Drone Attack

Clive Arthur <cliveta@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote in
news:qepuot$ia9$1@dont-email.me:

On 24/06/2019 03:14, Rick C wrote:
On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:01:52 PM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:

snipped

Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive*
drone was flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to
avoid a SAM. Not good.

Fighter pilots can avoid a missile if they see the light burst on
launch. A warning later doesn't give them enough time to dodge a
SAM.

So why would you expect a slower and less agile drone to be able
to outmaneuver a SAM?

I wouldn't know, but if it can't protect itself then it becomes
little more than an expensive target drone.

Cheers

Except that shooting one down is an act of war that warrants a
response that may not be on an unmanned location.

Would you rather it had been one of our recon fighter jets and its
pilot?

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:d3f8ca0a-a129-4d32-a80c-71ee2ffc6b86@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 10:37:12 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:cce09c28-606f-459f-acdb-
0c0452a8615b@googlegroups.com:

No, he actually ordered the attack, then got cold feet at the
last minute.


The entire thing was staged.

Zero evidence of that and the alternate explanation, Trump
stupidity, fits perfectly and we've seen that many times before
and since too, with his flip now on deportation.




Our boys in the pentagon are a lot more paranoid about Iran
gaining continued nuke tech and provisions than our politically
motivated leaders are.

But they also know about psychological outcomes.

The whole thing... saying they though it to be not
proportional,
etc.

All a pre-stage so that ANY new asset attacks by them ARE going
to
be met with a take out of the offending launch station and
perhaps a string of coastal tracking stations as well.

You can bet that those will be the first assets to go once Iran
again steps over the line.

Mark my words... we will be taking actaions against Iran for
violations of law in international waters, and the UN will also
condemn their behavior.

That seems likely, given that Trump has started waging war against
Iran. That's right, war. Iran was complying with the agreement
reached by the US and five other countries with Iran. Trump
reneged and then started waging war against Iran, by not only
cutting off US trade, but also using the might of the US to force
most other companies around the world to also cut off trade. That
has caused a depression in Iran. The US would consider any such
action against us an act of war. And it would make Americans take
the side of their own govt, over the foreign country, exactly the
opposite of what we want in Iran.




It is time to stop lolly-gagging around and beat up the few
remaining despots spreading hate messages and death hardware all
over the place.

That's something coming from you, who spreads hate, vulgarity,
name calling and calls for physical violence against people you
don't like here. As for going around and beating up despots, how
well did that go in Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam? Hello? Why is
it our job to be the policeman to fix problems in the Mideast,
instead of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey, etc?





In other words... before the word can truly be a civil place,
a
few straggling asshole factions still need to have their faces
slapped.

Sure, and how well did that go in Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam?
And don't tell me, go tell Trump, he's the one that got cold feet.
Like most things, he's on both sides of the issue. He campaigned
saying we should stay out of the Mideast, not be the world's
policeman, yet he has a big hard-on to go fix Iran's wagon.
Mostly that's because he hates Obama and anything and everything
Obama did must be bad, so he reneged on the nuke deal. A nuke
deal that had Iran's nuke development halted and which they were
complying with. Trump is so terminally stupid, that stopping Iran
from developing nukes isn't nearly enough. He insists that Iran
must turn into Jordan or Sweden. Good luck with that. We've spent
18 years in Afghanistan now, thousands of our military dead, tens
of thousands wounded, crippled for life. And not only isn't it
Jordan or Sweden, the Afghans still can't stand on their own, the
Taliban still controls a good part of the country and they are
just waiting for us to fold up and leave. Trump is on the path to
a worse mistake in Iran than Bush made in Iraq or to show that the
US is truly impotent, when Iran humiliates him, defies him and he
does nothing.





Honorable Muslims do not attack other humans, and that includes
folks not muslim.

Muslim extremists DO attack folks, because the stupid bastards
have convoluted the very doctrime that is supposed to keep us all
civil. Period.

Work still to be done.

The NK thing is simply a CHILD in place as the despot.

We beat the fuck out of Iran (a bit), and NK will open their
eyes a
bit more widely.

Yeah, sure they will. We went to war, took out Saddam, did that
make NK give up their nukes? Actually what KJU just saw was Iran
call Trump's bluff and Trump got cold feet. Trump said the
thought of 150 Iranians getting killed was beyond his risk
tolerance. KJU knows that he threatens the lives of millions and
unlike Iran, he has nukes. Expect KJU to act accordingly. And he
will never give up his nukes because he knows that if he does,
then Trump will just renege on that agreement and tell him that NK
must turn into Sweden or South Korea too.





No room in a civil world for idiots growing up isolated in
their
bedroom getting dangerous toys to beat up on folks who called
them names in school.


You would know about calling people names and probably about
beating people up in school too.





If that were how it is, Most of you all would be dead by now,
because I'd have culled over half the nation. None of you
fuckers are worthy... of much other than a bullet.

And to whom are you addressing this to? Confused again? But
thanks for demonstrating again exactly what I talked about above.






Naaah... I'm the sanest guy in the whole place.

I'd rather help colonize the Moon. Then I could simply leave
you
all behind and watch from up there as you all kill each other,
because the timid fucks can't figure out that there is still a
bit of aggression to be directed here and there. So just blow it
all the hell up.

It does not take an expert to see the easily manipulated world
view. Our guys know that.

Nothing got "spooled up" it was all staged to ilicit a response,
and deliver a message.

That message is OK, asshole, you will not get away with that crap
any more. Go ahead... try it again.

We are cocked, locked, and loaded and they know it.

Every aspect of it including the view of "another stupid move by
the chief", was concocted.

 

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:01:52 PM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:

On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was at the point of either saying attack or to stand down. Thankfully he stood down as many people felt a military response was not warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute before deciding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack? Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.


Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive* drone was
flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a SAM. Not
good.

This is isn't the 1960s anymore, altitude doesn't save you from getting hit by a SAM. And if the drone doesn't have ELINT or similar, it doesn't even know it's being painted by a fire control radar, has no clue a SAM was launched and even less of clue of its trajectory. It never sees it coming.

And a 'cyber attack'? I mean, we can all announce that, but who'd ever
know?

Cheers
--
Clive

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:54:44 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:

On 24/06/2019 00:17, Mike Perkins wrote:
On 23/06/2019 23:01, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to
not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone.  It said he was
at the point of either saying attack or to stand down.  Thankfully he
stood down as many people felt a military response was not warranted
and not proportional possibly leading to further hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute before
deciding it was not proportional?  Was this part of his strategy to
draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without
striking?  Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the
number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute?  Why
didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack?  Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't
tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.


Maybe there's some embarrassment.  AIUI, the *very expensive* drone
was flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a
SAM.  Not good.

And a 'cyber attack'?  I mean, we can all announce that, but who'd
ever know?

Cheers


It was said that after Stuxnet Iran had one of the world's greatest
hacking ability, probably nothing like the $50b dollars for the US
budget, but I wouldn't want to be on the wrong end of an attack.

Also making a cyber attack, isn't this like poker, best keep your cards
close to ones chest until you really need to show them?

Worse than that. It is as dumb as f*ck to use any kind of cyber attack
against their air defences unless and until you intend to put real
hardware in harms way. No point in having them go through their systems
with a fine tooth comb looking for any remaining potential weaknesses.

Once you use cyber muntions in out the wild they are available for
anyone who wants to to examine them in great detail.

Duh-uh-uh-huh. You mean like this:
https://www.engadget.com/2019/05/25/ransomware-attacks-use-stolen-nsa-tool/
You don't say...

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:21:08 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was at the point of either saying attack or to stand down. Thankfully he stood down as many people felt a military response was not warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute before deciding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack? Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.

A lot o blabber based on the assumption the news media is publishing accurate information when all they're doing is relaying Pentagon press releases.

Independent investigation of the flight path probably showed the drone was in fact in Iranian airspace, making the shootdown lawful. Taking a full week or more to mine and process the data would be typical of the woefully inadequate workforce tasked with that kind of work.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote in
news:03909b2e-1fd9-47c1-83f7-686f6f8114d8@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:21:08 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision
to not a
ttack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was
at the point of either saying attack or to stand down. Thankfully
he stood down as many people felt a military response was not
warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further
hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute
before dec
iding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to
draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without
striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of
the numbe
r of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why
didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack?
Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't
tell wh
ich is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.

A lot o blabber based on the assumption the news media is
publishing accurate information when all they're doing is relaying
Pentagon press releases.

Independent investigation of the flight path probably showed the
drone was in fact in Iranian airspace,

BULLSHIT. "Probably"? Probably doesn't get it.

making the shootdown
lawful.

More bullshit. Were that true, we could shoot their craft down
for *leaving* their airspace.

Taking a full week or more to mine and process the data
would be typical of the woefully inadequate workforce tasked with
that kind of work.

Whereas making up stupid shit to support the assholes who
committed the attack only takes seconds and yet another retarded
Usenet post.

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 7:55:07 AM UTC-4, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:21:08 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was at the point of either saying attack or to stand down. Thankfully he stood down as many people felt a military response was not warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute before deciding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack? Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.

A lot o blabber based on the assumption the news media is publishing accurate information when all they're doing is relaying Pentagon press releases..

Except that we have Trump on record with all his damn fool statements.

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 7:40:50 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:d3f8ca0a-a129-4d32-a80c-71ee2ffc6b86@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 10:37:12 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:cce09c28-606f-459f-acdb-
0c0452a8615b@googlegroups.com:

No, he actually ordered the attack, then got cold feet at the
last minute.


The entire thing was staged.

Zero evidence of that and the alternate explanation, Trump
stupidity, fits perfectly and we've seen that many times before
and since too, with his flip now on deportation.




Our boys in the pentagon are a lot more paranoid about Iran
gaining continued nuke tech and provisions than our politically
motivated leaders are.

But they also know about psychological outcomes.

The whole thing... saying they though it to be not
proportional,
etc.

All a pre-stage so that ANY new asset attacks by them ARE going
to
be met with a take out of the offending launch station and
perhaps a string of coastal tracking stations as well.

You can bet that those will be the first assets to go once Iran
again steps over the line.

Mark my words... we will be taking actaions against Iran for
violations of law in international waters, and the UN will also
condemn their behavior.

That seems likely, given that Trump has started waging war against
Iran. That's right, war. Iran was complying with the agreement
reached by the US and five other countries with Iran. Trump
reneged and then started waging war against Iran, by not only
cutting off US trade, but also using the might of the US to force
most other companies around the world to also cut off trade. That
has caused a depression in Iran. The US would consider any such
action against us an act of war. And it would make Americans take
the side of their own govt, over the foreign country, exactly the
opposite of what we want in Iran.




It is time to stop lolly-gagging around and beat up the few
remaining despots spreading hate messages and death hardware all
over the place.

That's something coming from you, who spreads hate, vulgarity,
name calling and calls for physical violence against people you
don't like here. As for going around and beating up despots, how
well did that go in Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam? Hello? Why is
it our job to be the policeman to fix problems in the Mideast,
instead of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey, etc?





In other words... before the word can truly be a civil place,
a
few straggling asshole factions still need to have their faces
slapped.

Sure, and how well did that go in Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam?
And don't tell me, go tell Trump, he's the one that got cold feet.
Like most things, he's on both sides of the issue. He campaigned
saying we should stay out of the Mideast, not be the world's
policeman, yet he has a big hard-on to go fix Iran's wagon.
Mostly that's because he hates Obama and anything and everything
Obama did must be bad, so he reneged on the nuke deal. A nuke
deal that had Iran's nuke development halted and which they were
complying with. Trump is so terminally stupid, that stopping Iran
from developing nukes isn't nearly enough. He insists that Iran
must turn into Jordan or Sweden. Good luck with that. We've spent
18 years in Afghanistan now, thousands of our military dead, tens
of thousands wounded, crippled for life. And not only isn't it
Jordan or Sweden, the Afghans still can't stand on their own, the
Taliban still controls a good part of the country and they are
just waiting for us to fold up and leave. Trump is on the path to
a worse mistake in Iran than Bush made in Iraq or to show that the
US is truly impotent, when Iran humiliates him, defies him and he
does nothing.





Honorable Muslims do not attack other humans, and that includes
folks not muslim.

Muslim extremists DO attack folks, because the stupid bastards
have convoluted the very doctrime that is supposed to keep us all
civil. Period.

Work still to be done.

The NK thing is simply a CHILD in place as the despot.

We beat the fuck out of Iran (a bit), and NK will open their
eyes a
bit more widely.

Yeah, sure they will. We went to war, took out Saddam, did that
make NK give up their nukes? Actually what KJU just saw was Iran
call Trump's bluff and Trump got cold feet. Trump said the
thought of 150 Iranians getting killed was beyond his risk
tolerance. KJU knows that he threatens the lives of millions and
unlike Iran, he has nukes. Expect KJU to act accordingly. And he
will never give up his nukes because he knows that if he does,
then Trump will just renege on that agreement and tell him that NK
must turn into Sweden or South Korea too.





No room in a civil world for idiots growing up isolated in
their
bedroom getting dangerous toys to beat up on folks who called
them names in school.


You would know about calling people names and probably about
beating people up in school too.





If that were how it is, Most of you all would be dead by now,
because I'd have culled over half the nation. None of you
fuckers are worthy... of much other than a bullet.

And to whom are you addressing this to? Confused again? But
thanks for demonstrating again exactly what I talked about above.






Naaah... I'm the sanest guy in the whole place.

I'd rather help colonize the Moon. Then I could simply leave
you
all behind and watch from up there as you all kill each other,
because the timid fucks can't figure out that there is still a
bit of aggression to be directed here and there. So just blow it
all the hell up.



It does not take an expert to see the easily manipulated world
view. Our guys know that.

Nothing got "spooled up" it was all staged to ilicit a response,
and deliver a message.

ROFL. You say that when we see Trump doing exactly that, spooling up,
making lame threats all the time.

That message is OK, asshole, you will not get away with that crap
any more. Go ahead... try it again.

Whom are you speaking to now?

We are cocked, locked, and loaded and they know it.

Every aspect of it including the view of "another stupid move by
the chief", was concocted.

Yes, Trump just enjoys looking like a clown and weakening his position.
At this point, no country believes him or trusts him, not friend or foe.
The only ones that still believe him are trumpets and apparently now you too.

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 10:59:51 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:

On 24/06/2019 13:01, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

snipped

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:01:52 PM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone.


Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive* drone was
flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a SAM. Not
good.

This is isn't the 1960s anymore, altitude doesn't save you from getting hit by a SAM. And if the drone doesn't have ELINT or similar, it doesn't even know it's being painted by a fire control radar, has no clue a SAM was launched and even less of clue of its trajectory. It never sees it coming.

Doesn't that make it not fit-for-purpose where there are enemy SAMs?

Cheers
--
Clive

Sure, once you know that the enemy is going to fire into international
airspace. Before that, it was just routine surveillance in international airspace.

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 10:59:51 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:

On 24/06/2019 13:01, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

snipped

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:01:52 PM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone.


Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive* drone was
flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a SAM. Not
good.

This is isn't the 1960s anymore, altitude doesn't save you from getting hit by a SAM. And if the drone doesn't have ELINT or similar, it doesn't even know it's being painted by a fire control radar, has no clue a SAM was launched and even less of clue of its trajectory. It never sees it coming.

Doesn't that make it not fit-for-purpose where there are enemy SAMs?

Yes, it most certainly does. If the drone and its mission are absolutely critical, they escort it with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_EA-18G_Growler
-and that puts the SAM systems out of operation.

Cheers
--
Clive

 

[Clive Arthur]

On 24/06/2019 13:01, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

<snipped>

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:01:52 PM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone.


Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive* drone was
flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a SAM. Not
good.

This is isn't the 1960s anymore, altitude doesn't save you from getting hit by a SAM. And if the drone doesn't have ELINT or similar, it doesn't even know it's being painted by a fire control radar, has no clue a SAM was launched and even less of clue of its trajectory. It never sees it coming.

Doesn't that make it not fit-for-purpose where there are enemy SAMs?

Cheers
--
Clive

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 8:13:18 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote in
news:03909b2e-1fd9-47c1-83f7-686f6f8114d8@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:21:08 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision
to not a
ttack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was
at the point of either saying attack or to stand down. Thankfully
he stood down as many people felt a military response was not
warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further
hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute
before dec
iding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to
draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without
striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of
the numbe
r of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why
didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack?
Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't
tell wh
ich is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.

A lot o blabber based on the assumption the news media is
publishing accurate information when all they're doing is relaying
Pentagon press releases.

Independent investigation of the flight path probably showed the
drone was in fact in Iranian airspace,


BULLSHIT. "Probably"? Probably doesn't get it.

making the shootdown
lawful.

More bullshit. Were that true, we could shoot their craft down
for *leaving* their airspace.

Taking a full week or more to mine and process the data
would be typical of the woefully inadequate workforce tasked with
that kind of work.

Whereas making up stupid shit to support the assholes who
committed the attack only takes seconds and yet another retarded
Usenet post.

Okaaaay, thanks for the gullible dupe's-eye-view of the situation.
Things actually may be worse than you know. There's a good possibility the Iranians took control of the drone to push it into their airspace without the operator knowing it, or being able to do anything about it. That way they can destroy it without showing their hand by way of technical capability. Of course the U.S. helped the situation by flying too close to their airspace to begin with. It won't be the first time they've done something like this. Pentagon is probably scrambling to port manufactured geospatials into Power Point, or similar, to add to the ongoing charade, but it's hard getting monkeys to perform.
You just worry about what you want out of the grub truck for lunch, and stop stressing out over stuff beyond your grasp.

 

[Bert Timmerman]

Martin Brown wrote:

On 24/06/2019 00:17, Mike Perkins wrote:
On 23/06/2019 23:01, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to
not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he
was at the point of either saying attack or to stand down.
Thankfully he stood down as many people felt a military response was
not warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further
hostilities.

What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute
before deciding it was not proportional? Was this part of his
strategy to draw his sword then in full view and then put it away
without striking? Potentially this could have been an effective
threat.

Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the
number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why
didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack? Was
this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't
tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.


Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive* drone
was flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a
SAM. Not good.

And a 'cyber attack'? I mean, we can all announce that, but who'd
ever know?

Cheers


It was said that after Stuxnet Iran had one of the world's greatest
hacking ability, probably nothing like the $50b dollars for the US
budget, but I wouldn't want to be on the wrong end of an attack.

Also making a cyber attack, isn't this like poker, best keep your
cards close to ones chest until you really need to show them?

Worse than that. It is as dumb as f*ck to use any kind of cyber attack
against their air defences unless and until you intend to put real
hardware in harms way. No point in having them go through their systems
with a fine tooth comb looking for any remaining potential weaknesses.

Once you use cyber muntions in out the wild they are available for
anyone who wants to to examine them in great detail.

Methinks Rule #1 goes something like: "NEVER EVER DISCLOSE you lanched a
cyber attack" ;-)

 

[Bert Timmerman]

trader4@optonline.net wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:21:08 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was at the point of either saying attack or to stand down.

No, he actually ordered the attack, then got cold feet at the last
minute.


Thankfully he stood down as many people felt a military response was not warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further hostilities.

Except of course the position of Trump and most Republicans has been
that if Iran provokes us, we should respond with overwhelming force.
So, we'll see how this sits with them. Already they are falling in line
behind Dear Leader. That gas bag Hannity on Thursday night on TV was
calling for bombing the crap out of Iran. On Friday, after Trump chickened
out, Hannity was calling that brilliant, a smart move, that shows how
cautious and careful Trump is. ROFL.




What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute before deciding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Oh please. It's been very obvious from day one that Trump is in way over
his head and doesn't know WTF he's doing. But all Americans should be
very worried over what they just saw. By Trump's own words, he ordered
the attack and just ten minutes before missiles, bombs flew, he says he
asked a general, will people die? Trump says the general said, I'll have
to check and then came back and said about 150 will die. And Trump says
then he called it off. If that is even partly true, then WTF is going on?
How does our military brief the president on an attack like this and not
include casualty estimates? How does a president not ask? (Sadly we know
the answer to that, Trump is a moron). Imagine this loony tunes with the
Cuban Missile Crisis.





Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack? Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.


Well, that alone tells you all you need to know, doesn't it? I agree,
a lot of it doesn't make sense. Clearly Trump could not have asked a
general just 10 mins before no return, with the general saying he needed
to check on casualty estimates, and then getting an answer that fast.
Also, what does it tell you about Trump that he's so stupid that he tweeted
out what you're now talking about? He lies all the time, he could have
said some new intel came in that lead to calling it off, leave it at that.
Instead he exposed that he's an idiot.

Not convinced? Trump decided to do it again! From about Wed on the WH
and Trump were saying that ICE was going to do a big nationwide raid on
illegal aliens, ones that are recent arrivals, have been through circle
jerking our courts and where the courts have issued FINAL DEPORTATION
orders. It was going to be at least 2,000, across the country, this
weekend. On Sat, nothing had happened, WH said it was coming Sunday.
Today Trump tweeted, never mind, he's called it off. Why? Trump says
Democrats asked him to do it, that they need time to work with the GOP
on asylum laws and solving the border crisis. Say what? First, Democrats
would love nothing more than the imagery of Trump's ICE rounding up
illegal aliens and deporting them, so it's extremely unlikely they came
to Trump, hat in hand. But more importantly, WTF does that have to do
with deporting recent arrivals who have been through the courts with
final deportation orders? What's Trump going to do with the Dems, give
them amnesty? And that's not just 2000 for this weekend there are 145K
that came in just last month! Trump, the tough talking BS artist ran
promising to deport 11 mil+ illegals in just a year or two! Now he just
wussed out and reversed himself on deporting a couple thousand.

Only question remaining is why the trumpets continue to believe the
lying shyster.

Hi,

FWIW, methinks Trump is not stupid ... he was smart enough to get in the
seat ... or somebody put him there.

If Trump is the "problem", what is the *REAL* problem behind this
"problem" ?

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 1:35:35 PM UTC-4, Bert Timmerman wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote:
On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:21:08 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone. It said he was at the point of either saying attack or to stand down.

No, he actually ordered the attack, then got cold feet at the last
minute.


Thankfully he stood down as many people felt a military response was not warranted and not proportional possibly leading to further hostilities.

Except of course the position of Trump and most Republicans has been
that if Iran provokes us, we should respond with overwhelming force.
So, we'll see how this sits with them. Already they are falling in line
behind Dear Leader. That gas bag Hannity on Thursday night on TV was
calling for bombing the crap out of Iran. On Friday, after Trump chickened
out, Hannity was calling that brilliant, a smart move, that shows how
cautious and careful Trump is. ROFL.




What worries me is, why did he let it go until the last minute before deciding it was not proportional? Was this part of his strategy to draw his sword then in full view and then put it away without striking? Potentially this could have been an effective threat.

Oh please. It's been very obvious from day one that Trump is in way over
his head and doesn't know WTF he's doing. But all Americans should be
very worried over what they just saw. By Trump's own words, he ordered
the attack and just ten minutes before missiles, bombs flew, he says he
asked a general, will people die? Trump says the general said, I'll have
to check and then came back and said about 150 will die. And Trump says
then he called it off. If that is even partly true, then WTF is going on?
How does our military brief the president on an attack like this and not
include casualty estimates? How does a president not ask? (Sadly we know
the answer to that, Trump is a moron). Imagine this loony tunes with the
Cuban Missile Crisis.





Or was this truly a matter of Trump not having been informed of the number of potential deaths until he asked at the last minute? Why didn't he ask before ordering the preparations for the attack? Was this

With what we see Trump do in his everyday behavior I really can't tell which is the more accurate assessment of what really happened.


Well, that alone tells you all you need to know, doesn't it? I agree,
a lot of it doesn't make sense. Clearly Trump could not have asked a
general just 10 mins before no return, with the general saying he needed
to check on casualty estimates, and then getting an answer that fast.
Also, what does it tell you about Trump that he's so stupid that he tweeted
out what you're now talking about? He lies all the time, he could have
said some new intel came in that lead to calling it off, leave it at that.
Instead he exposed that he's an idiot.

Not convinced? Trump decided to do it again! From about Wed on the WH
and Trump were saying that ICE was going to do a big nationwide raid on
illegal aliens, ones that are recent arrivals, have been through circle
jerking our courts and where the courts have issued FINAL DEPORTATION
orders. It was going to be at least 2,000, across the country, this
weekend. On Sat, nothing had happened, WH said it was coming Sunday.
Today Trump tweeted, never mind, he's called it off. Why? Trump says
Democrats asked him to do it, that they need time to work with the GOP
on asylum laws and solving the border crisis. Say what? First, Democrats
would love nothing more than the imagery of Trump's ICE rounding up
illegal aliens and deporting them, so it's extremely unlikely they came
to Trump, hat in hand. But more importantly, WTF does that have to do
with deporting recent arrivals who have been through the courts with
final deportation orders? What's Trump going to do with the Dems, give
them amnesty? And that's not just 2000 for this weekend there are 145K
that came in just last month! Trump, the tough talking BS artist ran
promising to deport 11 mil+ illegals in just a year or two! Now he just
wussed out and reversed himself on deporting a couple thousand.

Only question remaining is why the trumpets continue to believe the
lying shyster.




Hi,

FWIW, methinks Trump is not stupid ... he was smart enough to get in the
seat ... or somebody put him there.

If Trump is the "problem", what is the *REAL* problem behind this
"problem" ?

That's easy, the trumptards that insisted on Trump when we had 15 other
choices in the primary, all far more intelligent, qualified, fit and
sane than Trump.

 

[Clive Arthur]

On 24/06/2019 16:21, trader4@optonline.net wrote:

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 10:59:51 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 24/06/2019 13:01, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

snipped

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:01:52 PM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 23/06/2019 20:21, Rick C wrote:
I read an article today with some details about Trump's decision to not attack Iran in retaliation for downing our drone.


Maybe there's some embarrassment. AIUI, the *very expensive* drone was
flying at a high altitude yet seemingly was unable to avoid a SAM. Not
good.

This is isn't the 1960s anymore, altitude doesn't save you from getting hit by a SAM. And if the drone doesn't have ELINT or similar, it doesn't even know it's being painted by a fire control radar, has no clue a SAM was launched and even less of clue of its trajectory. It never sees it coming.

Doesn't that make it not fit-for-purpose where there are enemy SAMs?

Cheers
--
Clive

Sure, once you know that the enemy is going to fire into international
airspace. Before that, it was just routine surveillance in international airspace.

It's not fair, those enemies are just so sneaky!

And who would ever know where it was anyway? All we know for sure is
that it was in SAM's purview.

Cheers
--
Clive

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:64d6d810-923c-4b0d-a9fd-71e465ed00ee@googlegroups.com:

ROFL. You say that when we see Trump doing exactly that, spooling
up, making lame threats all the time.

Except that you were referring to elements of the operation in
theater, not Trump's retarded personality.

You dance like a retard too, child.

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:64d6d810-923c-4b0d-a9fd-
71e465ed00ee@googlegroups.com:

That message is OK, asshole, you will not get away with that crap
any more. Go ahead... try it again.

Whom are you speaking to now?

That is our message to Iran.