Tiberius Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 10 hours ago, row_33 said: Give the Israeli Air Force a Hall pass to run a few errands Why would they do that? They have Trump to do their bidding. I mean, you think this is just a coincidence: Top stories Israel builds Trump a Potemkin village Washington Post 1 day ago Trump Heights, Binyamin Netanyahu’s tribute to America’s president The Economist 9 hours ago I'm sure they just really love the idiot.
Tiberius Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 Donald Trump promised to bring our troops home. Instead he has pulled out of a deal that was working and instigated another unnecessary conflict. There is no justification for further escalating this crisis—we need to step back from the brink of war. https://t.co/roUHtzRlE8 — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) June 21, 2019
Deranged Rhino Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 4 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said: No one likes that we backed out of the Iran deal. You really are deranged if you can actually explain this post. It wasn't a deal. It was extortion. 150 million in cash for the mullahs (who gave money to themselves and terrorist cells, not the country or people) in exchange for building a bomb slower. The "deal" accomplished nothing. Nothing. 3 2
3rdnlng Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It wasn't a deal. It was extortion. 150 million in cash for the mullahs (who gave money to themselves and terrorist cells, not the country or people) in exchange for building a bomb slower. The "deal" accomplished nothing. Nothing. Don't post before your coffee. 1.6 Billion in cash on pallets for Mullahs and 150 Billion in funds released that were actually Iran's that we had a hold on. Pays for a lot of IED's. Edited June 21, 2019 by 3rdnlng 2
Buffalo_Gal Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 42 minutes ago, Hedge said: Beginning of that thread (and I think Trump was being very kind to Obama). What is truly crazy is the responses to that first tweet "the money was working". Working to what? Fund more terrorism? 4 2
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: What is the purpose and capabilities of the PQ-4 Global Hawk? What type of surveillance was it designed to perform? Is it the ideal drone to send over another country's air space? The drone that was shot down was actually one of the Broad-Area Maritime Surveillance drones for the Navy. There's two prototypes (modified RQ-4As) stationed in the Persian Gulf region; together, they can basically provide full-time high-res radar coverage of the entire Gulf, and reportedly are always in the air to watch the Iranian Navy when a US Navy ship transits the Straits of Hormuz. Given that - their purpose and the nature of the mission, there's no particular reason they'd need to be flown in to Iranian air space. Basically, they're not that sort of platform. Based on that, and what I know of the operators' restrictions and procedure, it probably was in international air space. Not certainly, because mistakes do happen. But most likely. Another point: if this was in the air specifically to support the transit of a Navy ship at the time, and the Iranians shot it down...that's pretty serious. That's not just the loss of a drone. That sends the chain of command's collective asses puckering, wondering if it's the opening of an attack on whatever ship's in transit. 2 1 3
B-Man Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 President Trump confirms he called off retaliatory attack on Iran ‘10 minutes’ before strike It sounds like the release of this 'story' is designed to send a message to all concerned. . 3
3rdnlng Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 25 minutes ago, DC Tom said: The drone that was shot down was actually one of the Broad-Area Maritime Surveillance drones for the Navy. There's two prototypes (modified RQ-4As) stationed in the Persian Gulf region; together, they can basically provide full-time high-res radar coverage of the entire Gulf, and reportedly are always in the air to watch the Iranian Navy when a US Navy ship transits the Straits of Hormuz. Given that - their purpose and the nature of the mission, there's no particular reason they'd need to be flown in to Iranian air space. Basically, they're not that sort of platform. Based on that, and what I know of the operators' restrictions and procedure, it probably was in international air space. Not certainly, because mistakes do happen. But most likely. Another point: if this was in the air specifically to support the transit of a Navy ship at the time, and the Iranians shot it down...that's pretty serious. That's not just the loss of a drone. That sends the chain of command's collective asses puckering, wondering if it's the opening of an attack on whatever ship's in transit. Yes, thank you. I had already read somewhere a few things about the RQ-4 Global Hawk and figured out that our military's synopsis made sense while that poster's didn't. My post to him was to solicit some answers that he would have to put some thought into. I believe that drone is not stealthy and has the capability to fly at extremely slow speeds at heights of 50,000 feet or more. Certainly not designed to enter another country's airspace. 1
Hedge Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 @sherpa If you feel like sharing, I am curious about a few things. I really like to hear from those who have actually been on the front lines, as it's a perspective that can't ever be fully comprehended by those who haven't been there. Going with the 10 minutes timetable that has been mentioned, if strike aircraft were going to be involved (and were stationed in the immediate vicinity, much closer than 10 minutes flight time), how far into the process had it gotten? Would it be correct to assume that any pre-flight briefings had concluded, that individual targets had been parceled out, and that armaments would have been fully loaded? Would the pilots already have been in their planes awaiting take off, or would they have already been in the air? What would be the overall emotional sense of the pilots after getting called off? Relief? Disappointment?
B-Man Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 LIZ SHELD’S MORNING BRIEF: Trump Pulls Back from Iran Strike, Media & Democrats Confused. “Let’s be honest, there are plenty of things the U.S. can do that don’t involve invasion and bombs: bank accounts can be emptied, people can disappear. It can be very dangerous to be an Iranian agent walking freely around Latin America and Africa. Things happen. ‘No comment’.” . Weird, but the Democrats, media and Iran all seem a little disappointed that Trump chose not to attack. 1
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 43 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Yes, thank you. I had already read somewhere a few things about the RQ-4 Global Hawk and figured out that our military's synopsis made sense while that poster's didn't. My post to him was to solicit some answers that he would have to put some thought into. I believe that drone is not stealthy and has the capability to fly at extremely slow speeds at heights of 50,000 feet or more. Certainly not designed to enter another country's airspace. Not necessarily, considering they were originally purchased to complement/replace the U-2. But in this case, doctrine's an important qualifier. While the RQ-4A might be used as a strategic surveillance platform over other countries, that would be a mission more likely to be performed by the Air Force. In this specific case, this was a drone modified to support a specific Navy program of maritime ISR, and would be very unlikely to be used for overland missions. Particularly given the scarcity - there were only two in-theater, losing one just eliminated the capacity for full-time coverage of Persian Gulf traffic. The elimination of full-time surveillance actually creates some significant limitations on naval operations in the Gulf. For that reason alone, flying the Navy's BADS-M platforms over Iran would be downright reckless. 9 minutes ago, B-Man said: Weird, but the Democrats, media and Iran all seem a little disappointed that Trump chose not to attack. They're invested in the "Trump unstable warmonger" narrative. It's part of their identity. 1
row_33 Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 20 minutes ago, B-Man said: LIZ SHELD’S MORNING BRIEF: Trump Pulls Back from Iran Strike, Media & Democrats Confused. “Let’s be honest, there are plenty of things the U.S. can do that don’t involve invasion and bombs: bank accounts can be emptied, people can disappear. It can be very dangerous to be an Iranian agent walking freely around Latin America and Africa. Things happen. ‘No comment’.” . Weird, but the Democrats, media and Iran all seem a little disappointed that Trump chose not to attack. they have written scripts for anything possible done by Trump and its outcome, all condemning him no matter what
sherpa Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hedge said: @sherpa If you feel like sharing, I am curious about a few things. I really like to hear from those who have actually been on the front lines, as it's a perspective that can't ever be fully comprehended by those who haven't been there. Going with the 10 minutes timetable that has been mentioned, if strike aircraft were going to be involved (and were stationed in the immediate vicinity, much closer than 10 minutes flight time), how far into the process had it gotten? Would it be correct to assume that any pre-flight briefings had concluded, that individual targets had been parceled out, and that armaments would have been fully loaded? Would the pilots already have been in their planes awaiting take off, or would they have already been in the air? What would be the overall emotional sense of the pilots after getting called off? Relief? Disappointment? I can answer some of that, but a guess at what Trump "called off" would be pure speculation. First, you have to consider the source. Trump saying "ten minutes" is not something I put a lot of credibility in. But, if that's true, it sounds like it was a cruise missile thing. They are easy to abort because its just guys with easy and reliable comm sitting at launch stations, whether in the air, at sea or on land. Calling off a really serious strike is a lot more problematic. People often don't get the word. To answer your question, from a manned aircraft strike package position, the airplanes would have been loaded and ready. On a carrier it would have been hours before, up to about one hour.. Same with the air Force Launch briefings would be very detailed, including tanking, (air to air refueling) plans, search and rescue considerations, post strike egress corridors to make it easier for AWACS or a carrier air wings early warning aircraft to know who was a friend or foe. Specific weapons delivery timing and a whole lot of other things. In addition, though the Air Force has an easier problem, once its launched a carrier strike force does not want to return and land with ordnance. They can, but it is really undesirable because the force of a carrier landing. Pilot are pilots. they get train to do this stuff and do what is necessary. Still, once a significant strike plan is launched, its pretty hard to turn it off, another reason I think this was probably a cruise missile plan against Revolutionary Guard air defenses or other assets. Edited June 21, 2019 by sherpa 2 3
B-Man Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 They made a video with Jack Black and Morgan Freeman selling the Iran deal and are still aghast that Donald Trump is president....? .
Hedge Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 13 minutes ago, sherpa said: I can answer some of that, but a guess at what Trump "called off" would be pure speculation. First, you have to consider the source. Trump saying "ten minutes" is not something I put a lot of credibility in. But, if that's true, it sounds like it was a cruise missile thing. They are easy to abort because its just guys with easy and reliable comm sitting at launch stations, whether in the air, at sea or on land. Calling off a really serious strike is a lot more problematic. People often don't get the word. To answer your question, from a manned aircraft strike package position, the airplanes would have been loaded and ready. On a carrier it would have been hours before, up to about one hour.. Same with the air Force Launch briefings would be very detailed, including tanking, (air to air refueling) plans, search and rescue considerations, post strike egress corridors to make it easier for AWACS or a carrier air wings early warning aircraft to know who was a friend or foe. Specific weapons delivery timing and a whole lot of other things. In addition, though the Air Force has an easier problem, once its launched a carrier strike force does not want to return and land with ordnance. They can, but it is really undesirable because the force of a carrier landing. Pilot are pilots. they get train to do this stuff and do what is necessary. Still, once a significant strike plan is launched, its pretty hard to turn it off, another reason I think this was probably a cruise missile plan against Revolutionary Guard air defenses or other assets. Thank you for the insights! 2 1
B-Man Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 Asia has most to lose if Middle East turmoil hits oil supplies. “As Trump spelt out in the interview, the U.S. is no longer as dependent on oil from the Middle East as it was, thanks to burgeoning domestic production. Air Force General Paul Selva, vice chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, emphasized the message a day later, pointing out that China, Indonesia, Japan and South Korea were heavily dependent on supplies moving through the Strait of Hormuz, and needed to protect their interests. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has made similar comments.” .
dpberr Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 (edited) Today's events in the Persian Gulf are still low wattage compared to the events of the mid-80s. Back then you had legitimate mining of the Gulf and several small scale offensive operations against the Iranians. The US Navy was in several battles with Iranian gunboats. You had an Iraqi jet fire Exocet missiles at the USS Stark. The USS Vincennes shot down an civilian Iranian air liner. You still had hostages in Lebanon. Edited June 21, 2019 by dpberr 1
Hedge Posted June 21, 2019 Posted June 21, 2019 For what it is worth, Jack Keane is a retired 4 Star General. And if you don't follow this account, you are missing out: She isn't the most humble person, but her analysis is usually next level stuff. 1
Recommended Posts