Iran forces US jet to land in Tehran; war imminent?

CNN is reporting that Iran has forced a US jet to land in Tehran after it violated Iranian airspace (no online link yet). Will the Bush administration use this as a reason to attack Iran and open a third front in the the War on Terror?

The Pentagon is denying this ever happened, various news agencies also denying any military craft was forced down.

Calm down. The Iranians have claimed it was an American aircraft, but the U.S. says it has no knowledge of the incident:

In any case, Bush knows there’s no support for a war with Iran or any other new military adventures right now, nor is there likely to be in the near future. In any case, violation of air space is an extremely serious matter, and if the aircraft in question did violate their air space their action was justified.

Apparently the passengers where released, i dont know about the plane, also the pentagon denies that any war plane has being forced to land.

Rumor has it in da intertubez that it was a private jet on route to Afghanistan.

Even if the reports turn out to have a basis in fact, I doubt that it would lead to war. Bush was able to allow diplomatic resolution to the Chinese capture of a U.S. spy plane back when our military was at its peak and not strung out from six years of war. As with the British seamen Iran captured earlier, this is the sort of thing that is more likely to drag out through diplomatic channels without anyone being harmed rather than escalating to another war with hundreds of thousands of lives lost.
Even if someone decided that we were still powerful enough to “take” Iran, such an unnecessary war would remove any possibility of responding to further Russian aggression and could open us to China making a move on Taiwan.

Wolfowitz is gone. I don’t think Bush still has any advisors that are that stupid.

The plane and passengers already departed for Afghanistan.

A prolongued diplomatic incident with Iran can be just what the doctor ordered for the ailing MCain campaign, i hope this resolves itself quickly and without too much fuzz.

It wasn’t a spy plane that the Chinese captured. It was a Navy P3.

Looks like you got your wish.

I doubt it very much. Most of us Americans have our attention fixed firmly on the economy, and we know full well America can’t afford a third war. Beating the war drums right now would be a really bad move.

yup :D, “the power of positive thinking”, i hope my newfound powers persist, let me see.

“i hope that Obama wins ‘por afano’ in nov 4”

“i hope that i win the lottery”

Again, already resolved. Not a military plane and no longer detained.

Some people would say your priorities are a little skewed. :wink:

Why would a new war be good news for McCain? People are already sick of the current war, why would they cheer another brand new one?

The American people don’t mind wars, as long as those wars are won quickly and decisively. Even those people who are in favor of war with Iran don’t think the war will be over quickly and easily.

Yes, I know. I was responding to Frodo’s attitude that the McCain campaign might actually think stirring up another war would be good politics right now. It wouldn’t. It would be the kiss of death.

A Navy P3, loaded with electronic surveillance equipment flying the Pacific border of China monitoring Chinese military transmissions.
It may not have been a U2 or an SR71, but it was clearly as much a spy plane as the Russian Badgers that used to patrol our coasts from time to time. It was certainly not out there with a MAD boom looking for submarines.

No, the distinction between electronic surveillance aircraft and spy plane is significant. They’re less a spy entity than a Chinese tourist in Washington DC with a hand scanner. And it would more likely be a Russian Tu-95 bear doing surveillance work.



:dubious: There’s often a fine distinction between surveillance and spying. It seems rather picayune to jump on Tom for not making the distinction fine enough to suit you and for not being quite as familiar with Soviet military aircraft as you are. I don’t see how the distinctions you want to make would materially affect his point.