The following is a partial transcript of an interview with former IRGC Commander (now advisor for military affairs to the Supreme Leader of Iran) which which aired on Channel 2, Iranian TV on November 12, 2006:
General Yahya Rahim Safavi: The Shahab 3 missiles, which were fired with a cluster warhead, deviated a few meters [from the target]. Considering the extent of the explosion, a few meters is…
Interviewer: Is this within the norms of missile operations?
General Yahya Rahim Safavi: Naturally, a 20-30 meter [deviation] is acceptable, because the force of the explosion and the radius of the shockwaves exceed 20 or 30 meters.
[…]
The Americans and the countries that have satellite systems – especially those that monitor Iran’s airspace or the atmosphere – can see our missile launchings clearly – not the radar systems, but the satellite systems of the various countries. They see both the launching and landing points. It is completely obvious to them that these were real maneuvers. In fact, the maneuvers were carried out with combat weapons, and were not just for show.
[…]
The Americans have many weaknesses. In fact, in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they clearly displayed their strengths and weaknesses. We have planned our strategy precisely on the basis of their strengths and weaknesses.
[…]
We don’t see any motivation among the American forces in Iraq. They are very cowardly. There are even scenes from Iraq in which they are seen crying. When their commanders encounter a problem, they burst into tears. We did not see such spectacles in the eight years of the Iran-Iraq war. I can therefore say that our advantage over the foreign forces is moral and human.
Of course, in accordance with the technology that we have or that we are able to obtain from other countries, we have equipped our armed forces with the most advanced anti-aircraft, anti-helicopter, anti-tank, and anti-ship weapons. The equipment used in these wargames was only part of what we have. We never reveal all our cards to the enemy. We used only a small sample of our personnel and equipment.
[…]
Interviewer: General, the viewers asked whether the IRGC has the ability to conduct active and defensive electronic warfare.
General Yahya Rahim Safavi: I’m not at liberty to talk about some things, because they are highly classified. But I can say that our communications systems are very advanced. We can communicate with all our units. Even at the brigade level, we maintain five levels of contact and communication with our units. We make full use of satellite systems, and can handle the enemy’s satellite systems. We can disrupt the satellite systems of the enemy. We can disrupt the communication networks of the enemy.
[…]
Interviewer: General, the viewers asked many questions about the destructive power of the Shahab 2 and 3 missiles. If it is not secret, please tell us.
General Yahya Rahim Safavi: The Shahab 3 missile has a cluster warhead, and consequently, its destructive power exceeds several kilometers, because the warhead spreads into bomblets. [It can be used] against large bases, large concentrations of people, aircraft carriers… even against aircraft carriers, because it explodes from above, so it can completely destroy an aircraft carrier with its planes.
As for the Shahab 2 missile – its warhead carries approximately 900 kilograms of explosives. It has about 20 tons of fuel. This missile uses 12-20 tons of fuel, and its warhead carries 900 kilograms of explosives, so it has very great explosive power.
Interviewer: Does the Shahab series include a Shahab 4, Shahab 5, and so on?
General Yahya Rahim Safavi: I would rather not answer that.
[…]
As I pointed out, starting a war with another country or attacking it is currently not part of our plans or strategy. But if the Zionist regime or the Americans make problems for us and organize attacks against us… The Zionist regime is about 1,300 kilometers from our centers. If we have a missile range of 2,000 kilometers, it is only natural that a distance of 1,300 kilometers is within this range.
I’d like to say something else. If the Zionist regime was defeated by a group of Hizbullah in Lebanon… After all, Hizbullah is a small group in Lebanon, which defeated the Israeli army in this 33-day war. How can Israel withstand a great nation that numbers 70 million, 90 percent of which are Shiites? As for the IRGC and the Basij – we have 10 million Basij members and strong Revolutionary Guards. There is no comparison. Therefore, I do not believe that the Zionists would even dream of threatening us. If they do, they will face the greatest danger to their very existence. I say again: We are interested in peace and quiet in the Middle East. We have no policy of attacking [anyone], but we will respond to any invading power with a force that they cannot even imagine. Neither the Americans nor the Zionists know what complex, precise, and intelligence-based plans we have designed in order to defend our country and to deal with their possible attacks.
I’m a little worried about the carriers in the gulf. They are apparently within striking distance of Iranian missiles. If war breaks out these are sure to be targets as well as bases in Iraq like the green zone. WTF are we doing trying to provoke a war with Iran?
Notwithstanding all the propaganda about how war is being held out a bargaining chip should diplomacy fail, I see no evidence that diplomacy is being taken seriously at all. So what are we going to do -nuke Iran?
I’m a little worried about the carriers in the gulf. They are apparently within striking distance of Iranian missiles.
No need to worry about them. While, at times, they might, or might not, be within missile range (and mostly I suspect they are not), the USN will deny the Iranians the ability to acquire targeting data needed to fire at the carriers.
So what are we going to do -nuke Iran?
I am not sure what you mean by “we” but unless you are Iranian, which I am not, you ahve no business doing *ANYTHING* as this is not your country or your region. That should be obvious to any civilized person I would think.
vees,
Do you consider people that under Sharia law stone their children, wives, and sisters a civilized society?
Just because the law allows it, is it right?
If the U.S. attacks Iran, get ready to hear about thousands, yes thousands of dead American “troops”. Zionism I believe, may be heading towards it’s apex. Dead American soldiers along with high gas prices here in the States could result in some seroius blowback for Israel and sadly, for Jewish Americans as well. As I witnessed the latter here in America during the Lebanon bombing of 2006. But this time, it might well go beyond words. Or Americans perhaps might just blame the Iranians, just as they did the Arabs for the oil embargo of 1973. In any case…Bush will be sacrificed for Zionism.
If the U.S. attacks Iran it will be sold on the grounds of alleged Iraninan intervention in the sovereign affairs of Iraq, terrorist actions on the behalf of the quds force, and vague regional threats.
Anyone that claims this was primarily about Israel will be accused of raising an anti-Semitic canard and made out to be a kook.
jaclon -if you expect an answer from me you will have to either contribute something intelligently or, at least, ask a real question and not your trademark “question which is really a statement”. Frankly, I have no time to waste on your illiterate nonsense. As a policy, I do not erase posts, but if you expect an answer – at least from me – ask a real question (like you did about the bombers). The rest of your pseudo-questions I will ignore.
vees,
You are ignoring a question that goes to your core beliefs.
Why not say you believe, as do the sharia muslim, that it is okay to kill your sister or mother or any female to appease your neighbors.
I won’t bother you again.
@ Jalcon
I’ll rebut the implication behind your question, that because many find Iranian human rights record less than stellar, we have a ‘right’ to attack.
1) No nation has the right to intervene in another. To give that right to one nation is to give it to all. Suppose tomorrow Russia decides that Saudi Arabia has an appalling human rights record (which of course they do, far worse than Iran) and that only a Russian invasion can set things right. Would the U.S. be pleased with such a state of affairs? On what basis could it object?
Closer to reality, suppose Saddam Husein decides Kuwait’s mistreatment of women has no place in the modern world?
2) If you intervene on humanitarian grounds, what will you do if the result is in fact much much worse than before? Or will you argue that as long as you had good intentions, the result doesn’t matter?
3) Clean up your own house first. Democracy is best described as when the rule of law protects the rights of the individual from the power of the state. Here in America, I can be arrested without charges, held without limit, tortured and killed. I no longer am confident that the law will protect me. And so I’m disinclined to worry about civil liberties in Iran, or anywhere other than home.
Cheers
I dunno Lysander. America is an exceptional nation and a shining beacon to the world. Other nations may not have the right to invade Iran but surely we are within our rights to bestow the blessings of liberty and democracy upon the people of Iran as we have already done in Iraq.
Do not all the benighted souls of this world secretly yearn to breathe free?
With regards to human rights, it was an Iranian (Cyrus the Great) that created man’s first human rights charter (you can checkout the replica at the UN).
As to the Islamic Republic – you should keep in mind that Iran and the Islamic Republic are separate matters. The Islamic Republic is a theocracy and thus in this form of government the people are mere spectators (which is why the reform movement died – you can’t reform this regime).
The only thing attacking Iran will do is to unify Iranians around the regime much like the time during the Iran-Iraq war. Except back then it was OK for Iraq to use chemical weapons against Iranians and the whole world was providing support to Iraq, and now Iraq is in Iran’s sphere of influence.