Iranian drone that entered Israeli airspace seems to be American knock-off

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2018 4:14 PM GMT
    The Iranian drone shot down by the Israeli Air Force early Saturday morning appears to have been a relatively new stealth model whose design was stolen from an American unmanned aerial vehicle that was captured by Iran in 2011, according to aviation analysts.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/iranian-uav-that-entered-israeli-airspace-seems-to-be-american-stealth-knock-off
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 12, 2018 6:01 AM GMT
    Stealing technology is one thing.
    Properly implementing it is another.

    This "stealth" drone was tracked from the second it was launched from the Iranian base near Palmyra - 350 KM away.
    Not only was the drone destroyed, so was its command and control center at that base, as per the OP's source:

    || The army responded with a strike on the drone’s launch site, including a control facility manned by Iranian operators.

    CNN reported:

    || In response to the drone infiltration, the IDF attacked the Iranian T-4 center with eight fighter jets, which came under significant Syrian anti-aircraft fire, Conricus said. He added that there was no Iranian or Russian anti-aircraft fire.

    That's 8 Israeli planes going deep into Syria to attack an Iranian back base.

    After returning to Israel, after some 700 KM, one may have been hit by anti-aircraft fire leading the pilots to eject.

    It would be the first Israeli fighter jet to be hit by enemy fire in over 35 years:

    || The Israeli Air Force said it was investigating what caused the pilots to eject and if the aircraft was hit by Syrian anti-aircraft missiles. If the plane was in fact shot down by enemy fire, it would mark the first such instance for Israel since the 1982 Lebanon War.

    That battle, one of the largest dog-fights since WW II if not ever, saw each side fielding about 100 fighter jets.
    Syria also had the benefit of 19 SAM batteries (17 of which were promptly destroyed).
    Syria lost at least 64 fighter jets. Out of 100!
    It would lose another 23 over the few weeks that followed.

    This article, describing the "Bekaa Valley Turkey Shoot", says Israel lost 2 planes total.
    I believe one was shot down and one lost to technical malfunction.

    This dogfight between 200 Israeli and Syrian jets was one of the biggest of all time
    http://www.businessinsider.com/this-dogfight-between-more-than-200-israeli-and-syrian-jets-was-one-of-the-biggest-of-all-time-2015-11


    In response, Israel attacked attacked anti-aircraft systems in Syria:

    || Israel targeted at least 12 sites “including three aerial defense batteries and four Iranian targets that are part of Iran’s military establishment in Syria,”

    || The Israeli air force then launched its attack on 12 further targets inside Syria... all of which were hit.

    There was no further Syrian action.
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 12, 2018 9:28 AM GMT
    Stealing technology is one thing.
    Properly implementing it is another.
    This "stealth" drone was tracked from the second it was launched from the Iranian base near Palmyra - 350 KM away.
    Not only was the drone destroyed, so was its command and control center at that base, as per the OP's source:


    AyaTrolLiar> it’s hardly an act of brilliance to shoot down a UAV.
    How do you think the Iranians harvested the design of this model in the first place?

    ROTFL.


    AyaTrolLiar> "apparent conclusion"

    ROTFL.


    AyaTrolLiar> "Russian President Vladimir Putin blew the whistle to stop the confrontation between Israel and Iran in Syria and both sides accepted his decision."

    ROTFL.

    Let's see. Israel shot down an Iranian UAV that infiltrated into its airspace from Syria.
    Destroying also its command and control center 350 KM into Syria.

    Because the Syrians were foolish enough to shoot back (and for the first time in 35 years caused damage), Israel struck 12 more sites (Syrian and Iranian) in Syria.

    Well after this was over, when the Syrians (and their Hizbullah goons) were dug into their bunkers too scared to even peek out, Putin imposed a "cease fire" on "both parties". Uh huh. Whatever the Syrians/Iranians need to save face.

    What's more likely is that the Russians were aware of Israeli operations and stayed clear.
    Again, the first Israeli mission saw 8 planes fly (round trip) some 700 KM in Syria.
    Encountering no Russian opposition.
    Did Putin not know they were there?

    The second Israeli operation struck 12 more targets in Syria.
    Again with no Russian opposition.

    And only when Israel had finished its operation there was a phone call asking it to please stop because the Syrians cried "uncle"?!
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 12, 2018 3:22 PM GMT
    Oh, the insanity, the derangement. Above he was happy to gloat about the Iranian drone, but now we don't even know if it actually existed?

    Above he was beaming that Putin made Israel stop its attack, now we don't even know the 12 targets existed?

    Then we get the usual lies about 2006 (Israel didn't "start a war" because 2 soldiers were abducted in a cross-border raid but because upon trying to rescue them Hizbullah fired hundreds of rockets at Israeli population centers, forcing Israel to go after the rocket launchers). Said war saw Hizbullah lose 1/4 of its fighters, have another 1/4 injured and apologize to Lebanon for the resultant damage. But because Hizbullah survived the war, flunky fools like to say it "won".

    Let's not forget that those with a history of lying are Hizbullah and the AyaTrolLiar.
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1331632?forumpage=9#635402_4341479_name

    AyaTrolLiar saidYeah, we have Israel's word (and no evidence) for all of that. Anyone who believes it, given Israel's track record of lying, is a fool.

    The Iranians seem almost bemused by the suggestion that the drone was theirs, and who knows if the "targets" Israel struck in Syria even exist? They wouldn't be the first fictional installations or weapons caches Israel claims to have destroyed.

    The fact is Tel Aviv's rhetoric was warlike before Putin's intervention, quiescent afterward.
    They know who the boss man is, which is why, apart from occasionally striking at Hezbollah munitions transfers (tinkering around the edges of the conflict) for the most part they leave well alone.

    Israel would do well to remember that the last time its forces exchanged fire with Hezbollah, it ended with two dead Israeli soldiers and two destroyed IDF humvees in Shaba'a Farms. What followed was "de-escalation". In 2006, the mere capture of two soldiers (for the purposes of a prisoner exchange) was justified as a cause for war!
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 13, 2018 5:48 AM GMT
    Let's start with HRW (his purported source for Hizbullah casualtie):

    || During its armed conflict with Israel from July 12 until August 14, 2006, Hezbollah claimed at various times that its rockets were aimed primarily at military targets in Israel, or that its attacks on civilians were justifiable as a response to Israel's indiscriminate fire into southern Lebanon and as a tool to draw Israel into a ground war. In fact, the former claim is refuted by the large number of rockets that hit civilian objects far removed from any military targets, whereas the latter arguments are inadmissible under international humanitarian law.

    1. It's amazing that the AyaTrolLiar takes such pride in these rockets, which elsewhere he's denigrated as firecrackers.
    Those 4,000 rockets managed to murder about 50 Israeli civilians, most of them Arab-Israeli civilians.

    || Rockets struck hospitals in Nahariya, Safed, and Mazra, an elementary school in Kiryat Yam, and a post office in Haifa. Such attacks on civilians and civilian structures were often the foreseeable consequence of Hezbollah's attacks, and, as its statements indicate, were at times intended.

    || Hezbollah's attacks in violation of the laws of war, when combined with such statements indicating criminal intent, is strong evidence that some Hezbollah members and commanders were responsible for war crimes.

    || After initially claiming otherwise, Hezbollah quickly acknowledged that it was targeting Israeli towns and cities, but claimed it had no other means to compel Israel to cease its attacks on Lebanese civilians. The Geneva Conventions state explicitly that violations perpetrated by one party, no matter how grave, do not release the other party from its obligations to abide by that law.[5] And while belligerent reprisals are permitted in certain narrowly defined circumstances during armed conflicts between states, they are never permitted against civilians.[6] Parties to a non-international armed conflict have no right to resort to belligerent reprisals of any kind.[7]

    || Hezbollah also advanced another justification for firing rockets into Israel: to compel Israel to mount a ground offensive in Lebanon, thereby giving Hezbollah certain fighting advantages it lacked when facing a war from the air. Whatever the merits such a claim might have had if Hezbollah had aimed only at military targets using precise weapons (e.g., sniper fire across the border targeting soldiers), it cannot be used to justify indiscriminate or direct attacks on civilians.

  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 13, 2018 6:05 AM GMT
    It's actually humorous reading through the flunky idiocy and lies that the AyaTrolLiar considers brilliant.
    Exposing the depravity of the "all around shitty excuse for a human being" over and over again.

    AyaTrolLiar> violated Lebanese territory and airspace, kidnapping civilians and transferring them across state lines

    2. You know, the same way the USA violated Pakistani airspace, kidnapping "civilians" such as Usama bin Ladin....


    AyaTrolLiar> Lebanon and Israel are in a state of war, not peace

    3. Israel and Lebanon signed an Armistice agreement in 1949. Unlike those signed with Trans-Jordan and Egypt, it specified a permanent political boundary. (Syria and Iraq refused to sign an Armistice.)

    4. Recall that the Israel-Lebanon border was known as the "Good Fence" before the PLO took over southern Lebanon and began attacking Israel from there (after getting kicked out of Jordan). Israel was fully within its rights under international law, in fact had an obligation, to act against those attacking its civilians in violation of international law.

    5. And no, Israel was NOT seeking to use these terrorists as "bargaining chips" or hostages, unlike the stated goal of Hizbullah (and Hamas), which is another violation of international law. No more than the USA wants to "bargain" those terrorists it apprehended on the battlefield whom are held at Guantanamo Bay.


    AyaTrolLiar> the Israeli occupation of Lebanon

    6. Israel maintained a 6-mile wide security zone in Lebanon for 17 years to keep terrorist rockets out of range of its urban population centers.

    7. He'll cry us a river about that, without even mentioning the Syrian occupation of all the rest of Lebanon, for 30 years.

    8. He also ignores, again, that Israel fully withdrew from Lebanon in May, 2000 - as certified by the UN.
    That's more than 6 years prior to Hizbullah's attack.


    AyaTrolLiar> The Hezbollah action... afforded... Gaza a crucial reprieve

    9. This was just a few months after Israel withdrew its troops and all Jews from Gaza.
    But what is he saying, that Hizbullah wanted to put Lebanese civilians in the cross-fire, as Hamas did in Gaza?
    Hizbullah would go on to illegally launch its missiles from the midst of urban population centers, illegally using its own civilians as human shields.

    10. Can anyone name anything that Hizbullah has done for Gazans before or since?
    Yeah, didn't think so.

    11. Hey, maybe they can do something for the 4th generation descendants of refugees living in Lebanon?
    Like grant them the rights to education, work, relocation and citizenship guaranteed to all other refugees?!


    AyaTrolLiar> Then Leader of the Opposition

    12. As if the best source to quote is the leader of the opposition about a war conducted by his political rivals?

    But this takes the cake:

    AyaTrolLiar> 250 of whom, according to a study by Human Rights Watch, were killed. Even this figure is likely wide of the mark

    13. It was just a few weeks ago that he was lying about Hizbullah casualties in Syria.
    Seeking to minimize them by hundreds (30%!) less than his own source was stating.

    14. The 250 casualty figure was Hizbullah's own.

    15. As I've previously noted, HRW doesn't provide casualty figures. It repeats numbers provided to it.
    How silly to seek to mask this and then argue (again) that the bare minimum figure is potentially too high.

    16. The Lebanese government and UN estimate 500 Hizbullah terrorists killed.
    17. The IDF puts it over 700, with 532 bodies of dead Hizbullah terrorists identified.
    18. The Kuwait Times reported that Hizbullah had buried more than 700 of its terrorists, and wasn't yet done.

    Neither is the AyaTrolLiar done lying (his fingers are still typing, right?):

    AyaTrolLiar> the vast majority of those defending southern Lebanese villages... were not Hizballah fighters at all

    19. Then who needs Hizbullah in the first place?

    20. Oh, wait, Israel was only attacking Hizbullah sites.
    Which may explain why those other militias (e.g. Amal) barely took any casualties (20).

    21. Notice how this lie is meant to buttress the one above.
    As if Hizbullah's reporting of its own casualties includes other casualties?!
    As if we have to subtract from the bare-minimum figure of "250" those other casualties... which are tabulated separately.


    Oh, sorry, this takes the cake:

    AyaTrolLiar> Hizballah fighters at all, while its most skilled fighters never saw action - lying in wait along the Litani River for an IDF assault that never came.

    22. Paralleling his lie that Hizbullah was sending barely trained 16-year olds to the front in Syria while keeping its elite forces in reserve in Lebanon. icon_lol.gif

    23. What is is with Hizbullah crack troops that they always manage to avoid the battlefield?

    24. Consider that Israel had no objectives north of the Litani river.
    Its goal was to push the Hizbullah terrorists away from the Israeli border, north of the river.

    25. What the AyaTrolLiar is really saying is that the majority of Hizbullah's forces FLED before the Israeli advance.

    26. Consider further that according to sources only a few hundred Hizbullah troops remained in southern Lebanon.
    And "250" (or in reality 2-3x that figure) were nonetheless killed.
    So at best around 100% of Hizbullah fighters who didn't flee were killed.
    Or maybe even 300%. icon_rolleyes.gif

    AyaTrolLiar 1> Reality: Hizballah had 6,000 regular and irregular fighters
    AyaTrolLiar 2> Of the 2,000 regular Hezbollah fighters that saw battle

    27. Recall that I said 1/4 of its 2,000 man force were killed - with which he sought to take issue.
    That would be 500. Reality is probably over 1/3rd.


    AyaTrolLiar> none of the first or second levels of the military leadership were killed

    28. ROTFL. Now, going on 12 years later, most of the top leadership is still hiding in a bunker.


    AyaTrolLiar> Nasrallah thanked God that the attack came when the resistance movement was prepared, as he was convinced Israel would have otherwise invaded later in the year at a time of its choosing. Subsequently released Israeli planning documents show his instinct was correct.

    29. ROTFL. It's called a military contingency.
    Israel had no active plans (or desire) to attack Lebanon.

    30. Contemplate that if not for Hizbullah/Syria/Iran, Israel and Lebanon would have likely signed a peace treaty by now.


    AyaTrolLiar> "failed to overtake Hezbollah strongholds, even those close to the border”

    31. But he just told us that the bulk of Hizbullah's forces were north of the Litani.
    Those bases close to the border were vacated and manned by Lebanese Army soldiers as a result of the war.


    AyaTrolLiar> "the kidnapped Israeli soldiers were neither rescued nor released"

    32. Irrelevant to the outcome of the war, which likely lasted 33 days after the hostages were murdered.
    Yet another grave violation of international law.


    AyaTrolLiar> the taking of soldiers as POWs

    33. Highlighting his ignorance of international law, kidnapping random soldiers as hostages is just as illegal as kidnapping random civilians as hostages.

    34. What nonsense next, supporting ISIS claims it's just taking "POWs"?
    (The organizations parallel each other as illegal combatants under the Third Geneva Convention.

    35. Note further that Hizbullah doesn't provide its hostages POW status.
    In this case, as in others, it murdered them.
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 13, 2018 6:06 AM GMT
    AyaTrolLiar> Israel reacted to the Hizballah tit-for-tat

    36. How is an unprovoked and illegal Hizbullah attack a "tit-for-tat"?
    Not just taking hostages, but firing nearly 100 rockets at civilian targets.
    (See prior post how saccording to HRW such "tit-for-tat" attacks on civilians are blatantly illegal.)


    AyaTrolLiar> by bombing Lebanese civilian infrastructure

    37. False. First Israel attempted to rescue the hostages and prevent the Hizbullah from moving them.
    This "tit-for-tat" was met by Hizbullah launching hundreds of rockets at Israeli civilian centers.
    Leading Israel to pursue the rocket launchers - tragically deployed in civilian areas.


    38. The joke going around in 2006 was that if this were a Hizbullah victory (which not even the AyaTrolLiar is insane enough to argue), then one must wonder how many more such "victories" they could survive.

    39. The joke was not lost on Hizbullah, which for the past 12 years has stayed squirreled away in safety and done nothing to attack or provoke Israel.

    40. As I noted in the Lebanon thread, even these latest events surrounding the Iranian drone and Israeli strikes on Syrian and Iranian positions deep in Syria weren't sufficient for Hizbullah to peak out of its hole.
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 5810

    Feb 15, 2018 8:36 AM GMT
    Did anyone even read that?

    Didn't think so.