Iran Fires On US Drone

page: 11
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Duderood
 


I'd take pretty much the same course I am now. Not really a big deal. I grew up with the Soviets flying over our carrier groups, and off the coast of the US. If Iran had the capability to fly a manned or unmanned aircraft off our coast in international waters, then go for it. Treat it just like the Soviet, and now Russian, planes are treated. Escort it until it leaves the area, and then ignore it.




posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by hououinkyouma
 



Yeah, I would have no problem with that and since when US Army targets children? They are not some middle eastern "freedom fighters".


Civilians die in every war. They give it the DE-sensitizing name of collateral damage.


The rules are clear, they shoot an american aircraft in international waters. If USA wants they are attacking within the international laws.


Rationality triumphs rules.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

We were in International airspace... yeah right.






And you're so cocked sure it took place over Iranian territory?


No sir, not 'cocked sure', my expression meant I'm doubtful, apologies...I'm far from being a writer.
Personally, after ten years of watching our harassment techniques while employed by this country's military intel and communications units, I find myself a tad doubtful that the claims our military makes half the time are even close to accurate. I could be a bit tainted but I doubt not by much. I remain, however, a proud veteran and patriot.

I wish I had a nickle for every 109 Howitzer round we 'accidentally lost' over the DMZ into N Korea during live fire muscle flexing exercises back in '84, for example.
They thumb our nose at us, we rattle a sabre and thumb our nose back,.... happens all the time. Most of it never making the news.
edit on 9-11-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by maes2
what kind of news are those short statements at all ! any how as it was expected they claim that it was near their waters.



Common sense.

If it were in Iranian space and they fired on the evil drone they would have plastered it all over the Media as of another example of the "Great Satan" They knew they were in the wrong when they fired on it in International territory but now that the story has broke in the Western Media {After the Elections}
they have to say something instead of just sitting there like a bump on a log.

Otherwise this never would have come to light...............



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by rocklobster1

Originally posted by Auricom


Sorry, but the Iranians had every right to shoot this down. As does the US and every sovereign nation.




they didnt shoot anything down.
it helps to actually read the article and the thread


Plus, NO nation has any right to even shoot at any other nation's craft in international waters...or international airspace.
If that were the case, no commercial aircraft would be safe anywhere.
Naturally, the pro-Iran apologists would just love to cede the privilege to shoot at anything in the air or sea ANYWHERE, exclusively to Iran.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Trustfund
 





Rationality triumphs rules.


Actually the rules are the rationality.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
The problem here is that airspace definitions are so fuzzy when it comes to measuring off the coast. There is always some small island off the coast that the country may say is where the measurment starts, and other countries say that the mainland is where it starts. There are all other kinds of fuzzyness as well.

The US didn't go after these Iranian jets, to me that says that they really couldn't. Yes, they are saying they were in international space....according to them. I'm sure the Iranians will say they were in their airspace because of this one small island or outcrop or reef or something.

I would guess that the drone was in the fuzzy airspace, and that is why there is no huge response or outcry over it. Both parties were probably in the right and in the wrong.


+6 more 
posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Beavers
 


Except that our instrument of war was in international airspace where it had every right to be. What if it had been an RC-135, or a C-17? Or even worse, an A320, or 737? They had every right to fly a Predator in international airspace, wherever they wanted to, without it being shot at.


Just like when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655?


Iran Air Flight 655 was a civilian jet airliner shot down by U.S. missiles on 3 July 1988 as it flew over the Strait of Hormuz at the end of the Iran–Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. While flying in Iranian airspace over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path, it was destroyed by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes (CG-49). All 290 onboard including 66 children and 16 crew perished.[1] The incident is ranked ninth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history. It was the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Indian Ocean and the highest death toll of any incident involving an Airbus A300 anywhere in the world.[citation needed] The Vincennes had entered Iranian territorial waters after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits.


From the AP article:


According to the Pentagon, the Iranian war plane made at least two passes by the slower-moving drone, firing "multiple rounds."


We all know that everything the Pentagom says is completely truthful


This sounds fishy...

I take this news with a grain of salt as Iran would normally boast about these actions.
edit on 11/9/2012 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Lonewulph
 


I'm more than personally familiar with the scenarios...


The problem here is that the "Iran can do no wrong and when they are caught with their pants down around their ankles it is justified" crowd's noise get's a bit old.....



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


And I mentioned the Iran Air incident. There are aspects of that that absolutely reek of a setup, but they were wrong to shoot without identifying. Even if they thought they were under attack, the crew made a number of mistakes that day. The crew of the Iran Air flight made some as well, such as not monitoring Guard as required, but that doesn't justify Vincennes' actions.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Lonewulph
 


I'm more than personally familiar with the scenarios...


The problem here is that the "Iran can do no wrong and when they are caught with their pants down around their ankles it is justified" crowd's noise get's a bit old.....




Yessir agreed, although again personally, pending an honest investigation....doubt still exists as to who actually had their pants down because both sides lie.
edit on 9-11-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Just like when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655?



What always get's left out is that that aircraft prior to the "pilgrimage use" to Saudi Arabia was the fact that it was involved as a troops transport {Because they lacked those types of military aircraft at the time} in the Iran/Iraq war and it was still squawking as a military aircraft instead of switching back to civilian use.....


Check into it.




posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lonewulph
Yessir agreed, although again personally, pending an honest investigation....doubt still exists as to who actually had their pants down because both sides lie.



True..

Now, ask yourself this. If the Iranians had fired upon the craft in their territory why didn't they use it {as they always do in similar circumstances} as great propaganda as another example of the Great Satan's aggressiveness.?

No, They waited until after it broke in the West. Then, they release a few feeble lines in response. I'm sorry, but imho, they knew they were in the wrong and weren't going to say anything.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Not to mention the fact that despite only having been in the water a short time, the bodies were naked and bloated when found.

Although the Vincennes made mistakes too, and that whole thing probably could have been avoided if someone had stopped for an extra few seconds somewhere along the line.


+2 more 
posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Just like when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655?



What always get's left out is that that aircraft prior to the "pilgrimage use" to Saudi Arabia was the fact that it was involved as a troops transport {Because they lacked those types of military aircraft at the time} in the Iran/Iraq war and it was still squawking as a military aircraft instead of switching back to civilian use.....


Check into it.



This is the first I have heard of this, but instead of me looking into it, how about you provide a factual source?Even if what you claim is true does that justify the women and children on board as "collateral damage"?

I'm not trying to be lazy, and I know that Google is my friend, but since you made the claim I would appreciate that you back it up



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Lonewulph
Yessir agreed, although again personally, pending an honest investigation....doubt still exists as to who actually had their pants down because both sides lie.


Now, ask yourself this. If the Iranians had fired upon the craft in their territory why didn't they use it {as they always do in similar circumstances} as great propaganda as another example of the Great Satan's aggressiveness.?





Because they missed?

I know I would find that embarrassing to announce in fear it would make it appear, to my people, we could not shoot down the Great Satan's unarmed, unmanned, propeller driven drone flying straight and level over our territory.

Therefore their best 'announcement' is that they 'ran it off'....lol

I'd even bet they're posting a new Frogfoot pilot opening as we speak, kinda funny.
edit on 9-11-2012 by Lonewulph because: eta last line



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 



Of course it's disputed...

Linky

Iran Air Flight 655 reportedly squawked Mode II (Iranian F-14 Tomcat) IFF for a moment; personnel proceeded to re-label the target from "Unknown Assumed Enemy" to "F-14"



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 



Even if what you claim is true does that justify the women and children on board as "collateral damage"?

The alternative theory holds that the people on board may have been dead when the plane took off, bodies collected from morgues or something.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAMTAT
FACTS:
1.) The drone was unarmed.
2.) The drone was over International waters/outside of Iranian airspace
3.) The drone was not hit...and returned safely

Is this an 'Act of War'?...It's certainly an Act of Aggression'!
WHAT will Barry-O do?
edit on 8-11-2012 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



He will poo poo in his man panties and have his wife and Clinton clean him up. Then he will head to the pulpit and apologize for the incursion into international airspace.





new topics
top topics
 
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join