Politicspoliticsiranvincennesactofwarcriminalmurderterrorchildren

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 05:44 PM

30 years ago today the US blew an Iranian Civilian Airplane out of the sky killing 290- inc. 66 kids



On July 3, 1988, at exactly 10:16 am, Flight 655 leaves Bandar Abbas Airport for Dubai. Only 8 minutes into the flight and above the turquoise waters of the Persian Gulf, the Airbus passenger aircraft A300 is shot by United States Navy cruiser USS Vincennes. All 274 passengers, along with 16 crew members are killed. A total of 290 innocent lives are lost in a matter of seconds. But why was the Iranian passenger aircraft targeted? Vincennes crew claimed that they mistook this big aircraft for the much smaller F-14 jet. Yet Airbus A300 bears no resemblance to F-14 warplanes. The passenger airplane is much larger than the warplane and is not as fast. This documentary investigates the tragic incident through interviews with eyewitnesses and experts.



Iran Air Flight 655

The jet was hit while flying over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf along the flight's usual route. Vincennes had entered Iranian territorial waters after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits...

The U.S. government issued notes of regret for the loss of human lives, but never formally apologized or acknowledged wrongdoing. George H. W. Bush, the vice president of the United States at the time commented on a separate occasion, speaking to a group of Republican ethnic leaders (7 Aug 1988) said: “I will never apologize for the United States — I don’t care what the facts are… I’m not an apologize-for-America kind of guy.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

But why do they hate us? For our freedoms.

The US can run around the world doing "Regime Changes" and blowing civilian aircraft out of the skies because Americans are "Exceptional". Just look at how "Exceptional" the corrupt witch Hillary is! How lucky you are to be one of the chosen.

48 replies, 1012 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 48 replies Author Time Post
Reply 30 years ago today the US blew an Iranian Civilian Airplane out of the sky killing 290- inc. 66 kids (Original post)
Aquila Jul 2018 OP
Horsefeathers Jul 2018 #1
GoodKraic Jul 2018 #2
Red Bull Jul 2018 #3
def_con5 Jul 2018 #4
oflguy Jul 2018 #9
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #20
oflguy Jul 2018 #23
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #26
oflguy Jul 2018 #28
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #29
oflguy Jul 2018 #30
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #31
oflguy Jul 2018 #32
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #33
oflguy Jul 2018 #34
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #35
oflguy Jul 2018 #36
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #37
oflguy Jul 2018 #38
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #40
oflguy Jul 2018 #41
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #42
oflguy Jul 2018 #43
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #44
oflguy Jul 2018 #45
FreeWheelBurning Jul 2018 #46
uncledad Jul 2018 #47
oflguy Jul 2018 #48
uncledad Jul 2018 #15
def_con5 Jul 2018 #17
def_con5 Jul 2018 #19
uncledad Jul 2018 #21
def_con5 Jul 2018 #22
uncledad Jul 2018 #24
M411 Jul 2018 #5
def_con5 Jul 2018 #8
oflguy Jul 2018 #10
oflguy Jul 2018 #6
Solesurvivor Jul 2018 #7
RCW2014 Jul 2018 #11
quad489 Jul 2018 #14
TM999 Jul 2018 #16
drunk_teddy Jul 2018 #12
TendiesForBreakfast Jul 2018 #13
Banshee 3 Actual Jul 2018 #18
oflguy Jul 2018 #25
uncledad Jul 2018 #27
LeeCPTINF Jul 2018 #39

Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 05:50 PM

1. A staged false flag operation*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 05:53 PM

2. We ARE exceptional!

But exceptional doesn’t mean perfect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 06:12 PM

3. I am not trying to be an ass, I mean that!

But I have over time come to realize that the cheapest commodity in this world is human life.

Their are almost 8 billion of us in the world and we are not in short supply and we breed like rabbits.

The Russians have shot down several airliners and one with a US Congressman on board, shit happens.

I do not get worked up over shit like this because it is going to happen and that is why I do not care about the daily death toll in Chicago or any other American city.

On 9/11 A friend looked at me like I was out of my mind when I said we need to count are blessings.

This was a good friend and he asked what the fuck fore!?? I said they only killed 10,000 at most. ( that was worse case the day of) If the would have sailed a backpack nuke into New York harbor or loaded one on a Cessna then we would be looking at 2-4 hundread thousand dead from the the initial blast and then radiation sickness and cancer would take more.

Then told him the Russians were missing a shit load of backpack nukes after the collapse of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. He was flabbergasted to say the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 06:52 PM

4. This is quite disingenuous

The aircraft was never sighted or identified visually. It's all electronics and radar. The size is immaterial, how could they mistake it for a much smaller F-14, cause they believe their instruments.

Also, I don't believe one of the gentlemen is a real USN captain, if he is he's an idiot.

The F-14 most certainly has a surface strike capability. it was modified to carry the GBU-38 joint attack munition.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/gbu-38.htm.

And the IFF was a problem The plane was not squawking Mode 3 with a correct code. On a radar scope she appeared to be a skunk (unidentified contact, neither friendly or foe).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to def_con5 (Reply #4)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 07:42 PM

9. Correct

Without the code on the Airbus' transponder, the Vincennes had no way to identify it as either civilian or military, and had no way to determine its altitude or whether it was climbing or descending. All the the Vincennes could do was track its path and airspeed, which was directly at the ship. The airspeed may be the reason Vincennes radarmen determined the "F-14" was descending. Given the facts that Iran was at war with a country friendly with the US, the Vincennes was actively engaged in a gunfight with Iranian gunboats, the aircraft had just taken off from an airport that military and civilian aircraft operate out of, the aircraft did not respond to repeated verbal warnings over the international distress frequency, and the aircraft did not respond to an electronic signal the Vincennes sent out, the Vincennes captain had to make a life or death decision involving the lives of his crew.

Perhaps the moral of the story is don't fire on an American warship?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #9)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 08:02 AM

20. The Vincennes knew the altitude and knew if it was descending or ascending

The Vincennes is equipped with a SPY-1 radar which is a 3D radar. It can track bearing, distance and altitude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #20)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 09:39 AM

23. If the Vincennes had it at that time (It was not operational until 1986, and then not on all ships)

And, if it was in operation at that time, then why did the radar men think the aircraft was descending? Were they in on the conspiracy to murder innocent women and children?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #23)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 12:38 PM

26. The SPY was operational on the Vincennes at the time

There were other US ships in the area and they reported that the aircraft was climbing. When US ships are in a battle group, all data is shared via NTDS. I don't know if the same technology is used now but that was the case in '86. There was no conspiracy to shoot down the airliner. The Capt and crew of the Vincennes simply fucked up.

I was on the USS Mobile Bay (CG-53) at the time. There was a connection between the Mobile Bay and the Vincennes. The USS Valley Forge was scheduled to the relieve the Vincennes in the Persian Gulf. The Mobile Bay was scheduled to relieve the Valley Forge six months later. The Valley Forge bent their shaft doing pre-deployment workups. The Mobile Bay's deployment was pushed up six months so that we could relieve the Vincennes instead of the Valley Forge. We had a two or three week notice to get ready for the 6 month deployment. The day before we were scheduled to leave for deployment is the day the Vincennes shot down the airliner. We woke up the next morning thinking we were still going to deploy but a few hours before we cast off word came down that we would not be deploying at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #26)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 12:48 PM

28. How do you account for the interpretation of radar returns that the aircraft was descending?

(IF SPY was operating properly)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #28)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 12:56 PM

29. I was not privy to the Lessons Learned for the Vincennes

I was for the Stark incident. Those LLs are always interesting reading and they pull no punches when it comes to pointing out shortcomings.

Without having access to a similar document for the Vincennes, I cannot tell you exactly what happened because I do not know.

There are a number of ques that should have led to the ID of the aircraft as commercial.

IFF
Speed
Climbing
Information on NTDS from other vessels
The radar being used by the aircraft
Comms intercepts by the on board CTs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #29)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 09:32 PM

30. Without knowing the Airbus' unique squawk code

there was no way for the Vincennes to know if it was a commercial or military aircraft. Transponder codes are issued by air traffic controllers and change with each radar tracking facility the airplane flies in. It takes verbal communication between the controller and the aircraft to establish which aircraft on a radar screen is which.

Without that code number, the aircraft is just a blip on a radar screen, which is called a primary target, meaning it is the radar return being painted off the aircraft skin by the radar.

Transponders transmit electronic signals (not radar), which enables the air traffic controller to "tag" the primary return with an identification label on the screen.

The Vincennes had no such tag, so they could not know what kind of aircraft the Airbus was. The failure of the pilot to monitor the international distress frequency so that he could respond to a warship was a big mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #30)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 10:19 PM

31. You should read the article in this thread

The plane was identified as an commercial airliner e by a US frigate. How did the know and the Vincennesxdid not?

I was an EW in the navy. If you are not familiar with their function I will fill you in. They listen to the radar signals being generated by other aircraft and ships. I would be amazed if the airliner was not using its radar. I don't recall ever being in the vacinity of a commercial airliner not using its radar. The characteristics of any commercial airliner is nothing like what is used by an F14. There is 0 chance that an EW confused these signals, especially using the SLQ32 that was on board the Vincennes.

I get that you have a problem acknowledging such an ugly blight on Americas reputation. There is just too much information available from other assets in the area that point to the Vincennes being negligent. If after reading the article in this thread you are still not convinced, you never will be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #31)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 11:55 PM

32. "I don't recall ever being in the vacinity of a commercial airliner not using its radar."

Are you talking about the aircraft's transponder?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #32)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 07:10 AM

33. No. I was talking about its radar

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #33)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 07:43 AM

34. What radar? for what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #34)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:09 AM

35. Commercial airlines have radars

So do F14s.

It was my job in the Navy to listen to these radars. The radar you hear on a commercial plane is very different than what you hear on an F14.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #35)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:25 AM

36. Now we are getting someplace

What do commercial airliners use radar for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #36)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:34 AM

37. They use radar for weather

The commercial airline probably used a radar with an AN-ALQ designation. I do not remember what number though. I believe the F14 used an AWG-9.

There was a time when I had this type of information memorized and could recite it all day long. I also had the radar characteristics of these radars, along with hundreds of others, memorized. The SLQ 32, which is the ESM system on all Ticonderoga cruisers, would identify these radars automatically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #37)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:42 AM

38. Not in 1988 my friend

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #38)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:48 AM

40. What did not happen in 1988?

If you are referring to commercial airliners using radar, they absolutely did. I stood the watches, I intercepted the radars. I "hooked" the contacts and provided the data to NTDS. It was very rare to have a commercial airliner in the vicinity that was not using it's radar.

If you are referring to the AN/ALQ designation, you may be right. It was 30 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #40)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 09:41 AM

41. You are making a lot of assumptions

You are assuming an aircraft on a flight that took just a few minutes in a region of the world where it rarely rains:

A. had weather radar in 1988 before the era of the "glass cockpit."
B. Turned it on for a flight that only took a few minutes
C. Was the only aircraft in the sky within a 500 mile range.

All on-board weather radars use the same frequency. Any aircraft in the sky can transmit the frequency they use. An Airbus 300 probably would have been delivered from the factory with it, but the question is, did the Iranian company that owned the aircraft choose to bear the cost of maintaining it in a part of the world where there is very little rain? Unless you are privy to the aircraft's maintenance log books, you cannot make a blanket statement that the Vincennes must have been able to determine whether the aircraft was civilian or military.

Besides, an F-14 does not use "weather radar." They use weapons radar, which would have been turned off during a visual attack run for the very reason of identification.

What you are implying is the captain of the Vincennes intentionally committed murder. I don't buy that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #41)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 10:09 AM

42. A few responses

No assumptions.

A. Commercial airliners did have weather radar in 1988. You are talking to someone who literally has thousands of hours intercepting and identifying those radars during the time frame of this incident, both in the Persian Gulf and other bodies of water.
B. I did a cruise in the Persian gulf during that time period. Those commercial airlines always used their radar. We tracked them continuously.
C. When I intercept a radar signal, I know the bearing line to the platform generating the radar signal. In this case, the Iranian Airbus. When steaming with other US assets, as the Vincennes was, the other asset, in this case a US frigate, also has a bearing line to that aircraft based on it's own intercept of the radar signal. Both vessels input their bearing line to the radar signal into NTDS. Now both vessels have the exact location of the aircraft. Once that is established, the radar characteristics are "hooked" to the radar contact supplied from the SPY1 and as well as the SPS-49 on the Vincennes and the platform is identified. Hundreds of contacts are continuously tracked and ID'd like this so your comment regarding the number of aircraft in a 500 mile range is irrelevant. Hundreds of targets are tracked by the USN like this every minute of every day in the Persian Gulf.

All on-board weather radars do not use the same frequency. They do operate within a narrow frequency range though. If they all used the same frequency there would be interference issues that need to be avoided for safety concerns. Also, frequency is not the only radar characteristic used to identify the radar. There is scan type, PRF, pulse width, etc. With regards to needing the log book, you could have a point but it sure is a far fetched one. Also, that point assumes that the radar was the only way for the Vincennes to ID the aircraft. The article in this thread that I suggested you read, and I make that suggestion again, clearly states that the frigate that was sailing with the Vincennes ID'd the aircraft as a civilian airliner based on it's IFF signal. The Vincennes should have intercepted that same signal.

Nobody said the F-14 used a weather radar. I have no idea where you got that from. I did say it used an AWG-9, which as you said, is for weapons. Let's assume your statement is correct regarding having the AWG-9 off during a visual attack run. What data did the Vincennes use to identify the contact as an F14? The IFF of the contact stated commercial, there was, by your statement, no radar so that could not have been used to ID the contact.

I never implied that the captain of the Vincennes intentionally committed murder. In fact I was quite clear. I stated that he fucked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #42)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 10:24 AM

43. I don't have time to fully respond but

"I don't recall ever being in the vacinity of a commercial airliner not using its radar"

How would you know?

Also, civilian aircraft do not have IFF.

What you have been trying to say is the captain of the Vincennes committed murder

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #43)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 10:40 AM

44. Civilian aircraft do have IFF

I would know because the target would be on the ship's radar but I would not have a radar signal on that bearing line. I concede that the aircraft may have flown without it's radar on. My point is that it is unusual for them to do so.

From the article I referenced earlier, "Besides, Captain Rezaian's Mode III transponder, the civilian equivalent of the military's "identification friend or foe" (IFF) electronics, was broadcasting the unique code of a commercial airliner.

So while technically the transponder is not IFF, it performs the same function. In addition, on a US Navy ship, the same equipment used to scan for military IFF is used to scan for commercial airlines. Both systems are lumped into "IFF". For example, when an unknown target is detected, you would ask if there is an IFF signal. You don't ask for the IFF signal or civilian equivalent.

Again, I said no such thing. If you want put a label on my opinion call it negligent homicide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #44)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 06:33 PM

45. Another assumption

"Besides, Captain Rezaian's Mode III transponder, the civilian equivalent of the military's "identification friend or foe" (IFF) electronics, was broadcasting the unique code of a commercial airliner."

How do you know?

I've never had a tower issue me a transponder code. It would be useless since tower controllers are not the ones that "tag" aircraft on radar screens. Transponder codes are always issued by the enroute air traffic controller after the tower hands the pilot off to the en-route facility. When the tower hands the pilot off, the tower controller has to issue the pilot a frequency to call the en-route facility, then the pilot must tune it in and report to the facility, whereby the controller will give the pilot a code to squawk, workload permitting. All this takes time. Since the aircraft had just departed, there is a chance the controller had not issued the aircraft a code to squawk yet. It depends on how busy the controllers are. A heavy workload may also explain why the pilots were not paying attention to the international distress frequency. Cockpits can be quite busy in the first few minutes of a flight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #45)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 06:50 PM

46. Take it up with the CO of the USS Side

He is the one that stated that he received the reply from the transponder and stated that it was squawking a civilian airliner code. I can only guess that you still have not read the article because if you had you would not keep harping on the transponder. The fact is that the transponder was active and providing the proper code for a civilian airliner. The article also contains from more than one member of the US Navy stating that the aircraft was ascending, not descending, in direct contradiction of the Vincennes CO. That is not the only thing that he was contradicted on.

You have a choice to make. Assume that numerous US Navy personnel are lying about what happened or not. It is quite clear to me that your mind is made up and no amount of testimony or facts are going to convince you. Your heals are dug in despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Evidence that you cannot bother to take the 15 minutes to read because you already think you know everything.

I think we are at the point where discussing this is no longer a valid use of our time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #46)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 07:13 PM

47. The linked article is the detailed reports of the events by eyewitness's.

You've been very patient in trying to provide facts to a person who's mind is already made up. Kudos to you sir.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeWheelBurning (Reply #46)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:36 PM

48. I have read several versions of the story

all with variations.

The captain of the Sides was not engaged in a firefight with Iranian gunboats and did not have members of his crew telling him an F-14 was headed straight for him and descending, and would not respond to warnings.

You can call it negligent homicide if you want, but negligence by who?

If my son had been a member of the crew on the Vincennes, I would have wanted the captain to make the same decision he did - to look out for the lives of his men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to def_con5 (Reply #4)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 08:46 PM

15. This is a detailed review of what happened.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1993-08/vincennes-case-study

If he had been monitoring the distress frequencies, the American-educated Captain Rezaian, although fluent in English, might not have known that the warning transmissions were intended for him. Indeed, as the Navy's report to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) would later state, only one transmission made by the Sides just 40 seconds prior to the Vincennes missile launch, was clear enough that it could not have been mistaken as being intended for another aircraft. 1

Besides, Captain Rezaian's Mode III transponder, the civilian equivalent of the military's "identification friend or foe" (IFF) electronics, was broadcasting the unique code of a commercial airliner. 2

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uncledad (Reply #15)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 01:34 AM

17. Thanks, I'll read it

This says she was squawking mode 3 with the correct 4 digit code.

I'll look into this.

Thanks, again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uncledad (Reply #15)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 07:51 AM

19. Looks like you are correct

I found some other sources that confirmed what you wrote.

Now I'm really confused.

Live and learn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to def_con5 (Reply #19)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 08:23 AM

21. Proceedings is the best source out there on naval affairs.

There were some conflicting comments-stories put out there when the incident occurred, false claims with a dose of CYA as the brass closed ranks to protect their own.

Live and learn; the longer I live, the more I learn just how the confusion is intentional at times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uncledad (Reply #21)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 09:08 AM

22. Concur, I happen to be a USNI member.

Riddle me this, since it appears the plane's IFF was correct, it should have shown up on the scope as a commercial contact.

This whole thing started when then enlisted operator flagged the track number, and alerted the TAO. I'm completely confused on why someone would do that.

The operator identified it as an unknown contact and later designated it as an F-14.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to def_con5 (Reply #22)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 11:50 AM

24. Heat of the moment.

Buzzed up on being in contact. Scared he's gonna die. Wife just ran off with his best friend. etc...

I've seen things, I'm sure you have, that have no logical explanation when they happened.

There was a reason, but not one we might expect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 07:00 PM

5. the airliner did not respond on 121.5 Mhz emergency frequency

bad move

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to M411 (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 07:36 PM

8. True

For some unknown reason ( a clear violation of protocol) the second radio was not set to that frequency. One was set to talk to the ATC, the other one should have been set to "Guard" as the military calls it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to def_con5 (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 07:49 PM

10. Especially in light of the fact Iran was at war at the time

And they were flying over hostile warships

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 07:20 PM

6. So your take, Aquila, is that we did it on purpose?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 07:21 PM

7. Don't fly a plane on a constant barring decreasing range course towards a American Missile Cruiser

and it won't get shot down. why should we apologize?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 08:10 PM

11. The hypocrisy on this thread so far is truly astonishing but not a surprise, indeed.

Thanks for posting...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RCW2014 (Reply #11)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 08:38 PM

14. ''The hypocrisy on this thread''...do tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RCW2014 (Reply #11)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 12:39 AM

16. You mean the facts on this thread

are ruining more of our anti-America Marxist rhetoric and propaganda. After all, tomorrow is July 4th, so we must attack this country!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 08:16 PM

12. this was the outcome of that mishap...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2018, 08:21 PM

13. The 655 incident isn't nearly as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

1) A year earlier, the USS Stark had been hit by anti-ship missiles fired from an Iraqi aircraft. The captain and several senior officers were officially reprimanded, and their careers were all-but over, due to their lack of action in activating the ship's point-defense weapons or taking any action to defend the ship.

2) The USS Vincennes was already in a fight with Iranian gunboats.

3) Bandar Abbas is both a civilian and military airport.

4) 655 had not activated transponders identifying themselves as CommAir and were not responding on civilian or military emergency frequencies.

5) In total: The captain of the Vincennes, already engaged with Iranian forces, received word of an unknown aircraft taking off from a nearby airport known to station military aircraft, and after the aircraft not broadcasting transponders and failing to identify themselves as civilian began a sharp decrease in altitude in the vicinity of his ship, he ordered the aircraft shot down to prevent a repeat of the Stark incident that killed dozens and destroyed another captain's career due to inaction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 01:45 AM

18. In 1983 those Iranians blew up 241 US marines on a peacekeeping mission

But you dont want to hear about that. Just your usual "Murica Ebil'' threads

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/beirut-barracks-attack-remembered/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Banshee 3 Actual (Reply #18)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 11:57 AM

25. They'll take every opportunity they can get to bash this country

They make me sick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Banshee 3 Actual (Reply #18)

Wed Jul 4, 2018, 12:44 PM

27. 1983 Beirut

The attorney for the families of the victims uncovered some new information, including a U.S. National Security Agency intercept of a message sent from Iranian intelligence headquarters in Tehran to Hojjat ol-eslam Ali-Akbar Mohtashemi, the Iranian ambassador in Damascus. As it was paraphrased by presiding U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, "The message directed the Iranian ambassador to contact Hussein Musawi, the leader of the terrorist group Islamic Amal, and to instruct him ... 'to take a spectacular action against the United States Marines.'" Musawi's Islamic Amal was a breakaway faction of the Amal Movement and an autonomous part of embryonic Hezbollah.

A few weeks before the bombing, Iran warned that providing armaments to Iran's enemies would provoke retaliatory punishment. On September 26, 1983, "the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepted an Iranian diplomatic communications message from the Iranian intelligence agency, the Ministry of Information and Security (MOIS)," to its ambassador, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, in Damascus. The message directed the ambassador to "take spectacular action against the American Marines." The intercepted message, dated September 26, would not be passed to the Marines until October 26: three days after the bombing.

Much of what is now public knowledge of Iranian involvement, e.g., PETN purportedly supplied by Iran, the suicide bomber's name and nationality, etc., in the bombings was not revealed to the public until the 2003 trial, Peterson, et al v. Islamic Republic, et al. Testimony by Admiral James "Ace" Lyon's, U.S.N. (Ret), and FBI forensic explosive investigator Danny A. Defenbaugh, plus a deposition by a Hezbollah operative named Mahmoud (a pseudonym) were particularly revealing.

http://military.wikia.com/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Original post)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 08:45 AM

39. Yeah, we fucked that one up

Not apologizing was a dick move.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticsiranvincennesactofwarcriminalmurderterrorchildren