Iran Threatens to Shoot Down U.S. Drones

[tuvor]

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's intelligence chief on Wednesday accused the United States of flying spy drones over its nuclear sites and threatened to shoot down the unmanned surveillance crafts.

Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi comments backed a report in The Washington Post on Sunday that quoted unidentified U.S. officials as saying the drones have been flying over Iran for nearly a year to seek evidence of nuclear weapons programs.

"U.S. spying activities over Iranian airspace have been going since a long time ago," Yunesi told reporters.

"Most of the shining objects that our people see in Iran's airspace are American spying equipment used to spy on Iran's nuclear and military facilities," the minister told reporters.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=13&u=/ap/iran_nuclear

[Oreo]

1. 3 big stories in 10 minutes?!?

Syria Iran alliance
Threats to shoot down drones
Large explosion in Iran

Might be an interesting day!

[CottonBear]

3. How does the Beruit explosion/killing relate to these stories

A distraction or just a coincidence? Lebanon had been nice and quiet for quite a while until this week.

[Ganja Ninja]

12. There's something fishy about the way the media has all

accepted that Syria is behind the assassination in Lebanon. There's no question at all it's just taken as a given. Also look at how fast the Bush administration reacted by recalling the ambassador to Syria. There's no waiting to see who the responsible party may have been. It's Syria and no need to look any deeper even though it could have been any one of several suspects. That to me means this was something orchestrated by our government.

[Oreo]

14. They're being told it was Syria

So of course it's true.

[jayfish]

15. From What I Have Heard,...

not even the Lebanese are blaming Syria directly. They are blaming Syria for not stopping the attack because they are in control of the security apparatus. IMO, even trying to place blame in that fashion is pretty thin. By that logic the US government is responsible for 9/11. I was a little taken-aback by the US media as well when I saw the headline on CNNs' web-page "Pressure Mounts On Syria". I just don't get it.

Jay

[underthedome]

27. Syria made a direct threat 2 weeks ago

to the opposition stating that they were "not out of reach of their militants." Why hasn't this gotten more media airplay? Something fishy indeed, has Syria taken over the Media?

[Sterling]

28. By that logic the US government is responsible for 9/11

You don't have to use that kind of logic to figure that out.

[MrPrax]

16. No More Fishy than usual...

A couple of night's ago and the day it happened on CBC Radio's AIH, they interviewed a pretty 'straight up' editor from the Leb DailyStar and he started off by saying, 'nobody knows and but there are lots of theories involving, Israel, Syria, Hezbollah, Al Quaeda, political opponents'...so guess which out of these possible theories did ALL the questions concern?
Well if you guessed Syria...you were right. You could tell the editor from the Daily Star was getting a little annoyed by this tactic.

...hmmm...here is Fisk's first impression...

"I saw the blast wave coming down the Corniche. My home is only a few hundred metres from the detonation and my first instinct was to look up, to search for the high-altitude Israeli planes that regularly break the sound barrier over Beirut. There were customers coming bloodied from their broken-windowed restaurants and the great cancerous stain of smoke rising from the road outside the St George Hotel."

http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles461.htm

Yes...fishmongering

[paineinthearse]

2. Consider this

If Cuba flew unmanned spy drones over Florida, what would the US reaction be?

[tuvor]

4. To the US admin, geese and ganders are not equal.

They can have nuclear weapons, but they also get to choose who can't, etc.

[CottonBear]

It would all be over for Cuba.

:nuke:

[DistantWind88]

5. We'd shoot those suckers down and

Iran is well within their rights to shoot ours down if we are doing as they allege.

[CottonBear]

6. My cousin's wife is from Iran.

Her family still lives there. I hope they will be OK.

[sarcasmo]

8. Get them out if you can Cotton Bear, I fear they will not be safe.

Chimpy has already made his mind up IMHO to destroy that Country. I however think Syria may be first.

[CottonBear]

13. I think they live near the capitol.

She came here to go to school in the 1970's and was not able to return after the revolution. Her family survived that time and the Iran/Iraq war. She was not able to see them for many years. They missed her wedding, which was sad. I need to call her and find out if they are all OK.

[DistantWind88]

9. Why shouldn't they be

This doesn't look like any kind of attack; do they live near that facility?

[LinuxInsurgent]

7. agreed.

[Coventina]

10. And why shouldn't they?

We'd shoot down any drones sent over our airspace by a foreign power.

:shrug:

[cthrumatrix]

11. maybe this is "what the US wants"..... zero diplomacy....oil-oil-oil

[David__77]

17. Why haven't they tried if that's the case?

Do they have the capability. It seems like a given that they would do so. Any Iranian general is an idiot if they didn't give the order to shoot ANY foreign military aircraft down in its airspace.

[leveymg]

19. Actually, the Gen. would be an idiot if he did shoot missiles at drones

The drones are there to activate and test air defense systems, not to surveil anything else. Everybody in the military knows this. The only ones who believe the story that they're used to hunt for nuclear facilities are the American people who believe what they're told by CNN "Eyes on Iran" and the rest of the disinformation media.

The things are nothing more than model aircraft. I wouldn't waste a round on them, if I were an Iranian air defense officer. Correction: I'd take the opportunity to send a lot of false signals.

[David__77]

21. Hmm... good point.

But, if they are confident in their anti-aircraft capabilities, then destroying it as a signal would be a good thing. Not responding will, perhaps wrongly, be interpreted as a sign of weakness.

[DistantWind88]

22. The Predator is nothing more than a model airplane...

interesting...

[leveymg]

25. Ya, a $30 million model airplane

The Predator airframe is cheap, cheap - a carbon fiber pusher-prop with a cruise missile body and glider wings. All that money is to pay for the development of the software for the semi-autonomous avionics, sensors, and ECM. A lot of it is lkely off-the shelf from cruise missiles, F-117, A-10, etc.

What amuses me is that they're painting them silver to glint in the sun like UFOs, maybe lighting them at night, too -- so unstealthy. Can you figure why they might make them such easy targets? Actually, the lighted-up ones are probably smaller, cheaper model airplane-like drones, not Predators.

They were testing spherical drones some years ago - maybe they're finally deploying those.

[DistantWind88]

26. I don't think $30M is cheap

and the Predator has a 49 foot wingspan and is about 27 feel long. hardly a "model airplane."

Anyway, I think the Predator actually costs about $4M a copy. Still not inexpensive.

[leveymg]

31. As I said, what the Iranians are mistaking for UFOs are not Predators.

Whatever they are, they set off radar systems. They're cheaper than F-15 pilots.

[DistantWind88]

33. I thought the radar

systems were not responding?

[RebelOne]

34. My cousin, a retired Air Force Lt. Col., is the chief engineer

for the Predator program.

[DistantWind88]

37. Very cool

General Atomics is making a ton off the AF with those. The Navy may be buying them as well in the future.

[wuushew]

35. They could do what the British did against the V1

A popular tatic against V1 was to fly parrel to the bomb and tip the wings causing it to spiral out of control and crash.

A simple visual intercept with a Mig seems like cheap and effective way to bring these things down. The wreckage could then be put on display in the Security Council after Iran has sold the most valuable components to Russia and China.

I hope Bush likes eating crow.

[DistantWind88]

39. That would assume the Us is really

flying UAVS over Iran. I'm not sure we are.

[leveymg]

45. What are they, then - Interdimensional Antigravity Vehicles (IAVs)?

Remember, the Iranians reported UFOs.

Wink.

[leveymg]

44. Ya, but I doubt Britain would sell them Spitfires or Hurcs to do it with.

Those are very hush, hush.

;-)

[yinkaafrica]

46. very interesting

[DrWeird]

40. That's true regarding fixed radar installations.

They could just send up an interceptor.

[Wwagsthedog]

18. Why is Iran "warning" the US aabout shooting down spy drones?

If they can shoot them down, why haven't they done so? Something fishy is afoot that we aren't aware of, yet.

Not to mention that Putin says Russia will sell anti-aircraft missles to Syria and that Sharon is "disappointed".

Sure hope the whole Middle East doesn't blow up in our ignorant faces.

[leveymg]

20. Sending false signals. See my post above.

I agree that the thing seems poised to blow up. Bush and Sharon are hoping that Iran pulls the trigger first, which would give them a pretext for the attacks they've been training for many months.

The assassination of Harari in Lebanon is just too evocative of what happened to the leader of the Afghan Northern Alliance a couple days before 9/11.

If this is the start of the attack on Iran, look for a third party - a la Al-Qaeda - to set things off.

[Wwagsthedog]

23. You offer good points to ponder.

We sure aren't going to get much from the media except after the fact hysteria. One thing I can remember is the silence in the air before Gulf War I began in earnest. The "next one" won't be a slam dunk for anyone. War is hell and so unecessary.

[leveymg]

24. The "next one" is unlikely to resemble Gulf Wars One or Two.

We just don't have the troops on the ground to invade Iran. If we go to war, it's going to be some kind of decapitating air strike against Iranian scientists and political leaders, in situ. The Israelis have been threatening to send in commandos to carry out "targeted killings"

Let's hope it stays at the psychological warfare level, which is where things stand today.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

29. they have EVERY right to do so .......i would shoot them down ...would we

allow any country to fly such things over the US?

[DistantWind88]

30. Agree

They have every right to shoot them down; if they can.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Groverbort sighting

[KissMeKate]

38. shooting them down will give us info about their air defense systems.

thats exactly what the Bush admin wants Iran to do.

[DistantWind88]

41. Depends on how they are shot down

(meaning with what weapon system and if VISOPS were/were not used)either way, I'm sure the U.S. has the Iranian IADS pretty well mapped already.

[mmonk]

42. Looks as if 2005 will be an interesting year

[jswordy]

43. Man, I am scared! Woo! It is all a giant media conspiracy, too

That ought to about cover it all.

[Hell in a Handbasket]

47. and wouldn't that be the perfect excuse to bomb them?

how ironic.