able to target this regime with our 2,000 kilometre range missiles from Semnan and Damghan (in central Iran)," he said.
"We have the technology to build missiles with a longer range but we do not need them and we are not seeking to build such missiles."
Iran has said that its latest exercise is not aimed at any country but carries "a message of peace and friendship."
Kinda goes along with that whole religion of peace mantra doesn't it?
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Iran, National Security
Comments (12)
As the saying goes - "Don't... (Below threshold)1. Posted by JLawson | June 28, 2011 6:43 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
As the saying goes - "Don't start none, won't be none."
Somehow I don't think Iran's going to pay any attention to that, though...
1. Posted by JLawson | June 28, 2011 6:43 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 06:43
2. Posted by Evil Otto | June 28, 2011 6:48 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Iran has said that its latest exercise is not aimed at any country but carries "a message of peace and friendship."
All I could think of was this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CISRRn3wolk
2. Posted by Evil Otto | June 28, 2011 6:48 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 06:48
3. Posted by Dodo David | June 28, 2011 7:15 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Sure, nothing says "Peace and Friendship" like a missile aimed at a nation.
3. Posted by Dodo David | June 28, 2011 7:15 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 07:15
4. Posted by Chico | June 28, 2011 7:36 AM | Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
Israel has a pretty good deterrent, with 200+ nukes, including thermonuclear devices, and delivery systems including missiles in hardened silos and submarine launched cruise missiles.
4. Posted by Chico | June 28, 2011 7:36 AM |
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 07:36
5. Posted by retired military | June 28, 2011 7:52 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
""We have the technology to build missiles with a longer range but we do not need them and we are not seeking to build such missiles."
"
Funny, isnt this the same folks who said they werent seeking nuclear weapons either.
5. Posted by retired military | June 28, 2011 7:52 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 07:52
6. Posted by Michael Laprarie | June 28, 2011 8:38 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
"Sure, nothing says "Peace and Friendship" like a missile aimed at a nation."
Well DUH. Our own Nobel Peace Prize laureate President has launched hundreds of missiles during his tenure in the White House. Obviously those were weapons of peace, right?
6. Posted by Michael Laprarie | June 28, 2011 8:38 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 08:38
7. Posted by JLawson | June 28, 2011 9:02 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Israel has a pretty good deterrent, with 200+ nukes, including thermonuclear devices, and delivery systems including missiles in hardened silos and submarine launched cruise missiles.
And it's absolutely amazing how they're constantly threatening their neighbors, isn't it? Not a day goes by when you don't hear about them threatening Iran, Bahrain, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan or Syria with nuclear destruction. Why, it's enough to make you think they're totally hell-bent on destruction of all their enemies, isn't it?
/sarc
Mutually Assured Destruction only works when both sides have a desire to survive that overrides their desire for destruction of the enemy. From the way the leadership of Iran blathers, and I realize that leadership in Iran can be somewhat...ephemeral, the continuation of their country in an intact fashion isn't a high priority. MAD isn't necessarily a viable strategy when one side doesn't care about survival.
7. Posted by JLawson | June 28, 2011 9:02 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 09:02
8. Posted by GarandFan | June 28, 2011 10:21 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
"MAD isn't necessarily a viable strategy when one side doesn't care about survival."
Exactly. But I'm thinking that the 'religious' leaders in Iran have those shelters for themselves all worked out.
The people themselves are expendable.
8. Posted by GarandFan | June 28, 2011 10:21 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 10:21
9. Posted by JLawson | June 28, 2011 11:49 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The people themselves are expendable.
Of course, Garandfan. It's already established that in the mind of the Muslim leadership 'collateral damage' is acceptable. So what if you kill a few hundred Muslims while striking at your enemies?
Or a few million?
They go to Paradise early! Lucky them!
9. Posted by JLawson | June 28, 2011 11:49 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 11:49
10. Posted by Jim Addison | June 28, 2011 2:56 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
We have a prototype drone which is missile-launched and carries a heavy enough payload to wreak destruction, gliding down at high speed to a target. They are being tested this year and more extensive tests will be next year.
Supposedly these things could hit any target in the world within about one hour of launch. For instance, a "high-value target" might not have time to flee or, more importantly, when satellites spot ICBMs or other long-range missiles being fueled . . . KABOOM!
Faster, please!
10. Posted by Jim Addison | June 28, 2011 2:56 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 14:56
11. Posted by docjim505 | June 28, 2011 6:07 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Might be a good time to send our own message of peace and friendship.
"Hello, 509th Bomb Wing? Yes, I'd like to place an order for delivery. No, no, I'm not interested in a special just now. Actually, I just need you to deliver a little message to a little man. How soon can you drop something off in Tehran?"
11. Posted by docjim505 | June 28, 2011 6:07 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 28, 2011 18:07
12. Posted by dave742 | June 29, 2011 10:46 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The news is saying that these missiles are "capable of carrying a nuclear warhead":
"Foreign Secretary William Hague has said Iran has been testing missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead."
This is a lie. Uzi Rubin, the former head of Israel's Arrow anti-missile shield, had this to say about the Shahab-3:
"I must be clear on one important point here. The new triconic warhead is not a move toward accommodating a nuclear warhead.”
See pages 95 to 151 here for full details. See page 147 for Rubin quote:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/39038338/Pierre-Goldschmidt-Critique
12. Posted by dave742 | June 29, 2011 10:46 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 29, 2011 22:46