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.

 

US warplanes violate Iran's air space: press report

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 01:02 PM
link   
It could have something to do with the fact that Iran with Russia's assistance is planning on building a nuclear reactor. One site would be in Darkhovein near the Arvand River.

Bush would be an idiot to attack Iran before the election, but my guess is that this flyover was done on behalf of Israel, which probably would not risk a flyover before bombing any nuclear plants or facilities.




posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
If this flyover was a favor to Israel, I can't wait to see the fireworks that will ensue if Israel launches an attack against Iran. We'll obviously get sucked into the whole thing, but it'll give the world it's first solid proof (since Israel's not talking) of Israel's nuclear capabilities:

1) "Pre-emptive" strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities
2) Soft-target retaliation by Iran against Israeli interests
3) Nuclear response from Israel

Good thing we're not downwind.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by chaosrain
If this flyover was a favor to Israel, I can't wait to see the fireworks that will ensue if Israel launches an attack against Iran. We'll obviously get sucked into the whole thing, but it'll give the world it's first solid proof (since Israel's not talking) of Israel's nuclear capabilities:

1) "Pre-emptive" strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities
2) Soft-target retaliation by Iran against Israeli interests
3) Nuclear response from Israel

Good thing we're not downwind.


Israel has been making threats, and I'm sure is likely to carry it out. There is no better way at this time considering the Iraq backlash for the US to get into Iran than to declare defense of an ally.

I doubt nuclear weapons will be unleashed. Only a fool with a deathwish would push that button today.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by moxyone
the US is already at war w/ Iran....the battleground is Iraq.


YEP!
The war is on terrorism.
Terrorist supporting nations are the enemy.
Iran is on the list of Supporters of terrorsim.

Maybe we could fight a more "sensitive" war ( Kerryism)..
And Ask permission before entering an ENEMY'S airspace?

This is plain silly..



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt

Originally posted by moxyone
the US is already at war w/ Iran....the battleground is Iraq.


YEP!
The war is on terrorism.
Terrorist supporting nations are the enemy.
Iran is on the list of Supporters of terrorsim.

Maybe we could fight a more "sensitive" war ( Kerryism)..
And Ask permission before entering an ENEMY'S airspace?

This is plain silly..


Bush has no right to declare a global war, and especially one on a trumped up charge of terrorism and use that to invade sovereign nations, especially saovereign nations who did not engage in combative activity against the U.S. Every nation on this earth has terrorist activity within it, does that give him the right to attack Britain, Canada, Australia, France et al?

What if the Arab states were to declare a war against terrorism and invade Israel, would that be acceptable also? In their eyes Israel is committing terrorism.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
What if the Arab states were to declare a war against terrorism and invade Israel, would that be acceptable also? In their eyes Israel is committing terrorism.


Spoken or unspoken, that war already exists.
Fear of REAL retaliation, and the loss of those Arab nations to Isreal keep it
from coming to a head.

For now they are apparently satisfied with using Palestinans as the suicide pawns. As well as the occasional missle fired from across the Lebanese border by Hezbollah outposts..



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Unless there is big incident with Iranian, a potential war with them would be a hard sell for the Bush Adminstration. The the line between self-protection and out and out aggression is thin one. Not many countries are going to let the GWB argue that 9/11 justifies this. We rely to some extent on the good will and enlighten self-interest in the world. What I mean countries continue to deal with us because it is in their self-interest to do so, but there are limits. An unprovoked attack on Irainian without a lot of evidence of something, (smoking gun on a clandestine atomic bomb program), will be seen a threat to international order, and world might become a very cold place for America and Americans in general.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
What if the Arab states were to declare a war against terrorism and invade Israel, would that be acceptable also? In their eyes Israel is committing terrorism.


Spoken or unspoken, that war already exists.
Fear of REAL retaliation, and the loss of those Arab nations to Isreal keep it
from coming to a head.

For now they are apparently satisfied with using Palestinans as the suicide pawns. As well as the occasional missle fired from across the Lebanese border by Hezbollah outposts..


That war does not yet exist. And Lebanon is not the sole aggressor here, since Israel is well known make its own forays into their space. Case in point its bombing of Syria earlier this year.

An alliance of Arab states would certainly not fear retaliation by Israel, which leads me back to my question. If such an alliance were to attack Israel as being a terrorist state because they have so defined it, then either the U.S is to stay out of it and have Israel defend herself, just as it expects everyone else to butt out of Iraq, or live with the fact that attacked and invaded countries will, by any means, defend itself. The U.S after all does not have an absolute right to define morality for the rest of the world.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 11:33 PM
link   
this seems to be happening awfully fast.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 01:14 AM
link   
That artical seems a little far fetched to me. No way Russia would give Nuke sunburns to Iran - they have a huge terrorism problem themselves, and they know the only possable target would be US (a superior millitary power) or Isreal (a nuclear power in her own right, and best buds with you know who).

As for a shooting gallery - have you noticed that the delivery system for these weapons were aircraft? Now, who do you think has air superiority in the area? yup, you guessed it - they get too close, they get shot down. Plus, if Iran took out a carrier, they would be destroyed - seriously, just bombed to hell, bombed, and bombed some more. Then to add insult to injury bombed some more.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
That artical seems a little far fetched to me. No way Russia would give Nuke sunburns to Iran - they have a huge terrorism problem themselves, and they know the only possable target would be US (a superior millitary power) or Isreal (a nuclear power in her own right, and best buds with you know who).

As for a shooting gallery - have you noticed that the delivery system for these weapons were aircraft? Now, who do you think has air superiority in the area? yup, you guessed it - they get too close, they get shot down. Plus, if Iran took out a carrier, they would be destroyed - seriously, just bombed to hell, bombed, and bombed some more. Then to add insult to injury bombed some more.


Note that the sunburn can be launched off of ships and flatbed trucks as well as aircraft.

The article claims that the nuke-tipped sunburns are manned by Russian crews who are the only ones able to decipher the Moscow-issued launch codes and pre-designated targeting systems.

Also, to say that Russia has no strategic or economic interests in the Middle East is wholly untrue.

The presence of nuclear-tipped sunburns is a possibility, but the fact that the Russians are interested in the Middle East is a fact.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by robertfenix
It was as it appears an attempt to root out the Anti Air System. They went in there on purpose to get "painted" and to respond back with the details of the SIG-INT.


That would make sense sort of, but why do it at all with manned jets? You could get the same responce with drones or a predator etc. Shooting down an F-15 and parading the pilot in front fo the media would scuttle any chance of Bush selling a potential conflict with Iran.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
That artical seems a little far fetched to me. No way Russia would give Nuke sunburns to Iran - they have a huge terrorism problem themselves, and they know the only possable target would be US (a superior millitary power) or Isreal (a nuclear power in her own right, and best buds with you know who).


You also have to remeber that while Iran buys weapons etc from the Russians, they are considered sort of like a lesser satan to our Great Satan. In that note, IO have to agree with you. The Russians will sell almost anything, but a Nuclear tipped Sunburn could also threaten them down the road as well.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 05:55 AM
link   
sending F-15s instead of drones is brilliant. If they get shot down and the pilots gets killed by Iranians in front of the media, do realize what would happen?...

"...US Nuclear Launch countdown...10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1.............."
BOOM!!! GOOD BYE IRAN!!! YEE HA!!!



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT


You also have to remeber that while Iran buys weapons etc from the Russians, they are considered sort of like a lesser satan to our Great Satan. In that note, IO have to agree with you. The Russians will sell almost anything, but a Nuclear tipped Sunburn could also threaten them down the road as well.



Depends on Russia's threat analysis of Iran. Russia also has deterence. And if the sunburns rely on Russian codes and operators, that would buy plenty of time to bounce lost sunburns.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by American Mad Man
That artical seems a little far fetched to me. No way Russia would give Nuke sunburns to Iran - they have a huge terrorism problem themselves, and they know the only possable target would be US (a superior millitary power) or Isreal (a nuclear power in her own right, and best buds with you know who).


You also have to remeber that while Iran buys weapons etc from the Russians, they are considered sort of like a lesser satan to our Great Satan. In that note, IO have to agree with you. The Russians will sell almost anything, but a Nuclear tipped Sunburn could also threaten them down the road as well.



“Nuke sunburns” do you mean SS-N-22? If you do, then Iran bough some in 1992.
Iran also builds its own super sonic anti ship missiles with 350 Km range. I believe I have posted the picture before.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally by American Mad Man
That artical seems a little far fetched to me. No way Russia would give Nuke sunburns to Iran - they have a huge terrorism problem themselves, and they know the only possable target would be US (a superior millitary power) or Isreal (a nuclear power in her own right, and best buds with you know who).

As for a shooting gallery - have you noticed that the delivery system for these weapons were aircraft? Now, who do you think has air superiority in the area? yup, you guessed it - they get too close, they get shot down. Plus, if Iran took out a carrier, they would be destroyed - seriously, just bombed to hell, bombed, and bombed some more. Then to add insult to injury bombed some more.



You seem wholly convinced that America's air power is invincible. I don't think it's easy as that, how do you know that Iran hasn't got a comprehensive AA defence system? With Russia supplying them then who knows what they really have.


Originally by DJ Aghetto
sending F-15s instead of drones is brilliant. If they get shot down and the pilots gets killed by Iranians in front of the media, do realize what would happen?...

"...US Nuclear Launch countdown...10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1.............."
BOOM!!! GOOD BYE IRAN!!! YEE HA!!!



"...US Nuclear Launch countdown...10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1.............."
BOOM!!! GOOD BYE ISRAEL!!! YEE HA!!!

I'm sure a lot of people would like to see that happen



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Samiralfey
If Iran did this over US airspace, the US would consider this an act of war...


Then iran should declare war on the US for this act of war.

if this did infact happen, and I don't think the IRNA should be dismissed completely out of hand, then I would think that the most likely reason for it is 'Probing' Iranian defenses, not some scheme to make it look like they are attacking us out of retaliation.


persian:
its people like you who made 9/11 happen


People acting like jingoistic a-holes are not the reason why 911 happened. 911 happened because of bin laden. No 'arrogance' can possibly excuse murdering thousands of civilians.


somewhereinbetween:
Bush would be an idiot to attack Iran before the election

If he perceives it as a real threat then he should attack it immediately, election or not. 'Not saddling an incomming presidency with a new war' is the justification I have often heard given for the Clinton Admin not attacking afghanistand and al-qaeda at the end of clinton's term (personally I don't beleive this, a threat is a threat, irregardless of who is in the administration).

And if the threat is serious enough bush should be taking care of it regardless of the political implications.

Why would the US be invading Iran if the Israeliis attack the nuke plant there? To begin with, they would probably need to fly over Iraqi airspace. It would be exceedingly difficult to say that the Iraqi government agreed to this without strong pressure from the US. Then, after the strike, how would the Iranians be able to respond? Any attack would have to cross iraq, or at least its airspace, short of Turkey granting passage, which is unthinkable now. So how would the US be able to 'come to the defense of an ally' if the ally isn't even attacked?


Lebanon is not the sole aggressor here, since Israel is well known make its own forays into their space. Case in point its bombing of Syria earlier this year


Since lebanon is occupied by a syrian controlled governement, and terrorist groups that attack israel have offices in the syrian capital, why shouldn't israel periodically raid lebanon and syria?


An alliance of Arab states would certainly not fear retaliation by Israel


They should, since they couldn't defeat Israel in the two wars they started against then in the past.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flyboy211

Originally by American Mad Man
That artical seems a little far fetched to me. No way Russia would give Nuke sunburns to Iran - they have a huge terrorism problem themselves, and they know the only possable target would be US (a superior millitary power) or Isreal (a nuclear power in her own right, and best buds with you know who).

As for a shooting gallery - have you noticed that the delivery system for these weapons were aircraft? Now, who do you think has air superiority in the area? yup, you guessed it - they get too close, they get shot down. Plus, if Iran took out a carrier, they would be destroyed - seriously, just bombed to hell, bombed, and bombed some more. Then to add insult to injury bombed some more.



You seem wholly convinced that America's air power is invincible. I don't think it's easy as that, how do you know that Iran hasn't got a comprehensive AA defence system? With Russia supplying them then who knows what they really have.


Originally by DJ Aghetto
sending F-15s instead of drones is brilliant. If they get shot down and the pilots gets killed by Iranians in front of the media, do realize what would happen?...

"...US Nuclear Launch countdown...10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1.............."
BOOM!!! GOOD BYE IRAN!!! YEE HA!!!



"...US Nuclear Launch countdown...10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1.............."
BOOM!!! GOOD BYE ISRAEL!!! YEE HA!!!

I'm sure a lot of people would like to see that happen


hey flyboy,

no matter what, Iran's air defense system wont be able to shoot down stealth bombers and fighters


as far as the US attacking Israel, it will never happen. Do you know how much technology is exchanged between the two countries? They also work together on many military projects. And besides, Israel and the US have a very strong "Zionist" relationship!


so once again, GOOD BYE IRAN!!! YEE HA!!!



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Note that the sunburn can be launched off of ships and flatbed trucks as well as aircraft.

The article claims that the nuke-tipped sunburns are manned by Russian crews who are the only ones able to decipher the Moscow-issued launch codes and pre-designated targeting systems.

Also, to say that Russia has no strategic or economic interests in the Middle East is wholly untrue.

The presence of nuclear-tipped sunburns is a possibility, but the fact that the Russians are interested in the Middle East is a fact.


First off I never said that Russia has no interest in the ME. Never said that once. All I said was that all of their weapons in that artical are air launched weapons. As far as the nukes go, like I said - no way, no how. It poses a greater risk to them then it does us.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join