I know you're trying to be edgy and hip but you have no clue what you're talking about. Thousand yards away for a drone is practically nothing
i'd say it's pretty logical, on the contrary.This isn't responding normally. In fact, nothing Iran has reportedly done over the last month or so has been a normal response. Predictable for them, maybe. Normal, no.
We already came close with him calling off airstrikes at the last minute. It just depends on how much his advisors (like Bolton) are able to get in his ear, and he's not getting more capable of rational thought as he gets older.Unlikely since he's an isolationist that campaigns on no-wars and cheap gas prices.
Plus Iran flying a military drone basically on top of a US navy shit is on Iran, not Trump.
i think you may have read their post incorrectlyI know you're trying to be edgy and hip but you have no clue what you're talking about. Thousand yards away for a drone is practically nothing
Every time I see something like this I am amazed that the US shows such restraint. Especially when it comes to the Russians and Chinese which seem to always be testing how close they can get to US aircraft and ships.
I don't know and I especially don't want to find out.
America crushes a country under the boot of economic sanctions for decades, then calls the opposed country "hostile" when it respond normally.
I had to Wikipedia that myself when I saw the range. There's no way that's an effective range for shooting down a missle. I'd be impressed as hellSounds like the Phalanx kicked in. There are three on that LHD with a max range of 2.2 miles.
Bzzzrt
I don't think he was being sarcastic and essentially you're both saying the same thingI know you're trying to be edgy and hip but you have no clue what you're talking about. Thousand yards away for a drone is practically nothing
That is within range of the Phalanx I think?
Guess the saved some money and used bullets instead of a million dollar missile.
They actually took it down with a Polaris 4x4....... really.
UPDATE: 8:XXpm EST—
The Wall Street Journal had a reporter on board the USS Boxer during the transit. That paper has now reported that there were a number of other instances where U.S. and Iranian forces came relatively close to each other in the Strait of Hormuz beyond the drone shootdown and the MH-60R escorting the Iranian Navy's Bell 212 away from the ship.
The Navy convoy passed a number of Iranian fast boats along the way, but there does not appear to have been direct altercations with them. An unspecified larger Iranian warship also sailed within 500 feet of Boxer. Lastly, an IRGC Y-12 twin-engine turboprop, an aircraft the organization's air arm uses for surveillance missions, flew near the Boxer.
I would imagine not. Permission would take far too long to get with a aircraft rapidly approaching.In a situation like this, does the navy captain need permission to shoot down this drone or is it an automatic response? I am surprised there is even time to ask anyone permission.
It doesn't matter whether Trump is an isolationist or not. Bolton and Pompeo are there, and they're extremely dangerous and hungry for war.Unlikely since he's an isolationist that campaigns on no-wars and cheap gas prices.
Plus Iran flying a military drone basically on top of a US navy shit is on Iran, not Trump.
It doesn't matter whether Trump is an isolationist or not. Bolton and Pompeo are there, and they're extremely dangerous and hungry for war.
The US might want to consider releasing some proof because right now this is simply looking like a lie
The US might want to consider releasing some proof because right now this is simply looking like a lie
Yes but the USA and particularly this administration are known for lying about literally everything at all times. I find iran far more credible than my own country.What's the point of this? Both sides can say whatever they like. Talk is cheap.
Every time Trump opens his mouth, a lie has followed. I have no reason to believe anything from this administration for the foreseeable future.Yes but the USA and particularly this administration are known for lying about literally everything at all times. I find iran far more credible than my own country.
The US might want to consider releasing some proof because right now this is simply looking like a lie
Why would I take the White House's word on anything?
You didn't, that wasn't the question.
I've read the WSJ article with the journalist aboard the USS Boxer multiple times now, and unless I'm completely misreading or overlooking it (which could very well be the case because I'm extremely sleepy and have one hell of a headache) it doesn't say anywhere that the reporter witnessed the downing. It says the reporter witnessed the drone (Y-12 surveillance plane as identified by U.S. naval officials) flying close to the ship, with US officials then saying it was downed at around 10am.Wasn't what I asked. Plus we have independent reporters confirming.
All Iran did was issue a statement with no evidence, yet that was enough for you to conclude that it looked like the US was lying.
So... You think that while a drone did come that close, the shooting down part is the lie?I've read the WSJ article with the journalist aboard the USS Boxer multiple times now, and unless I'm completely misreading or overlooking it (which could very well be the case because I'm extremely sleepy and have one hell of a headache) it doesn't say anywhere that the reporter witnessed the downing. It says the reporter witnessed the drone (Y-12 surveillance plane as identified by U.S. naval officials) flying close to the ship, with US officials then saying it was downed at around 10am.
Not necessarily, but considering it's the Trump administration we're talking about here I'd sure would like some proof that it was downed.So... You think that while a drone did come that close, the shooting down part is the lie?
Is that really the relevant part?Not necessarily, but considering it's the Trump administration we're talking about here I'd sure would like some proof that it was downed.
If you're going to lie about downing it, it's not a stretch to question what else they lied about. Including distance, motivation, ownership and so forth. Apparently things being close to each other over the years is common in that strait, so without some ill intent it may not be a remarkable event at all save for this lie.Is that really the relevant part?
The drone coming that close seems to layman me like a stupidly aggressive move, which I thought was the problem.
And while I would understand why they'd make up the encounter, why lie about how the encounter went?
Not necessarily, but considering it's the Trump administration we're talking about here I'd sure would like some proof that it was downed.
Another reason why I have a hard time believing this is that Iran obviously would love to make the US look bad (and can you really blame them for that?), having a drone crash into the Strait of Hormuz would be the perfect opportunity to do so.Is that really the relevant part?
The drone coming that close seems to layman me like a stupidly aggressive move, which I thought was the problem.
And while I would understand why they'd make up the encounter, why lie about how the encounter went?