IF they didn't shoot it down, why the refusal to turn over the black box.
Iran’s Response
- Thread starter Bethboilerfan
- Start date
I like that you edited this entire post, because the first one wasn't nearly as laden with name calling or anything else. You say I shouldn't extrapolate what I know from 20 years of service spanning across not just LCS which was my most recent, but multiple platforms (OASIS, RAMICS, RMMV, Seafox, ALMDS, various UUVs) and warfare areas (Standard Missile variants, ASROC, Kingfisher, TASM, other UUVs), and yes, multiple branches with things like the JSF, and then you proceed to extrapolate based on your single-company experience with IRAD. Brilliant. Mmmmmmk. Moving on.
No.no.no. Trump said the general was planning to blow up our embassy. Pay attention.
NY Times has published an additional video of what looks to be the missile strike.
https://nyti.ms/35Cc6Fr
If you watch all of the video's, it "appears" to me as if there may have been two missile hits. Horrible mistake...if it was a mistake.
I saw an interview of a former Navy operator with some knowledge about the types of missiles and my understanding was that they explode a small distance away from target and utilize the spreading fragments to create multiple broad damage to the aircraft effectively destroying its electronics, avionics and penetrating fuel containment. If that is so, then I would expect a second explosive event.
Anyone know more about this?
I also heard somewhere tonight that Iran had programmed their anti-aircraft missiles to automatically shoot down anything that flies. Don't know if it's true, but if so it's not a good move IMO.
Wrong again. I worked for 3 major companies managing IRAD and CRAD and multiple development platforms and systems of systems. In the one case, our company was bought by another, but the way the buyer and buyee dealt/deals with the customers was/is very different. I'm sure that you have heard of some of the platforms - some may have even been used on the ships you've commanded or sailed on.
I think he’s pretty awful overall, but have to give kudos when someone does the right thing at least once.
It's a non-binding resolution. It's has no teeth and is simply for show. You know, like Pelosi's fake impeachment.
Fake impeachment? No, Trump is really impeached. Pelosi can hold on to the articles and continue investigating as more and more damning evidence comes out, while Trump and McConnell sit there seething.
If you were being honest, you'd know this impeachment will have zero impact....on anything.
Do you really believe that anything new will be uncovered and presented that will suddenly change a lot of people's opinions on Trump?
No, it won't.
This impeachment will have no impact on his re-election, which has been the entire motivator from the beginning.
Pelosi is just holding on to the articles because she knows it's the last card to play in a shitty hand and once she lays it down, she's got nothing else.
If Trump allows the witnesses to testify and the documents to be released, we would actually see if anything new will be uncovered. If he doesn't , it won't be a real trial.
Even if there were something damning in the files and Trump had the ability to preventing it from being released, why would he? It's called self preservation.
There's nothing in there that hasn't already been thrown at the wall by dems to see if it would stick.
But, keep your chin up and keep hoping.
Rather than engage in the usual rejection of most points that are offered up as truth.....here's just one:
The idea that this Impeachment will not have "any impact on (anything) ??….consider the possibility that it will forever be remembered in history as a fake, hoax, witch-hunt Impeachment.
Sorry. Trump's everlasting reputation and legacy , in history books and elsewhere....will reflect the FACT that this impeachment had a viable predicate, with the appropriate biographical references and background.
It's never going away.
Nixon, Clinton, Trump. Understand ??
There is an interesting article from USA Today wherein it is reported
"Iraq's prime minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, told Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in a phone call Thursday to send a U.S. delegation to Iraq to negotiate the withdrawal of U.S troops...But the State Department's chief spokeswoman said the U.S. presence in Iraq is a 'force for good' and U.S. officials would not discuss a military withdrawal."
"Iraq's prime minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, told Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in a phone call Thursday to send a U.S. delegation to Iraq to negotiate the withdrawal of U.S troops...But the State Department's chief spokeswoman said the U.S. presence in Iraq is a 'force for good' and U.S. officials would not discuss a military withdrawal."
Oh my god.
You mean like Nixon?
So if there is more and he is guilty.....for the sake of argument.....you are fine with the POTUS refusing to allow those who could prove his guilt to testify? Please be specific.
Fine, put an * next to Trumps name in the history books if it makes you feel better. Also, anytime someone mentions Trump and his 2 term presidency, you can say "But, but, he was impeached" (again, if that makes you feel better).
But, the bottom line is, it won't prevent his reelection, it won't change the way he governs, it won't change the way he deals with the press or Dems.
It will have no impact. Unless, of course, it makes you feel good to say "he was impeached"
Kicking Trump out after one term will show that our country hasn't completely lost its way. I have no expectation of Republican Senators staying true to their oath and holding Trump accountable and removing him before the election.
So, if it doesn't get Trump removed from office before the election, what impact did it have?
With the circus it's becoming and Pelosi acting like a spoiled brat who won't let others play with her ball, do you think undecideds and independents are going to give that more weight than the economy, jobs, international trade, taxes, etc when it comes to who they'll vote for?
Sir: H-I-S-T-O-R-Y........will sooner or later reveal what is and isn't known about our Presidents.
THAT's one of the things that provides a free society like we have here in our country, its identity.
What you & I think of Trump will be of no importance.
The presidential historians and journalists who will have spent MILLIONS of man-hours researching
their subjects provide the narratives for what History has to say about them.
Want a preview?
DJT dishonesty polling @ over 60%; approval/disapproval @ 42/55 %......
Your "bottom line" ?? Re-election will not alter the record of "who he is"....win or lose 2020.
All that gobbly gook doesn't matter. All that matters is that he's going to be re-elected because the country is doing great (well, maybe not in the eyes of a lefty because they're hoping for a recession and war with Iran). Our economy is hot. Our job market is the best it's ever been.
I could give 2 craps about what some historian decides to write about DJT when he's finished with his second term.
Again, go ahead and put an * next to his name if you want. I'll be enjoying it while I'm spending some Trump economy money in the Bahamas in a few weeks.
All that "gobbly gook" doesn't matter ??!!! And here we thought that you were vocabulary-challenged !!
Hell, spend all your " Trump economy money" you want, bone. Trump could be the world's most prolific drug cartel figure, and you couldn't care less, as long as you're flush.
If you don't mind Trump winding up having a worse historical reputation than Nixon....no problem for me, and others. Just don't try to convince anyone that, at this point, he's likely to go down in history as anyone with a favorable legacy. That would be delusional, y'see.
Last edited:
We can go through all of the exotica, political theory, historical theory and so on, OR we can consider the real potential impact, which, imho, is the possibility of leveraging the votes of the Repub Senators in tight races against them to allow a turnover of the Senate. The more the Repub underplay the process and give any image of unfairness or lack of systemic integrity the greater their risk that Dems are mobilized and/or moderate Repubs and Independents view the situation adversely. All of you who portray this as no big deal because the result appears cooked seem pretty politically naive through my political prism.
Solely an old guy's opinion who has been around the political game a bit.
It's like a magician's trick... you're looking where your being directed not where the action actually is. I think that, in a major part, is the result of the President's actual lack of political knowledge and his narcissistic self focused involvement which is his sole focal point.
That’s how SAMs and AAMs work. It’s too hard to hit fast moving and maneuvering objects dead on, so they get close and fragment, or expanding wire (which is a pretty cool concept) or directionally fragment depending on the missile. It doesn’t take much to knock something out of the air if you hit an engine, and most missiles fly well in one direction... not so good when you hit it with something, even small.
In all likelihood, the SA-15 is infrared seeking, so it went directly after the 737 turbofan and that was that.
That was pretty much my take on it. Essentially a form of proximity fuse with a wide quick fragment dispersal type of situation?
Usually not a “fuse” but yeah. It’s usually a seeker head and when the input it’s seeking reaches some threshold it explodes. Seeker could be active homing (RADAR), infrared, passive homing, semi active homing, antiradiation, etc...
I assumed something far more sophisticated but figured fuse was the closest that I would come up with...
So you're saying that could not be a possibility? That our intel (which is much the same as under Obama an Bush 2) is lying?
The one thing that I DO have "figured out" is that , if the General Discussion Board were a boxing sanctioning body......you'd be in the Featherweight Division...……..
(Obama lost " a lot" ? A lot of what?)
First of all, Trump doesn't get the benefit if the doubt when it comes to intelligence. He's trashed the community for years. To now turn around and claim we should unconditionally believe what HE says they told him is laughable. Bush and Obama trusted their Intel, Trump questions it when it suits him. You surely can't deny that.
Second, why don't you educate yourself on the facts before you reply.
No one in this admin brought up the idea that the American embassy was a target in any of the multiple and varied explanations given for the assassination.........at least until Trump did. No members of Congress confirmed the embassy was a target from the briefings they received......and they could have if it were true as Trump had already made it public.
Then Trump went even further, as he tends to do, saying it was multiple embassies.
Now we have his officials falling all over themselves to back up his claims, contradicting their previous statements.
No matter what your or my position is on the killing, the American people deserve the truth. This isn't about classified info, this is about a president who........when his actions are questioned or he is criticized for them.....pivots to lies or BS legal justifications or flat out refuses to cooperate.
