Talk:Islamic Republic of Iran Armed Forces

message: Removed the two lines of USA qoute about Iran is the most powerful military in the Middle East. There is utterly no proof of it! and its based almost complete on one mans personnel opinion not very reliable. No point in adding that comment until after more information is proven. It seems more like a ego and national pride comment.
Ben Harel
I completely agree with this comment.  Being a student of military studies, I also find that for the most part, the article is overwhelmingly Pro-Iranian, not an unbiased report on Iran's military institutions and capabilities.  Details, range estimates, clear, academic writing is what should govern this page, not what I can only imagine to be Iranian propoganda.
L Diaco  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.79.93 (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the problem here lies with using subjective and editorialized sentences, without a direct attribution to a reliable source supporting that. One may say Iran is ranked 14th in the world, with GFP Index taken into consideration, that's OK. Feel free to remove anything not backed up by the sources cited in the article. Pahlevun (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Iran Middle East power status

message: ArmanJan, threats are a poor substitute for reasoned arguments. Why do you object to the photo link? I believe it is relevant; it adds to the resources immediately available to the reader of "Military of Iran," which is hardly detailed enough. And, as long as I'm asking, why did you add the Eagle Claw link? PRRfan 00:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Praying Mantis link

message: Where is there mention of Iran's attempt to obtain nuclear technology?
::Iran has already obtained nuclear technology, however this has nothing to do with the Iranian military. It is only in the imagination of the U.S. that Iran uses it for weapons. As can be read in the latest report (GOV/2006/15) of the IAEA "the Agency has not seen any diversion of nuclear material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices".
::: The above anon statement smacks of POV. However I imagine that until such time as Iran produces a working nuclear weapon and that weapon is handed to the military that mention of it should not be put in this article. NickD
::::I agree with the Anon statement above. Very much to the point... 
However, perhaps we should put a link to Irans Nuclear Programme with the above explanation in the Weapons of Mass Destruction area.
I don't think that Iran's nuclear program should be lumped with WMDs.  There is, so far, nothing to prove that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.  All we have right now are the Bush Administration claims that Iran is pursuing WMDs, and these claims may turn out to be like the claims regarding Iraqi WMDs.  Talmakian 19:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nuclear Technology

message: First, the sentence was ridiculous. A country does not have a strong military because it spends less. Obviously, you meant something else, but that is not what you wrote.
Second, to know whether Iran has the strongest conventional military is a simple comparison of equipment and personnel. We know that Iran vastly outnumbers and out equips any of its neighbors. One plus one is two, Iran has the strongest military. User:ArmanJan
::Training is also very signigicant. Its not all about numbers and hardware. Unfortuntely, Iran suffers from poor training (conscription service is a joke) for the larger part. Tototom 09:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: PRRfan, why do you not use your brain instead of asking for citations? This is like asking for citations about whether Germany is stronger than Holland or Belgium. User:ArmanJan
ArmanJan, citations are somewhat more persuasive than insults. If it is so obvious, it should be a simple matter to cite a reference. PRRfan 16:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here you have your citation --> User:ArmanJan. We do have brains you know? Who do you think runs all those websites? People like you and I.
Question on this quote: "Still, Iran has one of the strongest conventional militaries in the Middle East because it keeps costs low by manufacturing many of its weapons instead of buying them abroad"
Doesn't make sense to me. It is an interesting fact that they manufacture themselves, but why are costs lower when manufactured instead of bought? Common sense says it should be the other way around (Division of labour) 15:40, 8 Aug 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Budget 

message: You guys have done an excellent job of expanding this series, but I think a couple of things are still missing.  First, what about the pre-revolutionary combat history of the army?  Didn't they successfully beat back a Soviet offensive in the north in 1946?  I know this isn't the place to go all the way back to Nadir Shah, but it would be nice to include at least the rest of the twentieth century.  Secondly, you did a great job with the rank insignia tables, but it would be nice to add the Persian spelling.    Speaking of that, when I look at the Persian page, it has the lowest rank as سرباز دوم, which would transliterate as sarba(a)z do(o)m; however, the English version calls that rank sarbaz yekom.  The Persian page has that word (سرباز يکم) next to the corporal's insignia.  Which is correct?  Overall, you've done a great job, but please check out issues I've mentioned.  --Jpbrenna 21:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: :::"In another case, Iranian UAVs spied on the USS Ronald Reagan for 25 minutes without being detected."
The source for this statement points to an RIAN article which paraphrases the Iranian government only.  Is there not a source that includes a response from the Americans?  Just seems to me to be a suspect claim that a US Aircraft Carrier would not detect a drone.  Perhaps this sentence should be changed to "In another case, Iranian UAVs spied on the USS Ronald Reagan for 25 minutes without, according to Iranian sources, being detected.
:Perhaps if you worded it could be worded better? I see your point but id suspect it being correct so wouldn't want it worded to harshly 144.82.192.102 12:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: acually they can only mobilize apprx 1 million troops..  the 11 million number includes kids and grandfathers and in no way represents how many they could truthfully bring to battle.  Its very misleading.  sorry but IRAN does not have the largest fighting force in the world.
that is not true those 11,000,000 are revolutionary guards
...and i'm sure thats true! ;) Smackmonkey 14:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 11 million number for basij is bogus. 

message: I propose that the format of the page changed, with a more organized view. I believe that the chemical weapons should be removed to the end of the page and the budget to the beginning. also I dont understand why so many names are present, this is one of the few military pages that I have noticed such a thing. A history is definitely needed- not just history of operations but the history of iranian military. The defense industry section is also incomplete and needs more information on the industry after the revolution- especially in the past few years. Also more important there should be a section regarding iranian available weapons. If everyone agrees it would be nice to make it easier to look at.User:Ali Soltani
::Sounds good, the defence industry already has an article of its own here that we always need help with. The new format sounds good though. L0b0t 22:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You guys should take a look at the Military of Pakistan. I think that is a good template for the Iranian Military page on wikipedia. I know, I wrote it. ;) Mercenary2k 17:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the format 

message: on the military menu there sais iran has got 768,000 troops is this wrong or is the 545,000 wrong? The Honorable Kermanshahi 13:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  active troops iran 

message: It has recently been proven by VatooVatoo that the Iranian navy consists of 25,600 personel instead of 18,000. This is 7,600 more so I have added this to the numbers and changed the active troops to 552,600 and the total troops to 12,292,600. The Honorable Kermanshahi 14:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read this thanks --VatooVatoo 19:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Changed Irans Number

message: "The U.S had been accused of supplying Iraq with chemical weapons, yet an international coalition reported no evidence of such U.S. manufactured weapons after a 2003 invasion of Iraq. This could however be attributed to Iraq disposing of its weapons of mass destruction after the conflict with Iran."
This reeks of POV and bias.  I know that there is an ongoing arguement that Iraq may or may not have disposed of its weapons of mass destruction after the first Gulf War, but why does this issue have to be brought up in a section about another country?  I asked that it be removed, please, to improve the quality of this article.  Thanks.
I'll give till Sunday to have this edited, then I'll do it myself.  Thank you for the discussion on this topic.--splashallison
I took out the link about the chemical weapons coming from the west.  May well be true, but shouldn't be in there without a supporting reference link.  If you have one, feel free to add it back. ~~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.108.104 (talk) 20:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical Weapons 

message: The information about Irans military budget is out of date, it is from 2005. Can anyone find a source for 2007? The Honorable Kermanshahi 20:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the CIA World fact book Irans military expenditures are 2.5% of it's GDP and it's GDP is $599.2 Bilion meaning Irans expenditures are $15 Bilion. If anyone can find an other source wich actually states Irans military expenditures as of 2007 please do but I have been unable to find it and the current source is out of date as it is of 2005 and we are 2 years further now. But should we change it to $15 Bilion now? The Honorable Kermanshahi 10:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am trying to find some references for the military expenditure. Can someone point me to the reference of the $36 billion (2009) and the 10.5% (2009) %GBP? FFMG (talk) 20:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Military Budget

message: :Image:ArteshEmblem.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 10:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:ArteshEmblem.jpg

message: :Image:Fajr-3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Fajr-3.jpg

message: :Image:Artesh Logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 08:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Artesh Logo.gif

message: :Image:Iranchemical.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Iranchemical.gif

message: The author of this sections makes claims that are as sweeping as they are unsubstantiated, and in some cases, outright wrong: 
The word navy is a term derived from Persian Naavs (ships) of Achaemenid military expeditions against ancient Greece. 
The word navy in English is clearly derived from the Latin, which had such terms as navis, ship, and navigare, to sail.  The ancient Greek word for ship (in Latin transcription) is naus. The author seems to be unaware that Greek, Latin, and Persian are all Indo-European languages, and so distantly related. Similarities in their vocabulary are to be expected, and cannot serve to prove the seniority of Persia in military navigation.
Those very same expeditions entailed crossings of entire armies from Asia to Europe over military bridges constructed by extending a floating platform of ships from the Asian land mass to Europe.
Boat bridges were well-known in antiquity, and their use not limited to Persia.
The first Knights complete with shinning armor and plumed helmets were Sassanid Iranian nobles, and European heraldry is directly traceable to the Iranian Knights and overall culture of (lone) heroes and mythic figures such as Rostam, Zal, Bahram, etc. 
Any sources for this rather daring assertion regarding European chivalry?  There is certainly none to be found in the article on Heraldry. Not to mention that Europe lost contact with Persia almost completely during the early middle ages, when knightly culture developed. 
And it was the sovereign head of the Iranian Army that marched un-opposed into Babylon that decreed the first codec of the rights of conquered people and nations. 
Again, no proof at all is cited for this claim.  Given that the Babylonians rebelled three times against Persian rule after their occupation in 539 BCE, maybe these "rights of conquered people" were not so substantial after all?  Also, the entry of Cyrus into the city was unexpected rather than unopposed. See Babylon for comparison. 
This section needs to be rewritten in full, with proper sources, and less boasting. Textor (talk) 04:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious Claims in History Section

message: On the page it is mentioned that the military expenditure was 3.5% of the GDP in 2005. While this is not true:
(6.3*10^9/634.563*10^9)*100=0.9928%, which is just about 1% of the GDP.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noaccess2k (talk • contribs) 11:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was meant at exchange rate parity prices not PPP.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.251.98 (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Military Expenditure

message: Should read:
-Major General Hassan Firouzabadi (Head of the Joint Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluezappy (talk • contribs) 07:55, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commanders entry outdated and foreign supplier addition 

message: >> Iran announces missile breakthrough (Lihaas (talk) 18:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: Currently, there is a significant amount of information about Iran's Pahlavi era armed forces, in the History section of this article. Considering that this is about the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, that information is out of place and unnecessary. It could be moved to the Pahlavi Era section of the Military history of Iran article.
The History section of this article only needs to start from the sentence "With the Iranian revolution in 1979, deteriorating relations with the United States resulted in international sanctions led by the USA, including an arms embargo being imposed on Iran."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreddmoto (talk • contribs) 17:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section 

message: Recently there has been a series of edits by User talk:Behnamvvv which are clearly pushing a clearly agenda driven and personnel POV that in my opinion can be considered vandalism, he uses unsourced materials, he also removed the pics he doesn't likes and added pictures that are clearly chosen based on his anti-IRI POV(picture of a failed experimental helicopter from 1980s and a mini submarine- Sabehat SDV), the same images have been deleted by bot some times ago because of copyrights violations, he has also threatened to take me to interpol!! and other made nonsense threats in order to intimidate me.Farzam1370 (talk) 21:48, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by Behnamvvv 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091013091005/http://www.google.com:80/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g1Gstwmv_-bbq2W6NOlhaubl5UMw to http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g1Gstwmv_-bbq2W6NOlhaubl5UMw
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120515214415/http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=110934§ionid=351020101 to http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=110934§ionid=351020101
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081013025249/http://www.presstv.com:80/detail.aspx?id=69562§ionid=351020101 to http://www.presstv.com/Detail.aspx?id=69562§ionid=351020101
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080912235940/http://www.presstv.ir:80/detail.aspx?id=68062§ionid=351020101 to http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=68062§ionid=351020101
*Added  tag to http://www.globalbearings.net/2011/12/view-irgc-naval-bases-in-larger-map.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100328072123/http://milexdata.sipri.org/ to http://milexdata.sipri.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071019052158/http://www.ieicorp.com:80/about.htm to http://www.ieicorp.com/about.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090618194613/http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Missile/1788_1789.html to http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Missile/1788_1789.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090526210910/http://www.presstv.com:80/detail.aspx?id=95824§ionid=351020101 to http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=95824§ionid=351020101
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121108034357/http://www.armyrecognition.com:80/november_2012_new_army_military_defence_industry/iran_reported_that_irans_army_has_achieved_self-sufficiency_in_producing_military_equipment_0511123.html to http://www.armyrecognition.com/november_2012_new_army_military_defence_industry/iran_reported_that_irans_army_has_achieved_self-sufficiency_in_producing_military_equipment_0511123.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.mehrnews.com/fa/newsdetail.aspx?NewsID=1075876%2F
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120601051006/http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8711271164%2F to http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8711271164%2F
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304121825/http://www.irdc.ir/en/calendar/357/default.aspx to http://www.irdc.ir/en/calendar/357/default.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Russia, China, Belarus, North Korea, Eritrea, Venezuela, Algeria, Syria, Iraq, India, South Africa, etc Jw10u36engeve25be768ko27siw37ppql639sns918nvzfgzb (talk) 03:23, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add foriegn suppliers or allies 

message: Is this Pompous pompeo serious? How the hell are Tawakalna ala Allah "Operations" and "the" Operation Praying Mantis (terrible English btw) depicted as the "last two major battles" fought by Iranian forces? They're neither major nor last, obviously, and this cherry picking is outright naked. Also, how does Iran's military "largely" consist of outdated US or Soviet arms? I mean obviously the bulk of Iran's "purchased" weapons are old Soviet and US weaponry but every idiot knows Iran's military has invested in a domestic rearmament program and poured in considerable capital. There's a reason why arms proliferation and missile technology is one of the political hot topics between Iran and the West. The person responsible for the intro knows nothing of this rearmament program, or they're simply biased.
He mentions two non-major Iranian defeats (he would have found major defeats if he had looked harder!) and ignored all the major victories during the Iran Iraq war. Not that that's the point, but he's obviously cherry picking, and in doing so he picked two minor engagements in an intro meant to outline a summery of Iran's armed forces. This article has become a platform for anti-Iranian as well as pro-Iranian edits, and this needs to end
:  for now,  got some cites for all your above claims ?---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 10:07, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The introduction is clearly biased and outright silly 

message: CsShko0 (talk) 21:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The article about the Iraqi civil war says that Iranian forces were engaged there, this information is sourced (source number 58).---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 21:40, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 July 2021 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: There is an image of the Iranian army I found on the news. So I uploaded it to Wikipedia commons then to this Wikipedia page Yhyhyhyhy (talk) 07:05, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image again