How do you warn off a drone?
One could start by using a radio, and saying something like, “Go away or we will shoot you down.”
When the Vincennes shot down the Iranian airliner, they failed to try that first. So, there’s sort of a historical record of speaking first instead of shooting first being a rational thing to do.
You know, it’s really amazing to me how opposition to war makes so many people sympathize with really bad people. How many posts did we have here 17 years ago that minimized the sadistic dictatorship of Saddam Hussein? And now we have an anti-war chorus taking up the cause of presuming Iran ain’t such a bad place after all.
Count me in the anti-war, but also anti-Iran camp.
WTF? Why is it so hard to understand that innocent people will get murdered in a war with Iran? Hate the fucking Ayatollah all you want, but I’ve actually met and gotten know a fair number of Iranians and guess what? They’re human.
Count me in the pro-Iranian moderate, anti-Iranian hardliner/hawk camp (and same with the U.S. and probably all countries). Trump, who has adopted a hardline approach, screwed over the Iranian moderates and emboldened the hardliners by withdrawing from the nuclear deal, imposing sanctions and sending the U.S. military to rattle sabers along Iran’s border.
Don’t forget declaring the Iranian National Guard to be a terrorist organization, even over the objections of high ranking members of his own defense department – who worried that in doing so, they would retaliate with attacks.
<Gomer Pyle voice> Surprise, surprise, surprise! </Gomer Pyle voice>
You really are not paying attention to what I write. I mean, just breathe, read my post, and process it for a minute.
I see people saying you should try to deescalate rather than go to war over a single drone being shot. I see people saying that, if the drone is over Iranian airspace, then they had every right to shoot it down. I see people explaining why they might want to shoot down a drone in reaction to the US’s current sanctions. I see the implication that we should reduce sanctions and try to go back to an agreement that would be better for every one. I see people mocking Trump for his dumb decision to withdraw from the Iran deal. And I see people saying a war is a bad idea, and that they’re worried the US is deliberately provoking one.
What I do not see is a single person defending bad people in order to avoid a war.
I do note there is a rhetorical strategy to accuse one’s opponents of an immoral act unrelated to their actual positions, in an attempt to discredit them. It is a variation of ad hominem. As such, one needs to be specific in citing what positions are immoral, and how said immorality actually disproves them.
Otherwise, people will assume that informal fallacy is being used.
I also note upon preview that you have tried the “calm down” tactic, which I will always point out only escalates situations. It accuses the other person of being hysterical, and does not actually refute their arguments.
Sounds t9 me like you’re saying that people opposed to turning Iran into a failed state/refugee factory are pro Ayatollah.
So are you assuming that the US Military is monitoring all Iranian radio communications?
I mean, you are aware that the drone is unmanned, right? Because if you weren’t, Trump assured us that there was nobody aboard:
“I think probably Iran made a mistake,” he later said. “I would imagine it was a general or somebody that made a mistake in shooting that drone down. Fortunately, that drone was unarmed. There was no man in it and there was no — it was just — it was over international waters, clearly over international waters, but we didn’t have a man or woman in the drone. We had nobody in the drone. It would have made a big difference, let me tell you. It would have made a big, big difference. But I have a feeling, and it maybe wrong and I may be right, I’m right a lot. I have a feeling that it was a mistake made by somebody that shouldn’t have been doing what they did. I think they made a mistake. I’m not just talking the country made a mistake. I think somebody under the command of that country made a big mistake.”
New York Times (behind paywall): Trump Approves Strikes on Iran, but Then Abruptly Pulls Back
When someone attempts to define defending sovereign airspace against a hostile foreign government as provocative, there’s not a lot of logic there to be understood.
Sounds like someone has proof the drone was in Iran’s airspace, as the US did when Turkey shot down a Su-24.
Not only do we monitor Iranian military radio communications for intelligence purposes, all drones have radios onboard that are used by the drone operators.
For example, when a US drone takes off from its airfield, the drone operators (often from thousands of miles away) are speaking through radios onboard to ground and air traffic control. This continues through the flight.
The idea of a fairly large aircraft having no communication with anyone during its flight is pretty silly and dangerous if you think about it.
Unmanned is not “no human control.”
I think what I was trying to say last night was that we can be anti-Ayatollah without doing stupid, stupid things that make an unnecessary war with Iran inevitable. We are very close to war with Iran, and there is absolutely no reason for us to be in this position. Wars rarely go as planned. There are consequences and suffering that are often difficult to predict, and there are long-term consequences that may be impossible to predict.
But while we’re at it, as bad an actor as Iran is - and I’ll grant you they are disruptive and anti-democratic - I’ll remind you that there’s another disruptive and anti-democratic force in the region. And unlike this other regional power, it’s not Iran that’s spreading Wahabbism. It’s not Iran that had members of its royal family essentially advocating and supporting events like 9/11.
The most reasonable explanation is it was in Iranian airspace as the US has no credibility right now when it comes to the truth and the US is the aggressor, not Iran. However I leave open the possibility that the missile was fired when the drone was in Iranian airspace but was able to fly and ballistically fall into international waters after the missile fired - which may have been part of the plan (the drone would turn and dive towards international airspace when a missile was detected to get it’s ass over the line when it hits).
Trump has a credibility problem in the international community due to numerous reports of him lying on many issues. He does not tell the truth so much that no one can trust what he is saying in the international setting, and his base in the US doesn’t care, so that’s even less credibility for Trump. So no one can believe that the drone was shot down in international waters just because the US says so.
It appears that the US is clearly the aggressor here. I say ‘clearly’ as they even forsook allies to take an aggressive stance. The next step is to try to frame Iran further to get the allies to get onboard with us, or at least not to oppose us, before the shooting war begins.
It’s a war of deception right now trying to further paint Iran as evil and the one doing the bad stuff while hurting it as much as possible. The US has to be careful that it doesn’t get caught in the eyes of it’s former treaty allies that the US unilaterally stepped out of and I’m sure that controlling the situation so they can control the news about it is one thing they are trying to do.
As a American citizen what side backs and supports the US and it’s ideals, support Trump’s plan, or question it and Trump’s believability?
Do you assert that if something is legal, it is by definition (or should generally be presumed to be) not provocative?
WTF is this? The naval version of sending a strongly worded letter from his attorney?
This right here is the kind of presidential grab-assery that I have been dreading since day 1 of his term. A crisis where his chaotic, winging-it approach could get a lot of ours and theirs needlessly killed.
On the bright side, Trump’s supporters in the military are bound to be mightily pissed by such shenanigans. They are nothing if not professional, and this was highly unprofessional.
Wreckage recovered inside territorial waters is not proof that the drone was inside their airspace, 40.000 feet is a long fall and an out of control drone can easily cover 12 miles on the way down, besides there’s currents in the sea that move things around.
One could argue that the US provoked first in this case. It provoked Iran by reneging on a deal that was actually effectively suspending Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and it provoked Iran further by imposing harsh sanctions on Iran, which is within our legal right to do but provocative. Adding the dimension of sending more military personnel and activity on Iran’s doorstep was further provocation. Yes, Iran is behaving provocatively in a technical sense, but in the broader political context, it’s simply responding to US provocation.
We don’t even have a confirmed defense secretary, and we’re on the verge of what could easily turn into a major war. Whether we go to war will likely come down to a meeting of the minds of Bolton, Pompeo, and Trump - now let that sink in for a moment. This is why I suspect that the outcome of the war will be devastating. I doubt seriously we’ve even remotely prepared for occupation and post-war aftermath. This means that any war is going to be the US just simply breaking stuff, attempting to smash Iran to pieces. And I doubt Bolton gives two shits about the loss of civilian life.
Meanwhile if Iran deploys Hizbollah in response, then Trump just might declare a national emergency and we could be looking at a de facto police state. He can put pressure on the media. He can put pressure on his protestors and critics. Can’t think of a better way to disrupt and upend the 2020 elections, come to think of it. I doubt we’ve seriously thought about any of this. We’re just going about our daily lives, oblivious to the consequences as usual.