Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Iran's Military Claims To Have Downed US Surveillance Drone

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the is-turnabout-fair-play? dept.

The Military 522

mrquagmire submits a link to the Jerusalem Post's report that an American reconnaissance UAV has been captured by the Iranian military. "'Iran's military has downed an intruding RQ-170 American drone in eastern Iran,' Iran's Arabic-language Al Alam state television network quoted the unnamed source as saying. 'The spy drone, which has been downed with little damage, was seized by the Iranian armed forces.' ... 'The Iranian military's response to the American spy drone's violation of our airspace will not be limited to Iran's borders any more,' Iran's Arabic language Al Alam television quoted the military source as saying, without giving details."

cancel ×

522 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First strike? (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257522)

Here we go.

Re:First strike? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257674)

To our US friends from a Brit, welcome to the party. To our Iranian "friends", congratulations on winning the first prize in the game of "how many nations can I piss off in a month".

Re:First strike? (-1, Troll)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257800)

What party? You brits don't play a significant role any more, the sun has set my friend.

Re:First strike? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257818)

Tell that to the regime-backed riot that occurred at the British embassy in Tehran following British economic sanctions against Iran.

Re:First strike? (5, Interesting)

InsightIn140Bytes (2522112) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257690)

It was US that violated Iran's airspace. They have every right to shoot it down. It happens frequently with my country too and they never do anything about it - they just go "yes, we will demand answers from the this time, honestly we promise!". Kudos to Iran for taking a stance.

Re:First strike? (4, Insightful)

caladine (1290184) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257834)

Allegedly. Given the amount of evidence and the history of the regime (last time they made this claim they backed off it) I'm skeptical. It wouldn't really surprise me either way. Iran was putting their equivalent of a drone into Iraq while US forces were there. Maybe they're just returning the favor.

No reason not to believe them (5, Interesting)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258100)

Someone just blew up (at least) one of their missile bases. There are reports of more attacks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/image-shows-than-an-iranian-missile-site-was-destroyed/2011/11/28/gIQA7KZW5N_blog.html [washingtonpost.com]

Iran claimed it was an accident...
Course then the UK embassy then gets invaded and a drone is shot down. Or claimed. All a coincidence of course.
 

Re:First strike? (5, Interesting)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257738)

Not really. The US has been flying manned combat aircraft into Iran for several years probing air defences. My Persian cooworkers have a social app that tracks when people on the ground see the planes, I don't speak farsi (or understand the language) so I can't point you at it unfortunately. Searches for USAF probing iranian air defences gives some results along these lines.

The US is trying to fly as deep into Iran as they can before all the air defence sites 'light up', they're trying to locate all the air defence radars etc. It's illegal, but it's been going on for years, and everyone knows the game, the americans pretend 'this time is the time' they're going to attack natanz etc. and the Iranians call their bluff. Presumably one of these days the Israeli's or someone else will take this data and go after air defence sites along with the nuclear facilities but who knows.

Re:First strike? (2)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257772)

This also isn't the first time that they've shot down a drone. I imagine that they make a big deal about this in part because they can't do much about U-2 overflights, and in part because it validates the government's rhetoric about how the whole world (except maybe Syria) is out to get Iran. Shooting down a drone is not terribly difficult.

Re:First strike? (2, Insightful)

fsckmnky (2505008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257878)

The US is trying to fly as deep into Iran as they can before all the air defense sites 'light up', they're trying to locate all the air defence radars etc.

There is 0 incentive to fly into a territory to find radar sites *before* a conflict has started. Anti-radar munitions have been around since at least the 70's. If a conflict were to break out, the US could then send in aircraft / drones with ARMs and take out any sites that light up.

This is at least the 3rd time Iran has claimed to have downed a US drone. They have provided no proof for any of the claims.

Re:First strike? (5, Informative)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257978)

Additionally, the technical specs of the radar systems are already known, because Russia probably makes the systems and American intelligence has the instruction manual.

Knowing the frequencies and techniques of the enemy radar is enough to build an operational flight program for our countermeasures to jam it. I'm pretty sure that it's in our best interests to jam and/or deceive the radars rather than deliberately "light them up" before we strike. I know because I was an avionics troop in the USAF, specializing in electronic warfare (TISS).

Lastly, though, I want to say that all this rhetoric in favor of war with Iran being shoved up our asses is disgusting. With public approval of government at an all-time low and protests in every major city, it is clear that the government have completely lost touch with reality. We are not buying this bullshit again, from the bullshit "WMD" excuse used to go to war with Iraq to the conspicuously missing pictures of Bin Laden ( the U.S. had no problem with proudly displaying Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay as if they were a science fair exhibit! ).

This is fucking bullshit. This shit-talking has to stop.

Re:First strike? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38258062)

Your friend has been telling you jokes. US has never flied manned aircraft into Iran let alone for several years. If that had happened everyone would know. There is not even a single news or even rumor on that except the one you just delivered. And I tell you that because I follow Iranian defense news everyday for the last few years.

no, it is a response (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257912)

There have been at least two attacks against Iranian missile bases.
 

Re:First strike? (0, Flamebait)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258060)

Here we go.

With current downward pressure on the price of energy (supply is up, demand is flat), the best way to boost oil prices is to have some "event" such as an Israeli attack on Iran or some American/Iran kerfuffle. Every time oil prices back off, you will hear the talking heads on CNBC and Larry Kudlow, etc starting talking about how "Israel is going to attack Iran any day now". If you listen to these people, you would have heard at least a dozen times in the past five years that Israel was within a month of attacking Iran. If such a thing should happen, you can bet your bottom dollar it will happen when oil prices are weak.

Interesting that this also coincides with the US becoming a net exporter of energy since Obama took office.

It all seems complicated, but you can't go wrong by assuming the worst about people with money and power.

First Drone (4, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257526)

Pics or it didn't happen.

Re:First Drone (1)

fsckmnky (2505008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257566)

+1

Re:First Drone (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257648)

You mean like that Bin Ladin character?

Re:First Drone (2)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257660)

pictures of his death have been leaked

Re:First Drone (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257712)

yeah after they thawed him.

Re:First Drone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257752)

And I saw a picture of the Pope kissing a Muslim imam. I can squirt some ketchup on the floor and lay down holding a knife in my armpit and had a picture that looks like I was stabbed. Does not mean I was stabbed. Or there is photoshop for those who do not want to make a mess.

Re:First Drone (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257886)

that's not the point, was only addressing the "pics or it didn't happen" philosophy. I can't know whether the pictures I saw were faked

Re:First Drone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257776)

pictures of his death have been leaked

Stories of leaked pictures have surfaced.

Pictures, however, have not surfaced.

There's a big fucking difference.

Re:First Drone (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257874)

I've seen them, as have millions of others

Re:First Drone (4, Funny)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257756)

Sure, we'll just get some photos with the dro-

Oh God DAMMIT.

pics or GTFO! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257528)

Seriously though this is tabloid fodder.

sold to china (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257538)

Why is it that USA thinks it can push other countrys around so much? They are in everybodys face, from Europe on copyrights to violating the sovereign territory of many countries with airstrikes that kill innocents to drones.

Iran will sell this drone to China, I'm sure. The world needs China as a counterbalance to the aggression of the USA. It's better to have 2 superpowers than just one which can do whatever it pleases. If China is there to push back against usa, usa won't be able to cause so many probs anymore.
 

Re:sold to china (5, Insightful)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257570)

After all, the PRC would never invade any of its neighbors. Not Vietnam, not Korea, not India, not Russia, not Tibet. And they certainly wouldn't make constant menacing gestures against ROC-Taiwan or Japan...

The PRC is hated by every one of its neighbors except Pakistan and North Korea, which are pretty much rogue states.

Re:sold to china (1)

seyyah (986027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257982)

After all, the PRC would never invade any of its neighbors. Not Vietnam, not Korea, not India, not Russia, not Tibet. And they certainly wouldn't make constant menacing gestures against ROC-Taiwan or Japan...

Not Tibet???

!

Re:sold to china (0)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257706)

two words, nuclear fucking weapons.

China has too few of those to go to the mat with the USA. Russia exaggerates the number of active warheads it can maintain, has half that of the USA.

Re:sold to china (3, Insightful)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257998)

China has too few of those to go to the mat with the USA. Russia exaggerates the number of active warheads it can maintain, has half that of the USA.

If you can reliably deliver even 20 warheads to the US on a second strike, you've got more than enough to keep even the most hawkish of politicians or generals from wanting to get into a nuclear slugging match.

Re:sold to china (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257728)

Yeah look at how well that worked out during the cold war, one half collapsed...who do you think will collapse this time China?

Re:sold to china (2)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257890)

China's not in good shape either. The EU is bumming and the Euro is tottering on falling apart. All those spare troops in Afghanistan and Iraq need something to do.

WW3 could be on its way. The Afghanis need to decide whose side they're on, and so do the Pakistanis. Israel, who has lots of trouble making friends, will be wondering what to do. The Saudis will try to keep the peace by carrying a big stick, but that'll probably backfire.

My guess: the drone business goes away. Iraq needed to crow about something because times are desperate there, too. One stick poked up the hornets nest of the US Congress, and the swarm will come out; that vote will pass probably without hesitation. Then a lot of people die, unnecessarily, because the ego of several highly placed and powerful people will have been maimed.

Re:sold to china (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257962)

The way you wrote that I can see you shrugging your shoulders as though it's as common as the Sun coming up, isn't that sort of complacency what got us into Iraq and Afghanistan, the war no one can "win".

Re:sold to china (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257758)

The irony is that China likely makes half the parts anyways (electronics-wise at least), but now they'll get to see how they go together.

Re:sold to china (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257896)

Maybe it's because if you combined the 20 largest military budgets of the world excluding the USA, the USA's is still larger? Because the USA has half the world's aircraft carriers and every one is between 2-9 times the size of any other country's? Because their technology is far beyond anyone else's capability?

China's military budget is less than 17% of the USA's, and they're second in spending. Iran's is about 1%.

The USA thinks it can push other country's around militarily because it actually can. It's a good thing that they're not anywhere near as aggressive as nearly every country/empire with anywhere close to that kind of military dominance in history. Seriously, the world kinda lucked out with how this ended up when it did. That's not to say there aren't problems with this, and the US exerts a lot of undue influence, but most governments in history (and indeed, even today) would have expanded to directly control much of the world with that kind of power.

Re:sold to china (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38258086)

Seriously, the world kinda lucked out with how this ended up when it did.

What makes you think it's over?

Just wait until resources like oil and water really start to get scarce. Hold onto your hat, you ain't seen nothing yet!

Isn't that kind of the point? (5, Interesting)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257542)

I mean I thought the whole idea is you send in unmanned drones to do a dangerous mission because losing a drone is preferable to losing a pilot.(Then again you'd hope the technology on the drone wouldn't be too advanced so the enemy doesn't get much out of shooting one down.)

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257594)

Worth a lot to other governments to do a deconstruct on this one, each drone should have a remote kill button...

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (1)

Delwin (599872) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257680)

They do.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (1)

geekylinuxkid (831805) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257694)

a remote kill switch? that wouldnt happen. just imagine how many drones have been shot down so far... iran says one in july then changed their mind. so maybe one in many years of use. so you want to enable a mechanism that would self distruct at a push of a button. okay, so what kind of public outcry would happen if a drone malfunctions and self distructs on a miltary base possibly injuring or killing troops? it would also add to weight and probably decrease the stealth ability. so no a remote kill switch is not a good idea.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257956)

You've seen too many Mission Impossible remakes. Who says the damn thing has to *explode* to self-destruct?

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (1)

rastos1 (601318) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257976)

so you want to enable a mechanism that would self distruct at a push of a button. okay, so what kind of public outcry would happen if a drone malfunctions and self distructs on a miltary base possibly injuring or killing troops?

Indeed. I mean, what is on a military base except personnel? Tonnes and tonnes of explosives. That's clearly dangerous and should be banned. It's not like any other weapons have self-destruct capability [strategypage.com] .

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258006)

so what kind of public outcry would happen if a drone malfunctions and self distructs on a miltary base possibly injuring or killing troops?

On any modern combat aircraft, there are enough ways to blow yourself up that a self destruct mech would not increase that danger. Ejection seats, hydrazine, rjrctor carts, and the normal bombs and missiles are there already.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257654)

The point is that sending aircraft into someone else' airspace without permission is an aggressive act forbidden by international law and treaties that the US is a party to.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (2)

Delwin (599872) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257696)

The problem with this is that those drones have encrypted radios and if they didn't get wiped in time closely guarded encryption keys. The radio has a remote-detonate so it should be OK but there's still a lot of other tech on that drone that we really don't want Iran getting it's hands on - not to mention China to whome it was likely sold.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257766)

It was likely made in China anyway.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (5, Funny)

multisync (218450) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258008)

It was likely made in China anyway.

It was made by Lockheed Martin [wikipedia.org] .

Maybe the Iranians will update the Wikipedia article and let us know what those pods on the top of the wings are for.

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (5, Interesting)

Frequency Domain (601421) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257946)

The problem with this is that those drones have encrypted radios and if they didn't get wiped in time closely guarded encryption keys.

Say what? Not changing crypto keys for every mission implies a level of incompetence I find hard to believe. Having hardwired crypto keys even more so.

Re:technology on the drone wouldn't be too advance (1)

roguegramma (982660) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257768)

The shape of the drone alone might have required hours of computing time to optimize for a low radar profile, so I'm not so sure that it was designed in a way to reduce technology creep.

Re:technology on the drone wouldn't be too advance (1)

glrotate (300695) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258002)

The shape of the drone alone might have required hours of computing time to optimize for a low radar profile

Might?

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (1)

drgould (24404) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258018)

The point, from Iran's point of view, is that it makes good propaganda.

The good news is that, yes, they don't have a pilot they can parade through the streets of Tehran and interrogate for information.

And if they manage to recover sensitive information from the onboard electronics, that's the fault of whoever designed the failsafe mechanism to prevent it. (It still beats putting a pilot's life at risk.)

Re:Isn't that kind of the point? (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258050)

There's quite a bit of tech in these drones that I would hope doesn't get into enemy hands. I'd hope that there's a destruct capability that will blow all the sensitive innards of the plane to smithereens before it gets into enemy hands.

Escalation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257544)

"will not be limited to Iran's borders any more". Yes, it will, you idiots. You don't want to give the world an excuse to level your country, do you?

(On the other hand, if Iran will restrain itself, then the US will just make up some evidence and "liberate the people" anyway.)

Those pathetic Iranians (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257632)

They downed one drone, haha. US downed their airliner in their airspace with 290 pax onboard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655 [wikipedia.org]

Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (4, Insightful)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257634)

Maybe they were just trying to slip something in, to see if it could be done? Like, how good are their air defenses really?

A good mission for an "expendable" probe.

Who knows if this is the first one that has been sent in already . . . ?

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257686)

may well be, but it still comes down to violating another country's airspace.
Iran will try to make this look like an act of agression by the US. and frankly, they would be right.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258036)

Iran will try to make this look like an act of agression by the US. and frankly, they would be right.

No more "aggression" than any other form of espionage.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (1, Interesting)

fsckmnky (2505008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257692)

Maybe Iran is getting ready to provoke a war, and knowing this, they are claiming a 3rd drone, even though they have not shown proof of any of them, so that after they provoke a conflict, and drones are used during said conflict, they can pick one up later as proof of the 3 as-of-yet unsubstantiated claims they have already made.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257826)

Maybe Iran is getting ready to provoke a war, and knowing this, they are claiming a 3rd drone, even though they have not shown proof of any of them, so that after they provoke a conflict, and drones are used during said conflict, they can pick one up later as proof of the 3 as-of-yet unsubstantiated claims they have already made.

I think you've got the whole geo-political situation upside down.
The only 2 countries that have created reasons for war (out of thin air) are the US and Israel.
I guess the last 10 years just whooshed by you.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (0)

fsckmnky (2505008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257898)

So *you* say. If you were supreme dictator of the galaxy, your opinion might carry some weight.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (3, Informative)

silanea (1241518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257844)

Sure. Or maybe the US violated a sovereign state's airspace and had their aircraft shot down. Looking at both countries' track records for provoking armed conflicts through blatant disregard for international law the latter somehow seems the more likely theory.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (1)

fsckmnky (2505008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257924)

Theory. It's all just a bullshit theory. The ball is in Irans court *if* they actually have a drone. They have everything to gain politically by showing the world said drone. When said drone evidence doesn't appear, try not to cry. Just find a new reason to mold the geopolitical landscape to match your next theory.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (1)

mSparks43 (757109) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258134)

In 2008 Iran used Russian S300s to shoot down several assault planes violating its airspace, which it tracked lifting off from Iraq some hours earlier, 5 hours later the price of oil crashed through the floor, and shortly thereafter, Lehman Brothers, who were heavily long oil, went bust. And you think a picture of a drone would change a damn thing?

Media prints what its told to print in "press conferences". This bears virtually no resemblance to what is actually happening in the real world.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257994)

Sure. Or maybe Iran decided to claim to have shot down a US drone because they need a propaganda boost.

The Iranians have released no photos. This is probably because there are no pictures of a RQ-170 except for a handful of grainy photos from Afghanistan. If they'd actually shot one down, they'd have plastered the media with photos of the thing.

It gets better if you read Al-Jazeera: they're claiming that Iran's elite cyberwarfare unit brought down the plane. No kidding. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2011/12/20111241599102532.html [aljazeera.com]

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38258026)

Who gives a fuck? There will be a war, if they want a war, not because of a fucking drone. Since both sides are governed by idiots, we'll see that war pretty soon.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (5, Interesting)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257798)

Not saying this is what's happening, but there's a tactic of probing an enemy's air defenses to get them to switch on the radars they've been keeping hidden so you won't know to bomb them when the war starts.

Re:Poking / Probing Iran's air defenses . . . ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257970)

Maybe they were just trying to slip something in, to see if it could be done? Like, how good are their air defenses really?

I would be greatly surprised if this was the case. The pilot of the drone either accidental entered their air space, or Iran is starting to get a little more strict on the definition of airspace. Given Iran's recent activity I think the latter is the more likely case.

Not the first time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257640)

...Iran has said they've downed a drone. There were also rumors they somehow "intercepted it" and landed it in one piece.

Again, pics or it didn't happen.

Not exactly the most reliable source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257672)

Keep in mind who is reporting this - I'll believe it when the pentagon confirms it or claims no comment. Now If true it really sucks cause they claim this one is largely intact, lots of people will be knocking at their door to take a look.

Re:Not exactly the most reliable source (1)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257720)

other news sites are reporting this to like the ap. plus googling the name of the type of drone downed makes this even more interesting since it's one based off the stealthy 'flying wing' b2 bomber....

Re:Not exactly the most reliable source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257748)

Keep in mind who is reporting this - I'll believe it when the pentagon confirms it or claims no comment. Now If true it really sucks cause they claim this one is largely intact, lots of people will be knocking at their door to take a look.

Right, because the Pentagon has never ever lied to the american people.
Oh man, I'll wait for the press statement that says "yeah, we had a drone right over Iran's airspace (a sovereign nation) because we just felt like it. You know fuck the Iranians, the US knows best so if we want to have a fuicking drone over their fucking airspace they don't have any say in it.. End of the fucking press statement.

Odd (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257698)

What a difference in detail

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9004290309 [farsnews.com]

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=248067 [jpost.com]

I am dismayed at Israels constant call for war against Iran when it will be Americans fighting the war not the IDF, I wonder how much war rhetoric they would be spouting if the US didn't back them up.

Re:Odd (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257760)

Israel is just the loudest voice. The Saudis are just as keen to see the Ayatollahs taken down a notch. At any rate, it would be an air campaign (if it happens at all).

Re:Odd (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257814)

Really? Why does Israel have the "loudest voice"?

Re:Odd (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257960)

Really? Why does Israel have the "loudest voice"?

In the US of A we have the AIPAC [aipac.org] , Fox News (and their right wing nut listeners who thin we cannot have peace with Iran), and all of the Evangelical Christian nutjobs who think that any threat to Israel threatens their ability to get into Heaven or some such mythological nonsense.

That's why they have the loudest voice.

Here in the US of A, I have never heard the Saudi's (or any other Arab) voice against Iran. The only time I see anything is in foreign published sources like the Economist. Of course, here in the US of A, most of us think that Iranians are Arabs and Persians make rugs and breed cats.

Re:Odd (2)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257810)

"I wonder how much war rhetoric they would be spouting if the US didn't back them up."

I think they trust the old saying "It is better to have your people die for our cause, than to let our soldiers die for a lost cause". No, that was no old saying, i just made it up. Sorry.

Re:Odd (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257916)

Wow that already shows up in a Google search pointing to your post, scary stuff...

"It is better to have your people die for our cause, than to let our soldiers die for a lost cause"

Idiots, don't mess with the U.S.A. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257710)

"The Iranian military's response to the American spy drone's violation of our airspace will not be limited to Iran's borders any more"

Veracity? Veracity?

If it is true, idiots! Don't mess with USA. Even if US tanks cannot readily attack Iran as they did in Iraq, the military power is there.

Yet. getting rid of the Ayatollahs would be a really good idea. Thinking of it, what did you say? Again, please.

and you will be first into combat right? (1, Funny)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257966)

oh, i understand, the 'faggot commies' in the Army didnt accept you, because you are too 'big boned'.

life is hard when you are surrounded by faggot commies.

Nuke em (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257718)

We should just nuke iran. They're going to continue to cause problems in the world until someone does. Just drop a couple strategic 50Meg nukes in select cities, problem solved.

Re:Nuke em (2)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257780)

What problems are they causing?

Re:Nuke em (1)

broken_chaos (1188549) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257832)

Bad idea. Nuclear weapons haven't been used since the bombs dropped in the second world war. We do not want to reopen that door as a 'legitimate' military strategy.

Re:Nuke em (1)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257944)

Agreed. Nuclear weapons should never be discussed in any sense beyond very last resort.

Many potential enemies have the ability to strike on US soil. We don't want to be the first to make transglobal nuclear strikes seem sensible.

Re:Nuke em (1)

silanea (1241518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257868)

They cause problems in the world by shooting down a foreign aircraft that intrudes into their sovereign territory? Interesting.

thank you heinrich himmler (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257948)

the Ostplan never gets old does it!! lulz wut!

Hopefully (-1, Flamebait)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257730)

this has a small nuke on-board. Then let it blow upon a hatch being opened or blockage of a signal.

Re:Hopefully (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257786)

So you want people to be nuked?

yup, i think thats pretty clear from his comments (3, Funny)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257928)

he doesn't know anyone in iran, he doesn't know any iranians, he just spent the weekend playing 'call of duty' and masturbating, but goddamnit, he knows foreign policy. and the number one thing we need to do is to violate the laws of war (which he calls 'faggot laws') and put weapons of mass destruction into a country without any formal declaration of war, congressional debate, etc.

because, after all, they shot down one of our robots.

  WindBourne can be found during days at his job as a Wal Mart security guard, where he protects us from terrorists by body slamming grandfathers face-first into the concrete floor because they "resist arrest".

Re:yup, i think thats pretty clear from his commen (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257992)

As I got older the thing that worries me the most is not the stupidity of people, that is with us forever, but how easily they are programmed to respond in a singular way to certain stimulus, Pavlovian nightmare.

Propaganda (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257770)

jpost is propaganda (well aren't all news media now a days)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerusalem_Post [wikipedia.org]

It's start "According to the Historical Jewish Press, The Palestine Post was established "as part of a Zionist-Jewish initiative", and "Zionist institutions considered the newspaper one of the most effective means of exerting influence on the British authorities".[4]"

It has a tiny circulation therefore shill rhetoric is the key to increasing visibility.

So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257792)

The US violating someone's air space? Nobody will shrug their shoulder...

USB sticks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38257816)

Probably it has a full bag of USB sticks loaded with the latest SCADA worms lol

Re:USB sticks (4, Interesting)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258140)

Probably it has a full bag of USB sticks loaded with the latest SCADA worms lol

Now this is an interesting Trojan strategy - fly RC Planes, er, drones, around annoying foreign country. Have specialized Stuxnet-type software embedded in the plane. Have annoying foreign country shoot down RC plane and try to disassemble it to gain secrets.

ZAP! You've been pawned.

Wouldn't be all that hard. If this actually happened there are going to be dozens of people just aching to open the thing up. First one to find the JTAG connector wins a prize!

HUH? (1)

Diggester (2492316) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257858)

Only source for this is Iranian state TV, and they've released no pictures. They've claimed before to have shot down drones and later backtracked, so I don't place much stock in this. Here's the al Jazeera article on the subject. Notice: Al Jazeera has been unable to independently verify this information, and there has been no confirmation of the attack from US authorities. Iran said in January that two pilotless spy planes it had shot down over its airspace were US-operated and offered to put them on public display. In July, Iran also claimed to have shot down a drone, but never shared video or photographic evidence. Of course, they never put the alleged January drones on display.

our brave robots who gave their lives for their.. (0)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257894)

damn, it just doesnt have the same ring to it.

the brave men and women in uniform, sitting in an air conditioned trailer with a snack machine down the hall, sitting at some computer yanking on a joystick. wow. must take huge, huge balls to do that.

Re:our brave robots who gave their lives for their (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38258020)

Who gives a shit if it takes balls? How in the hell is that relevant?

Why are we provoking Iran? (5, Interesting)

Dr. Spork (142693) | more than 2 years ago | (#38257932)

It seems like there has been some effort from the US to further increase tensions with Iran - including a string of three catastrophic, improbable but still officially accidental explosions at various Iranian industrial facilities. Add that to Stuxnet and targeted assassinations of Iran's brightest nerds, and it paints a pretty clear picture that we the West are trying to ratchet up tensions. On the other side, there are probably hardliners who are happy to play along. I don't like any of this escalation.

Congratulations (2, Insightful)

should_be_linear (779431) | more than 2 years ago | (#38258092)

For whatever reason, in USA - Iran battle I feel USA is somehow more evil and aggressive side... and given that Iran is theocracy, thats quite an achievement.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>