Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Iran displays downed drone (Update – a fake?)

    Iran displays downed drone (Update – a fake?)

    Fully intact:

    Iranian TV has shown the first video footage of an advanced US drone aircraft that Tehran says it downed near the
    Afghan border.

    Images show Iranian military officials inspecting the RQ-170 Sentinel stealth aircraft which appears to be undamaged.

    US officials have acknowledged the loss of the unmanned plane, saying it had malfunctioned.

    However, Iranian officials say its forces electronically hijacked the drone and steered it to the ground.

    Obama rejected plans to launch a covert operation to take back or at least destroy the drone and all its sensitive military technologies for fear it would spark a larger confrontation.  But if it is true, as the Iranians claim, that the drone did not fall by accident but was brought down by Iranian electronic means, then isn’t that already an act of war?

    There are a lot of mysteries here:

    The enigmas surrounding its capture continue to pile up. How did Iran know the drone had entered its airspace? How was it caused to land? Most of all, why did the craft’s self-destruct mechanism which is programmed to activate
    automatically fail to work? And if it malfunctioned, why was it not activated by remote control?

     

    Update: The readers called it correctly, the U.S. is calling the vehicle in the photo a fake:

    The aircraft shown on Iranian television today was not the American stealth drone that crashed in Iran last week, as the Iranian government claimed, but was likely just a model, U.S. officials told ABC News.

    BUT, now officials saying it’s not fake, it’s the real thing.

    Update 12-10-2011 – Nice to see Glenn Greenwald has taken notice.  The original reports were that the drone was downed near the Afghan border and the U.S. military initially asserted it lost contact with the drone in Western Afghanistan.  That was the context of my assertion that it could be considered an “act of war,” not that it was brought down while hovering over an Iranian city.  But let’s talk about what really is going on here, I’ve repeatedly called Greenwald out for his outrageous and repeated use of the slur “Israel firsters,” his disloyalty charge against Eric Cantor, and misguided defense of the Iranian mullahs under a misconception that supporting brutal tyranny is supporting the rule of law.  Greenwald is upset that I have called him out on these topics, so he takes a single sentence of mine out of context.  So much for what passes for the intelligentsia these days.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Tags:

    Comments


    Found this webpage, with photos, via a comment on the subject at Weasel Zippers.

    http://defenceforumindia.com/united-states-european-union/22331-lockheed-martin-rq-170-sentinel-still-top.html

    I’m guessing Iran has nothing but painted styrofoam.

    If I were releasing the next stuxnet, this is what the packaging would look like… well that or goat porn.


     
     0 
     
     0
    seedeevee | December 10, 2011 at 3:13 pm

    Do you take the phrase “Israel Firsters” to be a slur when used against Americans, Israelis or whom?

    Obviously, an American who is an “Israeli Firster” is a traitor and should be treated accordingly – slurs or not.

    “Greenwald is upset that I have called him out on these topics, so he takes a single sentence of mine out of context. So much for what passes for the intelligentsia these days.”

    So why then do you do the same to Greenwald? The fuller quote with crucial context is: “…see this casual speculation from a neocon law professor at Cornell that Iran may have committed an “act of war” if it brought down the American drone that *entered its airspace* and hovered over its soil without permission”).”

    You suggest that the fact that the drone was ‘near’ the Afghan border is somehow material to your point that *might* be an act of war and that this would make your question a reasonable one. Whether the drone was ‘near’ a neighboring border or directly above Tehran, the fact is that this drone was illegally in Iranian airspace. That’s the point. From the Fox News link you provide (“it’s the real thing”), the guest also confirms that this drone was *purposefully* in Iranian airspace and was 140 miles inside the border when in it was brought down.

    What is your working definition of an “act of war”, professor?


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend