IRAN/RUSSIA/CHINA and the Coming World War

Iranian Jets Fire on US Aircraft Over Gulf

Nov 08, 2012
Military.com| by Michael Hoffman



Excerpts:
The Pentagon confirmed Thursday two Iranian fighter jets fired upon, but did not hit, an unarmed U.S. drone flying Nov. 1 in international airspace over the Persian Gulf.

Pentagon spokesman George Little said the U.S. Air Force Predator was performing "routine surveillance" about 16 miles off the Iranian coast when two Iranian SU-25 jets intercepted it and opened fire. He said it was the first time Iranians had fired on an unmanned U.S. aircraft over the Gulf.
......

According to the Pentagon's account, the Predator was on a routine surveillance mission at about 4:50 a.m. EST over the Gulf on Nov. 1 and was operating at a distance of about 16 miles off the Iranian coastline when two of Iran's aging, Soviet- made Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot attack planes approached.

At least one of the single-seat Sukhois fired "multiple rounds" at the Predator from its wing-mounted, twin-barrel 30-mm mini-gun, but missed its target. The slow-moving Predator moved further off the coastline but the Sukhois pursued and one of them fired and missed again, Pentagon officials said.
........

It's unclear if the Iranian pilots meant to hit the Predator and simply missed or intentionally fired a warning shot. However, a Predator is a slow moving and relatively easy target to hit making it hard to believe the pilots meant to destroy the drone, said a U.S. Air Force official.
........

Iranian Jets Fire on US Aircraft Over Gulf | Military.com

(If the pilots really did intend to hit the drone, and missed, those boys need some practice. Top speed for a predator is about 135 mph. My wife chortled that "instead of going to prayer five times a day, perhaps they should go to the firing range five times a day.")

 

I'm thinking to myself "Unarmed Predator" isn't that like walking around with an empty shotgun in the hood?

 

It's been explained to me by an ex navy air crewman that,his words,"a shot across the bow,you could shoot one of them down with a crop duster and a .45". Being ex swab myself I'm sure there was a tiny bit of exaggeration there.But they had su-25s.

 

what a wonderful game of chess we play.

 

That was a thoughtful discourse on the subject; a little brief and narrow in its scope, but ten minutes is a short time to discuss the regional implications of what is happening in Syria.

I was surprised to hear him claiming Israeli support for the rebels, at about the six minute mark in the video. It's possible but, in my mind, highly improbable. Israel certainly has been involved in its share of intrigues, and they do attempt to dabble in Middle Eastern politics when the opportunity presents itself; but assisting in unseating Assad would be a huge gamble. The only excuse for Israel involving itself in this train wreck, that I can see, is if they believe that Assad's fall is inevitable, and they are attempting to curry favor with those they assume will be in positions of power in the coming regime.

To even intimate that Israel was behind this attempt at regime change is lunacy, unless there are factors at play which have yet to come to light. This fellow mentions that the Israelis have been searching for oil and gas in the Golan, and leaves that assertion hanging as a possible motivating factor for the Israelis. I don't buy it. He also obliquely mentions water. That is a more credible motivator for the Israelis; and supplies of water may very well be the match that lights the conflagration of WWIII. I don't see that toppling Assad would necessarily benefit the Israelis in either of these situations though.

Assad was a continuation of the status quo. His family has run Syria like a private corporation since 1964. The Assad family regime was even anti-Iraq during the time that Saddam was launching missiles into Israel. If there was ever a chance for the Assad family to go for Israel's throat, it was during the chaos and confusion of those days. Hafez Assad knew that going after Israel was a losing proposition, and Bashir Assad knows it as well. Both may have made bellicose grumblings at their Jewish neighbor, but neither were silly enough to stray across the fence, at least not after 1973.

So why would Israel trade in the status quo, which is Israel building their fence several miles into their neighbors' territory and the neighbor being too cowed to contest it; for the utter unknown? The will of the Syrian people, certainly toward Israel, is a fairly unknown and untested element. It would be a serious roll of the dice.

 

Wonder if this made CNN?

 

N. Korea may be first, with all those threats.

 

Makes me think of a prequel scenario to Jericho.

 

WORLD WAR 3 Started Two years ago.

 

Seeming like more and more of a possibility.