From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: February 12, 2007 1:35:42 PM PST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Remember the "WMD" Barrels in Iraq Marked "Made in USA"?
http://agonist.org/sean_paul_kelley/20070211/
doesnt_look_like_farsi_to_me
Doesn't Look Like Farsi To Me?
Look, I admit, I don't know much about bomb-making. And I don't
know much about how factories label bombs. But I do know that in
Iran virtually all numbers were in the Farsi-Arabic script. They
were not and do not resemble our numbers. Now, I may be wrong, but
I have a feeling that the implication of this is that the round
captured in this photo is bogus. Color me very skeptical. Any
thoughts? Anyone want to google this and other aspects of the
story? Steve has the same idea. Couple questions spring to mind
first: is this pattern of numbers to be found on other similar
weapons, made by other countries? This Russian 82mm has the
markings etched in Russian. Are we sure that the Iranians use the
81mm round?
Just in case I really embarrass myself by asking a tremendously
stupid question, let me just add this (consider it troll
repellent): there are no stupid questions. The only stupid
questions are those not asked. Otherwise how are we supposed to learn.
Markings on the Zelzal 2 rocket are in Farsi. On a similar note,
Juan Cole crunches some numbers. Result: implausible. Looks like
the Zelzal 3 has markings in Farsi too. Here's an anti-ship missile
with Farsi on it.
Finally, here are Persian serial numbers etched onto a handgun.
Update: Ordnance pictured by the Telegraph is might not be from
Iran, but from Pakistan. It could be from any number of countries,
as one of our reader's notes at this point the proof is not
definitive either way.
Sean-Paul Kelley February 11, 2007 - 6:01pm
Sean-Paul Kelley's diary | printer friendly version |
( categories: Iran )
Gulf of Tonkin - LBJ feigns evidence to escalate Vietnam
In August of 1964, LBJ used some feigned intelligence to claim
multiple attacks on U.S. Destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin, off
Vietnam's coast, to support his power to escalate the Vietnam War..
A great write up here:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/essay.htm
Some 2 years later, after LBJ's 1964 re-election, at the end of
1966, there were some 6,000 dead American soldiers.. By the end of
the war, there were some 57,000..
LBJ, like our current "Emperor Chimpy" and his mentor, "Darth
Cheney, seem to be stoking up the feigned intelligence propaganda
machine to attack Iran.
Would someone explain to me why it is not in America's best
interests just to let the Theocrats of Iran isolate themselves and
we leave them alone?
This administration is hell-bent on warmongering. They seem to be
planting a steady drip, drip, drip of "evidence" the last 2 weeks
to sieze the power to attack Iran.
This self described "War President" is actually mad. Sadly, the MSM
is too afraid of their corporate paychecks to challenge being given
a CD of "pictures" of weapons supposedly imported from Iran.
Duhh! Who didn't know that the Shia of Iran were supporting the
Shia of Iraq! They've only been doing this for some 1600 years..
Chimpy and Darth are acting surprised! Duhh!
- de Puesto
Puesto February 11, 2007 - 7:43pm
trick is
Will any of the press corp ask about this tomorrow. It is enough to
at least pique their curiosity I would hope.
Donald Braden
www.debatablepolitics.com
debatablepolitics February 11, 2007 - 8:40pm
Took me 2 minutes
This ordnance is from Pakistan (Pakistan Ordnance Factories, to be
exact):
http://www.pof.gov.pk/products/81mmhem57.htm
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 8:58pm
Quick Correction
There seems to be a number of manufacturers for this class of
ordnance. I found a number of places where they manufacture this
type of mortar round, but NONE in Iran. Other than Pakistan, I've
found manufacturers mostly in the UK, but also in the US and Canada.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 9:06pm
Another piece of evidence
Seems like Iran has provided Hizbollah in the past 81mm rounds of
Chinese and Russian manufacture. Don't know why they would have
done that it they were producing the weapons themselves.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 9:18pm
Confirmed that Iran does use 81mm rounds
http://www.irandefence.net/showthread.php?t=8133
I've been trying to find pictures of the Hadid 81mm round on the
net. No luck yet. If this is an Iranian round, based on what I've
found so far, that would have to be it.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 9:30pm
$7755
http://www.pmulcahy.com/mortars/iranian_mortars.html
Theres some pictures here, but really have no idea if it is what
you are looking for:
http://www.irandefence.net/showthread.php?t=8215
oops February 11, 2007 - 9:37pm
I landed on that page too.
But they only have pictures of the launchers, not the rounds.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 9:43pm
Since HE means "high explosive"
wouldn't one expect the abbreviation to be the equivalent thereof
in Farsi?
luciftias February 11, 2007 - 9:32pm
Any one able to find pictures of Hadid 81mm rounds?
They are, based on the info at the irandefence.net link above,
Iranian copies of Israeli originals, and the only 81mm round
manufactured in Iran.
A well-identified picture of that ordnance would clarify the issue
once and for all, and I've been Googling like crazy for a while
without success.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 9:42pm
Sorry, but we're all wrong.
http://www.iranmilitaryforum.com/pictures/IMF/Missiles/12_850.jpg
They DO use latin markings.
So even though the picture shows 122mm rounds, not 81mm, I think I
have to at least give this picture the benefit of the doubt until
we find otherwise.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 9:48pm
Give this crowd the benefit of the doubt?
no.
luciftias February 11, 2007 - 9:59pm
Benefit of the doubt
ONLY until proof is found one way or the other. I personally jumped
the gun, thinking I had a match with the Pakistani ordnance. I'd
rather be sure before going further.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 10:15pm
Those are not Iranian numerals
Been there, seen them, daily.
Bucksouth February 11, 2007 - 9:55pm
there are more photos of
there are more photos of serial numbers of alleged iranian
armaments found in iraq here and here (both are from the LA times)
maybe drobert can do his magic on them to see where they might be
from.
upyernoz February 11, 2007 - 9:58pm
="http://agonist.org/sean_paul_kelley/20070211/
doesnt_look_like_farsi_to_me#comment-109006">
The only clear pictures of Iranian Ordnance I found were at
iranmilitaryforum.com. They have nothing which looks like those
pictures.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 10:28pm
here's a picture of the
here's a picture of the Iranian 81mm launcher - no shell though...
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php/photo/3786
billy68 February 11, 2007 - 10:02pm
Israel sold to Iran
60 mm: wt. about 2kg (0.25kg HE), max range about 1.7km;
81 mm: wt. about 3kg (0.55kg HE), max range about 5.3km;
120mm: wt. about 13kg (2.5kg HE), max range about 6km.
In the 1950s the Israeli company 'Solel-Boneh' and the Finnish firm
'Tampela' established a joint enterprise known as 'Soltam', for the
production of mortars. ('Tampela' later withdrew from the 'Soltam'
project, but the name remained). 'Soltam' produces 60-, 81-, 120-
and 160-mm mortars, for the IDF and for export; it has also sold
production licenses. Iran was among the firm's customers until the
1979 Islamic revolution. It is therefore possible that the mortars
confiscated from the Karine-A are identical to those used by the IDF.
http://www.waronline.org/en/analysis/pal_weapons.htm#mortars
candy February 11, 2007 - 10:04pm
The Hadid 81mm shell is a replica of the Israeli one
Based on my research (see comments above), the Hadid is a replica
of an Israeli original. That would fit your theory.
drobert_bfm February 11, 2007 - 10:16pm
login or register to post comments
No theory,
just found it interesting that years ago they sold to Iran.
candy February 11, 2007 - 10:26pm
Is English the international language
of bomb makers?
Just wondering...
"Death before being dishonored any more." - Col. Ted Westhusing
Jimbo92107 February 12, 2007 - 12:20am
Depends which kind of bombs really doesn't it
If we are talking about the kind of bombs that get dropped by
planes then I would say yes, English it is. If we are talking about
bombs disguised as cars or trucks then the answer is probably no.
Both cause the same thing.
I think now would be a good time for those who know how, to start
looking back on those stories of arms dumps being looted back at
the beginning of this smeg up.
Carib
Caribdude February 12, 2007 - 1:47am
login or register to post comments
Courtesy of John leCarre in "Absolute Friends" -
"I am a terrorist - I have a bomb, but no airplane".
Escher Sketch February 12, 2007 - 1:54am
Psst.
http://img278.imageshack.us/img278/6980/mor81highkb4.jpg
Found the pointer from this page.
Looks to my eye like the round is an exact match.
(You'll note that diomil.ir is the web address for the Iranian
Defence Industry Organization)
I'm trying to hit their site, but it's slower than malass,
molassus, mola - it's really, really slow.
"Political Islam is a dream or a nightmare, but not a sociological
reality." - Olivier Roy, Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah
JustPlainDave February 12, 2007 - 7:50am
Dave, from your link
Video: What is that thing? Something about an Iranian Mi-17 firing
a Noor/C-802. (whatever a Noor/C802 is?) It looks a lot nastier
than anything Saddam had!
Would US carriers be able to shoot it down before it hit them?
canuck February 12, 2007 - 11:21am
Wiki -
C-802
Range of the C-802 is thought to be 120 km, which essentially
includes most of the Persian Gulf from the Iranian shore, even if
their missile boats and subs stayed near their docks. This is their
back porch.
The Yingji-82 or YJ-82 (Chinese: 鹰击-82, literally "Eagle
Strike"; NATO reporting name: CSS-N-8 Saccade) is a Chinese anti-
ship missile first unveiled in 1989 by the China Haiying Electro-
Mechanical Technology Academy (CHETA), also known as the Third
Academy.
Since the Yingji-82 missile has a small radar reflectivity and is
only about five to seven meters above the sea surface when it
attacks the target, and since its guidance equipment has strong
anti-jamming capability, target ships have a very low success rate
in intercepting the missile.
The hit probability of the Yingji-82 is estimated to be as high as
98 percent. The Yingji-82 can be launched from airplanes, surface
ships, submarines and land-based vehicles, and has been considered
along with the US Harpoon missile as among the best anti-ship
missiles of its generation.[1] Its export name is the C-802.
Escher Sketch February 12, 2007 - 11:29am
Thanks
given that the Iranians have that kind of firepower, wouldn't it
make sense to sit down with them and come to an agreement before
someone lights a match and the Middle East goes up in smoke? I.e.
doesn't their possession turn Iran into a formidable foe, unlike
Iraq and Afghanistan who have mostly conventional arms?
canuck February 12, 2007 - 11:42am
The C-802 is the missile type that...
...allegedly struck and seriously damaged the Israeli missile boat
during the conflict with Hezbollah earlier this summer.
There's a whole lot of variables associated with the use of these
things. In general US ships could shoot them down before they hit
them - the question is whether they could in the numbers that are
likely to be launched. Typically what one does as the attacker is
try to saturate the defenders ability to intercept the missiles by
launching a lot of them at once (as well as launching from
unexpected directions, with surprise, etc. etc.).
JustPlainDave February 12, 2007 - 11:41am
It beggars belief
that America intentionally has a fleet in the Persian Gulf right
now as these tensions are ramping up - trapped in a bathtub with a
tiny drain, the only exit along an Iranian coast bristling with
missiles with an unknown, potentially devastating ability to
overwhelm American antimissile capabilities.
There are only a couple of explanations that make sense to me
strategically. The ugliest and most likely one seems to me to be
"sacrificing a rook". Some ruthless bastard thinks they need
American ships on the floor of the Persian Gulf to politically
justify the next step. A few thousand dead Americans would give the
hawks a free hand.
I think someone wants - needs - to lose ships, and I think they're
calculating they aren't going to lose many, and I also think
they're wrong.
Escher Sketch February 12, 2007 - 11:56am
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
