Drone Attack

bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote in
news:136118fe-bfdd-4f6c-8684-ebe7f7906055@googlegroups.com:

You just worry about what you want out of the grub truck for
lunch, and stop stressing out over stuff beyond your grasp.

Nice try, punk.

Now, this dipshit thinks the Iranians hacked our drone control
waveforms.

Yeah, you need to make retarded class jokes about folks eating from a
'grub truck'.

You're a goddamned idiot, at best.

 

bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote in
news:a423be1e-7966-48cb-9c71-c0984921ec91@googlegroups.com:

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 d
eciding 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 num
ber 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.

The drones are electronic surveillance fitted. They KNOW when a
missile launch occurs within their purview, and that purview is far
and wide.

Of course they saw it coming. Because... this isn't the sixties
anymore. Doh!

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 8:21:56 AM UTC-7, tra...@optonline.net wrote:

Hillary was all for bombing Gaddafi and gloated when he was killed.
Define 'gloat'. I dispute that claim.

> She and Obama were all for regime change via military action.
'were all for', but not 'did'? So you're a mindreader? Or, just
making things up?

That was after Gaddafi made the mistake of trusting the US and handing
over his uranium, ending his WMD programs. Lesson learned by NK.

Gaddafi knew his position better than you, his decision wasn't necessarily
a mistake. He died over other issues entirely.
No rationale seen for the 'lesson' described, so I dispute that.
Study skepticism, you could learn something useful.

 

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in news:9ef957de-525f-4d92-8285-
40414217890d@googlegroups.com:

Hillary was all for bombing Gaddafi and gloated when he was killed.
Define 'gloat'. I dispute that claim.

It is a long standing tea party retard and retarded republican claim.
I am a real republican and I know it is bullshit. Same stupid fucks
who voted for Trump.

An yes, I saw their lame video.

Look out, now the retarded twit RepubliTard4 will call me a 'lib'.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-06-25, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org <DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org> wrote:

bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote in
news:136118fe-bfdd-4f6c-8684-ebe7f7906055@googlegroups.com:

You just worry about what you want out of the grub truck for
lunch, and stop stressing out over stuff beyond your grasp.


Nice try, punk.

Now, this dipshit thinks the Iranians hacked our drone control
waveforms.

It would not be the first time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:47:05 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in news:9ef957de-525f-4d92-8285-
40414217890d@googlegroups.com:

Hillary was all for bombing Gaddafi and gloated when he was killed.
Define 'gloat'. I dispute that claim.


It is a long standing tea party retard and retarded republican claim.
I am a real republican and I know it is bullshit. Same stupid fucks
who voted for Trump.

You're a liar, about both Hillary and being a Republican. Obama and
Hillary bombed Libya and upon Gaddafi's death, Hillary said, "we came,
we saw, he died".

An yes, I saw their lame video.

Look out, now the retarded twit RepubliTard4 will call me a 'lib'.

Just wrong, always wrong, as usual. But you are here lying to try to
defend Hillary, which is what libs do.

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 2:38:34 PM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:

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.

Yeah, but Trump talks like one of us!

--

Rick C.

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

 

[Rick C]

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.

Yes, and the military knows this. That's why I think they likely used some low value weapon that was effective but likely would not have been used during any real attack since it was marginal enough to maybe not have worked.

Of course that is pure speculation by me, but I'd like to think that even if the commander in chief is an idiot, the military is still run by competent people.

--

Rick C.

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

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 3:40:17 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:

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.

Clearly you don't know much about war. There are many different types of war. The drone is pretty effective in the types of war they are fighting against non-national armies. Drones usually fly high enough you don't know they are there unless you are using radar. Since the drone that was shot down was supposedly over international waters, I expect they were using it to monitor the shipping which it would be good at. There was no reason for anyone to shoot it down, especially since that is an act of war.

--

Rick C.

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

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:05:41 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

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.

Yes, and the military knows this. That's why I think they likely used some low value weapon that was effective but likely would not have been used during any real attack since it was marginal enough to maybe not have worked.

Of course that is pure speculation by me, but I'd like to think that even if the commander in chief is an idiot, the military is still run by competent people.

But it's Trump giving the orders, making the decisions. We don't know what
they told him and what he told them to do. Someone, anyone, like some
talking head on Fox could have said, "why not a cyber attack"? Trump
could have seen it, asked about it, they could have told him, that all
we have is tools X and Y but we don't recommend using them, we should
keep them in reserve. Trump could have said, I don't care, just do it.

Also the chain of command is in constant turmoil,
just about the time someone starts to figure out their job, they are fired
or have to resign. The Sec of Defense is acting, only there since Dec
when Trump fired Mattis. Remember "Mad Dog MAttis", one of "Trump's generals",
that he bragged were so great? Trump fired him and berated him as a
no good Democrat. Put in the acting guy, who Trump was going to make
permanent, until it came out he had a 911 call for domestic violence with
his wife and that in another incident, his son had used a baseball bat
on his mother. Another great vetting job by team Trump. And all his staff
know that if Trump wants something, you better not tell him it's not a
good idea if you want to keep your job. Sadly, that's the situation
we;ve come to.

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 4:01:07 AM UTC-4, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2019-06-25, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org <DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org> wrote:
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote in
news:136118fe-bfdd-4f6c-8684-ebe7f7906055@googlegroups.com:

You just worry about what you want out of the grub truck for
lunch, and stop stressing out over stuff beyond your grasp.


Nice try, punk.

Now, this dipshit thinks the Iranians hacked our drone control
waveforms.

It would not be the first time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident

--

Bingo. DL is wrong, always wrong.

Another thing that the media totally missed or ignored, is that Iran was
showing off pieces of what were supposed to be this drone they shot down.
I didn't see the US disputing that they were in fact real. Why is this
important? As soon as it was shot down, the US would want to recover
whatever we could, so it doesn't fall into enemy hands for analysis of
what's in it, like happened last time. If it was shot down
in international waters, then why
did we allow Iran to recover it, instead of recovering it ourselves?
We have a carrier strike group there, as well as other assets in the
area that could have covered the recovery area, if it was in international
waters.......

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:02:36 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 3:40:17 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
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.

Clearly you don't know much about war. There are many different types of war. The drone is pretty effective in the types of war they are fighting against non-national armies. Drones usually fly high enough you don't know they are there unless you are using radar. Since the drone that was shot down was supposedly over international waters, I expect they were using it to monitor the shipping which it would be good at. There was no reason for anyone to shoot it down, especially since that is an act of war.

--

There was good reason for Iran to shoot it down, Trump has been waging war
on Iran for over a year now. Trump has not only embargoed US trade with
Iran, but used the full might of the US to force most companies around
the world to do the same. It's created a depression in Iran, exactly
as it was intended to do. What would the US position be, what would we
do, if some foreign power did that to us?

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:1111b9e4-1c43-4794-98fe-
796161306c88@googlegroups.com:

if it was in international
waters.......

ellipsis is three periods, not 15 or 20 or whatever your wee wittle
bwain punches out.

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:1111b9e4-1c43-4794-98fe-
796161306c88@googlegroups.com:

then why
did we allow Iran to recover it, instead of recovering it ourselves?

Hundreds of miles away. even 40 miles distant. A lot farther than the
dopes doing the shooting. They got there right away, while it took us
a bit.

Drone do not simply fly in the airspace nearby a ship.

You have severly flawed logic on this.

And you are pretty obviously a not ever a service member. You don't
even rate 4-F or the group W bench.

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:445751e4-331a-4fec-85fe-f027344cad28@googlegroups.com:

It's also absurd that someone who claims to be a Republican would
call the Tea Party retards, when the Tea Party holds the same
positions as most Republicans on most issues.

The absurdity here is how truly predictable you are.
It is actually quite sad. Another sad aspect of it is that you are
blind to how blatantly obvious your problem is.

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:445751e4-331a-4fec-85fe-
f027344cad28@googlegroups.com:

You were just caught lying again:

He was a severely terroristic despot. Regardless of how, he needed
to go. And yes, idiot, it was a good thing.

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 9:45:52 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:445751e4-331a-4fec-85fe-
f027344cad28@googlegroups.com:

You were just caught lying again:


He was a severely terroristic despot. Regardless of how, he needed
to go. And yes, idiot, it was a good thing.

Not in recent years, not when Hillary and Obama went to war against him.
And it has nothing to do with you denying that Hillary gloated about
killing Gaddafi. His "going" just created more problems and solved
nothing. Gaddafi had ended his WMD programs, we;re burning his uranium
in our power plants, Libya had been taken off the list of state sponsors
of terrorism. And just look at what a hell hole full of violence and
terrorists it's become now. Even worse it's caused a flood of refugees
into Europe and no one is sure who's in that flood. Nice going Obama
and Hillary. It's also sent the message that the US can't be trusted.
Cut a deal, trust the US, give up your WMDs, then we kill you. North
Korea and Iran watched and learned.

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:54:21 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:02:36 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 3:40:17 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
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.

Clearly you don't know much about war. There are many different types of war. The drone is pretty effective in the types of war they are fighting against non-national armies. Drones usually fly high enough you don't know they are there unless you are using radar. Since the drone that was shot down was supposedly over international waters, I expect they were using it to monitor the shipping which it would be good at. There was no reason for anyone to shoot it down, especially since that is an act of war.

--


There was good reason for Iran to shoot it down, Trump has been waging war
on Iran for over a year now. Trump has not only embargoed US trade with
Iran, but used the full might of the US to force most companies around
the world to do the same. It's created a depression in Iran, exactly
as it was intended to do. What would the US position be, what would we
do, if some foreign power did that to us?

Your post seems very confused and is mixing two separate things. Are you suggesting that the US and Iran are in a state of war? I'm pretty sure neither of them think so.

--

Rick C.

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

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:15:51 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:54:21 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:02:36 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 3:40:17 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
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.

Clearly you don't know much about war. There are many different types of war. The drone is pretty effective in the types of war they are fighting against non-national armies. Drones usually fly high enough you don't know they are there unless you are using radar. Since the drone that was shot down was supposedly over international waters, I expect they were using it to monitor the shipping which it would be good at. There was no reason for anyone to shoot it down, especially since that is an act of war.

--


There was good reason for Iran to shoot it down, Trump has been waging war
on Iran for over a year now. Trump has not only embargoed US trade with
Iran, but used the full might of the US to force most companies around
the world to do the same. It's created a depression in Iran, exactly
as it was intended to do. What would the US position be, what would we
do, if some foreign power did that to us?

Your post seems very confused and is mixing two separate things. Are you suggesting that the US and Iran are in a state of war? I'm pretty sure neither of them think so.

--

Rick C.

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

I'm saying that Trump has been waging war on Iran. Instead of asking me
questions, why don't you answer the question I posed. Trump has not only
embargoed US trade with Iran, but he has used the might of the US govt to
force most companies around the world to do the same. He's forced them
to cut off trade with Iran. It's caused a
depression in Iran, which was the intended result. If a foreign country
did that to the US, what would we consider it, if not an act of war?
We;d put up with it? What would the American people think?

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:55:28 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:39:18 PM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:15:51 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:54:21 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:02:36 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 3:40:17 AM UTC-4, Clive Arthur wrote:
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.

Clearly you don't know much about war. There are many different types of war. The drone is pretty effective in the types of war they are fighting against non-national armies. Drones usually fly high enough you don't know they are there unless you are using radar. Since the drone that was shot down was supposedly over international waters, I expect they were using it to monitor the shipping which it would be good at. There was no reason for anyone to shoot it down, especially since that is an act of war.

--


There was good reason for Iran to shoot it down, Trump has been waging war
on Iran for over a year now. Trump has not only embargoed US trade with
Iran, but used the full might of the US to force most companies around
the world to do the same. It's created a depression in Iran, exactly
as it was intended to do. What would the US position be, what would we
do, if some foreign power did that to us?

Your post seems very confused and is mixing two separate things. Are you suggesting that the US and Iran are in a state of war? I'm pretty sure neither of them think so.

--

Rick C.

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

I'm saying that Trump has been waging war on Iran. Instead of asking me
questions, why don't you answer the question I posed. Trump has not only
embargoed US trade with Iran, but he has used the might of the US govt to
force most companies around the world to do the same. He's forced them
to cut off trade with Iran. It's caused a
depression in Iran, which was the intended result. If a foreign country
did that to the US, what would we consider it, if not an act of war?
We;d put up with it? What would the American people think?

It's not a relevant question since embargoes are not acts of war.

Heh, I simply asked you what you think the US would do if a foreign power
embargoed us. Can't you dishonest libs ever address a relevant question.
And who gets to decide what an act of war is? If a foreign power not only
embargoed the US but used it's might to force most of the companies that
we trade with to do the same thing, resulting in a depression, which was
the intended effect, WTF do you think we'd do?

We embargoed Japan and they eventually went to war with us, but the embargo was not an act of war.

Do try to keep up. I didn't say the US embargoing Iran was an act of war.
I said Trump embargoing Iran and using the full might of the US to force
most other companies around the world to do the same with the intent of
busting their economy, was an act of war. What pussies would put up with
that and not consider it an act of war?





We are not at war with Iran and Iran is not at war with us. You seem to be responding to these issues emotionally rather than thoughtfully.

You seem to be lost in the wilderness, as usual. And try answering the
question next time, instead of diverting to nowhere.

--

Rick C.

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