Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Iran Fires On US Drone

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I am not surprised that the Iranians missed.

If my memory serves me well, I think the SU 25 was designed as a ground support aircraft. That would be a mission similar to our A10 Warthog.

I guess they fly them as interceptors in the Iranian Air Force?




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lonewulph
We were in International airspace... yeah right.



Originally posted by PuterMan
Do you know it was in International airspace or are you just being gullible and believing what you are told?



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


pffft..

Yeah, There's gullibility in this thread alright...

The Iranians didn't report it because they knew they were in the wrong. The US didn't report earlier because of the election obviously.
edit on 8-11-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Drone on a "classified" maritime surveillance mission gets shot at by Iranian jets.

The term "classified" suggests that its been somewhere that probably wouldn't have been acceptable to the USA had the roles been reversed.

Soda and perspective time though...

In the cold war, in the 50's, 60's 70's and 80's US and Soviet fighters routinely shot at each other, several aircraft were downed and lots of pilots got killed.

I suggest people currently undergoing a wargasm over this read this book By Any Means Necessary : America's Secret Air War in the Cold War because this is nothing new, and in terms of such incidents, massively insignificant.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
First of all, it most likely was in International airspace during its routine flight path. Iran would have been ALL over this saying how the Predator violated the airspace of Iran, and blah blah blah. Iran being mum on this shows that they know what they did was wrong, and tried to score another victory point and IF they shot down the Predator they could have just said it went into their airspace. And Why didn't Iran "hack" the predator like it did the RQ-170 which would have been tenfold times easier? Oh, thats right cause they are great at making stories up.

Now we will hear Iran finally come out of the woodshed after trying to keep hush about what they did, and start pointing fingers saying it was the United States that violated the Airspace. If the United States DID violate the airspace, it would have made much more for them to shut up and not bring this story to light.

I also hear alot of what ifs and scenarios that just don't make sense. There are an infinite amount of what ifs which don't seem rational at all, I'm still waiting for the one that is "What if Israel disgusted their fighters as Frogfoots and made it look like it was Iran!"



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Here's how I see it.

An Iran was is inevitable. It has been in the cards since '01. The only difference is the narrative on how it begins. If Romney won the election, he would start it. Obama? Well, the enemy starts it.

It's like the game show let's make a deal. Except door #1 and door #2 both conceal a donkey prize.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAMTAT
What's ALSO funny, is that this event happened on November 1!
Wonder why we're hearing about this AFTER the election?


eggsactly



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by spy66
 


It is legal by treaty to fly in international airspace, without fear of being shot down, or attacked. That treaty has been in effect for a very long time now. It's not US law, it's a UN treaty signed by just about every country.


It is legal for civilian and non threatening military traffic to pass through international waters. But what if Iran felt threatened by this drone?

If the US flew this drone in a manner that had intentions other than peaceful. Like spying over the Iranian border.
is that in compliance with rules that apply for international water?



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyNut
I don't think the Obama administration would have anything to gain by holding the information back. Btw Obama is pretty good at handling things like that, anyways to the general public has he took care of OBL(apparently).

The only reason behind this is because there was bigger news at the time, like the election you know, common sense.
edit on 8-11-2012 by NavyNut because: (no reason given)


I appreciate your thoughts, but must disagree.
It really is NOT up to the Obama administration to decide for the American public WHEN they should receive their news...regardless of the size of the story, or what other news is concurrently occupying the airwaves.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by wishful1gnorance
I like how they use the words "unarmed Predator". That just seems I dunno illogical... I mean did it just get done dumping it's pay load and was returning to home base? I don't blame Iran, they want us to leave them alone, but we are the ones showing our aggressive nature. I really hope we don't go to war with Iran, but the media has perverted people's minds just one to many times, there are so many people willing and ready to fight them for no reason. It's sad we can do very little to stop our military aggression in the region.


Not all Predators are armed.

And how is this "US Military Aggression"? Drone was in international airspace and the Iranians fired on it.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
It is legal for civilian and non threatening military traffic to pass through international waters. But what if Iran felt threatened by this drone?

If the US flew this drone in a manner that had intentions other than peaceful. Like spying over the Iranian border.
is that in compliance with rules that apply for international water?


So, you're saying the Iranians can fire on anything as long as they feel it has other than peaceful intentions?

Hmmm.....



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Reporter on NBC said in case Americans wanted to know why they were reporting on a drone being fired on, but not hit, didn't crash and nothing really happened, was in case we woke up one morning and found out shots had been exchanged, because a nuclear iran is a bad thing.




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by spy66
It is legal for civilian and non threatening military traffic to pass through international waters. But what if Iran felt threatened by this drone?

If the US flew this drone in a manner that had intentions other than peaceful. Like spying over the Iranian border.
is that in compliance with rules that apply for international water?


So, you're saying the Iranians can fire on anything as long as they feel it has other than peaceful intentions?

Hmmm.....

I would say so, just like US planning a preemptive air strikes on Iran nuclear sites.
edit on 8-11-2012 by zilebeliveunknown because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   
They just said on the msm news the reason that they have made public disclosure on this issue is to prepare the public for when one of these mornings they wake up to the news of both US and Iran exchanging fire.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Well s/hit the bed - this has hit more MSM sites and officials are quoting that the drone was never in Iranian airspace.

Gods help us if this is how it starts :p

What a way to usher in another 4 years.

worldnews.nbcnews.com...

First paragraph according to this article.
edit on 8-11-2012 by Floydshayvious because: linkies.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Soooo...Terrorists like to attack unarmed people outside their home terror-tory...
and Iranians like to attack unarmed planes outside of theirs.
Coincidence?...I think not.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Depending on the mission, electronic eavesdropping, oblique photography and side looking synthetic aperture radar don't require direct overflights of hostile territory.

It is very possible this did happen in international airspace although it is also very possible the U.S. drone was pushing the boundary to provoke a response in order to observe IRIAF air defense protocols.

Anybody else find the SU-25's an odd choice of interceptor?

For anyone who doesn't know, the SU-25 is a ground attack aircraft similar to the USAF A-10.

The IRIAF acquired a half dozen SU-25's by Iraqi defectors during the gulf war and possibly bought another half dozen along with a bunch of spare parts from the Russian Federation in the early 2000's.

It's not exactly their premier air superiority performer.


Regardless, Iran needs to be careful playing that game as there are Raptors stationed in the United Arab Emirates...

UAE-based F-22s A Signal To Iran




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAMTAT
Oh good...Obama is getting tough.
The administration just sent a letter of protest to Iran.



We are really Really

Really

sorry..


Can we get our other drone back please.

Thanks


Signed.
Freshly reelected POTUS
Obama



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMTAT
 


I agree with you. The Obama administration should not be who or what dictates when we are allowed to know important, breaking developments, especially when those events could potentially lead to a new declaration of war.

Had this piece of information been made public, as it should have, in the days immediately following the incident, it may have allowed American citizens to make a more informed and comfortable choice at the voter booth.

Couple this piece of information with the Benghazi circus and Obama's re-election hopes would have been in very, very serious trouble.

With-holding this information from the American citizens, to ensure no campaign damage would be experienced, should be criminal. Fraud and deception through omission is what we have here. The American citizens should demand a full investigation to determine if with-holding this information was intentional and meant to keep us in the dark until after the election process.

Whether supporting Paul, Romney, or Obama, we all need to demand why there has been back-to-back major foreign policy failures that have been either completely lied about or hidden from public view until they felt their campaign would not suffer as an immediate result from the terrible management by the Obama administration.

I feel like I just sat through a sleezy used-car salesman's pitch and bought the lemon, only to have it fall apart as soon as the rubber hits the road.

Terrible.

ETA:

At least we will know what to expect when Obama runs for his, unprecedented, 3rd term as POTUS... maybe we should just go ahead and name him King of America, there would no longer be a need to worry about voter tampering or scripted campaigns in 2016, it may also save us from Martial Law.



edit on 8-11-2012 by esteay812 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 


Unfortunately a majority of this country just doesn't care. This isn't the same america it used to be. I could pick out twenty people i know and ask them what their opinion on benghazi is, or who eric holder is, or why our country is in decline. 19 out of those 20 wouldn't even know where benghazi was, would think eric holder was a football player, and would say well, we just have a bad economy ya know, times are hard.

I wake up every day and part of me is so disgusted that people act like sheep. I wish there was a switch you could flip, because at the end of the day, their ignorance will drag us all down.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by IAMTAT
Oh good...Obama is getting tough.
The administration just sent a letter of protest to Iran.



We are really Really

Really

sorry..


Can we get our other drone back please.

Thanks


Signed.
Freshly reelected POTUS
Obama


I'm thinkin' Barack and Hillary are probably already at work producing another $70,000.00 'apology' movie for the Iranians.





new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join