Irã tem como se defender de Israel?

[FOXTROT]

Exato, penso que o Irã não tem planos de iniciar uma ofensiva, perderia o pouco apoio diplomático que tem e conferiria legitimidade a uma retaliação/intervenção!

Suas forças podem repelir qualquer país do Golfo de uma intervenção sem apoio EUA/OTAN e mesmo com apoio, essa intervenção seria custosa em vidas e $$$$.

NO caso saudita, penso que ele devem se preocupar e muito com os mísseis iranianos, porque mesmo sem CEP comparável aos ocidentais os estragos seriam enormes, principalmente na industria petrolífera!

Ainda bem que tudo caminha para uma resolução do problema nuclear de forma pacífica, espero que o Irã consiga levantar o embargo armamentista e reequipe sua força aérea e sistemas antiaéreos!

Saudações

[Bourne]

Será a maioria virada geopolítica da região desde 1979 ou só delírio do autor. Tirar o irã do isolamento vai deixar muitos vizinhos do outros lado do Golfo muito irritados. E a arma do poder do petróleo não tem mais como antes. Não precisa nem ser aliado. Apenas sair do isolamento e ter boas relações com o resto do mundo irá contrapor os outros países da região.

Aguardemos.

Mr Obama’s Iran problem

Congress is not helping the president deal with the Islamic Republic
Jan 18th 2014 | From the print edition

Fonte: http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... an-problem

NEAR the end of George W. Bush’s presidency, his inner circle twice debated whether diplomacy or American air strikes were the best way to stop Middle Eastern foes from building a nuclear bomb. In both debates, involving Syria and Iran respectively, Robert Gates, the defence secretary, argued that Mr Bush could afford to try talking first without sacrificing his credibility. “I suspect no one in the world doubts this administration’s willingness to use force,” Mr Gates told Mr Bush in 2007, with more than a touch of understatement.

Now Iran is again causing angst in Washington. Barack Obama faces acute, bipartisan scepticism in Congress, after his envoys joined other world powers in brokering an interim nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic. This is due to take effect on January 20th, easing international sanctions in exchange for slowing Iran’s nuclear work, and buying time for a more comprehensive deal. At the time of writing 59 of 100 senators say they back a proposal to hold extra sanctions over Iran’s head, despite warnings from Mr Obama that if Congress votes for new sanctions Iran may abandon the talks. That means Senate sceptics are not far from the two-thirds majority they need to override Mr Obama’s threat of a veto. (The Republican-controlled House of Representatives strongly backs tougher sanctions, either because members think the Iranians are bluffing about walking out, or because their favoured Iran strategy involves regime change.) Team Obama has let rip, asserting that passing new sanctions—even ones whose bite is suspended—will wreck talks, shatter international unity over Iran and trigger a “march toward war”. A National Security Council staffer said that if some members of Congress want military action against Iran, “they should be upfront with the American public and say so.”

Some of the forces at work have changed little since 2007. Friends such as Israel and allies such as Saudi Arabia still believe that Iran is a rogue power that will always break nuclear promises. Many members of Congress sincerely loathe Iran’s regime, partly because it sponsors terrorism and tortures dissidents, but also, perhaps, because of a sense that Iran bested America in the battle for influence in post-Saddam Iraq. If the Iranian government of President Hassan Rohani presents a smiling face to the world, many American lawmakers see that as a trick or as a sign that existing tough sanctions have worked, making it imperative to keep a boot on the regime’s neck, while reminding Iran that fresh cheating will be punished.

Another constant is domestic politics, especially in a mid-term election year. An influential pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has been lobbying members of Congress to keep the pressure on Iran. So have members of the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (often known by the Persian acronym MEK), a group with a violent past whose opposition to the Iranian regime has nonetheless earned it allies in Congress. Lastly, cynicism remains a lodestar. Democratic leaders in the Senate are not rushing to put plans for extra sanctions to a vote, and insiders say that suits some senators very well. For such opportunists, co-sponsoring a sanctions bill that goes nowhere is an ideal outcome: it avoids hard foreign-policy trade-offs, while warding off attack ads that call them soft on Iran.

Yet at least one big thing is new: a widespread belief, certainly among Republicans, that Mr Obama is in exactly the opposite position to Mr Bush. Plenty of people in the world doubt his willingness to use force, even to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb on his watch. If Congress is willing to risk scuppering talks with Iran at this early stage, a big part of the explanation is that Mr Obama is suffering a crisis of presidential credibility. That crisis dates back, most acutely, to his failure to secure congressional approval for promised strikes on Syria for using chemical weapons. Put bluntly, Washington critics think Mr Obama talks endlessly and wields only sticks small enough to be delivered by drone.

Putin and Assad take him seriously

Obama supporters inside and outside government offer two big counter-arguments about credibility. First, they offer a different interpretation of what happened over Syria last year. At the very moment that Washington was focused on Mr Obama’s apparent weakness, they say, the people who counted—Presidents Bashar Assad of Syria and Vladimir Putin of Russia—found talk of American strikes credible enough—and frightening enough—to dismantle Syria’s chemical arsenal.

Second, it is argued, when such allies as the Saudis or Israelis talk about American credibility, they often mean that they want American troops to fight and die to advance their own foreign- policy interests. In their bleakest moods, American officials accuse the Gulf monarchies of being willing to hold the coats of the last American soldiers to fall on their behalf, but not much more.

In public, Israel and the Gulf monarchies say their fear is that a nuclear deal with Iran cannot work. In private, Obama-backers suggest, such Middle Eastern allies are almost as frightened of the opposite outcome: that a nuclear accord might work, paving the way for Iran to resume its pre-revolutionary role as a Shia regional power and a counterweight to the influence of the mostly-Sunni Gulf monarchies. There are few signs of Congress pondering these questions very hard. “There aren’t five senators who have really thought through what it means for the geopolitical balance of power, if we do reach a [nuclear] deal,” growls a senior figure on Capitol Hill.

Much simpler for Congress to cover its back while planning for failure. Overall, Mr Obama’s handling of foreign policy is far from flawless: his approach to Syria is a mess, for instance. But with Iran he is right to try talking, not least because international unity has probably peaked. He could do with more help at home—but is unlikely to get it.

[rodrigo]

Why is Iran building a dummy replica of a U.S. aircraft carrier?

American analysts say the vessel is a nonworking mock-up of a U.S. Nimitz-class aircraft carrier.

Iran is building a mock-up of an American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, possibly with the intention of blowing it up for propaganda value, according to a report in the New York Times.

The vessel is being constructed in the Gachin shipyard, near Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf. United States intelligence analysts first noticed it last summer from satellite photos of Iranian military installations.

The ship has the same distinctive shape and style of the Navy’s Nimitz-class carriers, as well as the Nimitz’s number 68 neatly painted in white near the bow. Mock aircraft can be seen on the flight deck.

American officials said that the mock-up has no nuclear propulsion system and is only about two-thirds the length of a typical 1,100-foot-long Navy carrier. Intelligence officials do not believe that Iran is capable of building an actual aircraft carrier.

“Based on our observations, this is not a functioning aircraft carrier; it’s a large barge built to look like an aircraft carrier,” said Cmdr. Jason Salata, a spokesman for the Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, across the Persian Gulf from Iran.

Intelligence analysts believe that the vessel is something that Iran could tow to sea, anchor and blow up — while filming the whole thing to make a propaganda point. Iran has previously used barges as targets for missile firings during training exercises, filmed the episodes and then televised them on the state-run news media, Navy officials said.

The U.S. officials cited a photograph taken on late February in Bandar Abbas and a brief description in Persian of the vessel on a website for Iran’s Ministry of Industry, Mines and Trade. Iran has not taken any steps to hide the mock-up from Western satellites.

The New York Times was unable to reach Iranian Navy officials for comment.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.581161

[FOXTROT]

Drone sionista abatido no Irã!

http://g1.globo.com/mundo/noticia/2014/ ... srael.html

Saudações

[rodrigo]

Ponto para a defesa aérea iraniana.

[LeandroGCard]

Ponto para a defesa aérea iraniana.

Para quem até já capturou intacto um drone americano secreto, abater um israelense é até um retrocesso .


Leandro G. Card

[Marechal-do-ar]

Para quem até já capturou intacto um drone americano secreto, abater um israelense é até um retrocesso .

E até hoje me pergunto que m**** os americanos fizeram para perder um drone daquele jeito, compraram um radio sem criptografia no hobbyking.com?

[LeandroGCard]

E até hoje me pergunto que m**** os americanos fizeram para perder um drone daquele jeito, compraram um radio sem criptografia no hobbyking.com?

Não duvide desta possibilidade .

Leandro G. Card

[Marechal-do-ar]

Eu gostaria de acreditar que foi um trabalho profissional mas no fundo sei que essa é uma possibilidade bem real...

[Viktor Reznov]

Why is Iran building a dummy replica of a U.S. aircraft carrier?

American analysts say the vessel is a nonworking mock-up of a U.S. Nimitz-class aircraft carrier.

Iran is building a mock-up of an American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, possibly with the intention of blowing it up for propaganda value, according to a report in the New York Times.

The vessel is being constructed in the Gachin shipyard, near Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf. United States intelligence analysts first noticed it last summer from satellite photos of Iranian military installations.

The ship has the same distinctive shape and style of the Navy’s Nimitz-class carriers, as well as the Nimitz’s number 68 neatly painted in white near the bow. Mock aircraft can be seen on the flight deck.

American officials said that the mock-up has no nuclear propulsion system and is only about two-thirds the length of a typical 1,100-foot-long Navy carrier. Intelligence officials do not believe that Iran is capable of building an actual aircraft carrier.

“Based on our observations, this is not a functioning aircraft carrier; it’s a large barge built to look like an aircraft carrier,” said Cmdr. Jason Salata, a spokesman for the Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, across the Persian Gulf from Iran.

Intelligence analysts believe that the vessel is something that Iran could tow to sea, anchor and blow up — while filming the whole thing to make a propaganda point. Iran has previously used barges as targets for missile firings during training exercises, filmed the episodes and then televised them on the state-run news media, Navy officials said.

The U.S. officials cited a photograph taken on late February in Bandar Abbas and a brief description in Persian of the vessel on a website for Iran’s Ministry of Industry, Mines and Trade. Iran has not taken any steps to hide the mock-up from Western satellites.

The New York Times was unable to reach Iranian Navy officials for comment.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.581161

O Irã o está fazendo pra em breve poder vender pra consumo interno o fato de terem um porta aviões. Já fizeram isso antes quando desfilaram um punhado barris soldados uns nos outros e falaram que era o S300 nacionalizado. Os Aiatolás vivem de inventarem mentiras pra consumo interno.

[cabeça de martelo]

Mas esse "modelo" já não tinha sido explodido pelos próprios Iranianos?