gooooooooooooooooooD

And what about FIGA?

Two seperate sentences to show the ties between Russia are commercial and military…

And who could they get superior aircraft and missiles from that would actually want an old model F-14 and Phoenixs?

And the HAWK is better than the TOR in some roles. I realise you think just because something was made in america it must be better than everything else in every role, don’t assume I just think the opposite of you.
(BTW I also think the F-14 is better than the Super Hornet. It certainly had more growth potential…)

The Mig-29s they had were crappy downgraded export models, of a plane designed for short range point defence and designed to operate within a GCI network. F-14s had the radar guy in the back seat and can continue to fight after all the ground radar installations have started getting cagey over ARM strikes. Yes of course the F-14s are better in such a case. Upgrade them to SMT and give them R-77s and they become much better able to operate alone, but there are more F-14s than Mig-29s in Iranian service AFAIK. Numbers in service are important too.

You are talking about technology transfer. Having a digital wristwatch instead of a wind up analog wristwatch somehow effects the user how? One has new technology and the other technology that is centuries older… the result of such technology transfer is that they can both tell the time… big deal!

Real technology transfer is teaching the man to fish, not giving him a fish and letting him work out for himself how to get his own.

Being able to make the technology yourself AND be able to incorporate the new ideas contained within the new technology to other projects is the core of technology transfer. Otherwise it isn’t technology transfer, it is merely the aquisition of a thing you can use but don’t really understand.

We are not talking about selling guns here though. A SAM is a lock for his door. He might barracade it to make the (self appointed) world police’s job of going in there and roughing him up harder, but who cares. Who gave the world police that job anyway. They don’t have to go in his property and bother him. He might yell and make threats towards his neighbour, but his neighbour is the biggest gun nut in the region and well able to look after his own. He is reported to have almost as many nukes as Britain anyway. If they are in case an enemy gets nukes then they are ready. If they are not I am sure a deal could be reached where no arab or persian country will aquire nukes of Israel gives up theirs.

Hahahahahahaha… it weighs 32 tons!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And in what way would HAWK SAMs fitted to F-14s allow the Iranians to invade any country… and if that is a bad think WTF has the US been doing the last 150 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, they might extract the HE from the warhead and concoct a deadly poison that they could put in the water supplies of their enemies…. Damn… my tinfoil hat keeps slipping… anyone got tape?

Most of Irans threats to get rid of Israel were in the 80s. They don’t even nearly have the forces to fight anywhere near Israel… the best they could do would be invade Iraq or Afghanistan. That would be something the Americans would love… they could blame those two FUs on Iran.

Iran signed the NPT and is a member of the international organisation monitoring nuclear materials. Both things Israel has yet to do. And what do you mean by cheating? When? If they had the US would actually have somethign real to whine about instead of “we think they might be developing nuclear weapons”.

The offer to enrich nuclear fuel in a foreign country doesn’t make sense if they are building power stations to be independant of oil. Fuel rod supplies might suddenly get embargoed if the price of oil is too high or too low. Would the US accept such international leverage on its electric power grid? I doubt it.

What point? That Arab, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein can’t be trusted therefore Persian leader of Iran cant be trusted either, but leader of Israel is OK with hundreds of nukes… yeah… great point.

Rubbish. That is your logic. WTF did the people who sold Iraq anthrax think he was going to do with it… the guy had a history of gassing people. The Americans and Soviets claimed they kept cultures of such things to develop cures yet both simply used them for weapons development instead. Why would they expect him to do any different.

Hahahahahaha… so what did the Iraqis do with the Scuds the Soviets sold them? Make handbags? Please explain to me what type of SAM motor will throw a weapon the size of a Scud about 300km.

My point is that if Iran and Russia are so buddy buddy why go to the cost and complexity of converting HAWKs into Phoenixs when the supply of Iranian HAWKS is just as dry as their supply of Phoenixs. Why not just buy some R-33s, or some R-77s for that matter? Why waste time and money converting SAM into AAMs when the complexity of converting AAMs into AAMs is much less… except where the relationship is actually purely commercial and not really very friendly. The Russians might sell them R-33s but might want to sell Mig-31s with them. Equally the Iranians might want to make their own R-33s, and without a Mig-31 purchase I doubt the Russians would be offering a price Iran could seriously afford to hand over R-33 technology.

Look up the word Jargon. Every field has its own jargon. Within the defence community technology transfer has a meaning that is different from the standard general dictionary meaning. If a contract includes technology transfer that means more than just getting the product. Look up the threads about the US and their purchase of the JSF. How can they demand more technology transfer? I guess the US denying them the software codes is OK because in your definition of technology transfer they are getting full technology transfer… they are getting the planes delivered aren’t they? What they aren’t getting is real technology transfer. They get to use somthing they don’t really own because if they want to integrate new weapons or sensor pods or jammers etc etc they have to go to the US and ask for permission to alter the software to allow the jet to use it. It is like buying a computer but only being a user instead of an administrator. You want to install media player 10 then take it back to the shop…

Same problem with the knives. They will do their jobs and defend targets, but they will remain a customer of someone for SAMs. They wont be able to develop their own SAMs to defend themselves.

Planes that were violating their airspace is not attack, it is defend.
Or why didn’t WWIII start when the Soviets attacked the US by shooting down Francis Gary Powers.

No scuds used in the last 10 years in Iraq mate… if you saw any you were dreaming.

When a coaltion builds up on your border with the express purpose of invading you that is called preemptive self defence isn’t it?

Every country on the planet reverse engineers and borrow technology. You thin the US invented the Wheel?

It is not rocket science… the US saw how effective the ZSU-23-4 was and tried to emulate it using their own components.

Not really. Highly precision made cenrifuges… and lots of them, but it was done in 1945 without computers, or even calculators…

It is a processed material, not a technology. Or are you going to say the carbon fibre in my bike is an advanced technology and I can’t ride over any international borders without permission?

Hehehehe violation of technology transfer… sounds like this enriched Uranium is fkd… :rolleyes:

Please keep your personal opinions of me to yourself. I am not here to be judged or analysed.

So the attempts to block the sale of TOR was just for show I guess…

BTW your strike warfare doesn’t seem to be getting much use in Afghanistan or Iraq. Is that why you are going to attack Iran?

Hi Garry, since your Air Force has withdrawn all the Skyhawks, do you know if it is selling them; i would buy one of the relics for my personal collection;
Best Regards

Okay…so, according to MiG-23MLD and Accipiter, F-15s are routinely downed in air-to-air combat, and Hitler isn’t dead. Got it. :rolleyes:

Sure, and let’s go to check all those US kills in Vietnam, not to mention 352(or so) Kills by Erich Hartmann (too much!!!!! ehhhhhh).
Ah, did the German report the sinking of the Bismark or was it only British propaganda?

First,declassify of J-10,then ASAT test,later FC-1 induction with WS-13 and future PLAAF WZ-10. Hahahaha… I like the year of 2007 😉

But the WZ-10 looks a bit small,like the size of Italian Augusta

Italian Mangusta, cazzo!!!

Bravo Martinez!!!!!!!!!!!

You don’t need to fight, to prove you’re right!!!

The trouble is that if the US did sell Finland the missiles, Russia would see it as provocative, and probably start putting the screws on Finland! There are of course alternatives, which would probably be more politically acceptable, such as the Storm Shadow or KEPD-350. The real question may be where all of this is going – are we heading back into the dark days of the ’80s, with IRBMs being seen as political cards? A lot of us remember those days, and are none too keen to revisit them (as good as the music was :diablo: )!

The music was not so bad!!
Remember the “Big suckers” with “out of the Trap”, The DEVO, and also the best: “ta ta ta tatata ta ta I’ve got the power!!”

What you mean with retarded?
Maybe delayed?