Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

On the eve of war

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

On the eve of war

Old 21st Jun 2019, 13:42
  #1201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,578
KelvinD

I know all about the Qatar issue with other nations. That’s why I mentioned it.

I also acknowledged that the spokesman was in error when he mentioned Dubai to Muscat flights transiting the area. What I pointed out was that there are some civilian aircraft flying through the area on different routes. You very kindly reinforced this fact.

As for FIRs, countries (or agencies) do not own them, they control aircraft within them.

If military aircraft entering an FIR were a crime punishable by shootdown then the North Sea would be full of destroyed Bears, Blackjacks and other similar Russian aircraft.

A countries ‘border’ (or territorial seas) extends up to 12 miles from its coastline. If someone were to enter this area then they are potentially fair game.

The fact the target was a drone shouldn't change our opinion.

I’m not sure why you are so keen to stick up for Iran. But then, there’s nowt so queer as folk!

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 13:48
  #1202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
I’m not sure why you are so keen to stick up for Iran.

Could we please stop this notion that because you are anti-war you are a supporter of the Ayatollahs. I'm not a supporter of the Iranian government (nor the US government or any other one for that matter), but I care about the innocent people in Iran who would be the primary victims of a war if it broke out.

Don't forget, the politicians and generals pushing for conflict aren't going to be the ones suffering because of it.
dr dre is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 14:00
  #1203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 674
I’m not sure why you are so keen to stick up for Iran. But then, there’s nowt so queer as folk!
I can’t speak for others but I feel strongly that it’s possible that thousands if not millions of people, both Iranians and others will be murdered if Bolton & co get their wish, and that would be an horrific tragedy as far as I’m concerned. I want to protest this event and prevent it happening if at all possible.

But as you say, there’s nowt so queer as folk! The sociopaths and and psychopaths in charge of us have dome their best to empty us of compassion for others. Propaganda is a powerful tool.
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 15:20
  #1204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 789
Originally Posted by ATSA1 View Post
Does this mean that the US will not be sending any more UAVs to do some recon on the Iranians now?
If they do, and another gets shot down, what happens then?
Whatever committee is in charge of Iran this week, must be laughing their collective socks off over this!
Not sure they were expecting their navy to be staring on prime time TV.

currawong is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 15:47
  #1205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.S.A
Age: 51
Posts: 400
“I’m not sure why you are so keen to stick up for Iran.”

Not really sure what “sticking up” up for Iran really looks like in a geopolitical sense however I suspect you are struggling to grasp that some folk here, much like the broader global community, view these issues after a certain degree of critical thinking.

The US has zero credibility when it comes to crying wolf having lied and deceived the world time and time again particularly in the middle east. From the lies of the USS Vincennes to the completely falsified existence of WMD and the manufactured rational for destroying Libya.

The last time I checked, Iran has not shot down a civilian airliner off the coast of San Diego or invaded Mexico and built bases along the border with California or threatened to destroy Canada if they don't comply with absurd requests or funded opposition political parties in the US or had special forces on the ground in the mid west of the US for the last decade.
oicur12.again is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 16:49
  #1206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London
Posts: 203
If the intention of the US is to put Iran Oil under its contol (Per Iraq), thereby enabling the US to exercise greater control over the ROW economies, all that's guarenteed is another shed load of dead middle-east peasants, another refugee crisis and accelerated expansion of China into the oil bearing areas of SE Asia in search of supplementary oil supplies.

Quite honestly, if that's the "Hawks" intent, why let ol' Orangina telegraph it to the other side through public pronouncements to his favoured part of the Home audience ? All it does is heighten the Iranian expectations of the American intent ? And they will be put on alert and react with exagerated responses.

I suppose that's what you do if you are trying to engineer a conflict where the instigator comes out smelling of Roses.

I think it would be fair to assume that Iranian air defence system won't be uniformly up to the standard of American kit (The best bits being reserved for protection of Karg island, the nucleur facility and bits of Tehran ?) so the likelihood of the local systems being able to detect, within an acceptable time frame, the difference between a Navalised Global Hawk intelligence gatherer and an offensive cruise missile might be reduced.

What might further heighten concerns is that its reported the thing entered into the disputed area in "Stealth mode". Is that standard for Global Hawk operations ?

Iranian concerns might be further aroused when weapons like this are likely to be available:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M730_Burevestnik

Reportedly, still under development, with the Americans recently committed to "Catching-up" having already done a fair bit of development work in the 1960s under Project Pluto - abandonned then because it was deemed "Too provocative", during the height of the cold war !!!!

If you were the Iranian Air Defence commander and one of these things appeared on your PPI ? What would you do ? Wait until your archiac radar and other systems had correctly identified it or knock it down before it had the opportunity to go bang ?

Nick

Last edited by NAROBS; 21st Jun 2019 at 17:07.
NAROBS is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 17:04
  #1207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 60
Posts: 508
IMHO, it's time to calm down and not let the situation get out of control. The PotUS did the right thing when issued a "No Go" command to the forces that were ready to strike. The Iranians, at least as they say, did not issue the command to attack a US (manned) plane that was reportedly accompanying the drone (that was hit).
I hope they all understand that it would not be a bi-lateral conflict. E.g., in case of a powerful US strike, the Iranians (and their proxies) may immediately attack Israel (as a US "vassal" in the area) with a catastrophic result.
A_Van is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 21:13
  #1208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: yes
Posts: 155
To be fair to the man as he put it 150 dead people even Iranians is not a fair exchange for a drone.

The question is whether the Iranians see this.

Because if the Iranians persist with this it will be a lot more than 150 dead people.

They need to get the message. Trump will push the button eventually.

They've played the game. Trump has no interest in killing Iranians or Americans. If they consider this a weakness the Iranians might do something foolish. I hope not.

​​​



​​​​​​
Steepclimb is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 21:47
  #1209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by Steepclimb View Post
Because if the Iranians persist with this it will be a lot more than 150 dead people.

They need to get the message. Trump will push the button eventually.
​​​​​​
What, the Iranians persist with defending their sovereign territory from US military aircraft incursions and attempting to remove sanctions so they can freely trade and engage with the rest of the world?

The US should be vying to compete in Iran and have American companies be selling their products to the Iranian people, which would have been possible had the nuclear deal remained in place.

Originally Posted by A_Van View Post
E.g., in case of a powerful US strike, the Iranians (and their proxies) may immediately attack Israel (as a US "vassal" in the area) with a catastrophic result.
The US needs to get the message that Iran isn’t Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, or Syria. They can punch back this time if they make up a false excuse for war. Iran has ballistic missiles which can hit US bases in the region, naval technology which can hit US vessels and a more advanced air defence system.


Last edited by dr dre; 21st Jun 2019 at 22:30.
dr dre is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 22:39
  #1210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 674
o be fair to the man as he put it 150 dead people even Iranians is not a fair exchange for a drone.
What a sick sentiment. ​​​​​​​
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 22:46
  #1211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: yes
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post

What, the Iranians persist with defending their sovereign territory from US military aircraft incursions and attempting to remove sanctions so they can freely trade and engage with the rest of the world?

The US should be vying to compete in Iran and have American companies be selling their products to the Iranian people, which would have been possible had the nuclear deal remained in place.

The US needs to get the message that’s Iran isn’t Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, or Syria. They can punch back this time if they make up a false excuse for war. Iran has ballistic missiles which can hit US bases in the region, naval technology which can hit US vessels and a more advanced air defence system.
Wow, didn't realise you were An Iranian troll. I'm intrigued. I'm Irish by the way. No dog in the fight. I agree in general that Iran would be a powerful force in the world without American sanctions but why does Iran persist with this hostility to the west?

Iran could be one of the most powerful if not the most powerful country in the middle east if they aligned themselves with the west. They're not Arab for one thing.
Ancient Persia is most revered.

Iran is a joke country now. A posturing failed state for most ordinary Iranians.
Steepclimb is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 23:26
  #1212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by Steepclimb View Post
Wow, didn't realise you were An Iranian troll. I'm intrigued.
Like I’ve said before, just as in the lead up to Iraq in 2003, any anti-war voices are ridiculed and accused of supporting the “enemy”.

but why does Iran persist with this hostility to the west?
Get out the history books. 1953 coup, supporting the Shah, supporting Saddam, supporting sanctions, shooting down airliners, threatening regime change. I should add hostility to the US, not the whole of the west, they certaintly want to trade with the EU at the moment.

Iran could be one of the most powerful if not the most powerful country in the middle east if they aligned themselves with the west.
They tried to with the Nuclear deal, and were well on their way to being a trade partner (Airbus and Boeing were going to sell them hundreds of aircraft) until the Americans pulled out. Now the Chinese, Indians and Russians will be the main benefactors and US companies and jobs will lose out.

Iran is a joke country now. A posturing failed state for most ordinary Iranians.
Not really. Democratic participation is higher in Iran than the United States. There was about a 75% turnout for the last Iranian presidential election, compared to about 50% for the last US one.

dr dre is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2019, 23:33
  #1213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post

What a sick sentiment.
Classic war propaganda. Dehumanise the “enemy”. Insist “their” lives are not as valuable as “ours”.
Or in this case 150 of “their” lives are only slightly more worthy than our flying robot.
dr dre is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 00:38
  #1214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Syd
Posts: 32
To suggest that the US had a large strike package inbound to Iran and that Trump stood them down upon learning that 150 people would die is not plausible.
He would have been fully aware of the collateral projections before signing off on the strike.
Either the Trump team are bluffing by calling off a strike that was never going to happen as a way of demonstrating US resolve OR the strike was underway when Trump learned that his advisors had not painted an accurate picture or that he had been lied to.
This is not unusual, Presidents have been lied to before. All presidents are beholden to their intelligence services and Trump has made no bones about his distaste for the NSA, the CIA and even the FBI. The first year of his presidency was focused on rooting out plants from these intelligence services.
Trump is clearly being pushed by operatives within Washington whose agenda is not completely clear and probably not in line with his. This explains the constant clashes he has with the likes of Clapper, Hayden and Brennan who are doing their best to see Trump taken down for not committing to the anti Russia agenda that has served the defense industry so well for so long.
He is terrified of becoming the steward of another Vietnam conflict which an extended campaign with Iran could well become. It doesn’t help when several Congressmen in TV interviews accidentally referred to the Gulf of Oman as the Gulf of Tonkin in the past week.
Orange future is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 01:48
  #1215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 64
Posts: 59
Neither of them should be panting for armed conflict.
Both have not had any military victories in quite a long time.
Some nice hardware - chain of commands need work.

There was about a 75% turnout for the last Iranian presidential election, compared to about 50% for the last US one.
Good voter participation does not guarantee good government.
meadowrun is online now  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 04:32
  #1216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,457
Originally Posted by Orange future View Post
To suggest that the US had a large strike package inbound to Iran and that Trump stood them down upon learning that 150 people would die is not plausible.
He would have been fully aware of the collateral projections before signing off on the strike.
Either the Trump team are bluffing by calling off a strike that was never going to happen as a way of demonstrating US resolve OR the strike was underway when Trump learned that his advisors had not painted an accurate picture or that he had been lied to.
This is not unusual, Presidents have been lied to before. All presidents are beholden to their intelligence services and Trump has made no bones about his distaste for the NSA, the CIA and even the FBI. The first year of his presidency was focused on rooting out plants from these intelligence services.
Trump is clearly being pushed by operatives within Washington whose agenda is not completely clear and probably not in line with his. This explains the constant clashes he has with the likes of Clapper, Hayden and Brennan who are doing their best to see Trump taken down for not committing to the anti Russia agenda that has served the defense industry so well for so long.
He is terrified of becoming the steward of another Vietnam conflict which an extended campaign with Iran could well become. It doesn’t help when several Congressmen in TV interviews accidentally referred to the Gulf of Oman as the Gulf of Tonkin in the past week.
What would make you think you need a large strike package to kill 150-ish? You don’t.

Given that Iran has some semblance of an air defense system, eliminating individual sites and disrupting their networks would be among the first tasks accomplished prior to your notional “large strike package”. The former didn’t happen therefore the later wasn’t considered.

With the weapons available today, coupled with the lack of a dead US pilot, the public’s intolerance to casualties along with the concept of a proportional response mean a limited scope response would likely be cruise missiles.
West Coast is online now  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 05:24
  #1217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 789
"Iran could be one of the most powerful if not the most powerful country in the middle east if they aligned themselves with the west. They're not Arab for one thing.
Ancient Persia is most revered. "

Absolutely.

Remember the Iran that was the most progressive and moderate country in the region? I wonder where they would be now if not for that whole Islamic Revolution thing.

I wonder where they would be now if they had not tried to export said revolution. Its a shame really. Heard good things about the place prior to all that.
currawong is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 05:33
  #1218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by currawong View Post
Remember the Iran that was the most progressive and moderate country in the region? I wonder where they would be now if not for that whole Islamic Revolution thing.

I wonder where they would be now if they had not tried to export said revolution. Its a shame really. Heard good things about the place prior to all that.
The problems didn't start in 1979. That was a reaction to the rule of the Shah.
The problems started in 1953 when the CIA installed the Shah in power.
I wonder where Iran would be now if the CIA hadn't overthrown Mosaddegh and his secular democracy had been allowed to flourish?
dr dre is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 07:23
  #1219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 789
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
The problems didn't start in 1979. That was a reaction to the rule of the Shah.
The problems started in 1953 when the CIA installed the Shah in power.
I wonder where Iran would be now if the CIA hadn't overthrown Mosaddegh and his secular democracy had been allowed to flourish?
That would be a good question for the Soviet apologists amongst us.
currawong is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2019, 08:21
  #1220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by currawong View Post
That would be a good question for the Soviet apologists amongst us.
Another example of how those who speak up against war are smeared via petty personal attacks.

“Soviet apologist”? That’s a pretty poor (and irrelevant) insult, you should try better next time.

Then again the CIA painted every democratically elected government they wanted to overthrow during the Cold War as “potentially communist” didn’t they?
dr dre is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.