Iran Fakes Missile Pics

[cpnichol]

After Iran test launced some of their missiles this week a picture was published on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards website showing 4 missiles being launched. Unfortunately the same image had also been published elsewhere, see if you can spot the difference (the one from the Revolutionary Guards website is second).



Also experts have cast doubts on Iranian claims that these are new missiles with a 1,240 mile range, but apparently they look exactly like the Shahab-3 missile, which is 10 years old and has a range of 900 miles.

Bit of an all round fail if you ask me but that didn't stop oil prices going up $6 a barrel .

[Insomnia]

... Iran does have missles but that nuclear propaganda needs to stop because it has already been proven that their nuclear program's sole purpose is for nuclear power plants. So the big 5 and the UN need to lay off of them and leave them be about their business.

I do not back them up because i do not agree with their political ideals especially Hezbollah in lebanon. But that doesnt mean i am biased.

Anyhoo the pictures look similar except one is taken from further away.

[Gatsurendo]

yes but it kills their point of the first pic all together. If it was from a further distance it wouldn't explain the same size blast cloud with 4 and 3 in the other pic. Even if the 4th went off a second later the clouds would be altered a bit but nope.

Also 2 depths of an image yet same thickness of fire and smoke trail out of the missiles. This is too easy to see a fraud pic in this one. 2 cameras in different places cannot get the same pic as eachother which is simple common sense.

On another note insomnia is correct. We need to end the bs of bothering them. This has become nothing more than US soldiers dying for a lost cause due to Bush's ignorance.

[Atrus]

Two things here...

1) Aside from being "old news" I suspect that neither image is trustworthy. The most curious thing about these two shots in particular would be the loaded mobile launcher in the foreground of the top picture, but it's missing in the bottom one.

2) With all due respect, anyone who trusts that Iran would operate a plant and not enrich uranium for a bomb is out of touch with reality.

~A

[White-Pinnacle]

Why do you need a nuclear power plant? To generate electricity because you don't have the oil or to reprocess uranium for the "BOMB".

Iran has a lot of oil so . . .

White Pinnacle

[Insomnia]

Eh i guess i worded my thoughts wrong.

I do not doubt that they will eventually for for nuclear warheads but for the time being the investigations proved that the sole purpose ofd them escavating uranium from africa and trading it with russia is for nuclear power plants.

And, even though the CIA told Bush that the Iraqi government possessed no WMD's he still claimed that they would be crazy not to believe that they had any. Once they were searched it was proven that George Bush's Propaganda was nothing more but lies..

On a side note... Atrus are you republican?

[dwinx]

Paraphrased from Mike Birbiglia:

I've always seen President Bush like "Whiffleball Tony," the cool guy you invite the picnic because you KNOW he'll start a whiffleball game up. But then, one day someone said "let's put Whiffleball Tony in charge," and I'm like, "Of everything? The chips AND the potato salad?" So Tony is in charge and on the grill. You look over and he's throwing hamburgers at the neighbors! You yell, "Tony! Stop," and he says "They were gonna throw hamburgers at me!" But, it turns out, they don't even have hamburgers. They have hotdogs, but they only throw them at each other.

And that's why we're all going to die.

[Atrus]

Not a Democrat, not a Republican - though over the years I have voted both sides.

Now days, I prefer to think of myself as just another pissed off American.

~A

[Jbulldog25]

do i get a cookie?

[Bobson]

Pissed about what, exactly, Atrus? Not that I can't think of something for the average American to be pissed about, just wondering what it is in particular that's got you heated.

I've definitely noticed a trend in people. You start a thread on a forum somewhere (not a SP forum, specifically, just a forum in general), asking if people are pissed, what they're pissed about, etc, that thread gets HOT fast, and it stays hot for a good while. Everyone's pissed about something.

Start a thread about solutions to those problems, it's rare to see a single suggestion. With so many pissed people out there, it's surprisingly how few people are willing to do something about it.

Everyone wants to complain, nobody wants to get off their asses and fix things. You get a lot of responses like, "I don't know how to fix things," or "There's nothing we can do about it."

That's bull. If I don't know how to fix a problem, I don't kick my feet up and accept it as something I'll have to learn to deal with. I think the reason that's such a common attitude right now is because things are still at an "acceptable" level.

I know this has been discussed before, and I'm definitely not trying to start a debate about it. But just say, for instance, that America had been behind 9/11, and it was common knowledge. I'm speaking hypothetically, but let's say there was never any question about it. Would people be willing to do something about it then? Let's say, hypothetically, that the American government made a deal, tomorrow, to merge all of North America into one united country. Would that be something people would be willing to do something about? Maybe its all for the greater good, right? Hypothetically.

Seven years ago, when I had just started driving, I wouldn't have imagined gas would go from $1.19/gal to over $4/gal. But it happened gradually, so it's all good. Ten years ago, the average person might not have guessed that in 2008, the American govt would have given itself the right to tap any American household's phone. Twenty years ago, before the AWB (Assault Weapons Ban of '94) was ever implemented, would you have guessed that Congress would soon be debating whether or not the Bill of Rights actually gives the average person the right to own any firearm? Sure, in certain high-crime cities throughout the US, certain weapons have been banned. Understandable. In DC, even a person licensed to carry a handgun while doing his job, to protect the life of someone else, can't carry one off-duty to protect his own.

We're all pissed Americans. Nowadays that's almost a given. The question is, what's it going to take for people to get off their asses and do something about it? Maybe voting for our reps is good enough, right? Let them do it. That's obviously been working well.

[dwinx]

Originally Posted by Atrus

1)The most curious thing about these two shots in particular would be the loaded mobile launcher in the foreground of the top picture, but it's missing in the bottom one.

~A

Originally Posted by Jbulldog25

do i get a cookie?

Not unless the posts got out of order...

[Atrus]

Bobson... I suspect there's a word limit on these forums that would not support the list of things that have me upset. Let's just say that I'm as disturbed with one party as I am with the other.

Dwinx... have you been drinking your own kool aid look closely at the photos once again - I'm not going to go over every OBVIOUS detail because it's clear to anyone who can see that the bottom photo has been edited. Hint... in the bottom shot check out the smoke patterns of the two missile exhausts on the right - they're the same - the mobile launcher is way out of position to be the 4th launch.

~A

[dwinx]

Atrus-
I always drink my own kool aid. It keeps me loopy. My point was that Bulldog doesn't get a cookie because you had already posted this difference out, unless the forums went screwy again and he actually posted before you.

[Jbulldog25]

Originally Posted by dwinx

Atrus-
I always drink my own kool aid. It keeps me loopy. My point was that Bulldog doesn't get a cookie because you had already posted this difference out, unless the forums went screwy again and he actually posted before you.

oh i didnt see that part in his post. i posted after him