"Captured" RQ-170 drone put on TV in Iran as Russia and China ask to inspect it

[just me]

I would never rule out the possibilities of technology. I will say it is possible Iranian, Russian, and Chinese technology may have possibly taken over the drone and landed it safely in Iran. I cannot help but state the possibility it was given to them or even sold to them as a political or financial ploy. Anything is possible. I have learned over the years not to trust everything I read, and have also learned to listen to my gut feelings on things.
If our government did indeed sell or otherwise trade or give this technology to Iran and their allies, the government that did it should be replaced and those that try to abscond should be imprisoned for life. The things that go on behind closed doors should be looked at closely before the world believes what they are being told just to buy Iran more time to finish their project.

Any other thoughts?

 

[Stu]

.................it is possible Iranian, Russian, and Chinese technology may have possibly taken over the drone and landed it safely in Iran..........

This is interesting and quite plausible.

If our government did indeed sell or otherwise trade or give this technology to Iran and their allies, the government that did it should be replaced ..............

This is Tea Party Logic. It implies that the current administration is fundamentally different then the last one. I would like to believe that but seriously the Dems and the GOP are more alike than different when it comes to the military.

........The things that go on behind closed doors should be looked at closely before the world believes what they are being told just to buy Iran more time to finish their project.........

Very cryptic here.

 

[muir]

The US used to fly U2 spyplanes over the Soviet Union and Cuba in the cold war. They have satellites nowadays to spy with but they do seem to be using drones more for spying and missile attacks.

Maybe the US is probing Irans air defence systems? I don't know enough about it to say....i'm just chucking some ideas out there

Just read an article (posted below) about how the US sold teargas to the Egyptian authorities to use against their people in the Egypt protests:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/07/us-firms-teargas-egypt-investigation

 

[Sriracha]

I'd like to quote a good friend: "Think of it this way: Our computer controlled 2005 Corvette drifted in to their country...a country were '71 Pintos are king." These people don't have the technology to make sense of our technology. I wouldn't be too worried about it.

The US used to fly U2 spyplanes over the Soviet Union and Cuba in the cold war. They have satellites nowadays to spy with but they do seem to be using drones more for spying and missile attacks.

Seem? bahahahaha You know little about our UAV programs. UAVs ARE the wave the of the future ... not just used in military, but in civilian practices ... such as border patrol.

You do have to realize that purchases for even RC Planes and Helicopters in the U.S. are under scrutiny now (b/c of a recent incident where a man was planning to strap a bomb to one.) So I'm not so certain a UAV would be able to fly across the ocean, nonetheless be able to carry a signal that far in order to carry out terrorist missions. I'm sure there is tight security regarding the selling of UAVs.

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU (in the U.S.)

 

[Stu]

asymetrical warfare

I'd like to quote a good friend: "Think of it this way: Our computer controlled 2005 Corvette drifted in to their country...a country were '71 Pintos are king." These people don't have the technology to make sense of our technology.

there are Ukranian's driving Yugo's who can control bot-nets with thousands of pirated PCs on them. (just ask death jam)

 

[Sriracha]

there are Ukranian's driving Yugo's who can control bot-nets with thousands of pirated PCs on them. (just ask death jam)

Hey now, no hatin' on the Ukrainians. LOL

 

[the]

I feel ok with them having a plane that was observing them. What are they gonna see? Just themselves.

 

[just me]

Actually, they may be able to see quite a bit more. This is not the UFO the hunter took pics of while the malfunctioning ballons dropped the cameras back to the earth.............taking pics of the hunter's taking pics of it. That was way cool.

 

[muir]

I'd like to quote a good friend: "Think of it this way: Our computer controlled 2005 Corvette drifted in to their country...a country were '71 Pintos are king." These people don't have the technology to make sense of our technology. I wouldn't be too worried about it.

Much of the US's military advances came as a result of German scientists who either fled to the US due to persecution (eg Einstein) or were captured by the US at the end of WWII

eg Operation Paperclip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip

So its not so much a 'corvette' as a volkswagen!

[video=youtube;iesXUFOlWC0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iesXUFOlWC0[/video]

Seem? bahahahaha You know little about our UAV programs. UAVs ARE the wave the of the future ... not just used in military, but in civilian practices ... such as border patrol.

You do have to realize that purchases for even RC Planes and Helicopters in the U.S. are under scrutiny now (b/c of a recent incident where a man was planning to strap a bomb to one.) So I'm not so certain a UAV would be able to fly across the ocean, nonetheless be able to carry a signal that far in order to carry out terrorist missions. I'm sure there is tight security regarding the selling of UAVs.

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU (in the U.S.)

It might have been flown into Iran from one of the US's many military bases in the middle east

It's a worrying evolution in warfare in the sense that if the UAV is being used offensively then the pilot is in no danger for his/her life but the victims obviously are (there's been a lot of 'collateral damage' with drone attacks)

What i mean to say is it is kind of like a computer game for the attacker but one where people are actually being killed; this might make it easier for the attacker to switch off emotionally from the task they are carrying out because they are not in fear for their own life and therefore not in a state of emotional high alert

Humans have moved a long way away from having to 'look into the whites' of their enemies eyes. Now they can kill them from thousands of miles away with the press of a button.

It just seems very detached and robot like (i guess that's the idea)

The clip on wikileaks of the apache helecopter pilots choosing targets (which were unarmed civilians) through a computer screen and then blasting them casually with a cannon in an emotionally detached way just kind of illustrates the callous inhumanity of modern warfare

Its reminds me of a scene in the HBO series 'Generation Kill' when one of the soldiers says to his sargeant 'it's an affront to my warrior spirit' and the sargeant responds 'you're not a warrior, you're a low skilled machine operator'

 

[This]

I'm just disgusted with how we all have to live with all these wars that benefit the few. I imagine most people on this earth just want to live their lives in peace. I have no interest getting involved in my, or any other governments bullshit, being pawns isn't fun.

 

[just me]

Neither is being a target.

I do not know if the the RQ-170 was armed, if they can be.

Lot of folk end up painting targets on their own heads with things they have done in the form of a simple battle that benefits nobody.

 

[just me]

Aviation Week postulates that these elements suggest the designers have avoided 'highly sensitive technologies' due to the near certainty of eventual operational loss inherent with a single engine design and a desire to avoid the risk of compromising leading edge technology.

Maybe "throw them a herring"? Still say the story is very is unlikely and difficult to believe. There are actually elements out there trying to usher in a world government. The way time flies, I won't be around long enough to see it happen. Don't know anyone with enough charisma and leadership capabilities to gain world trust. Got to where I don't believe half of what I read anyway, no matter who seems to be publishing it.

Concerning the UAVs, I think they are great. Some things have to be done.

 

[muir]

Aviation Week postulates that these elements suggest the designers have avoided 'highly sensitive technologies' due to the near certainty of eventual operational loss inherent with a single engine design and a desire to avoid the risk of compromising leading edge technology.

Maybe "throw them a herring"? Still say the story is very is unlikely and difficult to believe. There are actually elements out there trying to usher in a world government. The way time flies, I won't be around long enough to see it happen. Don't know anyone with enough charisma and leadership capabilities to gain world trust. Got to where I don't believe half of what I read anyway, no matter who seems to be publishing it.

Concerning the UAVs, I think they are great. Some things have to be done.

There have been people trying to create world government since the League of Nations (if not before!). The second world war gave credibility to the claims that the world needs a global government

The danger with government is the same danger that exists with all concentrations of power whether private or public and that is the possibility that it will become controlling and lead to exploitation and corruption

I like the idea of ending state and ending countries and humanity coming together as one people (albeit with cultural and religious/spiritual variety) but only if they are not being ruled over by a centralised system of control

The challenge as i see it is to maximise freedoms (thereby allowing diversity) whilst giving all people common ownership over the globe and its resources and allowing communities to manage themselves in cooperation with other communities; capitalism doesn't allow this....capitalism creates division, inequality and conflict.

Anarcho-communism does allow these things.

But back to your point.....yeah some people are looking to increase their powers by centralising their wealth and power...the current economic events can certainly be interpreted in that way. This might issue in a very restrictive but tranquilised world. This 'globalist' movement supports 'liberal' values as this gives a certain legitimacy to what is becoming a system of control that enters into more and more areas of our lives (move towards totalitarianism).

Some people are resisting these moves and muslim culture is seen as a block to this new liberal form of restrictive freedom! This new system would allow us a new set of tolerances but these would be rigidly and probably harshly enforced. For example we would probably have to sacrifice our privacy for more 'security': It seems i can't embed the clip i want to play below....funny that! Here's the link to it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3vbCxj2ifs&feature=related

[video=youtube;v3vbCxj2ifs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3vbCxj2ifs&feature=related[/video]

Clip below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcpWk2WKhEM&feature=related

[video=youtube;NcpWk2WKhEM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcpWk2WKhEM&feature=related[/video]

Earlier in the film (Network 1976): TV is mind control: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbug5sM1T1w&feature=related
[video=youtube;jbug5sM1T1w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbug5sM1T1w&feature=related[/video]

'Its a depression': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE&feature=related

[video=youtube;WINDtlPXmmE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE&feature=related[/video]