12
   

An unbiased view of the conflict with Iran. What is really happening?

 
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 06:57 am
@izzythepush,
I'm ex-Navy and I tend to follow these types of incidents. The Navy has confessed in the past when it has violated the 12 mile limit. (See this incident with Iran from 2016.) Don't get me wrong, I don't think it is because the Navy has a true and moral heart, but that region of the world has a number of countries, all using military and commercial air traffic control. Everyone knows where all the planes are in the Persian Gulf. If that drone really violated the 12 mile limit, there's plenty of evidence of it.
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 06:59 am
@maxdancona,
I made no such attempt, just expressed my opinion. If that opinion didn't match your expected pattern, you have the wrong pattern.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 07:17 am
@engineer,
You are an outlier, Engineer. And, I mean that as the compliment that it is.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 07:47 am
@engineer,
Quote:
the drone wasn't in their territory. 

You don't know that for a fact.

My guess is that the drone came in, or close enough that the Iranians believed it was in their territory. That's why they shot it down. Otherwise, they would have exposed themselves to a high risk of retaliation by shooting down an aircraft outside of their airspace.

The US would have done the same with an Iranian drone coming into the US airspace.
engineer
  Selected Answer
 
  3  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 08:29 am
@Olivier5,
I don't believe that the US would have automatically shoot down a drone they believed was in US airspace, I think they would have intercepted it which is standard practice if there is no apparent threat. Like the 2016 incident I linked to above, you usually don't shoot first and then ask questions. Remember, Iran also said that a manned P-8 plane was violating their airspace and they chose not to attack it. A P-8 is an armed threat. Their policy is clearly not to shoot at all targets over their airspace if they let an armed war plane go by and shoot down a surveillance drone.

That said, I get that the Iranians might not have wanted to scramble jets over the Persian Gulf. It is possible (although I believe unlikely) that the Iranians did not know where the drone was. I say unlikely because we're not arguing about a half mile, we're arguing about ten miles. No traffic control or military tracking system is going to be ten miles off. It could also be possible that the Iranians claim some area of airspace that is not internationally recognized. Think China in parts of the South China Sea where they have constructed artificial islands. I think if that was the case, we'd have heard about it.

The CIA has flown stealth drones into Iran before and Iran has shot a couple down, so it's not like the US has clean hands or "doesn't do that kind of stuff", but this drone was not a stealth drone and is part of very routine surveillance of the area. The Iranians have been watching these flights for years and the Navy has provided documentation showing the flight path. Iran has not done that.

In the end, I don't think it really matters whether the drone was in international waters or not. I believe Iran wanted to make a statement and they did. They didn't shoot at the nearby manned aircraft because killing people is an extreme escalation and leaves no room for Trump to maneuver. It was a risky move, but pretty calculated and it worked. Trump faced down his chicken hawks and staked out a middle ground and Iran can come to the table in the future.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 08:47 am
@engineer,
"Intercept" means what, in a drone's case? Nothing very different from "shot down", i would think.

Quote:
Like the 2016 incident I linked to above,

The two cases are very different, and not necessarily comparable, appart from sharing a probable cause (navigation error). In 2016, Iran had apprehended US marines straying into Iranian waters. It means Iran had a big leverage and the US almost none.

Anyway, I agree that they made a "statement", if only by proving that they had the capacity to shoot down drones. That's a statement alright: "we can shoot your aircrafts down, and we will if they enter our airspace." I also agree that they must have feared the consequences of shooting down the other (manned) plane.

Trump (or whoever called off the retaliation) did the right thing.

maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 09:10 am
@engineer,
Careful there Engineer. You are coming dangerously close to agreeing with me.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 10:33 am
@engineer,
Agreed.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 10:46 am
@engineer,
That the same navy that shot down Iran Air Flight 655?

I don't share your confidence. If the data is out there why haven't we heard from any neutral 3rd parties?
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 11:06 am
@izzythepush,
Yes, that's the same Navy. I knew one of the officers on the Vincennes. He had a bodyguard for a while due to threats on his life. But that makes the point, when the Vincennes shot down that plane they were pretty transparent about it.

That's a good question as to why we haven't heard from neutral parties. I went Internet hunting and I haven't found anything. Maybe the issue is that none of those parties are really neutral. UAE and Saudi Arabia are Iranian enemies with the Saudis agitating for a US attack, Qatar is an Iranian friendly but under serious pressure itself for allowing an independent press. Not sure where Kuwait stands. I wouldn't expect the US press to dig in, but I thought Al Jazeera might do some research. There was a post by the Russians agreeing with Iranians and calling the US information "poor quality and unprofessional".
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2019 11:23 am
@engineer,
They didn't really have any other options, not with all those dead Iranian civilians.

If they're prepared to shoot down a civilian liner I can't see lying about a drone causing that much of a moral dilemma.

Your personal loyalty is to be commended btw, but don't let it get in the way of being objective.

Turkey is probably the most neutral there, but they're already talking about ignoring Trump's unilateral sanctions as is Russia, China and the EU.

I don't trust either side to be honest, they're both good at twisting the truth, and if it's a drone trying to sail right up to the line then it becomes a matter of opinion whether it was in Iranian airspace or not.
sky123
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Jul, 2019 03:00 pm
@maxdancona,
Glad talking to you max...Remember you from time you helped me with a question in English some 2-3 years ago... Before anything, I apologize if my English is abundant with errors... I hope it would be understandable.
1- As an Iranian who has grown up and lives inside Iran, I should mention that war is very unlikely (but not zero percent).Now that I'm talking, maybe the match between our men's volleyball team with Poland is a lot more interesting subject to people than war. Generally people don't take it serious. Housing maybe the issue that will be affected by the signs of war, but here, it has not decreased even a penny. It is rather another propaganda and enmity from the west against us. As always!
2- About what you said that Iran might be behind recent attacks. I think that it's a false flag from our enemies. Back to 2015, look who were against the nuclear deal between Iran and 5+1 called JCPOA. Israel and SA. While Abe (Japan's PM) is in Iran for peace talks, who might be angry from imminent reduction of tensions? Note that like every other nation, Iranians are human. After years of inhumane sanctions imposed by the US and problems that they face by these sanctions, there is not any nation in the world who wants to resolve this issue more than Iranians. (although not by any cost because resistance is woven into the fabric of the culture of this nation and they wont accept a humiliation).
3- Though unlikely, but let's hope the war, not to happen. Iran is not by any means comparable with Iraq or Afghanistan. If there would be a war, there won't be a winner. I don't compare our military with yours, but even one person, only one person got killed in the war would be A LOT in terms of humanity. Very roughly but it is not far away to imagine that if you kill 10000 Iranian, they kill minimum 1000 American soldier (if not more) in retaliation. You kill 100000 they kill 10000. You think there would be a winner?
4- I think you people of the US, can ask your government to step back into the 2015 nuclear deal. Urge them! Ask them! Don't let them to stir up and provoke your enthusiasm. How can you expect this country to stay unilaterally in the deal while the US has already withdraw from it?
(I may not to be able to follow and have other posts in this thread, but will read your views (If any) and hope that we people do not let our politicians to burn our lives in the wars of themselves. )
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Jul, 2019 06:07 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
The CIA has flown stealth drones into Iran before and Iran has shot a couple down, so it's not like the US has clean hands or "doesn't do that kind of stuff", but this drone was not a stealth drone and is part of very routine surveillance of the area.

I'm not aware of any cases of a stealth drone being shot down. I recall one instance where a stealth drone lost control and crashed on it's own.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Jul, 2019 06:08 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
"Intercept" means what, in a drone's case? Nothing very different from "shot down", i would think.

Intercept means sending fighters up to confront the other aircraft.


Olivier5 wrote:
Anyway, I agree that they made a "statement", if only by proving that they had the capacity to shoot down drones. That's a statement alright: "we can shoot your aircrafts down, and we will if they enter our airspace." I also agree that they must have feared the consequences of shooting down the other (manned) plane.
Trump (or whoever called off the retaliation) did the right thing.

We should not let the loss of such an expensive aircraft go unanswered. At the very least we should force Iran to pay for the drone before we ease up on sanctions.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Jul, 2019 06:09 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
If they're prepared to shoot down a civilian liner I can't see lying about a drone causing that much of a moral dilemma.

It's not like they knew they were shooting down a civilian plane.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Jul, 2019 06:11 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
engineer wrote:
the drone wasn't in their territory.

You don't know that for a fact.

Sure we do. We wouldn't send a non-stealth drone into enemy territory.


Olivier5 wrote:
My guess is that the drone came in, or close enough that the Iranians believed it was in their territory. That's why they shot it down. Otherwise, they would have exposed themselves to a high risk of retaliation by shooting down an aircraft outside of their airspace.

Bad guess. We would not send a non-stealth drone into enemy territory.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/17/2021 at 04:48:30