Honestly… i think the whole thing is doomed. Reading about problems they are having, the correction would require some serious redesign before we even get to the engines … the cost will go trough the roof.

Well for the first one if i was ON the flight caption would be..

… AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!:eek:

Is F35 officially entered in F-X competition???

Maybe you should read your own Australian Press…………..As Australian Troops die by the hand a Iranian Weapons.

Iran boosts Taliban’s artillery

Font Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Michael Smith | March 02, 2009
Article from: The Australian
IRAN is supplying the Taliban in Afghanistan with surface-to-air missiles capable of destroying a helicopter, according to US intelligence sources.

They believe the Taliban want to use the SA-14 Gremlin missiles to launch a “spectacular” attack against coalition forces in Helmand in the southwest of the country, where insurgents claim to be gaining the upper hand.

Although coalition helicopters operating in southern Afghanistan are equipped with defensive systems to deflect an attempted strike, the SA-14 can evade such counter-measures.

It was a shoulder-held SA-14 supplied by Iran that Iraqi insurgents used to shoot down a Lynx helicopter over Basra in May 2006. Five British service personnel died in that attack, including Wing Commander John Coxen and Flight Lieutenant Sarah-Jayne Mulvihill, the first British servicewoman killed in action since World War II.

Although the Iranians are not natural supporters of the Taliban, they have been willing to assist them in the past to prevent Britain and the US gaining influence in the region. Special forces have previously intercepted arms shipments from Iran that would have helped the Taliban intensify a roadside bombing campaign that has killed coalition troops over the past 18 months.

However, coalition forces became aware of the presence of SA-14s only two weeks ago when parts from two of them were discovered during a US operation in western Afghanistan.

“The weapons are out there and we thought it was only a matter of time before they got one or two into the south,” said a defence source. “A Taliban spectacular against British or American troops would reinforce an increasing view among ordinary Afghans that the Taliban are gaining the upper hand.”

In the past eight months, small arms and rocket-propelled grenade attacks on British helicopters in Helmand have increased.

Reports of the Iranian involvement in Afghanistan came as Pakistan yesterday said it had forced Taliban militants out of Bajaur, one of Pakistan’s seven federally administered tribal areas along the Afghan border, and boasted of major gains in another border region.

The six-month battle with Islamist insurgents in the remote Bajaur district was seen as pivotal to Pakistan’s fight against al-Qa’ida and the Taliban, after bombings killed more than 1600 people in the area in less than two years.

Nuclear-armed Pakistan’s Government launched the Bajaur offensive in August amid heavy criticism from US and Afghan officials, who said Islamabad was not doing enough to stop militants crossing into Afghanistan to attack foreign troops.

Heavy artillery and helicopter gunships have pounded Bajaur in a bid to flush out militant bases, killing hundreds. “We think that we have secured this agency (district),” said Major General Tariq Khan, the commander of Pakistani forces fighting in Bajaur. “They have lost. They have lost their cohesion out here.”

A Pakistani army colonel said the military had also beaten back militants in the neighbouring tribal area of Mohmand, also on the Afghan border, where security forces have been waging lower-level offensives.

Pakistan is facing increased US pressure to clamp down on militant hideouts, with US President Barack Obama deploying an extra 17,000 troops to Afghanistan as part of a major shift in its action against global terrorist networks from Iraq to south Asia.

There was no independent verification of the Bajaur victory, but the Taliban see the district as a key strategic district they cannot afford to lose, analysts have said. To the east is Swat, where the Taliban have called an indefinite ceasefire, while on the Afghan side is a long frontier with the Taliban hotspot of Kunar province

This is fist i hear that Iran and Taliban are colaborating.. if anything they have been enemies for 20 years… but strange times make strange bed fellows. I can see how Iran would benefit from chaos in Afganistan.. its in their interest that neither NATO or Taliban get decisive victory. They are not fans of taliban, yet US controled country on its border is a threat.

Like i said, i do not defend Iran, nor do i particulary like them.. i just try to look at things trough “fair and balanced ” prism on each issue 🙂

Scoot i never put words into your mouth… the reply was not to you 😉

Regarding the support of the Terrorist statement.. it comes once again to that old addage that one mans terrorist is anothers hero, freedom fighter or what you will. There is no doubt that iran is supporting various factions in its neigborhood , be it Lebanon or Iraq, its undeniable fact. But the reason is not simply to wave fist to the west and US.. on few fronts both Iran and US are fighting on the same side.. Iran dislikes taliban as much are NATO, it also sided and supported Bosnian muslims and Kosovo albanians at the same side Nato did.

However there are few major sticking points.. Israel being the main. You act as Iran is the only country to believe that Israel has no right to exist… News flash.. its one thing common to EVERY arab country in the world (yes iranians are not arabs i know) Soudies , Syrians ,Jordanise,Yemenise ,UAE, and even Egypt would all like to see Israel wiped of the map.. and while Iranians often mouth about it, they never actually attempted.. many of those arabs i mentioned did.. and more than once… yet some of them are now customers of US advanced defense tech.. explain that one to me???

The second major issue, as always is found in religion.. as it tends to be often. Most of the groups Iran is suporting or financing are Shi;tes , and i anemosity between Sunis have been going on before Columbus made mistake and sailed too far west (Joke :D) . Iranians feel obliged towards their fellow belivers who they see opresed .. and one could argue that Shiite minority outside Iran has had fairly though few decades. During Iran Iraq war they sided with Iran which led sadam to Gas them.. he killed thousands and in Iran fall out of this affected attitude towards US who were supporting Saddam. Then during D.Storm, us agitated Shiites against Saddam, liberated them.. then promptly widrew and let the Saddam gass them again. I mean do not tell me you can not see how Shiites in Iraq would be rather antagonised by US yet again coming into their lands… considering past experienced. So they rebel .. and then Iran comes to their support seeing how they see them self very close to one another. I mean if Iran was offering blanket support to all Islamic nutjobs and terrorist.. would they not also support Taliban. ??? I think you will find that all , how you put it, Proxies of Iran, actually have legitimate ties to Iran, and its not hard to imagine why they receive support.

Finaly Let me get one thing straight.. i have 0 sympathy for Iranian or any other Hard line Islamic regime.. and unlike you (unless you served in combat in which case i applolgise) ive seen first hand what those nutjobs are capable of doing, ive seen headless corpses , cut off hands , remains of small childern cut in half by sabers.. and ive also seen few of the *******s captured and get what they deserved .. some where from Saudi Arabia, few from yemen, but most were from Iran. So like i said i have no sympathy for regime.. and i would not like for them to get the bomb. Thats right I DO NOT WANT TO SEE NUCLEAR IRAN. May come as shocker to you.

That said.. i am looking at the situation from objective and neutral point of view… and there is no legal, moral or any kind of objection that can be made against Iran and its pursuit of nuclear arms. Nor do I think they would be any more dangerous and at risk of getting into wrong hands as those Nukes in Pakistan. In fact id rate Pakistan much worse, considering its inteligence agency and its ties to taliban

They have history, tradition, technology , Aircraft and most importantly the usefulness of a additional carriers. What they do not have is Euros.

Your opinion of Iran is cartoonish deluded and absolutely idiotic. Despite its “Islamic” leadership 80% of the country are moderates. You think that whole country rides cammels, wears turbans and spends its days thinking how best to kill them self in the name of god.

It would be like me using Jerry Falwell to paint picture of every single American, to say that you are all racist intolerant gun toating nuts who belive that god will come and destroy the world saving you the righteous ones… how is that BS any different from Islam. Its both insane… and for the last 8 years you had a nutjob in whitehouse who belived that bit about god coming and raising dead and ending the world… how is this BS any better???

Let me spell it for you.. Leadership of Iran is neither insane or suicidal,, they may preach out religious BS and use it for control of the masses but not one of them wants to be a “martyr”… they have pretty good here on earth and can get all the virgins their harts desire ;)… Just like conmunist dictators dont practise whole “take only what you need” bit, or just like democratic leaders are not always practising the fine details of “majority rules”.

There are no “proxies” Iran would ever give one of its few Nukes, that is just BS scaremongoring propaganda… and neither are they crazy enough to start nuclear war with Israel.. despite Islamofobic bs you have been led to believe. Id suggest bit less of Fox news and bit more National Geographic.. you might be surprised about people of Iran.

Iran was never an agresor only a victim of its neighbors. 1941 It was attacked both by USSR and UK because it was “too close to germany” .. funny it was never closer then say Spain was.. yet Franko was not attacked because Franko has no oil. 1953 Uk and USA overturn hugely propular democratic president who dared to nationalize oil… OUTRAGE!! Shah is put in place and institues an oppressive dicatorship using his secret service to kill critic Stalin style. Finally people get fed up and in desparation choose another evil since it was only other avaliable option at the time.

US then continues to meddle into Iranian affairs culminating with Iran Iraq war where US proxy OPENLY used WMDs to kill quarter of a million people.. by all UN and neutral reports IRAN NOT ONCE during entire conflict responded with WMDs. Now think about that for a bit. Not even response to Saddams WMD usage… and you are trying to convince us all they would start shooting of nukes as soon as they get them. Pure and utter BS. People like you were saying exactly same thing about N.Korea.. well Kim has had a bomb for a while now… still not a single fired off or given to “proxies”

Best advice i can give you is put down your gun rack, jump into you prickup truck, drive to local airport and see the world. Its not full of dragons as you seem to think.

You have no idea what you are talking about………

An intelligent counter argument, substantiated by proofs facts and citations. Typical of Prof Scooter :rolleyes: