Iran
Joined: Sep 2023
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 219
Likes: 99
From: Montana
The Ayatollah and his Foreign Minister do not appear to be reading from the same sheet.
https://www.newsweek.com/iran-foreig...damage-2091540
https://www.newsweek.com/iran-foreig...damage-2091540
Joined: May 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 18,633
Likes: 1,072
From: Downeast
In response to a post by ORAC (Post 2346 in this thread) that discussed various people advising some sort of compromise with the Israeli's and the United States I made the following comment.....
Now we are seeing in the Newsweek article linked by Hangarless that suggests there is again some division amongst the Iranian leadership where the Ayatollah seems a bit detached from reality.
Are we beginning to see some "splintering" first mentioned by ORAC and added to by the information I offered?
ORAC's post re the apparent "splintering" of the upper echelons of the Iranian Government concerning strategy raises a very important issue.
I watched a long interview of some long time CIA Analysts who spent their full career in the Iran Unit and one of the "Red Flags" they said to look for that might foreshadow either a revolt by the Iranian People or a takeover of the government by moderates would be what they described as "splintering" meaning higher ups who abandon, flee, challenge, or in a major way fall out with the Ayatollahs and their closest allies. They did not say what they thought "would" happen but merely opined that certain events were indicators of "possible" events.
I watched a long interview of some long time CIA Analysts who spent their full career in the Iran Unit and one of the "Red Flags" they said to look for that might foreshadow either a revolt by the Iranian People or a takeover of the government by moderates would be what they described as "splintering" meaning higher ups who abandon, flee, challenge, or in a major way fall out with the Ayatollahs and their closest allies. They did not say what they thought "would" happen but merely opined that certain events were indicators of "possible" events.
Are we beginning to see some "splintering" first mentioned by ORAC and added to by the information I offered?
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 668
Likes: 127
From: London
Could it just be "sowing confusion?" The Iranians probably want both to be seen to be seen as powerful by their own people and supporting nations and as not needing to be bombed any more by enemies. Since these are conflicting aims they could just get two different people to make contradictory statements and then everyone will believe whichever statement they prefer to believe.
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
I refer you to my post 2328… Iran
And, of course, as shown on IAF videos most, if not all, Iranian F-14s/F-4s/F-5s were destroyed using PGMs.
Source: https://militarnyi.com/uk/news/iran-...kyh-su-35-zmi/
Iran plans to purchase Chinese J-10C instead of Russian Su-35s — media
Iran has intensified negotiations with China on the purchase of lightweight Chengdu J-10C multi-purpose fighters to replace the Russian Su-35. This is reported by The Moscow Times with reference to Khorasan.
According to the publication, Iran intends to modernize its Air Force as soon as possible, and Chinese aircraft are considered an affordable and cheap alternative to the Russian Su-35.
Iran has been interested in the J-10C for about two decades. In 2015, preparations for the conclusion of a contract for the supply of 150 fighters began, but the deal slipped. China insisted on payment in foreign currency, while Tehran, due to the shortage, offered a barter settlement of oil and gas. The UN arms embargo against the Islamic Republic also interfered.
In 2020, these restrictions were lifted and negotiations resumed. The scale of the deal decreased to 36 aircraft, but the parties again failed to agree on payment. However, after the United States allowed China to officially buy oil from Iran on June 24 without the threat of sanctions, the situation changed.
Although as of the beginning of 2025, the Iranian Air Force formally had about 150 fighters in service, these were mostly outdated American-made models that had reached the country before the Islamic Revolution of 1979.
These include the F-4 Phantom II (64 units), the F-5E/F Tiger II (35) and the F-14A Tomcat (41). There are also 18 MiG-29A/UB, delivered in the late 1980s and early 1990s, in service. However, these aircraft are not only obsolete, but most of them are in an unsuitable condition.
In particular, it is known that by the 2010s, the Iranian military carried out a series of modernizations and maintained about 15-20 F-14A Tomcat in operation. In 2022–2024, several F-14s were still recorded in the sky, but there were also reports of accidents.
With an outdated aviation fleet, Iran relied heavily on anti-aircraft missile systems of its own production as the basis of air defense. However, as the events of the "twelve-day war" showed, Israel managed to completely suppress the Iranian air defense and feel free in the sky.
Therefore, Iran's urgent desire to update its aviation fleet is natural, but simply purchasing a limited number of aircraft, even equipped with PL-15 long-range missiles, will not solve the problem of air defense.
Plans to purchase Russian Su-35s by Iran were reported back in September 2022, and in January, an Iranian official confirmed information about the purchase of Su-35 fighters from Russia. According to the plan, they were to start arriving in the country in the spring of 2023, but no aircraft were handed over.
In March 2025, it became known that the Su-35 fighters to be delivered to Iran were received by Algeria.
And, of course, as shown on IAF videos most, if not all, Iranian F-14s/F-4s/F-5s were destroyed using PGMs.
❗️🇮🇷Iran plans to purchase 🇨🇳Chinese J-10C fighters instead of 🇷🇺Russian Su-35S.
Iran plans to purchase Chinese J-10C instead of Russian Su-35s — media
Iran has intensified negotiations with China on the purchase of lightweight Chengdu J-10C multi-purpose fighters to replace the Russian Su-35. This is reported by The Moscow Times with reference to Khorasan.
According to the publication, Iran intends to modernize its Air Force as soon as possible, and Chinese aircraft are considered an affordable and cheap alternative to the Russian Su-35.
Iran has been interested in the J-10C for about two decades. In 2015, preparations for the conclusion of a contract for the supply of 150 fighters began, but the deal slipped. China insisted on payment in foreign currency, while Tehran, due to the shortage, offered a barter settlement of oil and gas. The UN arms embargo against the Islamic Republic also interfered.
In 2020, these restrictions were lifted and negotiations resumed. The scale of the deal decreased to 36 aircraft, but the parties again failed to agree on payment. However, after the United States allowed China to officially buy oil from Iran on June 24 without the threat of sanctions, the situation changed.
Although as of the beginning of 2025, the Iranian Air Force formally had about 150 fighters in service, these were mostly outdated American-made models that had reached the country before the Islamic Revolution of 1979.
These include the F-4 Phantom II (64 units), the F-5E/F Tiger II (35) and the F-14A Tomcat (41). There are also 18 MiG-29A/UB, delivered in the late 1980s and early 1990s, in service. However, these aircraft are not only obsolete, but most of them are in an unsuitable condition.
In particular, it is known that by the 2010s, the Iranian military carried out a series of modernizations and maintained about 15-20 F-14A Tomcat in operation. In 2022–2024, several F-14s were still recorded in the sky, but there were also reports of accidents.
With an outdated aviation fleet, Iran relied heavily on anti-aircraft missile systems of its own production as the basis of air defense. However, as the events of the "twelve-day war" showed, Israel managed to completely suppress the Iranian air defense and feel free in the sky.
Therefore, Iran's urgent desire to update its aviation fleet is natural, but simply purchasing a limited number of aircraft, even equipped with PL-15 long-range missiles, will not solve the problem of air defense.
Plans to purchase Russian Su-35s by Iran were reported back in September 2022, and in January, an Iranian official confirmed information about the purchase of Su-35 fighters from Russia. According to the plan, they were to start arriving in the country in the spring of 2023, but no aircraft were handed over.
In March 2025, it became known that the Su-35 fighters to be delivered to Iran were received by Algeria.
Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,914
Likes: 608
From: surfing, watching for sharks
Joined: May 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 18,633
Likes: 1,072
From: Downeast
No matter what Iran buys it is still going to be just another way of offering live fire target practice for the IDF and US Military should it become necessary again.
Look back to the Libyan experience of going up against the Professionals in the Gulf of Sidra.....wound up 2-0 in a matter of minutes.
Then...you can look at the success of the Iraqi Air Force as well.
Look back to the Libyan experience of going up against the Professionals in the Gulf of Sidra.....wound up 2-0 in a matter of minutes.
Then...you can look at the success of the Iraqi Air Force as well.
Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,914
Likes: 608
From: surfing, watching for sharks
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
…………..
Iran’s Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi issued a fatwa labeling anyone who threatens Islamic leadership, including the Supreme Leader, as a “muharib” a status that under Islamic law that carries the death penalty.
This ruling is a direct response to U.S. threats and targets President Trump.
In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
It is clear that threatening the leader of the Islamic world, as well as the esteemed sources of emulation, is a war against Islam. According to the Quranic verse “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against God and His Messenger…”, this act carries a severe punishment.
Strengthening the front of Muslims and the unity of Islamic ranks is an obligation. I consider it haram (forbidden) to remain silent in the face of such threats.
It is necessary for Muslims around the world to strongly condemn these threats and to take appropriate and united action.
May God preserve the Islamic community from the evil of enemies under the protection of the Imam of the Age (may God hasten his reappearance), and reward the righteous defenders.
This ruling is a direct response to U.S. threats and targets President Trump.
In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
It is clear that threatening the leader of the Islamic world, as well as the esteemed sources of emulation, is a war against Islam. According to the Quranic verse “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against God and His Messenger…”, this act carries a severe punishment.
Strengthening the front of Muslims and the unity of Islamic ranks is an obligation. I consider it haram (forbidden) to remain silent in the face of such threats.
It is necessary for Muslims around the world to strongly condemn these threats and to take appropriate and united action.
May God preserve the Islamic community from the evil of enemies under the protection of the Imam of the Age (may God hasten his reappearance), and reward the righteous defenders.
IRAN: A second grand Ayatollah, Noori Hamedani just issued a murder Fatwa against POTUS Trump.
"Any insult to Ayatollah Khamenei is an insult to foundations of Islam... Any individual or state threatening or striking him, or anyone aiding the crime, is Mohareb [enemy of Allah]."
"Any insult to Ayatollah Khamenei is an insult to foundations of Islam... Any individual or state threatening or striking him, or anyone aiding the crime, is Mohareb [enemy of Allah]."
Iran's main state daily Kayhan, which speaks for Supreme Leader Khamenei, wrote today that IAEA chief @rafaelmgrossi must be "EXECUTED" if he sets foot in Iran….
Quote: "We must officially announce that the moment he sets foot in Iran, he must be prosecuted and executed on the charge of spying for the Mossad and taking part in the murder of our country's oppressed people." - Kayhan, 28 June 2025.
Quote: "We must officially announce that the moment he sets foot in Iran, he must be prosecuted and executed on the charge of spying for the Mossad and taking part in the murder of our country's oppressed people." - Kayhan, 28 June 2025.
Joined: Nov 2011
Aviation Qualifications: SLF
Posts: 2,870
Likes: 508
From: Japan
“Threatening the leader of the Islamic world.” Something lost in translation?
Iranian (and Iraqi) Shiites might respond emotionally to such a Fatwa, and possibly Hezbollah and the Houthis.
Sunni Muslims throughout the Middle East might dispute such ‘leadership’ and will probably not feel the call. Just a guess.
Iranian (and Iraqi) Shiites might respond emotionally to such a Fatwa, and possibly Hezbollah and the Houthis.
Sunni Muslims throughout the Middle East might dispute such ‘leadership’ and will probably not feel the call. Just a guess.
Joined: Jul 2003
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 2,688
Likes: 1,522
From: Near the coast
They think it’s all over…
I wouldn’t be so sure. And neither is the author of this article.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...hu-forever-war
BV
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...hu-forever-war
BV
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 9,328
Likes: 2,175
From: Texas
What is going on with Iran is going to have some medium term ripple effects within the region. (Time magazine, author = H. A. Hellyer)
The Iran-Israel ceasefire seems to be holding. Arab capitals are relieved about the de-escalation. But they are also alarmed about what the latest flare up means for the Middle East.
This U-Turn is not due to any newfound trust in Tehran. The Arab Gulf states, broadly speaking, remain deeply cynical about the Iranian regime. If the Islamic Republic could be replaced with something more pragmatic and less ideologically driven than Khomeini’s revolutionary doctrine, few in the Arab Gulf would mourn. But this cynicism has evolved into a pragmatic rejection of war—especially one at the behest of a belligerent Israel and a complicit Washington.
For these reasons, the overwhelming response in Arab capitals has been fierce opposition to Israel’s strikes, and America’s bombing on June 22. There are two core reasons for this opposition.
First, these strikes are not happening in isolation. Over the past 20 months, Israel has waged a deadly and destructive campaign in Gaza following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, which has brought about a genocide case at the International Court of Justice. Israel has also expanded its military footprint beyond the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, amid the chaos following the ouster of Assad. And it has struck Beirut and parts of Lebanon repeatedly, including within the past week.
In short, even among states that are highly critical of Iran, there are concerns about an unrestrained Israel. A vision of a new regional order where Israel behaves with impunity while dictating security norms to its neighbors is profoundly unwelcome to Arab states, including traditionally pro-Western Arab governments such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
The second reason is more fundamental. For decades, Arab societies have criticized the West’s selective enforcement of international norms. That includes the 2003 Iraq war, Israel’s ongoing occupation in the West Bank and Gaza, and more recently the U.S. denunciation of the ICJ case and sanctioning of ICC judges after it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. There is a perception that powerful Western states shield Tel Aviv from consequences.
To be sure, the Arab states are hardly models of legality themselves. Various U.N. reports have repeatedly described an undemocratic region rife with issues around corruption, nepotism, and closed civil society spaces. But the powerful Western countries that erected the “rules-based” order should be exemplar pillars of it—otherwise, trust in the project altogether collapses.
That’s why the U.S. bombing of Iran—using the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, the heaviest non-nuclear weapon in its arsenal—set a dangerous precedent. Despite the undeniable nature of Iran being a nefarious actor in the region, there was no imminent threat, no U.N. Security Council authorization, and no widespread international consensus to engage in such a military strike. The war between Iran and Israel is over, at least for now. Whether Iran’s nuclear program has been hobbled is a separate question, one that analysts and intelligence agencies will continue to assess in the weeks and months to come.
But something else may have also ended. A new era is emerging in the region increasingly defined by a presumption that might equals right. The consequences of this have yet to be truly understood—but there are likely to be many repercussions indeed.
- When Iran signed the JCPOA nuclear deal with the Obama Administration, its reception in the Arab Gulf was, at best, frosty. The Iranian regime’s role in propping up Bashar al-Assad’s rule in Syria—one of the most devastating in modern Arab history—combined with its nefarious influence in Iraq and Lebanon, ensured that Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain saw the deal not as a diplomatic breakthrough, but as an endorsement of a destabilizing actor.
- So when President Donald Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, these same states applauded the move. Others in the region, including Egypt and Jordan, while more muted, also expressed concern about Tehran’s regional agenda. Yet fast forward to the present and the very same states opposed a fight with Iran, and support re-engagement.
This U-Turn is not due to any newfound trust in Tehran. The Arab Gulf states, broadly speaking, remain deeply cynical about the Iranian regime. If the Islamic Republic could be replaced with something more pragmatic and less ideologically driven than Khomeini’s revolutionary doctrine, few in the Arab Gulf would mourn. But this cynicism has evolved into a pragmatic rejection of war—especially one at the behest of a belligerent Israel and a complicit Washington.
For these reasons, the overwhelming response in Arab capitals has been fierce opposition to Israel’s strikes, and America’s bombing on June 22. There are two core reasons for this opposition.
First, these strikes are not happening in isolation. Over the past 20 months, Israel has waged a deadly and destructive campaign in Gaza following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, which has brought about a genocide case at the International Court of Justice. Israel has also expanded its military footprint beyond the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, amid the chaos following the ouster of Assad. And it has struck Beirut and parts of Lebanon repeatedly, including within the past week.
In short, even among states that are highly critical of Iran, there are concerns about an unrestrained Israel. A vision of a new regional order where Israel behaves with impunity while dictating security norms to its neighbors is profoundly unwelcome to Arab states, including traditionally pro-Western Arab governments such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
The second reason is more fundamental. For decades, Arab societies have criticized the West’s selective enforcement of international norms. That includes the 2003 Iraq war, Israel’s ongoing occupation in the West Bank and Gaza, and more recently the U.S. denunciation of the ICJ case and sanctioning of ICC judges after it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. There is a perception that powerful Western states shield Tel Aviv from consequences.
To be sure, the Arab states are hardly models of legality themselves. Various U.N. reports have repeatedly described an undemocratic region rife with issues around corruption, nepotism, and closed civil society spaces. But the powerful Western countries that erected the “rules-based” order should be exemplar pillars of it—otherwise, trust in the project altogether collapses.
That’s why the U.S. bombing of Iran—using the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, the heaviest non-nuclear weapon in its arsenal—set a dangerous precedent. Despite the undeniable nature of Iran being a nefarious actor in the region, there was no imminent threat, no U.N. Security Council authorization, and no widespread international consensus to engage in such a military strike. The war between Iran and Israel is over, at least for now. Whether Iran’s nuclear program has been hobbled is a separate question, one that analysts and intelligence agencies will continue to assess in the weeks and months to come.
But something else may have also ended. A new era is emerging in the region increasingly defined by a presumption that might equals right. The consequences of this have yet to be truly understood—but there are likely to be many repercussions indeed.
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
VideoBREAKING:
Mass-casualty event in Tehran after a drone struck an IRGC meeting.
Several people killed and wounded
Mass-casualty event in Tehran after a drone struck an IRGC meeting.
Several people killed and wounded
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
It will be very interesting to see what kind of drone it was. And what was the point of origin.
BV
BV
https://x.com/adi13/status/1939786308110422030?s=61
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 9,328
Likes: 2,175
From: Texas
Is this an "exercise gone wrong" or something like that?