Page 10 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 231

Thread: Tensions with Iran

  1. #91
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    In the desert, looking for water.
    Quote Originally Posted by Borderland View Post
    They did have chemical weapons. They had nerve gas in 55 gal drums they dumped on the Kurds from helicopters. They didn't have a missile delivery system. They didn't even have a missile defense system. Almost every tomahawk missile that was launched by the US hit its target and there were hundreds.

    So a WMD was nerve gas. US troops found a lot of nerve gas in artillery shells but none of that was a threat to the US.

    That entire war was shooting fish in a barrel. Not much of a threat to anyone but Kurds and Shiite Muslims.
    IIRC, a SCUD was a (not very good) missile. Once upon a time, I got to wear MOPP gear while a couple of them missed me.

  2. #92
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    This is gold...

    Name:  71E7EB8E-90BD-47F6-92BF-EBCFCA483B96.jpeg
Views: 442
Size:  29.9 KB

  3. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by trailrunner View Post
    Maybe, but consider these issues:

    a) Placing a mine under the water line isn't that easy.
    b) Even if you could place a mine under the water line, it's doubtful that one of those mines would sink a ship that size.
    c) Placing an explosive charge next to large fuel tanks could be an effective way to multiply damage.
    d) Maybe they didn't want to sink it. An uncontrolled fire that spreads can cause a lot of damage, including complete loss of ship. Even if the fire is controlled, a flaming ship that's shown over and over in the news gives your organization credibility and sends ripples through the worldwide economy.

    This is a very good point. Just because the mines were not employed in a manner that I might consider best practices doesn't mean that it is a red flag operation.

  4. #94
    LE Forum Moderator BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by trailrunner View Post
    Maybe, but consider these issues:

    a) Placing a mine under the water line isn't that easy.
    b) Even if you could place a mine under the water line, it's doubtful that one of those mines would sink a ship that size.
    c) Placing an explosive charge next to large fuel tanks could be an effective way to multiply damage.
    d) Maybe they didn't want to sink it. An uncontrolled fire that spreads can cause a lot of damage, including complete loss of ship. Even if the fire is controlled, a flaming ship that's shown over and over in the news gives your organization credibility and sends ripples through the worldwide economy.
    I'm much more familiar with land mines than sea mines, but a cursory search shows that sea mines also have (or can have) anti-handling devices. As such, I'd add that into the equation. An anti-handling device touches off the mine if you, well, handle it. Seeing those guys just pluck the unexploded one off the side makes me think they are pretty familiar with the mine, or they are suicidal. On land, anti-mine operations when they mine can't be blown in place is a time consuming and laborious task since mistakes tend to be rather costly. Even in training and handling an AT mine that *I* rigged the anti-handling device on and buried myself it wasn't what I'd consider an easy task.
    L'otters are not afraid.
    WWOMJD?

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

  5. #95
    PF Justice Warrior Chance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    D/FW, Texas
    From Military.com:

    An Iranian small attack craft fired a surface to-air missile (SAM) at a U.S. MQ-9 Reaper drone this week, a senior defense official said on background Friday. The incident happened in the general area where explosions crippled two tankers in the Gulf of Oman Thursday, the official said.

    The official also confirmed a report from CNN that a SAM allegedly fired by the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen shot down an MQ-9 over the Red Sea earlier this week.

    The two alleged attacks against U.S. assets by Iran and an Iranian proxy group are the first against the U.S. military to be confirmed since the U.S. began building up forces in the region last month. The White House accelerated the dispatch of an aircraft carrier to the Gulf region in May, charging that Iran was planning an offensive against U.S. forces and interests in the region.

    "There was an MQ-9 in the vicinity" overhead where the tankers Front Adair and Kokuka Courageous were proceeding in the Gulf Thursday, the official said. The SAM that missed the Reaper was fired from an Iranian patrol craft, the official added.
    "Trying is the first step toward irritating those around you who know better." - @angry_prof

  6. #96
    PF Justice Warrior Chance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    D/FW, Texas
    From BBC News:

    The IRGC said its air force shot down the US drone in the early hours of Thursday after the unmanned aircraft violated Iranian airspace near Kuhmobarak in the southern province of Hormozgan.

    The drone was identified by the IRGC as a RQ-4 Global Hawk, but the US military official told Reuters news agency the drone was a US Navy MQ-4C Triton, a maritime patrol and reconnaissance aircraft based on the RQ-4B Global Hawk.
    "Trying is the first step toward irritating those around you who know better." - @angry_prof

  7. #97
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Lander, WY USA

    Now what?

    I'm cogitating an appropriate response. Assuming the drone was in international waters and that there is irrefutable proof of this, something must be done. It seems that whatever choice is made, it will be the best of some mighty poor options. My knee jerk reaction is to select an Iranian war ship that was involved in the minings and/or the shoot down, give the crew 20 minutes to abandon ship, and then send it to the bottom. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.

  8. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyoming Shooter View Post
    I'm cogitating an appropriate response. Assuming the drone was in international waters and that there is irrefutable proof of this, something must be done. It seems that whatever choice is made, it will be the best of some mighty poor options. My knee jerk reaction is to select an Iranian war ship that was involved in the minings and/or the shoot down, give the crew 20 minutes to abandon ship, and then send it to the bottom. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.
    Isn't one of the added benefits of using UA's is that there is no loss of life in a shoot down? No need for a strike back out of honor or spite? Eff em, send them the bill, sue for damages, whatever.

    It's up to us to restrain from kicking over the next domino in this stupid game.

  9. #99
    Revolver Enabler-in-Chief Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    SE CT
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyoming Shooter View Post
    I'm cogitating an appropriate response. Assuming the drone was in international waters and that there is irrefutable proof of this, something must be done. It seems that whatever choice is made, it will be the best of some mighty poor options. My knee jerk reaction is to select an Iranian war ship that was involved in the minings and/or the shoot down, give the crew 20 minutes to abandon ship, and then send it to the bottom. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.
    I'm not seeing the need to go to war because the Iranians killed a fucking robot.
    Many a many married man, wants to go back to France again, hinky, dinky, parlez-vous.

  10. #100
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyoming Shooter View Post
    I'm cogitating an appropriate response. Assuming the drone was in international waters and that there is irrefutable proof of this, something must be done. It seems that whatever choice is made, it will be the best of some mighty poor options. My knee jerk reaction is to select an Iranian war ship that was involved in the minings and/or the shoot down, give the crew 20 minutes to abandon ship, and then send it to the bottom. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.
    The response will likely be some air-to-ground weapons hitting the SAM battery that launched the missile that shot down the GH.

    ETA: May not be air-to-ground. Could be Tomahawks.
    Last edited by trailrunner; 06-20-2019 at 07:47 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •