It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: US Jets Over Iran, Unidentified Aircraft Ordered Shot Down

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Recently American fighter jets have violated Iranian airspace. One a flight out of Afghanistan and another three jets based out of Iraq. The Iranian military has been closely watching occupying forces in Iraq and Afghanistan in case of a suprise invasion. The concerns that have been raised of a US or Israeli venture into Iran to destroy nuclear facilities has them on edge - and for such reasons they've issued a shoot down order for all unidentified craft.
 



www.payvand.com
"The three warplanes, of F-18 Hornets and F-16 Tomcats types, held overflights at high altitudes near the Khorramshahr and Abadan air borders.

"The circular maneuvering of the two American fighters indicated them as carrying out spying sorties and controlling the borders," the paper quoted the source as saying.

The report came less than a week after Iran's Air Force chief, Brigadier Karim Qavami was quoted as having ordered the forces under his command to open fire and shoot down any unidentified aircraft violating the country's air space.

"Given that the intrusion of enemy aircraft over Iran's air space is possible, all fighter jets of the country have been ordered by the Army chief to shoot them down in the event of sighting them," the daily Kayhan quoted Qavami as saying last Saturday.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Hopefully the "shoot down" order is just saber rattling. What better reason would we have to take offensive actions towards Iran than a few downed fighter jets that accidently (or not) wandered over the border.

Iran is fully prepared to defend their nation making a possible military invasion look that much more difficult.

In June the Iranian Navy seized three British craft for being in Iranian territory

[edit on (1/2/0505 by PistolPete]




posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Well playing Devils Advocate would we tolerate an incursion of say Cuban aircraft? I doubt it. Same difference. Now its a well known fact that Curtis E. laMay sent his bombers on his authority into sSoviet airspace hoping to provoke a reaction. Maybe thats what we have here?



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Oh Pete you have it so right, Bushco is looking for any reason to attack Iran
how long will it take for the "sheeple" to see what is happening or will the Bu#s come up with another distraction? Such as social security etc to distract the one-track minds of the blinder wearing sheeple, Faux Snuz and the Corporate News Network aka CNN are nothing but mind control for the herd. Mult-tasking to them equates to walking and talking on their cell-phone at the same time without triping over the cracks in the sidewalk, also supports the laws banning the use of cell phones while driving, . more later,,,katt



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:25 AM
link   
How quick the finger pointing goes, WITHOUT enough information to substantiate an alleged "Bush plan" to sucker Iran into an attack.

Anyone ever hear of pilots being slightly off course? Instrument malfunction? (on either plane or Iran side) Sure it could be a plan too, yet i see this as much lower of a chance than other more plausable explanations.

I dont begrudge Iran for defending its boarders IF they could...(they wouldnt get close to USA planes before we either left the area or destroyed them)

Saber rattling is a good possibillity, and i wouldnt be suprised that they would.
Even IF there was some kind on incident....i doubght there would be more than heavy rhetoric flung around...Iran wouldnt want to press the USA into a fight, and America would not blow suprise by accidentally allowing its jets to reveal an attack...it would most likley be investigated and no further millitary acts taken.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:27 AM
link   
With Rense.com-like credibility...

Ummm, sadly and unfortunately, I find the credibility of this article to be suspect and highly dubious.


"The three warplanes, of F-18 Hornets and F-16 Tomcats types...


Excuse me, but since when has an F-16 looked anywhere remotely close to resembling a/an Tomcat? A Tomcat is an F-14.

Furthermore, I Googled and found no other news agency's reporting this claimed occurance.
U.S. jet fighters violate Iranian airspace
and
US fighters violate Iranian air space

The last mentioned alledged U.S. incursion/violation happened in August of 2004 and again, this event is only picked up by Iranian news sources. No Western or Asian sources, not even the Indian or Pakistan sources.

Interesting.....






seekerof

[edit on 3-1-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Does anyone else secretly wonder if these UFOs are really 'UFOs' in the popular sense? Though I believe that Bush wants to knock out Iran's nuclear capability -- and though I believe that we will be at war with Iran shortly -- I also think that it's possible that these UFOs everyone assumes are american might actually be piloted by, shall we say, 'unknown' forces.

Think about it. UFOs have always been sighted near the nuclear facilities of nations at the moment they became capable of making atomic weapons. The classic American UFO stories, for instance, all involve UFO overflights of nuclear and missile stations/sites.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:35 AM
link   
seeker,
actually, UFO reports from Iran have been coming in for about a year. If there are no credible reports of US aircraft operating in that area... that just supports the notion that these are either unsual/classified ucavs or experimental planes... or that they are bona fide UFOs.

And, yes, we all know that an F-14 is a Tomcat, not a falcon. However I doubt that most Iranian reporters will know that... and this story supposedly came from Iran.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:47 AM
link   
This sounds like an Iranian policy just waiting for disaster. Shoot first and ask questions later. What if the UFO turns out to be a civilian airplane full of hundreds of passengers? Accidents have happened before and all sides should find out first what type of aircraft something is before immediately shooting at all unidentified flying objects. Maybe the Iranians want to go to war with the US afterall. Or maybe they want to accidently shoot down one of their own airlines that accidently became unidentified.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:53 AM
link   

as posted by onlyinmydreams
And, yes, we all know that an F-14 is a Tomcat, not a falcon. However I doubt that most Iranian reporters will know that... and this story supposedly came from Iran.


Not buying that, onlyinmydreams. The Iranian Air Force used to operate F-14's, and probably still does on a limited basis.


The United States in the late 1970s supplied F-14's to Iran, only to have them fall into the hands of the Islamic Republic of Iran after the 1979 revolution. From that point forward, Iran used the fighter primarily as an airborne radar controller, escorted and protected by other fighters.

F-14 Tomcat
A picture:
Iranian F-14

Can find a better reference or source, if so desired. Found the above in haste.




seekerof

[edit on 3-1-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 03:10 AM
link   
Google doesn't pick up all languages and even if it did we couldn't read them. Just because something doesn't show up in a google search doesn't mean stories haven't been run on the issue. And since there have been instances cited, like the one in August and the Iranian Navy debacle in June, past events have made the scenario much more likely than unlikely.

While it doesn't do much for us: this is the Kayhan. One of the sources used in the article. Another source is the AFP, that's definitely a reputable news agency.

This is a couple days old but it's from the IRNA:


Tehran, Dec 25, IRNA -- Iran`s Air Force has been ordered to open fire
and shoot down any unidentified aircraft violating its air space, the
press on Saturday quoted Air Force chief Brigadier Karim Qavami as
saying.
"Given that the intrusion of enemy aircraft over Iran`s air space
is possible, all fighter jets of the country have been ordered by the
Army chief to shoot them down in the event of sighting them," the
daily Kayhan quoted Qavami as saying.
The Air Force chief stressed that `any flight (within Iranian air
space) must be coordinated, or else it will be targeted`, the daily
added.
Iran has been wary of the occupation forces` presence on its
doorsteps in Iraq and have had their movements under close scrutiny.
In August, press reports said that five US warplanes had entered
Iran`s air space from the southwestern Shalamcheh border and flown
over the city of Khorramshahr.
According the Persian daily Seday-e Edalat, `the jet fighters
which flew at high speed and altitude, then headed to the Arvand
River`


Another interesting bit from the Pakistan Daily Times:


TEHRAN: Irans air force has been ordered to shoot down any unidentified or suspicious flying objects in Irans airspace, an air force spokesman said on Saturday, amid state-media reports of sightings of flying objects near Irans nuclear installations.

All anti-aircraft units and jet fighters have been ordered to shoot down the flying objects over Irans airspace, spokesman of the Regular Army Air Force Colonel Salman Mahini said.

Flying object fever has gripped Iran after dozens of reported sightings in the summer and in recent weeks. State-run media has reported sightings of unidentified objects flying over parts of Iran where nuclear facilities are located.

The unidentified flying objects could be satellites, comets or spying or reconnaissance crafts trying to monitor Irans nuclear installations, Mahini said.

Flights of unknown objects in the countrys airspace have increased in recent weeks ... (they) have been seen over Bushehr and Isfahan provinces, the Resalat newspaper reported on Saturday.

There are nuclear facilities in both provinces. The timing of the reported increase in sightings, which comes as the US is urging allies to confront Iran over its nuclear program, has strengthened Iranian public perceptions that the objects are surveillance or hostile aircrafts monitoring Iran.


The reason I posted an article from a somewhat questionable site was the fact that their sources for the article were all very real news entities. It really appears something might be brewing over there. Especially in the wake of Iran's largest military drills ever.

On the subject of the planes: it didn't say that they were either or - the three planes easily could have been two of one and one of the other. It's basically a semantics argument.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 03:43 AM
link   

as posted by PistolPete
On the subject of the planes: it didn't say that they were either or - the three planes easily could have been two of one and one of the other. It's basically a semantics argument.


Quite possibly so, but if this is simply a case of semantics, when applied to the number and type of aircraft, its not semantics that they were identified, alledged, and then reported as being U.S. though, huh? I find it rather hilarious that the sources can't identify an aircraft type, but they can identify the aircraft as being a U.S. "type" aircraft? Semantics, indeed, despite it being dubious, and highly questionable!

The problem here is that these claims, as from the original article, is/are mixing "identified" with "unidentified." Let me guess, because of "the US is urging allies to confront Iran over its nuclear program," the "unidentified" incursions are partially becoming "identified," in that they are being reported as U.S. jet fighter incursions?

Then again, its all semantics....*shrugs*





seekerof

[edit on 3-1-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 03:43 AM
link   
Payvand seems like a reputable site, just look at their news articles, payvand.com...
They are nothing like Rense.com.


I think this could be used as another way to justify military action against Iran.
They could violate Iranian airspace or Iranian waters and after Iran responds, just claim that they attacked you to help gain support from the media, the public and the international community.

Just like they did with 'Operation Praire Fire' in Libya in 1986.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 03:55 AM
link   
They are setting themselves up for failure in the long run unless they really get in deep into their air space...
I really dont see why our fighter/attackers need to be flying so close to the boarder anyway? Even with pilot error and instrument malfunction one usually isnt too far off course...



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Quite possibly so, but if this is simply a case of semantics, when applied to the number and type of aircraft, its not semantics that they were identified, alledged, and then reported as being U.S. though, huh? I find it rather hilarious that the sources can't identify an aircraft type, but they can identify the aircraft as being a U.S. "type" aircraft? Semantics, indeed, despite it being dubious, and highly questionable!


They did identify the aircraft type, they just called it a "Tomcat" mistakenly. That type of thing happens in the news frequently. Citing some legislator is from a wrong state, getting a first name wrong, etc. In those cases you just think "this guy should do better research", you don't call the validity of an article into question over such a thing. To top that off they are translating the original source from Farsi into English - things can easily get lost in translation.


The problem here is that these claims, as from the original article, is/are mixing "identified" with "unidentified." Let me guess, because of "the US is urging allies to confront Iran over its nuclear program," the "unidentified" incursions are partially becoming "identified," in that they are being reported as U.S. jet fighter incursions?


In the article it clearly states: " The Air Force chief stressed that 'any flight (within Iranian air space) must be coordinated, or else it will be targeted', the daily added." The planes are identifiably American planes, but are making uncoordinated (read: unidentified) flights. That's what I took from the article any way.

This source is quoting Asian News International as saying:


www.newkerala.com
Tehran, Jan. 3 : US warplanes flying out of bases in Afghanistan and Iraq have committed a string of violations of Iranian airspace, Iranian press reports said on Monday.

According to the local newspapers, the latest violation came on Saturday when a US fighter flew at low altitude over an area in the northeastern province of Khorrasan which borders Afghanistan.

According to The News, the over flight followed a recent intrusion by F-16 and F-18 fighters over the southwestern province of Khuzestan which borders southern Iraq. Papers said the planes appeared to be spying on nuclear sites.(ANI)



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:35 PM
link   
The UPI and Washington Times now reporting the incidents (still with the Tomcat mistake):


Tensions continue to rise between Iran and U.S. forces based in Iraq. According to the Iranian media, a U.S. fighter violated Iranian air space on Dec. 30, along the country's border near Afghanistan in Razavi Khorassan eastern province. The intrusion is the latest in a series of U.S. overflights reported by the press. The U.S. fighter entered Iranian air space over Iran's Mousa-Abad region for several minutes before returning to Afghanistan. Earlier U.S. overflights occurred over the southwestern cities of Khorramshahr and Abadan near the Iraqi border. An Iranian military source who was not identified said, "The three warplanes, of F-18 Hornets and F-16 Tomcat types held overflights at high altitudes near the Khorramshahr and Abadan air borders. The circular maneuvering of the two American fighters indicated them as carrying out spying sorties and controlling the borders." Less than a week earlier, Iranian Air Force chief Brigadier Karim Qavami was quoted as having ordered his forces to open fire and shoot down any unidentified aircraft violating the country's airspace, commenting: "Given that the intrusion of enemy aircraft over Iran's airspace is possible, all fighter jets of the country have been ordered by the Army chief to shoot them down in the event of sighting them." In August five U.S. warplanes entered Iranian airspace from the southwestern Shalamcheh border and overflew Khorramshahr. Iranian military specialists believe the intrusions are designed to assess the capabilities of Iran's anti-aircraft defenses.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
If Iran seeks to intercept the USA's over flights they will lose their planes then will seek recompense via the Un and end up with newer planes



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Predicition:
I am also of the opinion that very shortly a civilian airliner or other "innocent" craft will be "shot down" providing a reason to attack, and escalate tensions...
perhaps even result in a first strike, or war beginning...



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I keep thinking of interviewing 10 witnesses and getting 10 different descriptions! It all depends on who you place credibility in and which direction your personal inclinations lean to begin with.
We've all seen boogy men in the dark when actually there's nothing there. On the other hand, I don't want to be guilty of dismissing information and having it come back to bit me later...especially due to an error by a reporter translating the information.
For yet another version, the following link can be accessed to The Persian Journal.
www.iranian.ws...

Fastwalker



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by fastwalker
For yet another version, the following link can be accessed to The Persian Journal.
www.iranian.ws...

Fastwalker


That was the August incident.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   
I don't know... maybe the opinion polls show that americans won't tolerate anymore wars without someone trying to hurt our forces. Deliberatelly provoking an incident is a dangerous thing.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join