^^^

FOT&E (Full OPERATIONAL TESTING & Evaluation) occurs before IOC.

12/12/2011 8:59:47 AM

They're spending a lot of resources to try to get data from this thing, only to find out once they break the encryption, that was too easy btw, they get a photo of Ahmadinnerjacket blowing Khamenei with a caption of GO FUCK YOURSELVES.

12/12/2011 10:37:50 AM

hahaha.

i can only assume from our governments response that FOR SOME REASON this particular drone is not important.

somehow this thing is completely useless so...

carry on!

12/12/2011 11:50:27 AM

just throwing this out there but is it possible we let Iran get this drone? sort of like a Trojan Horse kinda deal? we let them get this thing, break it down, get the coding only to find out once they go to use the information it's all garbage info which allowed us to hack their systems, for example. [/theory]

12/12/2011 2:19:34 PM

Quote :

"^That's always been my assumption. I'm sure someone can back this up / pick it apart, but isn't there some logic in assuming that, were this drone of the super importance that Iran and the media are pitching it as, that not only would the US Military already have taken measures to retrieve it in the critical hours after crashing, but also hushed it all in the process?"

I think it would have to be really fucking important to risk military action on Irani soil. I think it could be "kinda important" and our military would decide not to risk it. Not saying that means that it was important, just inaction on the case of our military doesn't mean that it wasn't.

But yeah, Iran inflating the importance of a military something? Shocker.

[Edited on December 12, 2011 at 3:00 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2011 3:00:01 PM

x5 ^
so you post a post and simply quote it and you..


ok cool i see the logic of your posts now.


back on topic (from iran today):

Quote :

""Soon we will hold a military maneuver on how to close the Strait of Hormuz. If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure"

12/13/2011 1:34:18 PM

Hezbollah identifies undercover CIA officers
http://news.yahoo.com/hezbollah-identifies-undercover-cia-officers-211840825.html

I love how they say that "it is likely Hezbollah has already shared photographs of the case officers with Iran, its closest ally."

Uh, it is more likely that the Pasdaran was the puppet master for the entire operation.

12/13/2011 2:23:19 PM

Hezbollah and Iran hangin out on wajhbook, tagging and sharing their photos

[Edited on December 13, 2011 at 3:02 PM. Reason : .]

12/13/2011 3:01:34 PM

i like how iran has a drone of ours and taunting it in our faces and we are even asking for it back

hopefully the post at the top of the page is right, and we somehow 'allowed them' to get it. but that's pretty elaborate.


i for one, welcome our new muslim brotherhood overlords

12/13/2011 3:05:03 PM

We should get a pool going on when this war will start.

12/13/2011 3:58:00 PM

I'll take the over on 'not anytime soon'

12/13/2011 4:01:14 PM

i hope it makes them "shut the fuck up."

LOL, amirite?

12/13/2011 5:01:04 PM

Quote :

"hopefully the post at the top of the page is right, and we somehow 'allowed them' to get it. but that's pretty elaborate."

elaborate? not really

12/13/2011 5:21:32 PM

haha, compared to, say, the Glomar Explorer operation, it would be kindergarten level.

I mean, the CIA has some some mega-insane mind-blowing shit over the last 60 years.

I don't really see the point in even having an opinion on the drone matter beyond shrugging your shoulders and saying "Ehh, I'd really like to know the full story on this one!" Who knows what's accurate, inaccurate, deliberate CIA misinformation, Iranian propaganda, speculation, bullshit and lies, or what...

It could be a complete security disaster that will divulge our important collection efforts and capabilities, and advance Russian and Chinese stealth and/or sensor technology or countertactics by many years...or it could be much ado about nothing...or the CIA might sit back and look at Iran taking the bait, totally rake them over the coals, and be like "I got you good, you fucker!"

12/13/2011 9:59:52 PM

The current rumor is that Iran acquired technology from Russia allowing them to hijack the drone, spoof it's landing coordinates, and program it to "land" in Iran. Apparently, the landing wasn't perfect, so the drone got fucked up a little.

12/15/2011 2:11:54 PM

^It may not matter to anyone else, but to me I get a mental image of something much more sophisticated when I hear something like this.

What they are claiming they did was jam the comms link which sends it into autopilot by default, then spoof its GPS.

12/15/2011 3:48:28 PM

hmmm...

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/1215/Exclusive-Iran-hijacked-US-drone-says-Iranian-engineer

12/15/2011 5:01:35 PM

christian science monitor, you say?

12/15/2011 5:08:06 PM

Quote :

"I don't really see the point in even having an opinion on the drone matter beyond shrugging your shoulders and saying "Ehh, I'd really like to know the full story on this one!" Who knows what's accurate, inaccurate, deliberate CIA misinformation, Iranian propaganda, speculation, bullshit and lies, or what..."

You don't need to have an opinion either way, but speculation is important. If no one questions the official story, we have no chance of finding out the truth.

12/15/2011 7:16:01 PM

^^ i'm not sure what that's supposed to mean

12/15/2011 7:26:55 PM

Quote :

"We all feel drunk [with happiness] now," says the Iranian engineer. "Have you ever had a new laptop? Imagine that excitement multiplied many-fold."

ahahaha, what a dick

12/15/2011 7:55:18 PM

^^^^, ^^

Yeah, Christian Scientists are ridiculous and crazy, and their allowance of their children to go medically untreated is at least borderline criminal (if the adults want to neglect their own health, I don't care...fuck 'em), but CSM is pretty legitimate journalism from everything I've seen.

12/15/2011 9:09:42 PM

If Iran gets a nuke it could easily get into the hands of alquaida. Imagine how scary it would be if people like Osama were allowed to hang out in a country with a nuke and maybe even supported by their military?

12/15/2011 11:20:27 PM

Judge Rules Iran Connected To 9/11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw5v-kkIix8

12/16/2011 2:50:52 AM

No biggie. There will continue to be explosions and scientists/republican guard people's heads popping open under strange circumstances regardless.

12/16/2011 10:49:57 AM

Quote :

"Imagine how scary it would be if people like Osama were allowed to hang out in a country with a nuke and maybe even supported by their military?"

IF THAT EVER HAPPENED I WOULD HOPE WE WOULD NUKE THE FUCK OUT OF PAKISTAN

12/16/2011 2:26:12 PM

The winners and losers of US policy on Iran

Quote :

"In the same week that President Obama declared an end to the Iraq War, Congress brought Americans closer to confrontation with Iran. The whimper with which America's presence in Iraq ended was also drowned out by Republican presidential hopefuls beating war drums. This is America nearly four years into Obama's leadership. The President may have begun his term by trying to pursue a different path with Iran, but his acquiescence to domestic lobbying has made the results of his policies indistinguishable from his predecessor. Ironically, his attempts to appease pro-Israel advocates have only invited more onerous demands while leaving would-be supporters disillusioned. Perhaps more disheartening than the shattered hopes of millions who believed in Obama's campaign promises is the blowback. Iran's government is becoming more authoritarian and defiant as political infighting rages. Its position has also been strengthened by America's Mideast policies. The ouster of Saddam Hussein has placed forces friendly to it in power in Baghdad. Meanwhile, US competitors benefit from deals resulting from sanctions, while American officials depend on countries like Saudi Arabia to provide essential support for their initiatives. As in Tehran, hostile measures against political adversaries are also becoming the norm in Washington. On December 14, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the Iran Threat Reductions Act (HR 1905). An amendment to it proposed by hawk Ileana Ros-Lehtinen essentially bars US officials from even speaking to the Iranians with minor exceptions. Several analysts have written that the measure will enhance the threat of war. Intelligence veteran Paul Pillar warned in November that the restriction could block peaceful means of conflict resolution over Iran's nuclear program and "any diplomacy to keep US-Iranian incidents or crises…from spinning out of control”. Preventing unnecessary catastrophes was exactly what recently retired Admiral Mike Mullen was trying to do when he reiterated calls for engagement with Iran. In September he strongly recommended that the US explore "any channel [of communication] that's open”, adding that "even in the darkest days of the Cold War,” America "had links to the Soviet Union”. Even Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta felt compelled to explain why war should be avoided to a pro-Israel audience at the Saban Center in Washington earlier this month. "The consequence could be that we would have an escalation that would take place that would not only involve many lives, but…consume the Middle East in a confrontation and a conflict that we would regret,” he said. 'Sabotage diplomacy' But as in the run-up to the Iraq War, the political leadership is ignoring skeptical voices regardless of their provenance. Hawkish measures are being furthered at an increasing pace. Last week the administration implied that it would sign into law sanctions against Iran's Central Bank as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. Representatives from 11 countries dubbed as the "coalition of like-minded countries” are meeting in Rome on Tuesday to also discuss implementing a complete oil embargo. Analysts have written that the Iranians could interpret these moves as "an act of war”. HR 1905 has been opposed by a group of anti-war US organizations who fear it will "sabotage diplomacy”, including the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). According to NIAC policy director Jamal Abdi, the measures will "punish ordinary people, raise gas prices, and bring the US.and Iran closer to war”. Top American businesses have also voiced opposition. USA*Engage, an influential coalition of American companies and trade associations said last week that HR 1905 would work against US efforts to build a multilateral coalition on Iran. "Votes like these may satisfy domestic political considerations,” a USA*Engage statement said, "but they actually weaken American leadership and have the potential to unravel the calibrated, multilateral consensus that has been achieved.” History repeats itself and with Iran it's hardly the work of supernatural forces. In 1996, a similar battle raged between elements of the "Israel lobby” and USA*Engage, which opposed harsh sanctions against Iraq and Iran. The lobby prevailed, with parts of the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act being written by members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). This was confessed to journalist Jeffrey Goldberg by AIPAC staffer Steven Rosen who would later be indicted for espionage after being accused of giving classified US intelligence to Israel. AIPAC's victory was also a boon for the Russians and Chinese who were able to secure lucrative contracts in the sanctioned countries without competition. The main loser was America's economy. It's no coincidence that many of the same groups that agitated for war with Iraq are also pushing America closer to confrontation with Iran. The ultra-hawkish Foundation for Defense of Democracies does this by spreading their ideas in influential newspapers and informing key congressional committees. Washington Post hawk Jennifer Rubin regularly quotes the FDD when writing about Iran. In August, Mark Dubowitz told her that to "squeeze the regime” the US should "target Iran's crude oil sales, designate the Central Bank of Iran, and sanction the Chinese, Indian and other companies that continue to do business in Iran's energy sector.” He also claimed Americans didn't "have time” for diplomatic measures and argued that "a comprehensive Iran policy” must include "the real threat of force”. The hawks circle Dubowitz's Iraq war hawk colleague Reuel Marc Gerecht is less restrained with his language. In October he told two house subcommittees at a hearing about the alleged "Iranian plot” to assassinate the Saudi ambassador that the US would be "asking for it” if they didn't "shoot someone” in response. AIPAC has also been pushing for "strangling” sanctions against Iran for years. Last week journalist Philip Weiss blogged that the unanimous senate passing of the Kirk-Menendez amendment incorporating Iran Central Bank sanctions into the National Defense bill highlighted the pro-Israel "pressure” Obama faces. "AIPAC famously can get 70 Senators' signatures on a napkin inside of a day, as Goldberg himself reported,” Weiss wrote, but "[t]his time AIPAC got 100 against Obama!” State department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said Thursday that the US was studying how to apply sanctions against Iran's Central Bank "while causing minimum disruption” for its allies. But she did not explain how that's possible when enforcement requires a US financial ban on anyone who does business with it. And while Asian allies like Japan are scrambling for ways to cope with the US-led initiatives, China and Russia are looking forward to exploiting them. Iran could respond to strangulating pressure by blockading the world's most important oil-shipping route, the Strait of Hormuz. But it could also gain from higher oil prices caused by a reduction in global supply. Earlier this month, State Department undersecretary Wendy Sherman said there's "absolutely a risk that…the price of oil would go up, which would mean that Iran would in fact have more money to fuel its nuclear ambitions, not less.” Saudi Arabia plays a key role in countering that consequence and it still hasn't commented on an Iranian claim that the Saudis would not boost production to offset the effect of decreased Iranian exports. Despite their headline-dominating tensions, Iran joined the Saudis in Riyadh for talks last week. Both countries also prefer high prices; in October Saudi Arabia inadvertently pleased the Iranians when they cut oil output by four per cent so prices wouldn't fall below $100 a barrel. We'll see how the Saudis act this time when there's increased US pressure. But now America is also depending on an economically struggling European Union to stop purchasing Iranian crude. Oil prices have also been rising since last week and economists are warning that costs may surge if Iran's supply is halted. All this while Obama continues to be criticized by pro-Israel hawks despite submitting to their pressure. The President's schizophrenic Iran policy seems to have landed America in a no-win situation as a threatened Iran feels compelled to acquire nuclear weapon capability. While Iran insists it's "not really worried” about more "strangling” sanctions, it could accordingly slip into the "irrational” role that's constantly attributed to it. Even before post-war instability has died down in Iraq, conditions are ripe for yet another calamitous confrontation in the Middle East."

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/12/2011122110158611391.html

[Edited on December 23, 2011 at 10:40 PM. Reason : ]

12/23/2011 10:35:29 PM

I don't understand the concern over a war with Iran is about. Iran has a conventional semi-modern military that we could engage and destroy easily. We know that they have been supporting anti-us efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and we sit back and twiddle our thumbs when we could just roll in and topple them.

12/24/2011 12:26:49 PM

Right. No one actually believes this is about U.S. national security. This is about finding reasons to kill more Muslims, no matter how shaky the justifications may be. This is God's work.

12/24/2011 12:31:04 PM

^^
lol

just n00bed all over himself.

12/24/2011 12:37:38 PM

^^, ^^^

hahaha

12/24/2011 12:40:19 PM

It was said tongue in cheek, and I'm sure you have a slightly more strategic view on it, but just admit that the politicians pushing this war simply hate non-whites and non-Christians. We all know it's true.

[Edited on December 24, 2011 at 1:02 PM. Reason : ]

12/24/2011 1:02:04 PM

^ i think thats probably true for a sizable number, but i think it's more people that are like Gollum who are either unable or unwilling to look at the more systematic picture of how international politics work and evolve over time.

12/24/2011 1:04:20 PM

I didn't realize this thread was about international politics, I thought it was about a theoretical war with Iran


[Edited on December 24, 2011 at 1:21 PM. Reason : meh]

12/24/2011 1:12:44 PM

^^^


^ Well, I mean, yeah...obviously we'd whip the shit out of them if we went to war...but, uhh, a global hegemon's decision to go to war with a major regional power is, by definition, a question of major international politics. There is no point in discussing it without that angle.

Carl von Clausewitz: "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

(or something very close to that effect)

12/24/2011 1:29:30 PM

When diplomacy doesn't work because no honest attempt is made at it, the next logical step is slaughter? Got it.

Just an admission that the U.S. government has been far too involved in the region would go a long way. People are a lot more likely to work with you when you aren't actively fucking them over.

12/24/2011 4:31:34 PM

Quote :

"When diplomacy doesn't work because no honest attempt is made at it, the next logical step is slaughter? Got it."

Where the fuck did I say anything like that?

12/24/2011 4:35:37 PM

If you support action against Iran, that's essentially what you're saying. If you provoke a nation and isolate them, they become hostile. That is what the U.S. has done to Iran.

12/24/2011 4:52:56 PM

I have not said it's time to attack Iran, at least not yet.

If it gets to that point, I was not the one who supported isolating them and painting them into what they at least perceive is a corner. That doesn't mean I wouldn't support the best of unattractive options that we've left ourselves. That, however, is different from saying "Fuck diplomacy and searching for mutually acceptable solutions--we paid for a kickass military, so let's go use it."

At any rate, all I was saying originally is that it's completely inaccurate--and utterly pointless--to view military action against Iran as apolitical and strictly a matter of "whatever, we'd handily crush the shit out of them", even if that fact, in and of itself, is an understatement and not even questionable.

12/24/2011 5:37:19 PM

Crushing the shit out of them as in defeating their conventional military and crushing the shit out of them are two completely different things.

Anyhow, the American oligarchs are hungry to sell war material to the US government as that supply line is about to dry up. The entire purpose of the US military is to increase the demand for products that can only be used if we are at war. The only peaceful era in our nations history was conveniently during westward expansion.

Pointless wars will continue. We haven't needed to go to war in almost 70 years.

12/24/2011 6:27:35 PM

Quote :

"Crushing the shit out of them as in defeating their conventional military and crushing the shit out of them are two completely different things. "

Maybe if we wage war in the modern sense which is to engage a conventional enemy and limit damage to civilian infrastructure and innocent people. Total war on the other hand involves the commitment of all resources and means to achieve victory. I'm not sure when people decided that it would be a better idea to try not to kill people in war but its counter-intuitive especially when the other side doesn't play by the same rules.

The reason we haven't needed to go to war in almost 70 years of because of force projection and the world's perception that we will deploy anywhere for any reason to protect our interests.

^exactly which wars were pointless?

and Merry Christmas

[Edited on December 25, 2011 at 1:15 AM. Reason : ne razumijem]

12/25/2011 1:12:40 AM

haha, Jesus Christ.

12/25/2011 3:46:12 AM

Quote :

"Maybe if we wage war in the modern sense which is to engage a conventional enemy and limit damage to civilian infrastructure and innocent people"

When have we ever done that?

Quote :

"^exactly which wars were pointless?"

Korean war
Vietnam war
Afghan war
Iraq war
Libya thingy

12/25/2011 12:37:12 PM

Millions of South Koreans would disagree.

12/25/2011 1:08:57 PM

Millions of North Koreans would agree.

[Edited on December 25, 2011 at 1:15 PM. Reason : its not absurd to think things would have worked themselves without the clusterfuck we created]

12/25/2011 1:15:02 PM

it is blatantly obvious that you don't understand how wars are fought and by "we" you mean the United Nations right? They're responsible for the involvement in the Korean war.

12/25/2011 2:19:32 PM

Quote :

"When have we ever done that? "

Goddamn, you're just as retarded in the other direction.

12/25/2011 3:36:56 PM

I'm really not expecting someone in the military to distinguish facts from propaganda. No offense but we've killed hundreds of thousands of civilians everywhere we've gone. I'm not talking about collateral damage either. A lot of it has been intentional. Even in the current wars, just less. Our military has always been a civilian-killing machine and we pretty much are the UN anyway.

12/25/2011 4:20:11 PM

Quote :

""When have we ever done that? ""

Ahahahaha! Love it!

Quote :

"...you mean the United Nations right? They're responsible for the involvement in the Korean war."

Naw, it was pretty much us. Read "This Kind of War" by T.R. Fehrenbach.

[Edited on December 26, 2011 at 10:44 PM. Reason : .]

12/26/2011 10:42:48 PM

JesusHChrist is right. We should be doing everything possible to support this nation of equal rights and prosperity. They are a nation of peace and global civility and we should continue to pursue diplomatic efforts of peace with them.

May we all look at their heroic efforts at sustaining world peace over the last 5000 years as evidence of this ability as an Iranian sovereignty and religion of peace and equality and justice for all to sustain and promote the moral contracts of peace and good will throughout the region for millennia to come!

Achmadenijad shall be lauded through the passages of history as a defender of human rights and equality and a bringer of prosperity to the region as the demon gods of Obama and other oppressive emperors of hate and war reign over them and attempt to thwart their ways of peace with evil CIA spy's and robotic flying armies threaten to kill civilian masses because of their peaceful loving religion



Down with America!! Burn the constitution!! End the single worst reign of terror in the universe once and for all!!! Let us stand firmly with the Muslim brotherhood and the will of the peaceful ways of the great nation of Iran!!

12/27/2011 9:31:01 AM