Safe Mode: On
Iran gets a big Solid (Missile item) from Pakistan

http://www.emetreport.com/Iran%20Gets%20a%20Big%20Solid%20From%20Pakistan.htmLoading Poll.....Iran recently test fired a two
stage, solid fuel ballistic missile, the Sejil II. This missile has a
range of 2,000 kilometers, and can reach Israel. Iran already has dozens
of liquid fuel missile with the same range, the Shahab 3. What makes
the Sejil II more dangerous is the fact that it can be fired on short
notice. The Shahab 3 takes several hours to get ready, as the liquid
fuel must be pumped into the missile. Israeli spies and photo satellites
can spot the Shahab 3s being fueled, allowing the Israeli anti-missile
systems to be placed on a higher degree of readiness. This makes it more
likely that the Iranian missiles would be intercepted.


The Sejil II is not really a
surprise. A year ago, Iran tested a new IRBM (Intermediate Range
Ballistic Missile) called the Sejil. This was a solid fuel missile. Two
years ago, Iran had a failed test of a solid fuel ballistic missile it
called "Ashura." The Sajil appeared to be the Ashura with a new name,
and modifications that make it work. Even then, the big question was,
who did they get the solid fuel manufacturing technology from? There are
many potential vendors (North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, China, or even
stolen from the West). The Ashura test failure last year involved some
problem with the second stage, not with the solid fuel rocket motors.
Iran has been manufacturing solid fuel for smaller rockets for over a
decade, but had not yet developed the technology to build larger, and
reliable, solid fuel rocket motors. Israel believes that Iran got the
advanced solid fuel technology from Pakistan.
For the last five years,
Iran has been producing Shahab 3 IRBMs. This missile is basically 1960s
technology, with the addition of GPS guidance. Russian and North Korean
missile technology has been obtained to make the Shahab 3 work. This has
resulted in a missile that apparently will function properly about 80
percent of the time, and deliver a warhead of about one ton, to a range
of some 1,700 kilometers, to within a hundred meters of where it was
aimed. By world standards, this is a pretty effective weapon. A solid
fuel version of this missile would be, if the solid fuel was of
reasonable quality, about ten percent more reliable than liquid fuel,
and easier to hide and launch.
Iran has continued to refine
the Shahab 3 design, and conduct test firings. Iran is believed to have
50-100 Shahab 3s, and is building about one a month. Israel appears to
be the main target. Iran has threatened Israel with destruction, rather
openly and for several years. Shahab 3's could be fired with high
explosive warheads, and hit, with enough accuracy, to kill mostly Jews,
and not Israeli Arabs or Palestinians.
Israel has threatened to
retaliate with nukes if Israel is hit with chemical or nuclear warheads.
Israel has Arrow anti-missile systems that can stop Shahab 3s, but only
a few at a time. If Iran launched a dozen or more Shahab 3s
simultaneously, some would get through. If Iran had several hundred
Shahab 3s, they could launch most of them at Israel, using high
explosive warheads, and do a lot of damage. Israel could respond with
its own Jericho II missile, but this system was designed for use with
nuclear weapons, and Israel apparently only has 20-30 of them. Israel
could respond with air strikes, and cruise missiles from submarines in
the Persian Gulf or Indian Ocean. But, again, this would appear as a
limited response to massive Iranian missile attacks. An Iranian attack
with nuclear warheads would kill a large number of Moslems, and even
radical Iran might be put off by that, because Israel would likely
respond in kind.
A large number of IRBMs
could also be used to intimidate nearby Arab countries, as these
missiles could damage oil production facilities. If Iran gets nuclear
weapons, it would take 5-10 years to develop the complex engineering
required to create a nuclear warhead that would survive the stresses of
missile launch, and detonate as intended over a distant target. Russia
or China might provide such engineering secrets, but given the warlike
pronouncements and radical politics of the Iranians, probably not.


Added: Jun-11-2012 Occurred On: Jun-11-2012
By: Ray Kalm
In:
World News, Other Middle East
Tags: Pakistan, and, Iran
Location: Pakistan (load item map)
Views: 2310 | Comments: 34 | Votes: 0 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • iran pakistan? i dont understand the poll?

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Comment of user 'MrScabs' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • LET'S MAKE SOME GLASS.

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Comment of user 'Hazel_Nut' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @Hazel_Nut I think Pakistan does. In Iran that will get you the death penalty.

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • Comment of user 'Hazel_Nut' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • Comment of user 'MrScabs' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • I doubt that the tech came from Pakistan (if it did, it'd be a very VERY big deal, and the US and China would punish Pakistan for it), more likely from North Korea. In the 90's, North Koreans somehow acquired the tech for the Soviet R-27 SLBM, which is a step forward from the SCUD-tech they've been using.. then again the article mentions that this missile is solid-fueled, and the R-27 is still liquid-fueled, so maybe I'm wrong

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Iran nukes Isreal, Isreal will do the same ten fold to them. Iran knows this because they are not stupid to spite what some fools think. Who should be more afraid, the country that can take out a large city, or the country that can take out a country? The country with the capability to shoot down missiles before they are remotely near their targets or, the country that is 30 years behind their neighbors militarily?

    We shit our pants when Russia was arming, they shit theirs when we were. Guess w More..

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

    • @autowolf

      "Guess what, every one just wanted to live."

      If you believe the jihadists, mutual self-preservation (the foundation of MAD) is not a consideration anymore. All those virgins are just waiting for a new martyr. The worst possible enemy is a crazy enemy.

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @copperdog3 sorry...thumb diem was accident. I agree with you 100%. This new enemy worldwide must be destroyed...yet they get help from out side to gain control of new areas.....this will be a long deadly war.

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • pathetic article written by a 8th grader..

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Lets hope Iran is able to arm some of these with nukes and get a few dozen launched towards Israel. There are plenty in the US like me pulling for them!!!

    Posted Jun-12-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • so what? Iran should be ready to defend them against the zionist regime and the US

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (-1) | Report

    • @Blix Well sure. Problem is that these weapons are not designed for defense. They're first strike weapons.

      They remind me of the SCUD missiles Iraq dropped all over neighborhoods in Kuwait during the first gulf war. Designed to kill large amounts of people in their homes.

      If they were a good defense weapon, you could bet that Isreal would have a bunch of them. Yet they only have 20-30 while Iran is building hundreds. That doesn't jive with only using them for defense.

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @kajidono

      So i guess that Israels Nukes and the US Tomahawks are only defensive weapons?

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @Blix Nukes are a deterrent weapon. They are first strike weapons, but the whole point of having them is that everyone knows you have them too. Then nobody uses them.

      Tomahawks are more like a kamikaze drone with a warhead strapped on that we can drop in someone's shirt pocket. The UK has them too.

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • Comment of user 'MrScabs' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @kajidono

      then Iran should build their own Nukes and Israel will know that there is nothing to worry because nobody uses them. great, they can be friends

      Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

      (3) | Report

  • I'm sure Israel is shaking.

    Posted Jun-11-2012 By 

    (-1) | Report

  • Comment of user '1812' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!