U.S. Shoots Down Iranian Drone Flying Over Iraq

[ToughOmbre]

From FOX News

Friday, March 13, 2009

An American fighter jet took down an Iranian drone over Iraq last month, U.S. military sources told Wired.com.

The U.S. has long accused Tehran of supplying militant groups in Iraq with weapons and training, Wired reported. While the flow of Iranian weapons into Iraq has slowed, Shiite militias have fired Iranian rockets at U.S. troops and Sunni militias reportedly use Iranian bombs to destroy U.S. military vehicles.

Iran has supplied the terrorist group Hezbollah with several models of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Iran's deputy defense minister claimed in February that the country's latest UAVs can fly as far as 600 miles. If true, the Iranian drones could fly over any U.S. military installation in the Middle East, including Iraq, Wired reported.

Multi-National Corps would not confirm or deny the previously unreported incident to Wired.com.

The alleged incident comes at a particularly sensitive time, when the Obama administration is looking for ways to reach out to Iran diplomatically and trying to spark renewed relations.

TO

 

[syscom3]

Soon we will have a drone vs drone dogfight.

 

[RabidAlien]

Fire away! I find it hard to believe they're seriously looking for a way to "spark renewed relations" while sending drones out. Sounds more like the Japanese continuing to persue peacetalks while simultaneously planning for and launching the attack on Pearl Harbor.

 

[BombTaxi]

Hmm, I agree with principle of shooting the drone down, but shouldn't the Iraqis have being doing the shooting, as the US prepares to pull out and let them take responsibility for their own security?

Either way, this incident shouldn't lead to the closure of talks with Iran, the future stability of the ME largely rests in the hands of this difficult and frequently aggressive nation. The Iranian govt has a choice before it, and pointing a gun at their head isn't likely to bring about the best result, i.e the one where the US/UK doesn't go to war with Iran. To say 'fire away' makes the fear of war with Iran virtually a self-fullfilling prophecy. The lesson that has been learned and ignored countless times in the ME since 1948 is that if you point a gun at the Arabs, they will shoot first and ask questions later. Diplomatic channels should and must be kept open, while the use of force should and must be kept as a last-ditch option.

Before I am accused of being an appeaser or worse, let me say that I am categorically not pro-Iranian, pro-Arab, pro-Muslim, anti-American, anti-Israeli or anything else of the sort. As far as I am concerned, these labels are at best meaningless in the discussion that needs to take place in the ME. The present situation in the ME springs at least partly from an 'Us and Them' mentality on both sides, which dictates that the region is only big enough for one or the other faction to exist in. Previous solutions for 'peace' in the ME have mainly consisted in finding ways in which one side can exist at the expense of the other without fighting. What needs to be found now, and what I believe the US is moving towards is a solution for sustainable peace which acknowledges the needs of all parties and tries to meet them in an equitable manner. Iran is absolutely critical to any such solution, and whether we like it or not, they must be admitted to the discussion as a partner, not held at gunpoint and told to co-operate. That is why dialogue must continue with Iran. It won't be easy, but it must at least be tried before committing the US and most likely the UK to yet another Middle Eastern war and the implications of human, social and financial cost that come with it.

 

[GrauGeist]

BombTaxi, that's a good point of view you presented, and I wish it would work.

One of the main problems with Iran at the moment is thier president, ahmanutjob, who beleives that he's some sort of mystic and has repeatedly said nothing but unconditional death to both the U.S. and Israel.

It seems to me that if the leaders of those countries would discourage the readiness of the people to kill themselves and others, and be a little bit more relaxed, perhaps progress would be made towards a lasting peace.

 

[Matt308]

... and what would the Iraqi's have shot down a UAV with? So without anti-air assets, should the US have let the Iranian UAV go?

 

[Bill G.]

How do you score that? A full kill, half kill, or no kill?

Iraq has no fighter aircraft yet. From what I read just helos and transports.

I wonder what weapon was used to shoot it down?

Bill G.

 

[BombTaxi]

My point is Matt, if the Iraqis are supposed to be looking after themselves in the very near future, why do they not have the equipment to defend themselves? Who is going to shoot Iranian UAVs down for them after the US forces leave? I'm glad the US forces were on hand to deal with this situation, but they won't be around much longer. It would seem that Iraq will be very vulnerable very soon...

GG, agree totally that the current Iranian leadership is not the best to try and negotiate with (putting it mildly). At least they have shown willing to get round a table with the US and talk. A tiny step in itself, but a million miles forward from where the two parties were just a year or so ago. It won't be easy, but it is a start.

 

[The Basket]

Good points Bombtaxi.

 

[Amsel]

From FOX News

Friday, March 13, 2009

An American fighter jet took down an Iranian drone over Iraq last month, U.S. military sources told Wired.com.

Sweet!

 

[Golladay]

Fire away! I find it hard to believe they're seriously looking for a way to "spark renewed relations" while sending drones out. Sounds more like the Japanese continuing to persue peacetalks while simultaneously planning for and launching the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Our Drones probe Iranian Airspace all the time.

 

[Golladay]

One of the main problems with Iran at the moment is thier president, ahmanutjob, who beleives that he's some sort of mystic and has repeatedly said nothing but unconditional death to both the U.S. and Israel.

The President never once threaten Israel or the U.S., you like many have fallen for the lie that he called for Israel to be wiped off the map.

This is what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said, "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

Ahmadinejad has nothing against Israeli people, his beef is with the Israeli Government who has the blood of innocent civilians on its hands as it continues to wage genocide against the Palestinians.

Nor is Ahmadinejad a nut job for asserting Iran's right to enrich uranium, which under the NPT they have every right to do so and the U.S. is obligated to help them achieve this.

If Iran wants it can even go to the U.N. and demand the U.S. be sanctioned or it can simply cut Oil Production along with Venezuela and cause prices to spike.

This overlooks the fact that Ahmadinejad doesn't actually run the country, lives in an apartment in the poor part of Tehran, and when his car doesn't work, he takes the bus.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the man you should be keeping an eye on in Iran. By his word and his alone does Iran function.

By concentrating on Ahmadinejad, you are playing into Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hands, while he laughs and makes fun of you behind your back as he goes about his business unnoticed.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ahmadinejad has nothing against Israeli people, his beef is with the Israeli Government who has the blood of innocent civilians on its hands as it continues to wage genocide against the Palestinians.

And the Palestinians are just innocent...???

Yeah okay, tell that to the Israeli civilians that are blown up by a suicide bomber while at a street cafe!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The President never once threaten Israel or the U.S., you like many have fallen for the lie that he called for Israel to be wiped off the map.

This is what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said, "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

So he NEVER made these quotes...

""Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury."

"Remove Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations."

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land. As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

"If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d' tre, Israel will be annihilated."

"Israel is a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed."

"Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm."

:
Ahmadinejad has nothing against Israeli people, his beef is with the Israeli Government who has the blood of innocent civilians on its hands as it continues to wage genocide against the Palestinians.

Islamic rhedoric bullshit

:
Nor is Ahmadinejad a nut job for asserting Iran's right to enrich uranium, which under the NPT they have every right to do so and the U.S. is obligated to help them achieve this.

Really? Then maybe Iran should sell oil on the open market for $10 a barrel!

:
If Iran wants it can even go to the U.N. and demand the U.S. be sanctioned or it can simply cut Oil Production along with Venezuela and cause prices to spike.

Go ahead during this world wide recession! Right now the Iranian and Venezuelan governments are in a lot worse shape than the US.

:
This overlooks the fact that Ahmadinejad doesn't actually run the country, lives in an apartment in the poor part of Tehran, and when his car doesn't work, he takes the bus.

Perhaps, but he is still the mouth piece of the Iranian government and the one the west focuses on .

:
Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the man you should be keeping an eye on in Iran. By his word and his alone does Iran function.

Agree

:
By concentrating on Ahmadinejad, you are playing into Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hands, while he laughs and makes fun of you behind your back as he goes about his business unnoticed.

Perhaps, but at the same time Ayatollah Ali Khamenei must also know that Iran's financial survival still depends on dealing with the west, like it or not and if rhetoric from Ahmadinejad is allowed to continue, Iran may find itself another victim of the IDF in the same manner Iraq did in 1981

 

[pbfoot]

I've heard the qoute was mistranslated as well ,I can't confirm this as my Farsi is pretty bad however the man is a twit one amongst many in that region on earth.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

however the man is a twit one amongst many in that region on earth.

An understatement!

 

[BombTaxi]

It would be in everyone's interests, I believe, to engage Iran without resorting to violence yet again. Tehran have shown willing and come to the table - IMHO the US should do it's best to keep Israel on the leash until such time as those talks break down irretrievably. Tiny as it is, that willingness to talk is the first step towards any kind of dialogue, never mind peace, in may years. NOTHING should be allowed to de-rail this, including the IDFs penchant for unilateral action. If Israel wants to go around shooting the neighbourhood up, there will never be peace. Same goes for the Arabs too. It is all well and good saying that Hezbollah needs to lay down its arms, but that isn't likely to happen while the Israelis go around armed to the teeth. Neither side will disarm unilaterally - what is really needed is an international force to go in and oversee disengagement and prevent either side from doing anything stupid. And Israel needs to come to the table and hear the Arab side, instead of just shooting up anyone who disagrees with them. Like I said in my last post, there will have to be compromise if there is to be peace, and Israel and the US will have to listen to the Arabs instead of presenting them with a plan and threatening to bomb them if they don't comply. That, as far as I can see, is the only way any lasting peace can be achieved.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

BT, again very sensible - I think the length of the leash will depend on the rhetoric being fielded from the Iranian President as well as any plans of the Iranians to manufacture nuclear weapons. You know Israel will not allow that to happen.

 

[Colin1]

Israel needs to come to the table and hear the Arab side, instead of just shooting up anyone who disagrees with them. Like I said in my last post, there will have to be compromise if there is to be peace, and Israel and the US will have to listen to the Arabs instead of presenting them with a plan and threatening to bomb them if they don't comply

Persians
Iranians wouldn't take kindly to being called Arabs; Persian/Arab hostility is as historical as Arab/Jew

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Persians
Iranians wouldn't take kindly to being called Arabs; Persian/Arab hostility is as historical as Arab/Jew

VERY CORRECT!!!! And despite the "unity" of the religion that seems to hold them together, that's the point many miss about the Iranians (Persians). Saddam Hussein once stated he hated only Persians worse than Jews!