Iran / War? (1 Viewer)

user

Lifetime RDF Contributor
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
328
Reaction score
488
Awards
0
I think that provocation is not a single event. It is developed from an aggregate of matters and that includes things that we civilians are not aware if as the diplomacy channels are pretty secret. Personally, I think that we have seen a very large aggregate of issues, not just in the past few weeks but even before that. I certainly believe that in the diplomacy channels Iran has been literally flipping the bird to the US. I don’t expect this to end quietly, but the responsibility for that rests solely with Iran. They have been the aggressor from the beginning. The problem for the US is not really provocation at all. That is there. Like it or not, whatever kind of stipulations that you want to put on it, the provocation for a military response by the US is there. The problem for the US is tactics. The US has always valued the lives of its soldiers and a military confrontation with Iran will have casualties. No question that Iran will lose. I doubt the entire world combined could bring the kind of military mite that the US has. But due to the technology of warfare, Iran does have some weapons that could cause serious damage and loss of life to our military. Again, we would quickly overcome what they do have, but do not think that they are defenseless. So, how the response is put together will determine the loss of US lives. If we execute a surprise attack, and do so with a great deal of “shock and awe” (meaning use a lot of very accurate and lethal weapons) we could minimize the loss if US lives. The difficult thing in doing that is that old thing called public sentiment, which as we see here is a problem in this country, which creates a backlash. I honestly believe that those that fail to fully support the country then create the greatest danger for our soldiers, even though they claim the opposite. Our soldiers know the risk. They are ready. Let us support them and if necessary, let them get it done in the safest way possible. It wouldn’t be pretty, but tactically it would be more sound for our soldiers.
 

asleeper

Premium RDF Member
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,841
Awards
0
Location
Virginia
I don't think anyone is defending Iran but the issue is where the drone was shot down, international waters or Iranian airspace. Obviously, both sides can't be correct in their claims so now the question is if one (or both) countries are willing to share the relevant GPS data of where the drone was located at the time of the attack. That determines if the attack was legal, although it can be debated whether or not it was justified. Echoing some previous comments, was the attack authorized by the hierarchy of the Iranian military or was this a rogue element operating within it? If that's the case, this situation become a lot more complicated.
 

CPB

Left Lane for Passing Only
Intermediate User
Joined
May 26, 2017
Messages
630
Reaction score
812
Awards
0
Location
Louisiana
I don't think anyone is defending Iran but the issue is where the drone was shot down, international waters or Iranian airspace. Obviously, both sides can't be correct in their claims so now the question is if one (or both) countries are willing to share the relevant GPS data of where the drone was located at the time of the attack. That determines if the attack was legal, although it can be debated whether or not it was justified. Echoing some previous comments, was the attack authorized by the hierarchy of the Iranian military or was this a rogue element operating within it? If that's the case, this situation become a lot more complicated.
Does it really matter morally where the imaginary lines on the ground are? Should the imaginary line be the difference between going to war with them versus "our bad, flew too close?"
 

user

Lifetime RDF Contributor
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
328
Reaction score
488
Awards
0
I don't think anyone is defending Iran but the issue is where the drone was shot down, international waters or Iranian airspace. Obviously, both sides can't be correct in their claims so now the question is if one (or both) countries are willing to share the relevant GPS data of where the drone was located at the time of the attack. That determines if the attack was legal, although it can be debated whether or not it was justified. Echoing some previous comments, was the attack authorized by the hierarchy of the Iranian military or was this a rogue element operating within it? If that's the case, this situation become a lot more complicated.
First off, the drone was shot down. That is the relevant fact. I believe it is Iran’s responsibility to dispute where it was AND what danger it created for them. It is not our responsibility, or in this matter, the responsibility of our military to take time and add to the risk and danger of our troops to produce “evidence” that it was done illegally. They shot down our drone. I believe the presumption is against Iran, not the US. Why some people want to keep making that a US responsibility is difficult for me to understand.

Second. Why, in the world, does it matter to us if it is the Iranian govt. or a rogue element? That again is Iran’s responsibility to address and I suspect they better do so quickly and with deadly due diligence. The fact for the US is that we were attacked by Iran. I honestly do not care which element of the military did it. They did it.
 
Last edited:

asleeper

Premium RDF Member
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,841
Awards
0
Location
Virginia
Does it really matter morally where the imaginary lines on the ground are? Should the imaginary line be the difference between going to war with them versus "our bad, flew too close?"
I'm not saying it should be a basis for going to war but it does determine who is the guilty party.
 

xydrine

Vengeance. Justice. Fire and Blood.
Administrator
/Dev/Ops/
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2010
Messages
26,865
Reaction score
23,800
Awards
0
Location
/dev/null
I don't think anyone is defending Iran but the issue is where the drone was shot down, international waters or Iranian airspace.
Apparently they shot the drone down over international waters. This isn't just coming from the President but from the Pentagon. And they have released information regarding this.

Apparently this drone had no actual point of even being IN Iranian airspace anyway, so why it would be in there as the Iranians are saying, is just ridiculous.

This whole thing is ridiculous. They shouldn't have shot it down. This was escalation on their side, and I guarantee you they are about to have military action used against certain targets related to this attack on our equipment - I'm sure we will hear something regarding this within the next 12-24 hours.

We're not talking about war, we're talking about a proportional response to their aggression. And one is warranted.
-- Double Post Merged: --
Why some people want to keep making that a US responsibility is difficult for me to understand.
Some people will defend ANYTHING, as seen with other things (which are more suited for MRGA) this week.
 

CPB

Left Lane for Passing Only
Intermediate User
Joined
May 26, 2017
Messages
630
Reaction score
812
Awards
0
Location
Louisiana
I'm not saying it should be a basis for going to war but it does determine who is the guilty party.
So they can go to civil court or exchange insurance.
 

CPB

Left Lane for Passing Only
Intermediate User
Joined
May 26, 2017
Messages
630
Reaction score
812
Awards
0
Location
Louisiana
Apparently they shot the drone down over international waters. This isn't just coming from the President but from the Pentagon. And they have released information regarding this.

Apparently this drone had no actual point of even being IN Iranian airspace anyway, so why it would be in there as the Iranians are saying, is just ridiculous.

This whole thing is ridiculous. They shouldn't have shot it down. This was escalation on their side, and I guarantee you they are about to have military action used against certain targets related to this attack on our equipment - I'm sure we will hear something regarding this within the next 12-24 hours.

We're not talking about war, we're talking about a proportional response to their aggression. And one is warranted.
-- Double Post Merged: --


Some people will defend ANYTHING, as seen with other things (which are more suited for MRGA) this week.
No one wants war!
 

asleeper

Premium RDF Member
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,841
Awards
0
Location
Virginia
First off, the drone was shot down. That is the relevant fact. I believe it is Iran’s responsibility to dispute where it was AND what danger it created for them. It is not our responsibility, or in this matter, the responsibility of our military to take time and add to the risk and danger of our troops to produce “evidence” that it was done illegally. They shot down our drone. I believe the presumption is against Iran, not the US. Why some people want to keep making that a US responsibility is difficult for me to understand.

Second. Why, in the world, does it matter to us if it is the Iranian govt. or a rogue element? That again is Iran’s responsibility to address and I suspect they better do so quickly and with deadly due diligence. The fact for the US is that we were attacked by Iran. I honestly do not care with element of the military did it. They did it.
It matters if it was shot down in their airspace, not that it would be the best course of action but they would have been justified in doing so. Given the tensions in the region, a more appropriate response would've been to issue a warning when it was approaching (or entering) their airspace. That's assuming it did, which of now remains to be determined.

On the second point, yes, Iran did it and agreed, if it was a rogue operation, and they wish to avoid a conflict with the US, that's something their government needs to address ASAP. If not, then this situation is going to get a lot messier.
 

user

Lifetime RDF Contributor
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
328
Reaction score
488
Awards
0
No one wants war!
You are right. At least I hope you are right. But it also is a mistake to let the fear of war misguide our response and our actions. We do not live in a world where all countries and all Governments have morals. We live in a world where different entities are guided by very different interests and desires, some very repugnant and very difficult for those of us in US to comprehend. You can not successfully run from your fears.
 

xydrine

Vengeance. Justice. Fire and Blood.
Administrator
/Dev/Ops/
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2010
Messages
26,865
Reaction score
23,800
Awards
0
Location
/dev/null
On the second point, yes, Iran did it and agreed, if it was a rogue operation, and they wish to avoid a conflict with the US, that's something their government needs to address ASAP. If not, then this situation is going to get a lot messier.
Iran already announced that they did shoot it down (thus they took credit for it - as it was "not" a rogue operation), and claimed that it was in their own airspace, which the US has already refuted with evidence that it was not.

It's going to get messier.
 

Gunney57

Premium RDF Member
Intermediate User
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
Messages
236
Reaction score
199
Awards
0
Location
Wisconsin
No one wants war!
Apparently someone does. How quickly we forget about the regime who lined up unarmed children and old men against Iraqi forces. I remember it all too well....
 

STS134

Premium RDF Member
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
9,620
Reaction score
8,761
Awards
0
Location
Saratoga, CA
What if you blockade my driveway and flies drones around me?
Then a court would likely find that I infringed on your right to travel by blockading your driveway. Blockading and obstructing someone else's right to travel is completely different from just being present.

First off, the drone was shot down. That is the relevant fact. I believe it is Iran’s responsibility to dispute where it was AND what danger it created for them. It is not our responsibility, or in this matter, the responsibility of our military to take time and add to the risk and danger of our troops to produce “evidence” that it was done illegally. They shot down our drone. I believe the presumption is against Iran, not the US. Why some people want to keep making that a US responsibility is difficult for me to understand.
Defendant (the party alleged to have committed an illegal act) is typically presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Burden of proof is always on the prosecution to rebut that presumption by presenting evidence to the contrary.

Apparently they shot the drone down over international waters. This isn't just coming from the President but from the Pentagon. And they have released information regarding this.

Apparently this drone had no actual point of even being IN Iranian airspace anyway, so why it would be in there as the Iranians are saying, is just ridiculous.

This whole thing is ridiculous. They shouldn't have shot it down. This was escalation on their side, and I guarantee you they are about to have military action used against certain targets related to this attack on our equipment - I'm sure we will hear something regarding this within the next 12-24 hours.
I agree. Even if I step onto your property, stick my tongue out at you, and put my thumbs in my ears and wave my fingers, and say "nyah nyah", it's not really justified if you respond by shooting me dead. Especially if I retreat from your property back onto the public street first. It's probably not even justified if you were to shoot me with a BB gun if that was all that happened, and it only happened once. On the other hand, if I had been doing this for days, dancing around on both sides of your property line, sticking my toes, legs, and arms across the line onto your property, and taunting you the entire time, and you presented video evidence of this to the court, and documented that it went on for days to weeks, I think it would probably change the outcome of the case. Deadly force, still probably not justified, but being shot with a BB after doing this for days? I think the court would rule in your favor especially if you issued multiple warnings which were ignored.
 
Last edited:

user

Lifetime RDF Contributor
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
328
Reaction score
488
Awards
0
Apparently someone does. How quickly we forget about the regime who lined up unarmed children and old men against Iraqi forces. I remember it all too well....
Yes. I still remember the overthrow of the Shaw of Iran and the bloodshed, murder and incredible violence of the people involved in that.
 

Gunney57

Premium RDF Member
Intermediate User
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
Messages
236
Reaction score
199
Awards
0
Location
Wisconsin
Yes. I still remember the overthrow of the Shaw of Iran and the bloodshed, murder and incredible violence of the people involved in that.
The power drills as weapons still freak me the most...
 

asleeper

Premium RDF Member
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,106
Reaction score
1,841
Awards
0
Location
Virginia
Iran already announced that they did shoot it down (thus they took credit for it - as it was "not" a rogue operation), and claimed that it was in their own airspace, which the US has already refuted with evidence that it was not.

It's going to get messier.
I'm not denying Iran shot it down, as they've admitted doing so. My claim as far as the legality of the attack is concerned is whether or not it was in their airspace. Both sides have competing claims and only one can be correct. That's where we stand now.

As far as wanting a war, you could make an argument there some in both governments that are beating the drum for war. It's all of our best interests that cooler heads prevail in the current issues in gulf (the drone and tanker attacks) can be resolved peacefully.

Edit: Apparently Iran has released evidence showing it was in their airspace when it was shot down. This is going to get interesting.
 
Last edited:

xydrine

Vengeance. Justice. Fire and Blood.
Administrator
/Dev/Ops/
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2010
Messages
26,865
Reaction score
23,800
Awards
0
Location
/dev/null
Both sides have competing claims and only one can be correct. That's where we stand now.
Iran is a state sponsor of terror and has lied about the tanker attacks, and has carried out proxy wars against us and Israel for decades.

I personally WANT to see us wipe their government off the face of this Earth. They have attacked US soldiers in all theater's of operations and Iran deserves the exact same.
 

drtoddw

Jammer bieten keinen 100 %-Schutz
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Messages
3,812
Reaction score
5,043
Awards
0
Location
Behind the wheel
Well all that I can say is that the law of unintended consequences has reared its head again. I'm sure the US didn't fully expect that the effects of the 1953 Iranian coup d'état would reverberate through the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and even well into the 21st century.
I also note that a sitting President is often re-elected when we're at war... Just saying.
 
Last edited:

user

Lifetime RDF Contributor
Intermediate User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
328
Reaction score
488
Awards
0
Then a court would likely find that I infringed on your right to travel by blockading your driveway. Blockading and obstructing someone else's right to travel is completely different from just being present.



Defendant (the party alleged to have committed an illegal act) is typically presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Burden of proof is always on the prosecution to rebut that presumption by presenting evidence to the contrary.
I am trying to be polite and respectful. But, by your philosophy, and that of other Americans entrenched in the “i am so sad to be an American” philosophy, we should file paperwork and ask the Court to hear our case. That would satisfy (maybe) the people with that concern. Then, we could get the matter put on the docket, be given a date to appear to make our case and then submit our case. Of course, once having done that we have given authority to the Court to determine discipline. You are aware who the Court would be? In the meantime, with Iran laughing at us and becoming more bold by our inaction, we would likely face more and more serious aggression by Iran. As well as give them more time to build defense to our military, more time to form allies in their quest and consequently more death and destruction in the end to our soldiers and to their soldiers as well. It is well established the greatest deterrence to future behavior is shock and the time span between the act and the punishment. As in, the less time the more effective the punishment is in future behavior. And the more the punishment creates a significant personal event, the more effective.

At any rate, I don’t want to make this a you and me argument. So I will end with that and with my assurance that while we both want the same thing, eventual peace with the middle east, we disagree very strongly on a path that will achieve that.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)

Unregistered User Ad


ATTENTION: Want ads to disappear? Register for an account by clicking here - it's free and NO ADS ARE DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED MEMBERS! Thanks!

Donation drives

RDF Server & License Fees (AUGUST 2019) (ACTIVE)

This donation drive covers the server and licensing fees for RDF for the month of August 2019...
Goal
$541.00
Earned
$180.00
This donation drive ends in

Latest threads

Latest posts

Social Group Activity

Forum statistics

Threads
76,516
Messages
1,166,136
Members
19,649
Latest member
zacf16
Top