Friday, December 20, 2013

Iran Air Force Drill to Kick Start Velayat-92 Exercises


Iran’s air force is holding a two-day air drill over the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf starting today, said Brig. Gen. Ali Reza Barkhor, acting air force commander. (IRNA, 20 December)

The IRIAF as well as IRGC-AF participated in today's joint drill, code-named Defenders of Velayat Sanctuary 4, which kick starts the annual Velayat exercises that would involve Artesh and IRGC branches of the military. 


In a remarkable and noticeable departure from the past, the Iranian military has toned down rhetoric in its announcements of the exercises, not issuing any warnings against potential adversaries. The reason seems to be the strategic importance of the on-going nuclear negotiations with the U.S. and other major powers for the new moderate government in Tehran and their eventual success.

File Photo: IRIAF F-4E Phantoms (Airliners.net)

62 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't think with this obsolete planes Iran can get any strategic credit.

Anonymous said...

You're very ignorant..You just make comments without thinking...

Anonymous said...

He just makes comments because he is a hasbara shill.

Anonymous said...

this is, like, a violation of the spirit of the negotiations and might hurt people's feelings.

Anonymous said...

Old Air platforms use by modern air forces are typical these days, USAF uses F-15s deigned in 70's, its the electronics and modernizations that make these platforms useful.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMWVvdFEMOk --- Iran is among five countries capable of producing laser guided artillery shells.

Anonymous said...

who cares?!!! you both sound like idiots.

Anonymous said...

You're comparing these obsolete pieces of crash to the f15? Go look up what Saudi f15s did to these pieces of crash in the 1980s. Wow at what liars Iranians are.

Piruz Mollazadeh said...

But those Saudi F-15s you speak of were aided by U.S AWACS even though the intruding Iranian fighters were Vietnamese era F-4s, and still they only managed to take down 1 or 2 planes at best. God knows where the "Saudi" pilots were from since Saddam's French fighters where piloted by French pilots!

I'm not saying that F-4s are as good as F-15s but training and experience are as important as (if not more important than) equipment.

Also look how pathetic the Saudi air force's performance was during the recent border dispute with the Houthis.

Piruz Mollazadeh said...

I believe, like U.S General John Abizaid did, that Iran's military is the most powerful and active in the region. But I am also sure that this has nothing to do with the IRIAF who's equipment are indeed obsolete and outdated and can do little to retaliate against the enemy.

Missile technology, and not aircraft inventory, is the reason Iran has a good response capability. The air force is trash compared to other air forces in the region.

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:57 PM

...and are you aware of the fact that the USAF and the GCC airforces respectively has had and will always have access to the latest upgrades to any and all systems of their current inventory of military aircrafts. Iran missed out on the basic F-16A which was intended to replace all F-5s. Now the latest version of the F-16 is entirely different than the early version introduced in 1978. The changes that it has gone through has made it into a whole new aircraft. The F-16A is totally antiquated compared to the F-16E/F Block 50-52+, which by the way, serve across the Gulf. There is no modernization program that Iran can undertake that could bring their F-5s and F-4s to the standard of US and GCC aircrafts that are in use right now. I don't see the potential for partnership, assistance and co-operation with Israeli, German or US companies in the future. I think it's pretty clear to everyone that the IRIAF is badly outdated and cannot survive in eventual encounters with the USAF and GCC.

Gurney said...

I feel sorry for the Iranian airmen who are forced into confrontation against a supreme opponent.

Poor Iranian pilots will have to count their lucky charms if they want to get out alive in air engagements with our fighter jets/elite pilots. It would be better for them to hide their aircraft the way Saddam did or send them north to Turkmenistan. No Iranian pilots life is worth sacrificing in the current odds but then again Iranian mullahs has never shown qualms when it comes to brainwashing their foolish youth into performing acts of martyrdom, as evidenced by their past war against Iraq and in the Gulf at the hands of the USN.

Anonymous said...

jesus these planes are so old, 60s vintage!!!

Anonymous said...

Old and rusty airforce!!!!!!; you must be kidding. These are such good that can even beat F22 and F35.
Anyone who says that in case of conflict Iran 's airforce will be vanished in a giffy is a dead ignorant hasbashill.:)

Anonymous said...

Once again, truth conquers lies:
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/06/06/world/2-iranian-fighters-reported-downed-by-saudi-air-force.html
http://defence.pk/threads/1984-saudi-f-15s-shot-down-iranian-f-4-phantom-iis.263493/

What do you care, terrorist bacheh akhoond, right? You're not going to be the one dying in those things.

Anonymous said...

I'd rather wow at the everlasting nonsensical nature of your claims Anon 1:32 AM : those were a couple F4s in this encounter and they had wandered away from Iranian airspace, not anything close to the best asset the IRIAF was then fielding for air-to-air combat, such as the F-14s. Do we need to remind you how these same "liars" torn apart entire formations of then cutting edge Iraqi and French planes with that bird while having no support to provide the platform with critical spares ? How many times are you going to make a joke of yourself making empty claims about facts taken out of their context ?

Anonymous said...

GurneyDecember 21, 2013 at 7:20 AM
You`re assuming that there would be much left of the gulf airforces to take to the air,virtually all of their air bases are within range of irans short range missile arsenal,that is irans primary striking force and its one that I have no doubt would be very effective,I also would not underestimate the f14 aim54 combo both of these have been modernised and they would likely get off the first shot in any air to air engagement.There is also the question of how capable the arab airforces would be,historically they have not performed well in combat

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:30 AM,


Granted, in the air, on paper at least, the GCC enjoys better equipment than Iran does at the moment (and this is going to be subject to major change in the coming decade) though you do realize than any direct and all-out confrontation between a neighboring GCC country and Iran will lead to the latter making extensive and devastating use of its strategic missile force against every major airbase in direct range of its hundreds if not thousands assets, and this before even sending a single plane out in foreign airspace ? attacks against which none of the GCC countries have enough (unproven) ABMs systems deployed that would prevent them from sustaining critical damage to their air force's efficiency and inventory ? it's like saying that the Taiwanese Air Force stands a chance at fighting on equal odds with China while it's practically an enclave surrounded by hundreds of SRBMs and IRBMs with anti-runway, frag and HE warheads, just like Iran possesses, albeit I concede with a greater degree of accuracy, which is not a prime requirement anyway if your objective is to devastate as much infrastructure as you can on a target as large as an industrial district. I am not even counting the terrible fallout that would occur for the Saudis or Qatar would their vital petrochemical infrastructure be hit as well. Those GCC members have no credible answer to Iran strategic deterrent, hence their inability to do anything except pushing the US ahead on every of their confrontational ambitions towards Iran, just like distant Israel.

The only credible scenario in which Iran would make use of its airforce precluding its missiles would be in a Recce role and/or pinpoint SEAD mission for taking down high-powered and easily-detectable ABM radars, for which they have more than enough modernized assets available, hence the emphasis they put on Su-24s, F4-s and Mirage-F1s with adapted air-to-ground avionics and weaponry for anti-radiation operations, courtesy of China and Belarus. And testing such configurations is precisely the goal of the ongoing drills in which everyone can see new laser designators and HARM-type targeting pods being mounted on planes that we did not see displayed publicly before. It's all a game of messages, beyond the PR stunt. That is also why we don't see much air-superiority fighters such as Mig-29s or F-14s in those exercises for now.

-A

Anonymous said...

"Wandered away" Ha ha ha.

They were sent for all intents and purposes to attack Kuwaiti tankers in Saudi territorial waters.

Denial of such magnitude by Anon 9:25, amazing! LOL

Anonymous said...

Iraq-Iraq War explained briefly in English:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdm6h66mWUY

Anonymous said...

you're nuts

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:26,

Both parties attacked one another's shipping assets in that war, is that new to you ? Besides it is off-topic. Hanging to one word and ignoring my ENTIRE post without adressing any of the counterclaims it makes against your previous pathetic comment only further exposes your desperation at being taken seriously. On second thought, why would anyone expect anything else from such an amateur making a fool of himself every time he touches the keyboard. You're more like a funny punchbag for the mind I'd say :-)

-A

Anonymous said...

Junk,Junk,Junk !!

Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM
Well said,the gulf states have no strategic depth virtually all of their military infrastructure is within range of irans short range missile arsenal,never mind their critical civilian infrastructure,there is also the very real question of just how capable the gulf militaries would be under actual war time conditions,historically their performance has not been great

Anonymous said...

What an adacious lie by Anon 10:31

Historically they have done heck of alot better than Iran and have in the past shown just how capable they are, downing both Iraqi and Iranian planes for no losses.

Now go suck on a lollipop kid. LOL!

Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 21, 2013 at 11:48 PM
You seem to be ignoring the historic poor performances of the arab airforces in general,one only needs to look at how poorly they performed against the israelis,the libyans in chad and the iraqis performance against iran was also far from stellar,when one considers the inability of the saudis to even maintain their airforce without considerable western help then it is an open question how well they would perform especially if iran had destroyed or badly damaged the bulk of their air bases,you seem to think that you can estimate their performance based on a couple of encounters,thats like saying that because the iraqis were the first to shoot down an aircraft,a coalition f18,during desert storm the iraqis should have won the air war.You have done nothing to disprove my point,the ability of the gulf states militaries is an open question and I for one dont see them ever being so reckless as to pick a fight with iran regardless of how many western supplied weapons they have on paper,after all they only have to look at what happened to the last arab who was dumb enough to try that

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:48 PM

Ahahahahahah !!!!! AHAHAHAH !!! And when was last time Saudi Arabia go to a major and lengthy war comparable to what Iran had with Iraq (in which internationally supported invading Iraqi air force got pwned and humiliated to the surprise of the whole world by embargoed and totally isolated Iran which was fighting with enough spares for its planes) to show a sample of study for such extraordinarily funny comment ? Tell us about The Mighty Saudi Air Force and its many Successful Global Military Campaigns ! ahahahah that would make a great Sci-Fi movie !!! now go help them bomb Houthis next time ok ? since they had their share of trouble dealing with them right there, and then we'll talk about more serious engagements. When you learn basics, you have to go one step at a time. Oh and how is Qatar's military history going by the way ? I almost forgot to ask !!! hahahahah duuuude get a life seriously !!!

Ok Cheers lollipop boy, you made my day,

Anonymous said...

A,

Saudi Arabia (GCC for that matter) never attacked any Iranian tanker, Iraq did.

You lie to justify Iranian agression within a non-belligerents country's airspace.

See how easy it is? I will keep exposing your lies everytime. Quit lying!

Anonymous said...

Saudi Arabia did not attack Iranian tankers, but they were helping Saddam with everything they could, (Money, Arms supply, carrying the Iraqi oil with their tankers) therefore legitimate targets for Iranian Air force and military during the Iran-Iraq war. (The Kuwaiti and Saudi deserved what they got from crazy Saddam afterwards). Kuwait almost destroyed and occupied and the Saudi corrupt Royal family paid through their nose for the American military operation to kick Saddam out of Kuwait.

Anonymous said...

Troll,

you systematically rely on cheap distortions every time your lies are cornered, it is getting pathetic but you keep going. Why ?

You keep on saying Saddam gave Iran a "lesson", among other things by thrashing their rusty air-force in the war, while in reality Iran's F-14s crushed Iraqi fighters on every encounter so long as they were kept airworthy, and Iraq was not even able to consolidate its late gains at the end of the war, let alone move forward back into Iranian territory much ==> you lied.

You said that Saudi Arabia thrashed the IRIAF while in reality, all that ever happened was their F-15s enjoying full GCI and AWACS support downing a couple older F-4s in Saudi airspace on a single occasion ==> you lied.

You said that Saudi Arabia wasn't guilty in attacking Iran, while in reality it, along with other major GCC countries, gave weapons and funds for Iraq with the very purpose of allowing it to attack Iran in the same manner, which it did, as you say yourself ==> you lied.

You keep on saying that Saddam thrashed Iran's army while in reality Iran thrashed 80% of Iraq's navy in a single operation and reduced the IqAF's efficiency by more than half less than 24 hours after the initial assault, and repelled them beyond their borders and took oil terminals from them as early as 82 ==> you lied.

You keep on saying that Iran "surrendered" its nuclear program to US pressure, while in reality it is the US that dropped most of its hard-line demands concerning Iran's nuclear program, namely the enrichment capabilities and facilities, even ignoring Israel's and Reps' demands in that regard and Obama is even planning to veto Congressional attempts at going forward with more sanctions ==> you lied.

You said the GCC (and its near-zero combat record) as done a much better job than the IRIAF ever did, while in reality an embargoed Iran destroyed any aerial incursion of Iraqi planes in its airspace for years so long as it wasn't feeling the effects of the embargo while Saddam was receiving his planes and spares on demands, and no GCC country ever even got embroiled in a real war to properly speak of ==> you lied.

You repeatedly said I'm a liar ==> you lied many times, then some more ;-)


Too easy. Should I go on ?


-A, at your service.

Anonymous said...

Well done A
As always factual. (May I just add that now there are even some evidence that as the French Mirage F 1's at least at the beginning of their delivery to the Iraqi airforce (before they were experienced enough) were flown by French pilots.
Do you have any more info. about this topic?

Anonymous said...

Woe at what racists, anti-Iran people like Anonymous December 21, 2013 at 1:32 AM, are.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Your comment which contributes nothing, certainly is.

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:11 AM is setting up A-blah to spew even more lies. LOL!

Anonymous said...

And this coming from a junky.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone ban or at least delete such explicitly racist and insulting formulas and words from Anon 10:18 AM or his buddy Anon 1:30 PM? What does "Hendizadeh-ye shepesho" have to do on a professional blog ? Having no love for the regime and calling it names is one thing, being racist altogether is another. He should be put on leech for Christ's sake... look at him barking all over the blog on everything but nonsense unrelated to any ongoing topic. There are other places to express rage and anger, and this blog is not one of them. Here, we discuss matters in an mature, constructive and bilateral way, I suppose.

Anonymous said...

hey! they are antiques and not junk!

a little respect for the people who keep these 50 year old airplanes in condition and allows them to be flown when there's sufficient fuel.

Anonymous said...

Once more, you prove my point, Anon 3:35 PM.

Anonymous said...

Annon. Dec. 23 2013 3.00 pm

I have the highest respect for A's comments on this blog, as I with many more like me found them being factual. If you have any proof for your mantra "Lies , Lies " please do share it with us.

The Iranian military deterrent capabilities are a fact (Regardless of how you feel about the Iranian leadership) that western military experts are well aware of and are taking into account in their dealings with Iran.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Anon 5:11 AM,

I tried to answer your question while addressing yet another insulting comment from our other "participant", but it seems it was moderated along with his initial post, which on second thought, isn't a bad thing, I got carried away a bit I guess. Anyway, sadly I do not have much more information than you do regarding the French pilot rumors. I indeed stumbled upon many such stories here and there on specialized forums and sites throughout my years of personal research on Iranian military history and defense sector, but it stops right there. To date, I have yet to find a single piece of such testimony on any major recognized website or open-source literature. Though it is entirely possible that such occurrence actually materialized, since such practices were commonplace in the region for both Soviet and Western patrons of smaller allied states (like Eastern pilots flying Mig-21s for Egypt during the War of Attrition or US pilots flying recon sorties under Israeli colors) there is no solid evidence to credit any of them officially or with certainty. Too sensitive to publish as established facts I suppose.

And thanks a lot for such attention and warm comments at my written efforts here. Witness other participant recognize them as such counts a lot. I wish I could contribute even more to Nader's blog provided I finally had more time on my hands...

-A

Anonymous said...

Ignorant 5:03PM

Kuwaiti or any tanker belonging to any other nation, despite assisting Iraq in transporting its oil, were definitely not legitimate targets for the Iranian military when viewed through international law. They counted as neutral shipping and Iran broke the rules by unlawfully attacking them, leading to the epic punishment that was Operation Praying Mantis and other similar operations by the USN, for over-stepping the boundaries. And even then the US choose to knock out targets of military value, (as opposed to economical or civilian infrastructure). Those oil platforms were either not functioning anymore due to Iraqi air strikes (Iraqi F1 Mirages had refueling capability and could reach far down the Gulf) and had instead purposely been modified into observation posts for directing illegal pirate attacks against neutral oilers.

As usual, your fault is that you arbitrarily apply your own non-objective thoughts while ignoring internationally recognized rules of conduct. In other words, you lie just like your companion A-blah to justify the violations perpetrated by that regime-e-kapakzade and its crook at the helm. You are a beacon of non-objectivity when it comes to protecting this evil regime's actions.

Anonymous said...

A
Thank you very much for the information. I have not been able to find anything more than what you have already mentioned in your post.
Merry Christmas and a Happy new year.

Anonymous said...

7:12 AM,

The US also consciously shot down a civilian airliner not long after Praying Mantis, killings hundreds of innocent Iranian people , including children, women and elders alike, and never apologized for it, "no matter what the facts are", from the mouth of then president Bush senior himself at the time, verbatim. The USN even granted medals to all as a reward to their brave triumph. And by all accounts including those coming directly from former members of the USS Vincennes' crew after the incident, the ship's commander acted both aggressively and recklessly, providing a totally unsatisfactory excuse for the kill claiming it mistook the airliner for an attacking F-14, which failed to convince any expert who commented on the issue afterwards. How is that for a valid military target ? Funny you self-proclaimed Objectivity King failed to mention not only that, but also the blatant historical reality which is that the GCC provided tens of billions in loans and weapons and even oil transport to invader Iraq along with their western patrons, and that Saudi Arabia even provided shelter for IqAF fighter planes to spare them early annihilation during Iran's first massive counter-attack , Operation Kaman 99 that occured 24 Hours after the initial Iraqi assault. The GCC thus willingly and knowingly aided Saddam while it was violating every fundamental rule of international conduct by leading aggession on a non-hostile country with the express desire to annex its neighboring resource-rich regions arbitrarily. And you rather pathetically try to divert people's attention on how bad it supposedly is to target GCC tankers in such context, well that's just brilliant and a sound reminder of your shameful and cheap distorsion attempts once more. Now how is that for criminal anti-Iran behavior, you blind, insulting and racist badbakht ? You wanna get moderated again with your insults, will you never learn to show respect to people disagreeing with your opinion and counteracting on your truncated testimony of History ? Who's going to be the "Shepeshous" this time , "Afghanzadehs" ?

Oh, and Merry Xmas you clown !


-Abtin is actually the full name, it seems you got it wrong. Better luck next time, retard ;-)

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:03 AM,

Thanks again. Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones as well. Happy New Year in advance too ;-)

-A

Anonymous said...

The impolite troller should understand one day that it was the whole war itself which was illegal in view of the International Laws, and no amount of ranting and gesticulation will ever be enough to hide the fact that it was an agression war imposed on Iran, initiated and perpetrated by Saddam's Iraq and then supported by all GCC countries (and the EU, US and USSR) in a unilateral decision to take pieces of land from a nation that saw its armed forces de-facto impaired by a recently finished Revolution. But unlucky for him, Iranians showed both courage , tenacity, and patrotism in defending their borders from the foreign-backed invader and did so in such a crushing manner for the Iraqi armed forces despite being isolated and embargoed, that it shattered their morale on the battlefield for years to come.

Besides, I mean come on, its been like 25+ years already, maybe it is time to get over the fact that all Iran's enemies combined technically failed in their efforts at cutting the nation to pieces away from its richest parts, no ? I know such outcome hurt your feelings and expectations a lot back then, and continues to obviously burn you from the inside to this very day, but it's never too late to try...

Anonymous said...

Annon 24 Dec. 7:12 AM

International law?? "Internationally recognized rules of conduct" ? Interesting you mentioned it.

How about violating "International law" by attacking Iran (Saddam's regime was finally condemned in 1991 as the aggressor nation who started the war by the UN when the west gave up on their former best friend as they decided to kick him out of Kuwait)
How about violating "International law" and conventions by using Chemical weapons against the civilians (Iranians , The Kurds) and Iranian troops ?
How about starting the "War of the Cities" by targeting the Civilian populations ?
How about starting the "Tanker War" in the Persian Gulf?
Who is ignorant now?
Don't let your hate of the current regime in Iran, affect your judgment to the extent that you distort facts.
Finally the least you can do, is to refrain from using a language that not only does not strengthen your arguments, but also shows the lack of civility in your behavior towards fellow commentators.
Wish you a merry Christmas and a happy new year.
K

Anonymous said...

Anonymous December 23, 2013 at 4:10 PM, displaying the limit of technical knowledge and debating ability of anti-Iran people.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:45.......

the F14s were retired from military service many years ago.... only the Iranians still use them and only because Iran has nothing newer or better and can't build anything warplanes of their own......

very, very silly of you to talk about other peoples' limit of technical knowledge and ability, sonny

Anonymous said...

All you numbnut minions of this wicked rotten regime are the true ignorants cuz you fail to see why Iran deserved all those things that happened to it...as mentioned by Mr K-olah bardar and his lying/decieving dumb friends. Iran willingly continued the war past 1982 when it was offered the option to end bloodshed and was offered a gift some 40 Billion of Dollar in war reparation from Saudi Arabia to compensate for Saddams mistake (which it didnt need to pay back), which would have covered the rebuilding of all destroyed assets in Iran...so all your arguments, wailings, lamentations, and excuses for the devil Khomeini become null and void...cuz just like the criminal and clinically insane Khomeini and his gang, you too do not wish for peace. Ask yourselfs why Iran barely got any support?! That vile Khomeini manipulated Iran's people into hating the whole western world even before the war. Iran, its people, and those digusting creatures in power have only themselves to blame! No wonder most other countries refused to help Iran, tough luck! GCC started supporting Iraq past the middle of 1982 when it was being attacked the whole time by brainwashed basiji goons. Infact your love of this regime-e-gandideh blinds you, thats why cannot see the real facts! And to A-blah ... 295 people lost their lives because the stupid people in charge allowed civilian air traffic to fly a direct course through conflicted areas...instead it could have done what Israel does - have the airliners fly through the Red Sea and take a round about trip whenever their flight destination lay in the East. Besides you cannot prove that the U.S. navy warship knew that they were targeting and firing on a non-military aircraft. Iranian Sepah bandits were the whole time even during the accidental shot down, swarming close to USN units and pretending to be wannabe pirates, while the USN were escorting neutral oilers thru International waters. The civilian airliner had been wrongly configured by incompetend morons so its radio transponder couldnt recieve those warning calls that were sent from the US warship. The USS Vincennes tried to contact the airline pilots but didnt get any response plus it was impossible for them to distinguish wether its an airliner or combat aircraft, so they concluded it has been sent to help those playing basiji pirates who were firing crude weapons on US ships and oil transporters. And as far as innocent deaths go, Mr A-blah, you forget how the Terrorist Navy of Iran killed approximately 500 innocent souls (sailors, merchan marine men, crewmen) with the use of Guided missiles and deck guns....but when they came up against somone who could shoot back (US navy warships) they suddenly got slapped all over the place. You guys ignorance and inept thinking never seizes to baffle me!

I wish all you terrorist regime sympathizers a NOT so happy new year and an UNHAPPY Christmas!!!

Anonymous said...

Now at this stage and after reading your response, I just feel sorry for you and have decided to just ignore your posts in the future.
Wish you and your family a healthy, happy new year.

K

Anonymous said...

As can be seen from the junk comments above, the limit of technical knowledge and debating ability of anti-Iran people commenting here, is perfectly clear to see.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:32 AM :
"[...]Iran deserved all those things that happened to it" ==> including the start of the war ?

"[...]40 Billion of Dollar in war reparation from Saudi Arabia" ==> A "mistake" during which, contrary to your shameful lies, Saddam was already enjoying full backing from the GCC, with the KSA providing not only funds and weapons, but also shelter for Iraq's fighter planes during Iran first massive counterattack 24 HOURS after the start of the war, not even close to 82, I've said it before , and will repeat it as many times as it's needed to put it into your kaleh-pukeh nafahmeh khak-be sar. Witnessing that their vicious plan was backfiring, they wanted to offer a quick settlement. As usual you dorough-goo e badbakht lie and distort facts again all along to suit your personal view of events.

"[...]excuses for the devil Khomeini" ==> there is nothing null and void but your desperate and cheap manipulations always putting the blame on Iran while the whole world embargoed it directly after the start of a war it didn't start while at the same time supporting Saddam, hence the abysmal war debt it inherited after the war, you pathetic liar.

"Ask yourselfs why Iran barely got any support?!" ==> The same reason why it received no support in 1953 while its democratically elected gov't was getting overthrown. It had recently undergone a Revolution turning it into a powerful independent actor in the mid-east while its predecessor, to whom you must still be devoting a cult to this day, the Shah, was a docile vassal doing America's bidding ever since he took the reign from his father, just like GCC monarchs. And Iraq at the time was an ally for the USSR, hence their support. The GCC feared a newly-formed Shiite stronghold right on the other side of the PG's shores.

"295 people lost their lives because the stupid people in charge allowed civilian air traffic[..]. ==> The USS Vincennes was in Iranian territorial waters at the time of the incident, as admitted by the US government in legal briefs and publicly by Admiral William Crowe, and violated Omani waters when it engaged the Iranian airliner, under the pretext that an Iranian helicopter had attacked it. Plus, the Iranian airliner was climbing at the time of the incident (contrary to the Captain's claim that it was descending in a threatening posture) and its radio transmitter was "squawking" on the Mode III civilian and military code rather than on the purely military Mode II, as recorded by the USS Vincennes own shipboard Aegis Combat System. So there was no "moronic" configuration of any sort, you incompetent liar. The flight was using commercial air corridor to Dubai airport, which was not restricted during the war. The Vincenne's commander was as reckless as he violated countless rules of engagement in this encounter, while his excuses and testimony were dismissed even by American military-men asked on the issue. What truly astonished me is your systemic reflex to rather excuse anything coming from a USN Captain that has been widely challenged on the international scene while you put the whole blame on an airliner who's only crime was to choose its usual commercial route and maintaining English radio contact with neighboring control towers.And FYI, Aegis radar in the late 80s had the ability to fully differentiate between large targets and fighter-class targets, let alone fixed-wing vs rotary wing aircraft, so you and your pathetically mediocre "arguments" can go kiss my a**.

Also, you fail to mention thousands Iranian civilians who died as a result of chemical Scud attacks given to your idol Saddam and their use advised by the CIA, a fact that you desperate moron cannot deny anymore according to declassified documents posted on this blog ? No amount of insults will be enough for you to hide the emptiness of every single of your hastily written and undocumented claims on the various issues you touched.

-A

Anonymous said...

LOL anon 2:32 AM !!!  

And since when didn't Iran dare attack "people who can respond" ? Weren't they precisely the ones to respond, repel and utterly crush armed to the hilt Iraqis when they attempted to invade the country and push them back even beyond their own borders ? Was it the mighty US savior that marched rifle in hand in 1982 on Khoramshahr right in front of world cameras or was it rather busy helping Saddam ? Your amazingly flawed way of putting forward your filthy propaganda claims would almost make it seem like Iranians forces exclusively attacked unarmed inocent souls during the whole damn war, your Iranophobic hysteria is reaching insane heights for everyone here to see, opponents and supporters of the IRI alike ! por favor senior, cool it and stop making a disgrace out of yourself !!! My God, how dare you maximize a single, short and late phase of the war that occured 8 years after the start of the conflict and that followed international support of Saddam when he took countless innocent lives notably by randomly firing inaccurate Scuds on Tehran by the hundreds, while remaining willingly silent on every of the invader's abuses during the short-lived forward phase of his surprise invasion campaign ? How on earth can you come and say that Iranians "deserved" the unfair fate of getting pounded and gassed in the process ? No matter Khomeini's personal responsibility in making the war drag on accordingly to his own wicked , opportunistic expansion agenda (where he is no more to blame than any other player involved, plus he didn't draw first blood anyway), it is an undeniable fact that none of these tragedies would have occured had Saddam and his GCC backers refrained from fomenting such aggression in the hopes of crushing their new shiite regional competitor early after its establishment. You and your dirty ideogical bias and associated ridiculously distorted, self-hating and very obviously Americanophile (what a surprise) testimony of historical facts are an insult to everything Iranian, past, present and future. I'd sure advise you to attend many history classes you missed regarding the conflict, if it wasn't so glaringly clear that your job IS to lie here. No matter what your ideological allegiance is or is not, letting it come into the way of fundamental objectivity regarding clear, recognized and established facts are a clear sign of either undipsutable amareurism or complete intelectual dishonesry. Either case, sir, I for one am grateful I have never nor will ever have to undergo the nauseating experience of making your acquaintance in my entire lifetime. I sincerely wish you burst the bubble of your dark cocon of hate one day.

Anonymous said...

It appears some recent comments on this page are displayed on android devices and not when viewed from a desktop, can any webmaster look into the issue ?

Thanks.

-A

Anonymous said...

"I wish all you terrorist regime sympathizers a NOT so happy new year blahblahblah"

that one pretty much confirms your official status as a prime moronic hater with zero capacity at hearing others express their views and challenge yours on its plethora of holes without resorting to plain insults and ranting, hence does not even need further answers, already addressed by previous posts you didn't bother to properly read anyway. The claim about Saddam being supposedly helped only after 1982 by its many allies being one good example of falsity you tried in vain to sell as a fact against informed posters here. It is common knowledge that Saudis themselves supported him since the onset of the war against their common enemy, and CIA documents made public recently also show how deeply and directly involved the US gov't was in equipping Iraq with chemical warheads for their Scud and advised them in how and when to use it against both civilian and military targets in 86, with infamous, official video footage showing Rumsfeld himself acting as a broker and shacking hands with the dirty dictator. As if the Iraqi army was a self-sufficient one to begin with, you're trying to tell us it waged its military and economic effort all by itself for two full years, who do you think you're fooling beside yourself ? what about its many planes that took refuge in GCC bases while their home bases were getting pounded by 200 of IRIAF's planes 24 hours after the first Iraqi assault ? It seems like when it comes to intellectual ineptitude and utter dishonesty, your case truly is a bottomless pit. The USS Vincennes case to this day remains full of contradictions, claims and counterclaims challenged by US commanders and other experts themselves, and the endgame was never established beyond the fact that the Vincennes acted in an irresponsible way by interpreting transponder emissions improperly, same for the claim that their target was plunging in their direction while it was later established that the airliner was in fact gaining altitude at the time of the shot-down, let alone the ludicrous F-14 radar signature claim, since the plane was known to be unable at performing anti-ship attacks. The air corridor used was not restricted during the war and the US vessel was in Iranian waters, the pilot had no way of seeing the threat since it wasn't even equipped to do so, and had no reason to fear such sudden attack and maintained radio contact with several air control centers throughout the recorded time-frame preceding the incident. Thus, it is unfair to put the blame exclusively on the pilot and its colleagues' professionalism on the ground like you shamefully do, insulting their memory, and by contrast excuse if not defend the Captain of the USS Vincennes, betraying the terribly biased nature of your perspective. Khomeini committed many crimes both during and after the Imposed War, but this is in no way a justification for Saddam and its main allies namely the GCC powers in their concerted plot to deprive Iran of pieces of its oil-rich land in 1980. Iraq started this war, Saddam decided to attack, and it was certainly not up to the Saudis to decide when and how this conflict had to end. When such dice is cast and spirals out of control, you pay for consequences. Did you blame the Israelis the same way in 1973 when Syria attempted to take back the territories it lost on the Golan after the Six Day War, after which the IDF went beyond its own borders and attempted to push through Damascus' suburbs for more than one year before sustaining enough losses to get discouraged and finally withdraw ? I'm guessing that in their case, you'd call it bravery... and what about the Allies in WW2 ? do you forgive them for bombing the hell out of Nazi Germany and punishing it to the very heart of the Reichstag in Berlin ? should have they offered reasonable terms to Hitler instead of pushing ahead with a counter-invasion ? Your broken rationale sure is a pain to read, but is also easy to kill on the spot.

Anonymous said...

The limit of technical knowledge and debating ability demonstrated by the anti-Iran people here, is clear for all to see.

Anonymous said...

Again, how many times must i explain this already clear matter to this empty-headed A-blah... How many times must i reiterate and harshly remind you of the fact that Khomeini in 1979 publicly announced his and his henchmens enmity towards several countries, particurarly Iraq and the other countries around the Gulf by capitalizing on internal sectarian divisions in those countries and using the Shia population in those countries to stir up trouble. No matter how hard you try to paint Iran as the victim, it is a mere grasping at straws. Let's go back to the beginning/roots, Khomeini's ascension to power was initially welcomed and were sent warm and friendly letters by Saddam and other heads of states, congratulating him on the eve of his victory. In one letter he expressedly wished to establish close ties with the new establishment in Tehran. Does this signal a readiness to declare hostilities and launch a pre-emptive war of agression? Maybe in your warped mind...which does not count for much. Khomeini immediately had his mind set on devilish things and quickly set his wicked plans in motion to realize his completly unacceptable dream of spreading his version of extremism. He responded by calling for the overthrow of the Baathist regime and the toppling of the Arab monarchies. If that's not bringing heat on oneself, then i don't know what is. He began fomenting instability in Southern Iraq and Saudi Arabia by encouraging Dawa party members and other affiliated Shia militant groups to carry out assasinations and terror bombings etc. There was even an attempt on the life of the Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz among other high ranking officials and everything pointed to the Iranians, sponsoring their minions inside Iraq. Furthermore local Iranian garrisons stationed along the central part of the border were given orders by the Ayatollah reigime to send small detachements to cross the already officially recognized border (part of the Algiers agreements) to occupy areas that had oil underneath the surface. Infact one of the main demands of Iraq was that Iran withdraw from recently occupied border areas that belonged to Iraq. The Baathist regime told Iran to stop meddling in Iraq's domestic affairs and stop the violation of Iraqi territory & sovereignty, they wouldn't listen! The terrorist Akhoond regime also had issued orders to ships and other sea vessel to navigate anyway they pleased without any concern to the 1975 Algiers treaty regarding the Shatt Al Arab, violating the agreement and essentially making it null & void. Iraq finally had enough after having, no avail, filed many complaints to the Akhoonds. That's when they decided to break away from the agreement too and commence a limited military operation designed at forcing Iran to the negotiating table. The Iranian revolutionary government started the problems with the secular Baathist regime therefor is guilty of everything that befell Iran from then on, so don't complain. You know the saying in Persian... people like you have been fed donkey brain!

Anonymous said...

Why "silly"? It is perfectly clear to see.

Anonymous said...

Retard 9:47 AM,

you never fail to impress me with the cheer stupidity of your attempts at distorting history and tell outright lies to give painfully weight to your weak propaganda. Indeed, how can any sane individual believe that mere vocal political hostility, no matter how displeasing it is to hear from one statesman to another, is justification for a full-scale, opportunistically thought and well-concerted plan at cutting entire resource-rich pieces of land from a bordering sovereign state (which you chose to call "limited military operation") that hasn't threatened its neighbor equally, not even with measurable deployment of forces ? post-Revolution Iran had pain even to keep hold of its military structure after the institutional breakup of the army and the purges/exiles that arose soon after, how could it even plan for war ? Hey looks like I just condemned the Islamic Regime, how could the "terrorist sympathizer ablah" that I am do such a thing, maybe some lowlife khak-bar-sar can explain it ?

Besides, how many more conflicts would we be witnessing if we based our rationale on your yet again ill and ludicrous way of perceiving interstate relations ? Netanhyahu threatens almost weekly to go it alone in attacking Iran, and there isn't a day that passes since the Geneva interim accord without KSA's Prince expressing his desire in taking matter into his own hands vis a vis Iran, no to mention Mossad-acknowledged assassinations on several academics not even directly related to the military. Should Iran start a total war with the two countries on that pretext by launching a hundred MRBMs before even declaring war ? The mere thought of such act seems as foolish as is is frightening, but it fits your logic on the Iran-Iraq issue perfectly, another proof of its broken nature. Do you genuienely find it that shocking that govts use internal levers in one another's political spectrum to push their agendas forward ? hasn't it been the very basis of cynical geopolitical maneuvering since the onset of Civilization ? Didn't the Shah even help quell the Dhofar Rebellion through this glaring episode of meddling, playing mercenary for its masters the US of A ? oh and you forgot to mention the many provocative statements Bani Sadr himself made against the Iraqi state in order to drag it into a skirmish and eventually a full scale war, in hopes of using the ensuing military defeat of the Islamic Repulic to gain further authority and move upwards the chain of command within the post-Revolution country. Too bad he underestimated the country's ability to fight back so decisively, just like the GCC leaders, Saddam and cheap and irrelevant anonymous morons such as yourself probably did in their time. Do you want me to give you a hand in strengthening your position buddy ? Underlining the IRI's continuity of vicious bellicose history after the Shah is piece of cake to me (even though they cannot come close to compete with the latter in its intensity), since I have no love for any of those regime, as I said many times on this blog while you conveniently chose to ignore it, a needed requirement to justify your repeated, systematic insults to my very name, you unintelligent clown.

So now we should have taken for granted warm praises from Saddam and believe every single one of his calculated friendly posturing with no second-thoughts to his true intentions, like Stalin literally gave up the Red Army's readiness after sealing the non-aggression pact with Ribbentrop ? you know you cannot teach me History, you failed miserably before, now you challenge me on pre-war context without even being able to address even a SINGLE counterclaim I made to your"facts" above, so why keep trying and drift even further from credibility ? You wanna talk about broken accords ? Remind me how many multi-billion dollar agreements were fulfilled by western countries after the fall of the Shah, no to mention current US support for the UAE's claims on Abu Musa, you idiot ?

Merry Xmas,

-A

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:47 is right. He explained the historical events very well.

After the revolution in Iran the Khomeini regime tried to export his influence into the region giving life to old Persian aspirations of reaching the Mediterranean and joining forces with the Assad regime in Syria and Hizbollah elements that were just born in Lebanon. Iran used religion to try and penetrate the region. In 1978-1980 the Iranians launched a series of attacks on Iraq, forcing the latter to respond. This continued for months eventually reaching the level of a full scale war the west was keen on having prolonged for as long as possible supporting both sides of the conflict in public and secret as the revenues of war were too dear to loose. Also was planned to reduce both economies of Iraq and Iran down to a desperate level, ensuring that Iraq would not be able to wage war against Israel. Khomeini refused many Iraqi attempts to halt the war but in the end he was forced to accept a ceasefire as his army fell apart under the successful attacks of the Iraqi army putting an end to this costly war on 08.08.1988.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAkOOD_gcmA

Anonymous said...

As you put it quite correctly, Iranian attacks on Iraq dated back to the Shah's regime as well, and the West's active and calculated support of one party over the other, would it be directly or via Gulf Proxies, is akin to a crime and testimony to their opportunistic geopolitical game as much as Khomeini's obsessive desire to prolonge the war for the reasons mentionned by several protagonists to this exchange including myself. Khomeini, Saddam, its Gulf allies and the US, USSR and Europe are all complicit in that tragic and highly destructive episode that ruined both countries in the end for years to come, both financially and on a human level. I adhere to that thesis and been saying it over and over again through my own references to established history and associated conjectures that I repeatedly reminded historian 9:47 who would probably not agree with your balanced view on the conflict, notwistanding your vocal appreciation of his account putting the entire blame on Iran alone in its entirety, excusing even the most undefensible actions from the US and the GCC that occured during that time in the process.

-A