Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Midnight on December 23, 2002, 09:55:24 AM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73735,00.html
If Iraq keeps this up.. war won't be far off.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That the UN/US/UK try to enforce this does not surprise me either. Incidents like this are bound to happen.
The no fly zone is not in any way UN mandated. It was unilaterally imposed by the US and UK. Iraq makes no breach of any UN resolution by shooting down that drone.
Unforunately, I don't expect any survivors. :(
-
Drones are drones... no people... why would you expect survivors?
Must be a canadian thing, you guys put men in unmanned drones?
:)
-SW
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Unforunately, I don't expect any survivors. :(
:)
-Sik
-
:D
-
Why is everyone treating this as a big deal? It's an important step sure, but nothing new.
Iraq shoots at american planes daily. They've had jets try to shoot down predators before. They shoot us, we bomb them back. Nothing new, been going on for some time now.
The loss of a predator drone is hardly important, thats the whole point of using drones.
God help them if they manage to hit a piloted aircraft.
-
This is certainly the mother of all shoot downs! :D
-
Congratulations to the Iraqi Air Force!
You shot down a souped up Cox Remote Controlled Plane!
No playgound is safe now! What's next? AAA fire against kites?
It was probably a HO, too!
The missle they used to knock out the drone probably cost more than the drone itself.
Unless these brave Iraqis got into a wicked turn fight with the R/C and gunned it down.
Next, they'll be having a parade for the brave pilot who took down the Zionist intruder!
-
Does this seem... "Tonkinesque" to anyone?
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
You shot down a souped up Cox Remote Controlled Plane!
The missle they used to knock out the drone probably cost more than the drone itself.
There have been times where iraqi pilots have made gun passes on predator drones...missing completly.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
The no fly zone is not in any way UN mandated. It was unilaterally imposed by the US and UK. Iraq makes no breach of any UN resolution by shooting down that drone.
Unforunately, I don't expect any survivors. :(
You forgot France.
Also, have you forgotten why it was imposed? Maybe something to do with the extermination of 5,000 Kurds?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Does this seem... "Tonkinesque" to anyone?
Good point. Answer: It might, except that the circumstances aren't the same. Its merely the latest in a decade-long series of similar Iraqi actions. The fact they finally "scored" against a drone doesn't really seem to raise the ante. We've been hitting back solidly all along against their assets used to make these attacks, after all.
If GWB is looking for reasons to escalate the conflict, this wouldn't seem to qualify IMO.
culero
-
Like everything else, there's plenty of gray to balance out the black and white.
Do politicians EVER vote or sign anything that doesn't give them a huge amount of "wiggle room"?
Provision in U.N. resolution could trigger Iraq war even before inspections begin (http://198.65.138.161/org/news/2002/021112-iraq02.htm)
...One sentence in Resolution 1441 says Iraq "shall not take or threaten hostile acts" against any personnel of any U.N. member state who are "taking action to uphold" any Security Council resolution. Some in the Bush administration say this is relevant to the flight-interdiction patrols because the flights were implemented to uphold an April 1991 U.N. resolution designed to keep Iraq from repressing its civilian population. That view is not universally accepted, however, because the patrols are not explicitly authorized by the Security Council.
...Central Command said Iraq's movement of the missiles violated U.N. resolution 688, adopted in April 1991, one month after the Persian Gulf War ended in a cease-fire. Resolution 688 demanded that Iraq end repression of civilian populations, mentioning only the Kurdish people of northern Iraq, whose attempted revolt against President Saddam Hussein after the Gulf War was brutally put down by Iraqi forces. The resolution says nothing about prohibiting movement of Iraqi surface-to-air missile batteries.
Simple solution: The Security Council meets RIGHT NOW and resolves the "no fly zone" issue. It's either approved or disapproved. Right Now.
Any bets on whether or not any member of the Security Council would have the balls to bring this to the table will full media fanfare?
No chance. All of 'em like it just the way it is. Lots of wiggle room.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Hmmm ... sure the Iraqis can no longer bomb the Kurds. They'll just have to use tanks. :rolleyes:
They used chemical weapons before. Without air support, their tanks would be reduced to scap metal in short order. Even with their ill-equipped air forces they wouldn't last a week in a serious confrontation, probably not even a day.
-
Last time we declared war on Iraq and killed about 80,000 of them because they trew away some pre-term babies from the maternity-ward incubators.
Since that whole baby-story proved to be a hoax and US population had nothing else against them in 1991, I think they are entitled to one free athrocity or a few minor transgressions.
So we should forgive them an incident with the drone that left no survivors...
miko
-
Predators are tough. Ask Arnold ;)
-
Originally posted by miko2d
and US population had nothing else against them in 1991,
miko
Well, there is that little matter of the Invasion of Kuwait... you know the invasion of a sovereign nation by another sovereign nation for the purpose of replacing their government.
That's clearly wrong and need redress.
Hey....... wait a minute!
:D
-
Originally posted by miko2d
So we should forgive them an incident with the drone that left no survivors...
miko
Actually, I believe that the pilot of the drone did survive, with minor injury to ego probably.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Also, have you forgotten why it was imposed? Maybe something to do with the extermination of 5,000 Kurds?
No moral high ground there, only hypocracy. No one gave a toejam that, our ally Turkey was exterminating Kurds.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
No moral high ground there, only hypocracy. No one gave a toejam that, our ally Turkey was exterminating Kurds.
The US isn't the world's policeman even though we often find ourselves in the role, far too much imo. If you're saying the US never takes the moral ground then you're talkin' out your ass.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
The US isn't the world's policeman even though we often find ourselves in the role, far too much imo. If you're saying the US never takes the moral ground then you're talkin' out your ass.
"No one gave a toejam that, our ally Turkey was exterminating Kurds."
Note the "No one" and the plural, "our". And I am certainly not saying the US never holds the moral high ground.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
"No one gave a toejam that, our ally Turkey was exterminating Kurds."
Note the "No one" and the plural, "our". And I am certainly not saying the US never holds the moral high ground.
Didn't think you were Thrawn, just checkin'.
It's never too late to do the right thing. Preventing genocide is never the wrong or hypocritical thing to do.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Kurd slaughtering is still an active sport in Iraq, but the media seems to have lost interest.
Can you reference your source for that?
-
Toad, resolution 1441 is the latest one right?
It might, as you say, mean that they shouldn't shoot at planes in the no fly zone. But that assumes that the no fly zone is valid.
And what about before this new resolution? US and UK were flying then too.
Not saying it's wrong - I believe it's a bloody good thing they do. Just saying there ain't really a UN resolution that directly supports it.
-
Imagine how much worse it would be for the Kurds if not for the US and the UK. There likely would be none in the region.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Can you reference your source for that?
Iron, although evidence might seem to be to the contrary. I am a huge fan on the Consitution of the US. But I do not believe that our love for our respective countries should make us blind to it's faults. In fact, because we are great patriots, we should be the first to point out it's illnesses.
Although I think that Canada is a great nation, it does not mean that I don't see where we are failing our allies in our mutual defence pact. Once again, my patriotism and love for my country and what it was, and what it can be, makes me more aware of our short comings.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Like everything else, there's plenty of gray to balance out the black and white.
Do politicians EVER vote or sign anything that doesn't give them a huge amount of "wiggle room"?
Provision in U.N. resolution could trigger Iraq war even before inspections begin (http://198.65.138.161/org/news/2002/021112-iraq02.htm)
Simple solution: The Security Council meets RIGHT NOW and resolves the "no fly zone" issue. It's either approved or disapproved. Right Now.
Any bets on whether or not any member of the Security Council would have the balls to bring this to the table will full media fanfare?
No chance. All of 'em like it just the way it is. Lots of wiggle room.
Toad, you are funny as usual. Your trigger-happy cowboys don't give a flying f#$k about any resolutions. In case such a meeting will be about to happen - I am 100% sure you'll not admit Russian and Chinese reperesentatives there, like it was in 1950.
What poor Iraqi need is a good team of SAM officers from independant countries to shoot any agressor violating their airspace.
You "fighters for peace and democracy" need another good punch in the nose to get down to reality.
Damn. Got up too early after drinking till 4 AM, spent 2 hours in a subway, then an hour trying to get a bill from some stupid telecom hardware company, then an hour in a traffic jam for my own 100 roubles, and when I come to work and look at the BBS - what do I see!?
OK, let me see if Toad will get into my little trap.
-
Last time we declared war on Iraq and killed about 80,000 of them because they trew away some pre-term babies from the maternity-ward incubators.
Since that whole baby-story proved to be a hoax and US population had nothing else against them in 1991, I think they are entitled to one free athrocity or a few minor transgressions.
So we should forgive them an incident with the drone that left no survivors...
miko
The sooner Sadaam is killed, and the sooner that a democratic goverment is set up, the sooner the Iraqi people will be happy. I'm looking at the long-term success of Iraq.
Also, we didnt declare war on Iraq because of a few babies, we went to war because Iraq invaded Kuwait. Less Americans died in the Gulf War than during peace time operations.
-
The sooner Sadaam is killed, and the sooner that a democratic goverment is set up, the sooner the Iraqi people will be happy. I'm looking at the long-term success of Iraq.
You must be a genius to prove a connection between "democracy" and happiness.
Wasn't Hussein democraticaly elected? Or your understanding of "democracy" means "set up by American armed forces"?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
The US isn't the world's policeman even though we often find ourselves in the role, far too much imo..
US puts themself in the role. And now is facing the problems it can cost to be onvolved alot crisis on the world.
-
Originally posted by fffreeze220
US puts themself in the role. And now is facing the problems it can cost to be onvolved alot crisis on the world.
Can't really say that Freeze,
If we do, the world squeakes, if we don't the world squeakes.
-
Let em squeak. Better idots squeaking about u then having a new war. And the squeaking will stop sooner then the war is over.
Bush is just resuming what his father couldnt complete.
I dont believe at all this war will be about terrorrism.
U must be a fool if some 1 velieve it.
This was is about Oil and about a personal thing between bush and hussein. Nothing more.
-
Originally posted by StSanta
Not saying it's wrong - I believe it's a bloody good thing they do. Just saying there ain't really a UN resolution that directly supports it.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. That's exactly what I'm saying as well. There doesnt seem to be a clear, unambiguous UN Security Council resolution authorizing the Northern and Southern fly zones.
OTOH, you don't see the Security Council making a big beef about this to the US/UK do you?
It's exactly as the UN politicians want it. Deniability. IMO, they don't mind the US/UK doing this at all... but if it blows up into a big mess they want to be able to pretend they had nothing to do with it and the US/UK were acting all on their own.
As I said before: Simple solution: The ENTIRE Security Council meets RIGHT NOW and resolves the "no fly zone" issue. It's either approved or disapproved. Vote on record, Right Now.
But they won't do it because they're POLITICANS.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
- I am 100% sure you'll not admit Russian and Chinese reperesentatives there, like it was in 1950.
Thanks, B. I needed a good laugh today!
If you're talking about the Korean War UN resolution to deploy forces, IIRC the Russian Ambassador to the UN was boycotting the UN and was absent from the Security Council in protest against the UN's failure to admit the People's Republic of China.
The Security Council voted with him absent and thus he could not exercise his veto power.
A lesson in the "rules of order" for the Security Council that your country never overlooked again, eh?
Of course, the fractured fairytales that you use for history must surely have another version. :D
-
who do i talk to about flying my r/c jug over iraq?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Iron, although evidence might seem to be to the contrary. I am a huge fan on the Consitution of the US. But I do not believe that our love for our respective countries should make us blind to it's faults. In fact, because we are great patriots, we should be the first to point out it's illnesses.
Although I think that Canada is a great nation, it does not mean that I don't see where we are failing our allies in our mutual defence pact. Once again, my patriotism and love for my country and what it was, and what it can be, makes me more aware of our short comings.
I respect that Thrawn. Like many I often find myself questioning what my government does. I usually remind myself that the view is often different when the weight of responsibility is on your shoulders.