Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Iran's New Space Program

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the surveilling-puppies-and-sunshine dept.

Privacy 243

eldavojohn writes "Coinciding with the 32nd anniversary of the Iranian revolution, Iran opened a center to receive satellite images built 'entirely by Iranian engineers.' Iran promised that by the end of their year (March of 2011) they would launch two observational satellites: Fajr (Dawn) and Rasad-1 (Observation-1). You might recall two years ago when they launched Omid, which completed about 700 orbits in two weeks. There are reports that new launch rockets will be revealed in February to launch the new satellites — all equipment is claimed to be entirely Iranian made. Iranian media is reporting that one of the satellites 'carries remote measuring equipment that would be used in meteorology and identifying sea borders.' The Iranian Student News Agency says Explorer 4 (Kavoshgar 4) is meant to transport humans and other living organisms into space, and that the sensory on the satellites 'is able to find gas and oil resources, identify coal mines, jungles and agricultural products as well as salty-marsh and contaminated environments.' These rapid fire achievements are not the only bragging Iran has done as of late; they also claim 'new gamma radiation units for medical treatments and a supercomputer billed as among the top 500 most powerful in the world. But, fact or fiction aside, the satellites have old enemies speculating."

cancel ×

243 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Orbital nukes in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... (2)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129658)

But I guess what Stuxnet is for.

You're a hypocrite (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129690)

Filthy American.

Re:You're a hypocrite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129780)

I honestly can't tell if this response was a joke or not.

Re:You're a hypocrite (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130304)

Ah Bomb bomb bomb...bomb bomb Iran...

Ah Bomb bomb bomb...bomb bome Iran...

[Falsetto] A bomb Iraaaaaaan....

(sung to the tune of Barbara Ann)

Re:You're a hypocrite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129906)

Is there any other kind?
Not counting Canadians, Mexicans and South Americans of course.

Re:You're a hypocrite (1)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129910)

Poe.

Re:Orbital nukes in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... (2)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130506)

Having a working ICBM would be a great way to prevent your country from being "liberated", or at least your oil from being liberated. Provided the ICBMs don't do a boomerang.

I'm a rock-it-man! (1, Funny)

NitzJaaron (733621) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129670)

I'm shocked that they aren't just photoshoping pictures of a guy in an American or Russian space suit strapped to the side of a photoshoped rocket.

Re:I'm a rock-it-man! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130052)

Reminds me of this picture:
http://i.neoseeker.com/mgv/152409-Kilik%2064/409/21/g_gundam.jpg
as featured here:
http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=15132&page=64

Built by Engineers? (4, Funny)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129704)

Somehow, I had a mental image of a bunch of engineers trying to erect a building. None survived.

Re:Built by Engineers? (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130108)

You've got the joke wrong.

"A building built by an architect might fall down, but a building built by an engineer should be torn down."

Just who do you think designs and supervises the construction of buildings?

Re:Built by Engineers? (1)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130718)

Who actually constructs the buildings?

Re:Built by Engineers? (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130734)

Just who do you think designs and supervises the construction of buildings?

Usually, a Structural Engineer of Record who stamps, signs, and vouches for the building. The SER is then liable for problems with the building for up to six years after their death. Special insurance is available for those claims.

SER certification requires formal training (e.g. B.Eng.) specialized post-graduate training, experience, and registration explicitly as a SER with multiple peer reviews. They often specialize in areas such as a building envelopes.

Yes, Russia better worry the most (4, Interesting)

rednip (186217) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129708)

I've never understood why the Russian leadership seems willing to arm it's most crazy neighbor to the south. It's not like they don't already have an islamist problem.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129730)

I'm not worried by islamist. I'm more worried by the radical christianist.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129834)

How rational of a worry is that? Which of those two groups is really the more genuinely dangerous nowadays?

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129880)

That would depend on whether or not you are a young boy.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129990)

Radicals are radicals and radicals of any kind are dangerous. In the last 20 years there have been significantly more successful attacks on US soil by Christian extremists (primarily in the form of attacks on abortion clinics) then their have been by Islamic extremists. Granted, the Islamic attacks have taken significantly more lives. To be honest, I'm most scared of people who use the term "christianist" as I believe that the gradual but steady decrease in intelligence of the average human being poses a much greater risk to our collective security than terrorism.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130206)

I used the term christianist mainly because those who point the finger forget to look in their own backyard. I grew up around people like this. It's more than just rattlesnake worship and the occasional nutjob. The other reason for the term is that I find it offensive and those that use it have no clue about the religion or the people and could care less. Take a look at any other term that has been used to demonize a people. It doesn't matter just as long as we have a sub-human group to hate.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (3, Informative)

khallow (566160) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130256)

In the last 20 years there have been significantly more successful attacks on US soil by Christian extremists (primarily in the form of attacks on abortion clinics) then their have been by Islamic extremists.

What's the body count? Last I checked, the Islamist extremists killed over two orders of magnitude more people than the anti-abortion people. The second biggest known terrorist attack (the Oklahoma City bombing) was anti-government not Christian. EgyptAir 990 [wikipedia.org] might qualify as a terrorist attack. After that, you're into nuts with guns territory.

If we look overseas we see a number of high casualty bombings in Europe and a ridiculous amount of bloodletting throughout the Middle East. You can talk about how scary the Christians are, but where's the countries with high death rates from Christian extremists? The Islamists have killed lots of people in Algeria, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Nothing in the Christian world compares to that.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130002)

The christianistas most definitely.

There are members of apocalyptic christian death cults at the highest levels of government and military power in the US. People who pray every night that the world and all humanity be annihilated in a cleansing fire, so that they may finally dominate the world with a global christian theocracy lead directly by their god made manifest. Some of these people have access to nuclear weapons.

Even if you discount the worst case scenario, they are working very hard to repeal freedom, social and scientific progress in the US and occasionally they win.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130176)

People who pray every night that the world and all humanity be annihilated in a cleansing fire, so that they may finally dominate the world with a global christian theocracy lead directly by their god made manifest.

Cite for the cleansing fire claim? I don't deny that evangelical Protestantism drives a great deal of American politics, but your assertion doesn't at all square with the beliefs of the denominations widely represented in government.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

JordanL (886154) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130250)

Why? When was the last time radical christians organized a global attempt to indiscriminately kill people on a massive scale? The Crusades? There are simply more dangerous things in the world at the moment.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (2, Informative)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130402)

IIRC couple months ago, an american christian preacher went to Uganda and preached about the righteousness of killing homosexuals, dozens have been hanged and stoned and laws have been drafted with the death penalty for homosexuality in response.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

JordanL (886154) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130456)

An american christian preacher got the ugandan govt to change laws by preaching? Citation needed. And even if true, that is a far cry from any group that goes about training in the use of munitions intended for civilian targets.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130664)

Laws were drafted, no idea if they passed.

Basic scenario is that the American christian preacher came to Uganda, preached hate and death.
Then a tabloid published a list of names and addresses of gays.
Many of them were killed.
Laws were drafted with the death penalty for gays.
?
That should be enough info for you to google it yourself.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130552)

Why? When was the last time radical christians organized a global attempt to indiscriminately kill people on a massive scale? The Crusades?

There are simply more dangerous things in the world at the moment.

The Crusades were a response to over four hundred years of Muslim crusades and unchecked violence. Four centuries is a lot of turning the other cheek wouldn't you say? The purpose of the Crusades were to restore access to the holy land for pilgrims visiting from Europe and to halt the advance of the Moors into Europe.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (5, Interesting)

Aaron England (681534) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129778)

Because instability in the Middle East raises oil prices and as of 2009 Russia surpassed Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil exporter.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

bsquizzato (413710) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129994)

Syriana, anyone?

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129840)

Taking into consideration the "crazyness" of the rest of the worlds governments (US: Torture, invasions, abuse of power, runaway government spending - Mexico: Rampant Corruption - Egypt:Mass censorship, dictatorship - Pretty much every government: Civil Rights Issues, police state tendencies, etc) is Iran really so out of control?

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129930)

Yes. Next question?

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130012)

Evidence please of Iranian Government out of control.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130100)

Go walk around town in wearing a speedo, a crucifix, and a "Mo sucks" poster on your butt. Bonus points if you're a woman. Echoes of Die Hard 3 notwithstanding, let us know if you survive. Cultural relativist moron.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (-1, Flamebait)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130146)

nonsense, it the USA that is out of control and evil and crazy. Warring for no purpose other than profit and power, mass-murdering of innocents, backing evil regimes, backing a theocracy that engages in genocide and murder of innocents (Israel)

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130278)

>it the USA that is out of control and evil and crazy

Put your sister in a bikini and have her walk down the sidewalk in Times Square. Then have her do the same in Tehran's Grand Bazaar. Report back and let us know which scenario goes best.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130724)

True Iran has womens rights/"cover your shame" cultural/morality issues, but lets modify you situation a little. Take ten people with "end the (US) war in Afghanistan" signs/t-shirts. March the group through Tehran's Grand Bazaar, they'll probably be cheered. Take that same group and try to have them march around the White House in Washington DC, they'll be arrested (I believe several recent attempts to protest near "national icons" have resulted in almost immediate arrests, protests have been limited to very narrow timeframes and often to specific areas such as "freedom cages").

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130312)

Israel is not a theocracy, or if it is, it's not a Jewish theocracy.

Israel also does not engage in genocide. There are well over 100 million Arabs in the ME. Their squabbles with a small handful who call themselves Palestinians hardly qualifies as genocide.

All states murder innocents. At least Israel doesn't attack shopping centers and public buses.

Burn, strawman! (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130410)

(US: Torture, invasions, abuse of power, runaway government spending - Mexico: Rampant Corruption - Egypt:Mass censorship, dictatorship - Pretty much every government: Civil Rights Issues, police state tendencies, etc)

And my brother is the most evil of all, he kicked my dog!

If you are trying to equate any of those other governments' wrongdoings with one that tries to stone a woman to death for "adultery" because she befriended another man two years after her husband died you are as wacko as the Iranian theocrats.

A Tiny Bit of Compassion for the Iranian People (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129964)

I believe that recent military and defense transactions with "their most crazy neighbor to the south" has little to do with logic and more to do with lucrative arms deals [washingtonpost.com] that have recently been put on hold (I daresay in the interest of regional stability).

To answer your question in a historical context I might point you to the horrible things that Russia and the United States did during the Cold War that essentially provided puppet theaters for their ideologies to be fought out. Why risk your citizens when you can show the world who's right with war and poverty in weaker nations? Wikipedia does a decent job of summing this up [wikipedia.org] but you might look up the 1953 Iranian coup d'état followed by the 1979 Iranian revolution and surmise why it would be in Russia's best interest to keep this thorn festering in the United States' side right up until today. The Soviet War in Afghanistan, the Eastern Bloc and many other actions were basically a cowardly way of Russia and the United States putting external countries in chaos to prove who was the better country in our petty capitalism versus socialism spat (and after all that everybody's implementing a little bit of both).

Similar to the redrawing of national/political boundaries by the Allies following World War II, we (and I mean the world, US/Russian citizens, the citizens of those countries, everybody) will for a very long time feel the pain and suffering of putting such pressures on weaker nations during the Cold War.

When you say "it's most crazy neighbor to the south," it might benefit you to consider the pressures that added to that craziness. While the blame lies entirely on no one, everybody participated. For a somewhat more even handed introduction to Iran's problems, check out the intro to Persepolis (the movie or the manga).

You know who's really lost a lot in all of this? The Iranian citizens.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (5, Insightful)

Smauler (915644) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130018)

Iran is not crazy. I'm not sure where you got that idea from. The government is pretty hard line in some instances, but the populace isn't generally. In my opinion crazy is starting wars.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130150)

"Iran is not crazy."

A piece of Geography rarely is.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (2, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130778)

A piece of Geography rarely is.

Rosie O'Donnell begs to differ.

Re:Yes, Russia better worry the most (0)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130172)

Iran is not crazy. I'm not sure where you got that idea from. The government is pretty hard line in some instances

And, when you're talking about countries and how they interact, you're talking about the Government of that country. In this case, crazy. Batshit crazy one might say -- listening to any speech of Ahmadinejad, and you're forced to wonder if the man is even lucid.

but the populace isn't generally

No, but if they try to dissent with the government, out comes the guns, batons, and tanks.

The citizens of Iran may not be crazy, but in a real sense of the word, they don't get a vote. At least, not a real one.

Cold War deja vu all over again (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129718)

Sounds like an echo from a few decades back. Just swap "iranian" for "russian", and you have authentic old news story. The cold war was acually quite deadly for a lot of peple however.

Re:Cold War deja vu all over again (1)

ISoldat53 (977164) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129922)

Do you think that is just coincidence? With NASA facing cutbacks, this is good news for the space agency.

What did one Iranian astornaut say to the other? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129756)

Get ready for 72 virgins in Uranus.

Re:What did one Iranian astornaut say to the other (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129832)

Ouch.

Re:What did one Iranian astornaut say to the other (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130014)

That's what she said.

Re:What did one Iranian astornaut say to the other (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130504)

Ouch

That's what she said.

No, that was what he, the Iranian suicide terrorist, said when he found out that the virgins in Paradise were not females...

Clone the space shuttle (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129764)

Iran can always do what the Soviets did and make a clone of the US space shuttle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_(spacecraft) [wikipedia.org]

Re:Clone the space shuttle (2)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129822)

That is like arguing that every Airbus is a ripoff of a Boeing. Despite the resemblance, the technology is fundamentally different in function and design.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (-1)

fishthegeek (943099) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129934)

That is like arguing that every Airbus is a ripoff of a Boeing. Despite the resemblance, the technology is fundamentally different in function and design.

You're right. The American version flew.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130452)

The soviet version also flew, completely autonomously and landed perfectly without incident. Then it was retired.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (1)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130484)

So did Buran. It made one test flight, in 1988, then the Soviet Union abandoned the programme as not being worth the cost.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129876)

How many ways to build a space plane do you think there are? Take a look at X-prize entrants, they either resemble a capsule or a shuttle. The Buran and Shuttle have a resemblance due to optimized design, but are very different under the hood.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (3, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129920)

Yeah, those Soviets never did anything first in the space race.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129954)

What they did first is what the Iranians are finally doing, and it's causing the same reactions in the same reactionaries that the Russian version did.

I think it's the reactionaries who aren't progressing.

Re:Clone the space shuttle (2)

gfreeman (456642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130168)

No mod points to give you, sorry, but to acknowledge your well place sarcasm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_exploration_milestones,_1957-1969#Notable_firsts [wikipedia.org]

1957: First intercontinental ballistic missile, the R-7 Semyorka
1957: First satellite, Sputnik 1
1957: First animal to enter Earth orbit, the dog Laika on Sputnik 2
1959: First firing of a rocket in Earth orbit, first man-made object to escape Earth's orbit, Luna 1
1959: First data communications, or telemetry, to and from outer space, Luna 1.
1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first man-made object in Solar orbit, Luna 1
1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2
1959: First images of the moon's far side, Luna 3
1960: First animals to safely return from Earth orbit, the dogs Belka and Strelka on Sputnik 5.
1960: First probe launched to Mars, Marsnik 1
1961: First probe launched to Venus, Venera 1
1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1, Vostok programme
1961: First person to spend over a day in space Gherman Titov, Vostok 2 (also first person to sleep in space).
1962: First dual manned spaceflight, Vostok 3 and Vostok 4
1963: First woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, Vostok 6
1964: First multi-man crew (3), Voskhod 1
1965: First EVA, by Aleksei Leonov, Voskhod 2
1965: First probe to hit another planet (Venus), Venera 3
1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the moon, Luna 9
1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
1967: First unmanned rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188. (Until 2006, this had remained the only major space achievement that the US had not duplicated.)
1969: First docking between two manned craft in Earth orbit and exchange of crews, Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5

Re:Clone the space shuttle (2)

Animats (122034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130636)

Buran is not a clone of the US space shuttle. It looks similar, but it's not. Buran is launched on a huge booster; it has no main engines of its own, unlike the US Shuttle. It's more rugged than the Shuttle, which can't handle rain or cold weather. In many ways, it's a better design. T

congratulations are (4, Insightful)

nimbius (983462) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129802)

in order to iran, the islamic nation with an apparently insatiable appetite for science! I hope the pictures and data from the satellites are released publicly as well as perhaps their beacon frequencies? (to listen in on them as they traverse the skies, i know, im an amateur radio geek.)

the medical equipment is fascinating too...are they based on any current designs? do they take advantage of any FLOSS?

and being a tech nerd I cant wait to get specs on the new supercomputer too...are they soliciting any CPU time for college projects? what is its ultimate goal/architecture/performance metrics?

and if you're wondering when politics plays into all of this, it doesnt. I dont care what the russians are doing, what the mullas are barking, or what the israelis are doing because this is nerd news.

Re:congratulations are (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129914)

in order for your high level of naivety.

Re:congratulations are (1)

bsquizzato (413710) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130048)

in order for your lack of understanding of sarcasm.

Re:congratulations are (0, Flamebait)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130004)

the pictures will be available on a site much like Google Maps but with a name you can't pronounce

the medical equipment is operated on the principle that god willing you will get well

their supercomputer is built using AMD microprocessors illegally smuggled into Iran in contravention of the ITAR

and if you're wondering if politics plays no role in this, it does, because everything iran does is directed by a central oligarchy of religious fascists who don't care if their people live or die as long as they get closer to the day they can vaporize Israel

Re:congratulations are (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130254)

go post that crap on israeli sites please. nobody gives a shit.

Re:congratulations are (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130496)

in order to iran, the islamic nation with an apparently insatiable appetite for science! (Yeah, real hard for a bunch of islamic fundamentalists to copy western designs...) I hope the pictures and data from the satellites are released publicly as well as perhaps their beacon frequencies? (Iran share data? fat chance. Think of all the shitty companies that steal GNU source code and never attribute or share with the rest of the world. Now multiply that to the size of a nation, and you have Iran.)

the medical equipment is fascinating too...are they based on any current designs? do they take advantage of any FLOSS? (If it's based on open source, they won't tell you, they'll take all the credit for it, and they won't share any minor improvements.)

and being a tech nerd I cant wait to get specs on the new supercomputer too...are they soliciting any CPU time for college projects? what is its ultimate goal/architecture/performance metrics? (Ultimate goal? Projecting military power with nukes.)

and if you're wondering when politics plays into all of this, it doesnt. I dont care what the russians are doing, what the mullas are barking, or what the israelis are doing because this is nerd news. (I'd love to share knowledge as well, but these guys aren't friendly at all. They just take and never give.)

For sale, bridge in Brooklyn (0)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130574)

Hello, I have this wonderful bridge [wikimedia.org] and I want to sell it really cheap. I think you would love it. I also happen to have a tower in Paris that I'm willing to sell at a bargain price.

BTW, are you interested in getting a commission for taking a few million dollars out of Nigeria?

Why all the hate? (2, Insightful)

AtomicDevice (926814) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129808)

Every time I read a story about technological advancement in some [non friendly to the US] nation it's always portrayed in the light of "Oh crap, dirty brown people are getting their hands on technology OMFG THEY'RE GONNA NUKE US"

What's up with that? What possible use could a stable, financially self-sufficient nation have for nuking a much larger nation (who has a lot more nukes)? I know people like to portray them as crazies and always extract the most radical-when-translated-and-taken-out-of-context quotes about how these countries/groups of people want nothing more than to wipe Israel and the US off the map, but I find it hard to believe that the leaders of such countries have any serious plans to this effect. I'm sure it drums up some good publicity in certain mainly arab nations, but every politician likes to talk big, few like to ask a country to pay for a dangerous and expensive war with a nearby nation.

Maybe if we worked with countries like Iran instead of just antagonizing them to the max and declaring their religious government illegitimate (even though the only reason they don't have the secular government they used to have is because we installed the shah because they weren't doing what we wanted, oops!).

If you're feeling threatened by someone, perhaps you should examine why they don't like you - is it because you are always a dick to them? Maybe don't be such a dick? (and apologize for forcibly removing their democratic government just so you could get a bigger piece of the money cake)

Re:Why all the hate? (4, Informative)

cptdondo (59460) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129916)

Stable? At the last election, government forces killed some 36 people demonstrating against vote fraud.

That's not the mark of a stable government; that's a mark of a totalitarian regime that will kill to stay in power.

That's why it's bad when they get nukes.

I for one believe that trade is the best binder; sooner or later we won't be able to go to war against China because we simply won't have the industrial base to support ourselves (and I'm not talking weapons but shoes. How long would a US president last if the voters couldn't buy shoes? )

Let's bind Iran in a web of trade so they can't go to war with us. The problem is that we really don't have anything they want....

Re:Why all the hate? (1)

Smauler (915644) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130140)

The US installed regimes (ousting democracies) that killed thousands when in power. Just because a regime is corrupt and brutal doesn't mean that the west does not consider it stable. It's up to you to decide the morality of that, but your point that the Iranian government killed 36 people pales into insignificance compared to the brutality the west's allies have meted out in the past (and most of the west itself for that matter).

Re:Why all the hate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130306)

You act as if things here in the US (I assume you are speaking as a US Citizen) are a whole lot different. Do "freedom cages", "mass arrests", "baseless arrests", and "use of sonic/chemical devices on peaceful protesters" ring a bell. One or more of those occurrences seem to happen every time there is a sizable protest here in the US, especially when it involves federal matters (presidential elections/parades, "economic" meets, etc) We've had more than a few protester deaths in this country, especially when the protests are about police officers getting away with murder.

Re:Why all the hate? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129980)

Stable? Just as stable as Tunisia and Egypt right? The only difference is that because Iranians never had that much freedom. So when there are protests out there, we don't see all that much about them.

Re:Why all the hate? (3, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129998)

I know people like to portray them as crazies and always extract the most radical-when-translated-and-taken-out-of-context quotes about how these countries/groups of people want nothing more than to wipe Israel and the US off the map, but I find it hard to believe that the leaders of such countries have any serious plans to this effect. I'm sure it drums up some good publicity in certain mainly arab nations, but every politician likes to talk big, few like to ask a country to pay for a dangerous and expensive war with a nearby nation.

Iran has been bankrolling Hezbollah for years and years now. I agree that starting a nuclear war isn't very likely, but the Iranian regime has gone beyond mere rhetoric into driving violence.

Re:Why all the hate? (2)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130026)

I don't think there's any worry that Iran will nuke the United States. That would just be completely stupid on their part.

The worry is that some of their nuclear technology might fall into the hands of some extremist group that would have no qualms about setting off a nuke in the middle of a city just to send a message. When someone blows themselves up using a regular bomb there's enough debris left over to have a good idea of who might have done it. Even a small nuclear device would cause enough destruction that there's going to be nothing left of the person, vehicle used for delivery, and ground zero to have any real clue. We'd have to base everything around the intelligence that's been gathered and that's not always very accurate. It can help corroborate an explanation, but you've seen what happens when we take action based solely on intelligence reports. It might not happen, but it's semi-plausible. It's probably even more likely to happen to Israel.

Otherwise your post is spot on. Of course we really don't want to admit that for the last several decades we've been dicks to the rest of the world to serve our own interests. It clashes heavily with the vision of ourselves that we like to portray: leading by example, bringing democracy to the rest of the world, etc. We'll probably stop messing around with their governments, politics, and country just as soon as they run out of oil. Unless they become the next China and have a lot of western companies conducting business in their country, there wouldn't be much reason for us to stick around after that.

Re:Why all the hate? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130042)

Well, we developed all of those technologies for the purposes of nuking someone ... so, its not unreasonable, if somewhat irrational, to expect we'd believe the same of someone else doing it.

Not sure we've got the moral high ground to point fingers, though.

Because they're religious nuts? (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130126)

Maybe I think we should nuke them first because Ahmadinejad (you know, the Iranian "President" - well if you don't count those pesky votes..) believes that it is his duty to trigger a period of chaos, war and bloodshed, which will lead to the coming of the 12th Imam who will eventually rule the world.

Citation [theisraelproject.org] .

Seriously, Iran is fucked in the head when it comes to thinking. I don't want their kind of thinking having access to nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles.

Re:Because they're religious nuts? (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130152)

If you were truly informed on the Iranian situation you'd know that Ahmadinejad, though holding the title of president, is not the supreme ruler of Iran. He must answer to other people, and he does not have control over the military. While he's probably a nutjob, he can't singlehandedly plunge Iran into a war against the wishes of others.

Re:Because they're religious nuts? (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130224)

He's a nutjob and I think the world would be a safer place if Iran did not pursue "peaceful" nuclear energy and ballistic missiles at the same time. Call me rational when I think that is wise.

Re:Because they're religious nuts? (1)

losfromla (1294594) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130370)

your citation is far from unbiased. Try again.

Re:Because they're religious nuts? (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130594)

It is perfectly biased from my perspective. Of course, I'm not a nut.. ;)

Re:Why all the hate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130230)

I think part of it is the same reason why white folks get upset with the brown people driving while unlicensed with uninsured vehicles. And no, it's not the driveby-shooting-like aspect of having nukes in space. (While keeping up the car analogy.) Not so much upset that they're driving or have vehicles, but rather who will be left holding the bill when their shit hits our shit. And the fact that sooner or later, given enough time that such a collision is more than likely.

Also there's this problem of having them avoid a collision while not telling too much about our low reflectivity, low-IR, and radar absorbing spy satellites that may cross trajectories with anything they decide to put up. Particularly when it comes to a heavily watched area like the Mideast and Persian Gulf. To some various DOD related agencies, it's probably bad enough that we have to share some things with the ESA, Russians, and Chinese just to avoid accidentally making a mess of space.

Re:Why all the hate? (0)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130688)

Every time I read a story about technological advancement in some [non friendly to the US] nation it's always portrayed in the light of "Oh crap, dirty brown people are getting their hands on technology OMFG THEY'RE GONNA NUKE US"

If you didn't start your post declaring that you are a total racist, you could be taken a lot more seriously. I know it is hip to claim that the only reason we have a problem with anyone in the middle east is because "they are brown", but that doesn't cut it. The only way you could possibly think that it has anything to do with race is if you forget that the USSR was the big bad boogie man throughout the cold war. You would also have to forget that China is quickly growing to be considered a serious threat as well.

Open your eyes, and see that not everyone is as much of a racist as you are. Sometimes people hate other people for reasons other than the color of their skin.

May I be the first to say that this is great... (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129816)

...target practice!

(I kid, I kid. Just don't tell Sarah Palin.)

Russian Parts, Chinese Parts... (2)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129896)

All Made in Iran.....

(Clang).....

To Paraphrase the first Iranian Astronaut after his retro rockets failed to fire trapping him in orbit for a few extra hours....

Re:Russian Parts, Chinese Parts... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129992)

The first Iranian astronaut was Anousheh Ansari, a female

Re:Russian Parts, Chinese Parts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130328)

No, she was a cosmonaut, she flew on a russian ship.

in orbit, to face Mecca's direction, face Earth (1, Informative)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130396)

That's Iranian-American [wikipedia.org] .
There's been no Iranian Islamonauts, female or otherwise.
In my book, that's score 1 for the Americans, err Russians. Damn this outsourcing is confusing.

Nuke 'em! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129902)

Because Greedo shot first, too!

Translated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35129936)

..opened a center to receive satellite images

Read as: "..opened a center to receive SPY satellite images"

Explorer 4 (Kavoshgar 4) is meant to transport humans and other living organisms into space

BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PAYLOADS

Re:Translated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130544)

"BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PAYLOADS"

In your pants!

(Don't use so many caps, it's like yelling error forced me to add this.)

I would really like to see another space race (0)

Palpatine_li (1547707) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129942)

so we can soon see a real Orion spaceship up in the orbit, if only just to spite of all the hipsters. but seriously, how is an Orion continental destroyer more dangerous than the thousands of missile silos on the ground? while the development of the former will finally grant us large scale human existence outside earth and the technologies to fly to and colonize moon and even Mars.

Swarm (1)

reitton (1443679) | more than 3 years ago | (#35129958)

It's only a matter of time until they start using swarm techniques to overwhelm our star cruisers.

Iran needs a place to put all their viruses (1)

swschrad (312009) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130056)

so they're looking towards space. if you think their reactor is going to be a big hit when the rooted controls stop working, just wait until their space bombs get called by the botnet.

Re:Iran needs a place to put all their viruses (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130382)

"so they're looking towards space."

That's good.
There's nothing able to fund NASA quicker than the US Religious nuts thinking the Iranians would make Mars a Muslim planet and build a mosque there.

NK is the best Korea! (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130290)

This story sounds strangely deja vu like.

What other militant country with a nutjob leader which has openly swore to wipe another off a map was trying to advance "satellite putting up in orbity" technology and at the same time trying to start a nuclear program (but only to generate power) which is their god given right to do so...

Nothing to see here, move along.

I would say they are playing with fire, but that would be too obvious not to mention literal.

Iranium the Movie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130418)

Wow, there is even a movie to go along with it...

http://www.iraniumthemovie.com

orbital nukes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130448)

you people are worried about nukes? Jesus they have new gamma radiation units people! Who's to say Dr. Banner has gone rouge? he hasn't been seen in months!

Miscalculation in article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130596)

> You might recall two years ago when they launched Omid, which completed about 700 orbits in two weeks.
Something is wrong about these numbers.
It is impossible for any satellite to surround earth in less than about 86 minutes. At that orbital period, 700 orbits would take more than 40 days.

The nearer to earth the satellite gets, the lower the orbital period will be and the cheaper the rocket.

If the satellite would be orbiting just at the limit of space (100km, where it would lose height and burn in the atmosphere very quickly), it's orbital period would be about 86 minutes.
For the orbital perioud to be just 2 weeks / 700, required orbit height would be about 3300 kilometers beneath sea level somewhere in earth's outer core (ignoring the fact that gravity would be significantly lower there).

Re:Miscalculation in article? (1)

IceFoot (256699) | more than 3 years ago | (#35130670)

Yes. According to Wikipedia, [wikipedia.org] "It completed more than 700 orbits over seven weeks."

Note to OP: 2 != 7

Skipped a few steps there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130682)

How about them making cars and gasoline before nuclear power and spacecraft?

did it really do 700 revs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35130762)

The source was Iranian state television. They have been known to embellish Iranian accomplishments... Did Omid really even make it into space?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?