It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Yeah, I would have no problem with that and since when US Army targets children? They are not some middle eastern "freedom fighters".
The rules are clear, they shoot an american aircraft in international waters. If USA wants they are attacking within the international laws.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
We were in International airspace... yeah right.
And you're so cocked sure it took place over Iranian territory?
Originally posted by maes2
what kind of news are those short statements at all ! any how as it was expected they claim that it was near their waters.
Originally posted by rocklobster1
Originally posted by Auricom
Sorry, but the Iranians had every right to shoot this down. As does the US and every sovereign nation.
they didnt shoot anything down.
it helps to actually read the article and the thread
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Beavers
Except that our instrument of war was in international airspace where it had every right to be. What if it had been an RC-135, or a C-17? Or even worse, an A320, or 737? They had every right to fly a Predator in international airspace, wherever they wanted to, without it being shot at.
Iran Air Flight 655 was a civilian jet airliner shot down by U.S. missiles on 3 July 1988 as it flew over the Strait of Hormuz at the end of the Iran–Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. While flying in Iranian airspace over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path, it was destroyed by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes (CG-49). All 290 onboard including 66 children and 16 crew perished.[1] The incident is ranked ninth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history. It was the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Indian Ocean and the highest death toll of any incident involving an Airbus A300 anywhere in the world.[citation needed] The Vincennes had entered Iranian territorial waters after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits.
According to the Pentagon, the Iranian war plane made at least two passes by the slower-moving drone, firing "multiple rounds."
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Lonewulph
I'm more than personally familiar with the scenarios...
The problem here is that the "Iran can do no wrong and when they are caught with their pants down around their ankles it is justified" crowd's noise get's a bit old.....
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Just like when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655?
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Yessir agreed, although again personally, pending an honest investigation....doubt still exists as to who actually had their pants down because both sides lie.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Just like when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655?
What always get's left out is that that aircraft prior to the "pilgrimage use" to Saudi Arabia was the fact that it was involved as a troops transport [Because they lacked those types of military aircraft at the time] in the Iran/Iraq war and it was still squawking as a military aircraft instead of switching back to civilian use.....
Check into it.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Yessir agreed, although again personally, pending an honest investigation....doubt still exists as to who actually had their pants down because both sides lie.
Now, ask yourself this. If the Iranians had fired upon the craft in their territory why didn't they use it [as they always do in similar circumstances] as great propaganda as another example of the Great Satan's aggressiveness.?
Iran Air Flight 655 reportedly squawked Mode II (Iranian F-14 Tomcat) IFF for a moment; personnel proceeded to re-label the target from "Unknown Assumed Enemy" to "F-14"
Even if what you claim is true does that justify the women and children on board as "collateral damage"?
Originally posted by IAMTAT
FACTS:
1.) The drone was unarmed.
2.) The drone was over International waters/outside of Iranian airspace
3.) The drone was not hit...and returned safely
Is this an 'Act of War'?...It's certainly an Act of Aggression'!
WHAT will Barry-O do?
edit on 8-11-2012 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)