President Trump announces military strikes on Iran: Operation Epic Fury

333,997 Views | 5359 Replies | Last: 1 min ago by boognish_bear
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.


I read somewhere else today that said it was a drone
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



So, now we are down to just stealing.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.

I thought assumed Capt. QuickStop had another tantrum and the pilots would rather crash than listen to his girlyboy fantasies while slinging Slurpees at the CEFCO.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



Stepping away from discussing Trump, how does a move like this help Iran? Seems like repeating a mistake.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another day another $100 million stolen from the American tax payer by a jew...

Once a shadowy dealmaker, former Zelenskyy associate is accused in Ukrainian corruption scandal



After he stole the money he fled to Israel like they always do...

Journalists found Mindich in Israel: what does this mean for the case
J.R.
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.

I thought assumed Capt. QuickStop had another tantrum and the pilots would rather crash than listen to his girlyboy fantasies while slinging Slurpees at the CEFCO.

perhaps Landman would be a better reflection on what I do. Same sandbox. Glad to see you are queer curious. Go ahead, let that Freak Flag Fly. The community loves them some Twinks! You got your quals handy? Let's start slow. Do you have a job?
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630 said:

boognish_bear said:

https://x.c...019?s=46

So, now we are down to just stealing.

War Man - why don't you lead the BF BDA.

- el UF

D!

WAR!!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }



pro ecclesia, pro javelina
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.


I read somewhere else today that said it was a drone


Short of a random midair collision, the odds of which are infinitesmal, a Shaheed drone cannot shoot down an Apache. It is a ground attack drone and the warhead alone weighs around 110 pounds. Compare this to something like a Stinger where the entire missile weighs around 20 pounds. In addition to that, the drone follows a pre programmed course to its target, and cannot be manuvered to engage in air to air combat. Finally, if such a drone did happen to collide with an Apache, the end result wouldn't be two uninjured pilots.
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

boognish_bear said:



Stepping away from discussing Trump, how does a move like this help Iran? Seems like repeating a mistake.


They are waging asymmetric warfare designed to destroy our economy through inflation.

Iran knows:

(1) It's lived longer under sanctions than our economy can tolerate a depression, particularly given our flawed fiscal and monetary policy post GFC. Its not that we are not capable of sacrifice. It's that no one is capable of pointless sacrifice, and the cat is out of the bag that this is a war that doesn't benefit anything but Israel's expansionist ideology. At the end of the Vietnam war, only 29% of the Americans supported it. Prior to the start of this war, polling indicated that only 21% of Americans supported a war with Iran. Think about that, this war started with public opinion about it worse than where it was when Vietnam ended. Stupid Fox News propaganda showing that 100% of MAGA supports it or Trump is going to be irrelevant in November.

(2) It cannot win an air war against us, and we cannot reopen Hormuz through the air.

(3) We cannot win a ground war against it, which is what would be required to reopen Hormuz by military force.

If the status quo continues for another 6 months, they win.
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.


I read somewhere else today that said it was a drone


Short of a random midair collision, the odds of which are infinitesmal, a Shaheed drone cannot shoot down an Apache. It is a ground attack drone and the warhead alone weighs around 110 pounds. Compare this to something like a Stinger where the entire missile weighs around 20 pounds. In addition to that, the drone follows a pre programmed course to its target, and cannot be manuvered to engage in air to air combat. Finally, if such a drone did happen to collide with an Apache, the end result wouldn't be two uninjured pilots.


It had to be a MANPAD or SAM. Hell, in the environment i wouldn't be surprised at mechanical failure. Filters on Apaches in middle east were notorious for clogging, at least way back when.
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630 said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.


I read somewhere else today that said it was a drone


Short of a random midair collision, the odds of which are infinitesmal, a Shaheed drone cannot shoot down an Apache. It is a ground attack drone and the warhead alone weighs around 110 pounds. Compare this to something like a Stinger where the entire missile weighs around 20 pounds. In addition to that, the drone follows a pre programmed course to its target, and cannot be manuvered to engage in air to air combat. Finally, if such a drone did happen to collide with an Apache, the end result wouldn't be two uninjured pilots.


It had to be a MANPAD or SAM. Hell, in the environment i wouldn't be surprised at mechanical failure. Filters on Apaches in middle east were notorious for clogging, at least way back when.


I was thinking mechanical failure as well, with Netanyahu/Trump/Hegseth using it as a fig leaf to continue attacking. I'm guessing that the drone story was put out there because the location of the crash was far enough from shore for small arms fire or a MANPAD to be unbelievable.
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:




Iran has said that this call never happened.

Honestly, at this point, Trump is just running his mouth.
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630 said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.


I read somewhere else today that said it was a drone


Short of a random midair collision, the odds of which are infinitesmal, a Shaheed drone cannot shoot down an Apache. It is a ground attack drone and the warhead alone weighs around 110 pounds. Compare this to something like a Stinger where the entire missile weighs around 20 pounds. In addition to that, the drone follows a pre programmed course to its target, and cannot be manuvered to engage in air to air combat. Finally, if such a drone did happen to collide with an Apache, the end result wouldn't be two uninjured pilots.


It had to be a MANPAD or SAM. Hell, in the environment i wouldn't be surprised at mechanical failure. Filters on Apaches in middle east were notorious for clogging, at least way back when.

sounds like some inside intel.........

- UF

>>
"U.S. Central Command forces began launching additional self-defense strikes today at 5:15 p.m. ET against multiple targets in Iran at the Commander in Chief's direction," CENTCOM announced in a statement. "The strikes are in response to Iran's unwarranted and continued aggression."
<<

WAR!!
pro ecclesia, pro javelina
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FWIW

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/06/cheap-iranian-drone-downed-25-million-us-army-helicopter-maybe-by-chance/

A US Army helicopter gunship was apparently struck by an Iranian Shahed drone before going down near the Strait of Hormuzbut it's unclear whether the one-way attack drone was deliberately aimed or achieved more of a lucky accidental strike.

Axios correspondent Barak Ravid first reported an unnamed US government official's comments that an Iranian drone had hit the US Army AH-64 Apache helicopter before the latter went down on June 8. The New York Times later confirmed that reporting through more anonymous US officials, including one official who said US military investigators were still evaluating whether the Iranian drone strike on the helicopter was intentional or accidental.

Iran has fired thousands of such Shahed drones against a wide range of military and civilian targets in the Gulf region since February 28, 2026, when the United States and Israel began the war by jointly attacking Iran with a barrage of bombs and missiles. But Shahed drones have mainly struck stationary targets such as Amazon data centers and energy facilities, sometimes hitting slow-moving commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

The basic models of Iranian Shahed drones rely on GPS satellite guidance and preprogrammed coordinates to strike stationary targets from long range and are not usually designed to track and strike moving targets, said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank based in Washington, DC, in an interview with The New York Times. But he suggested that Iran may have received newer Russian-modified Shahed drones that can be remotely operated to strike targets in motion.

Whatever the case, the result is that an Iranian drone that usually costs about $35,000 managed to take down a US Army helicopter with a price tag of $25 million. The only silver lining for the US military was its successful rescue of both helicopter crew members from the water due to the unprecedented use of a drone boat.

The growing tally of US military aircraft losses

This represents the first US Army Apache helicopter to go down during the conflictand apparently the first such helicopter to be taken out by a drone. The United Arab Emirates and Israel had been using their own US-supplied Apache helicopters to hunt and shoot down Iranian Shahed drones.

But Iran had previously succeeded in shooting down an F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jet and an A-10 Thunderbolt ground-attack aircraft on April 5 and April 6, respectively, using ground-launched missiles. All crew members were rescued, though the US military had to mount a risky combat search-and-rescue operation to retrieve the F-15 fighter jet's weapon systems officer from the Zagros Mountains in Iran.

Iran has also shot down dozens of US MQ-9 Reaper drones used for surveillance that can each cost more than $30 million. Other US military aircraft have sustained damage during combat operations over Iran or while sitting on the ground at air bases targeted by Iranian missile and drone attacks, according to a tally compiled by the Congressional Research Service on May 13. Furthermore, six aircrew died after their KC-135 Stratotanker aerial refueling aircraft crashed on March 12 following a collision with another tanker aircraft.

The US military was initially tight-lipped about how the Army Apache helicopter went down. But, in a social media post on June 9, President Donald Trump became the first to publicly blame Iran for shooting down the Apache helicopter, while also warning that "the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack."

US Central Command, the US military combat command responsible for Middle East operations, followed up by launching what its press release described as "self-defense strikes against Iran, June 9, at the Commander in Chief's direction in response to yesterday's downing of a US Army Apache helicopter."

The latest flashpoint

Trump was initially inclined to shrug off the Apache helicopter's downing after the pilots were rescued, according to The Wall Street Journal. But the president apparently changed his mind during a White House briefing when both Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine "recommended military action" and shared more details about the Iranian Shahed drone striking the US helicopter.

The strikes from US fighter jets targeted Iranian air defense, ground control stations, and surveillance radar sites near the Strait of Hormuz, according to the US Central Command press release. But Iran's state broadcaster claimed the US military strikes also damaged water tanks and cut off the water supply for at least 20,000 people in Hormozgan province.

Iran also retaliated by launching yet another round of Iranian missile and drone attacks against Gulf countries such as Bahrain and Kuwait, along with Jordan, according to The New York Times. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, an Iranian paramilitary force, said it had targeted US bases in the region, including the US Fifth Fleet base in Bahrain, while claiming to shoot down yet another US MQ-9 Reaper drone.

The latest tit-for-tat strikes threaten to completely shatter any lingering illusion of a ceasefire between the United States and Iran that supposedly began on April 8. The ceasefire period has been punctuated by intermittent fighting and dueling blockades in and around the Strait of Hormuz, the vital shipping lane choked off by the conflict.
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:

FWIW

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/06/cheap-iranian-drone-downed-25-million-us-army-helicopter-maybe-by-chance/

A US Army helicopter gunship was apparently struck by an Iranian Shahed drone before going down near the Strait of Hormuzbut it's unclear whether the one-way attack drone was deliberately aimed or achieved more of a lucky accidental strike.

Axios correspondent Barak Ravid first reported an unnamed US government official's comments that an Iranian drone had hit the US Army AH-64 Apache helicopter before the latter went down on June 8. The New York Times later confirmed that reporting through more anonymous US officials, including one official who said US military investigators were still evaluating whether the Iranian drone strike on the helicopter was intentional or accidental.

Iran has fired thousands of such Shahed drones against a wide range of military and civilian targets in the Gulf region since February 28, 2026, when the United States and Israel began the war by jointly attacking Iran with a barrage of bombs and missiles. But Shahed drones have mainly struck stationary targets such as Amazon data centers and energy facilities, sometimes hitting slow-moving commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

The basic models of Iranian Shahed drones rely on GPS satellite guidance and preprogrammed coordinates to strike stationary targets from long range and are not usually designed to track and strike moving targets, said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank based in Washington, DC, in an interview with The New York Times. But he suggested that Iran may have received newer Russian-modified Shahed drones that can be remotely operated to strike targets in motion.

Whatever the case, the result is that an Iranian drone that usually costs about $35,000 managed to take down a US Army helicopter with a price tag of $25 million. The only silver lining for the US military was its successful rescue of both helicopter crew members from the water due to the unprecedented use of a drone boat.

The growing tally of US military aircraft losses

This represents the first US Army Apache helicopter to go down during the conflictand apparently the first such helicopter to be taken out by a drone. The United Arab Emirates and Israel had been using their own US-supplied Apache helicopters to hunt and shoot down Iranian Shahed drones.

But Iran had previously succeeded in shooting down an F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jet and an A-10 Thunderbolt ground-attack aircraft on April 5 and April 6, respectively, using ground-launched missiles. All crew members were rescued, though the US military had to mount a risky combat search-and-rescue operation to retrieve the F-15 fighter jet's weapon systems officer from the Zagros Mountains in Iran.

Iran has also shot down dozens of US MQ-9 Reaper drones used for surveillance that can each cost more than $30 million. Other US military aircraft have sustained damage during combat operations over Iran or while sitting on the ground at air bases targeted by Iranian missile and drone attacks, according to a tally compiled by the Congressional Research Service on May 13. Furthermore, six aircrew died after their KC-135 Stratotanker aerial refueling aircraft crashed on March 12 following a collision with another tanker aircraft.

The US military was initially tight-lipped about how the Army Apache helicopter went down. But, in a social media post on June 9, President Donald Trump became the first to publicly blame Iran for shooting down the Apache helicopter, while also warning that "the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack."

US Central Command, the US military combat command responsible for Middle East operations, followed up by launching what its press release described as "self-defense strikes against Iran, June 9, at the Commander in Chief's direction in response to yesterday's downing of a US Army Apache helicopter."

The latest flashpoint

Trump was initially inclined to shrug off the Apache helicopter's downing after the pilots were rescued, according to The Wall Street Journal. But the president apparently changed his mind during a White House briefing when both Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine "recommended military action" and shared more details about the Iranian Shahed drone striking the US helicopter.

The strikes from US fighter jets targeted Iranian air defense, ground control stations, and surveillance radar sites near the Strait of Hormuz, according to the US Central Command press release. But Iran's state broadcaster claimed the US military strikes also damaged water tanks and cut off the water supply for at least 20,000 people in Hormozgan province.

Iran also retaliated by launching yet another round of Iranian missile and drone attacks against Gulf countries such as Bahrain and Kuwait, along with Jordan, according to The New York Times. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, an Iranian paramilitary force, said it had targeted US bases in the region, including the US Fifth Fleet base in Bahrain, while claiming to shoot down yet another US MQ-9 Reaper drone.

The latest tit-for-tat strikes threaten to completely shatter any lingering illusion of a ceasefire between the United States and Iran that supposedly began on April 8. The ceasefire period has been punctuated by intermittent fighting and dueling blockades in and around the Strait of Hormuz, the vital shipping lane choked off by the conflict.


pro ecclesia, pro javelina
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Iran has said that this call never happened.

Honestly, at this point, Trump is just running his mouth.

Incredible that Republicans just dont care that Trump lies to the nation, about war with Iran, regularly. I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife.

Tribalism ruining the country.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso: " I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife."

If you are referring to Clinton, most of the anger was that the sitting President was molesting his intern, and lied under oath about it to get out of a legal mess.

Also, JFK and FDR cheated a lot while in office, but no one made any noise about it.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Porteroso: " I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife."

If you are referring to Clinton, most of the anger was that the sitting President was molesting his intern, and lied under oath about it to get out of a legal mess.

Also, JFK and FDR cheated a lot while in office, but no one made any noise about it.

Thr big deal was that he told the entire country a lie, when pressed, then it was proven to be a lie. Americans usually don't like being lied to.

Say it could be proven that Trump is making all this up. That he spoke with Iran. That they agreed on x y z. Would you care, at all?
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

Oldbear83 said:

Porteroso: " I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife."

If you are referring to Clinton, most of the anger was that the sitting President was molesting his intern, and lied under oath about it to get out of a legal mess.

Also, JFK and FDR cheated a lot while in office, but no one made any noise about it.

Thr big deal was that he told the entire country a lie, when pressed, then it was proven to be a lie. Americans usually don't like being lied to.

Say it could be proven that Trump is making all this up. That he spoke with Iran. That they agreed on x y z. Would you care, at all?

All you have so far is spite and a long history of it towards the sitting President.

As for lying, every President does it, even Reagan (remember Iran-Contra?). So I absolutely reject the idea that Americans are outraged when a President lies.

The thing about Trump, of course, is that he polarizes opinion. It's why, realistically, he has a lower approval ceiling than most Presidents but also a higher floor.

Also, with regard to negotiations with Iran, it's very possible he could be telling the truth, given how negotiations often go all kinds of places. The Soviets in the Arms talks used to agree to all sorts of things in principle, in order to get good press in the West, then make very different demands when it was pen to paper time. The Iran regime certainly plays that game. That doesn't mean Trump is telling the truth, but whatever is the final result of the talks in no way proves any claim made during them is false, so I am sure Trump knows that and is spinning what he believes is his most advantageous position.

That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
J.R.
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Iran has said that this call never happened.

Honestly, at this point, Trump is just running his mouth.

Incredible that Republicans just dont care that Trump lies to the nation, about war with Iran, regularly. I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife.

Tribalism ruining the country.

can't disagree. I have lost all respect for my former party, Republicans, save a couple. Just a bunch of cowards and the Rs will get theirs in the mid terms unfortunately. Only Piggy to blame. Our country is being run by bat chit crazy dude, married to a former Escort/Hooker (high end, hooker still). Only the best people.
J.R.
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Porteroso said:

Oldbear83 said:

Porteroso: " I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife."

If you are referring to Clinton, most of the anger was that the sitting President was molesting his intern, and lied under oath about it to get out of a legal mess.

Also, JFK and FDR cheated a lot while in office, but no one made any noise about it.

Thr big deal was that he told the entire country a lie, when pressed, then it was proven to be a lie. Americans usually don't like being lied to.

Say it could be proven that Trump is making all this up. That he spoke with Iran. That they agreed on x y z. Would you care, at all?

All you have so far is spite and a long history of it towards the sitting President.

As for lying, every President does it, even Reagan (remember Iran-Contra?). So I absolutely reject the idea that Americans are outraged when a President lies.

The thing about Trump, of course, is that he polarizes opinion. It's why, realistically, he has a lower approval ceiling than most Presidents but also a higher floor.

Also, with regard to negotiations with Iran, it's very possible he could be telling the truth, given how negotiations often go all kinds of places. The Soviets in the Arms talks used to agree to all sorts of things in principle, in order to get good press in the West, then make very different demands when it was pen to paper time. The Iran regime certainly plays that game. That doesn't mean Trump is telling the truth, but whatever is the final result of the talks in no way proves any claim made during them is false, so I am sure Trump knows that and is spinning what he believes is his most advantageous position.



Bro. u be losing it . You are living in a Fantasy Land (la la), man.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J.R. said:

Oldbear83 said:

Porteroso said:

Oldbear83 said:

Porteroso: " I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife."

If you are referring to Clinton, most of the anger was that the sitting President was molesting his intern, and lied under oath about it to get out of a legal mess.

Also, JFK and FDR cheated a lot while in office, but no one made any noise about it.

Thr big deal was that he told the entire country a lie, when pressed, then it was proven to be a lie. Americans usually don't like being lied to.

Say it could be proven that Trump is making all this up. That he spoke with Iran. That they agreed on x y z. Would you care, at all?

All you have so far is spite and a long history of it towards the sitting President.

As for lying, every President does it, even Reagan (remember Iran-Contra?). So I absolutely reject the idea that Americans are outraged when a President lies.

The thing about Trump, of course, is that he polarizes opinion. It's why, realistically, he has a lower approval ceiling than most Presidents but also a higher floor.

Also, with regard to negotiations with Iran, it's very possible he could be telling the truth, given how negotiations often go all kinds of places. The Soviets in the Arms talks used to agree to all sorts of things in principle, in order to get good press in the West, then make very different demands when it was pen to paper time. The Iran regime certainly plays that game. That doesn't mean Trump is telling the truth, but whatever is the final result of the talks in no way proves any claim made during them is false, so I am sure Trump knows that and is spinning what he believes is his most advantageous position.



Bro. u be losing it . You are living in a Fantasy Land (la la), man.

Odd you should say that. My answer was based in history of negotiations and protocol. Your emotive post seems to have originated in your spleen.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

Oldbear83 said:

boognish_bear said:



Stepping away from discussing Trump, how does a move like this help Iran? Seems like repeating a mistake.


They are waging asymmetric warfare designed to destroy our economy through inflation.

Iran knows:

(1) It's lived longer under sanctions than our economy can tolerate a depression, particularly given our flawed fiscal and monetary policy post GFC. Its not that we are not capable of sacrifice. It's that no one is capable of pointless sacrifice, and the cat is out of the bag that this is a war that doesn't benefit anything but Israel's expansionist ideology. At the end of the Vietnam war, only 29% of the Americans supported it. Prior to the start of this war, polling indicated that only 21% of Americans supported a war with Iran. Think about that, this war started with public opinion about it worse than where it was when Vietnam ended. Stupid Fox News propaganda showing that 100% of MAGA supports it or Trump is going to be irrelevant in November.

(2) It cannot win an air war against us, and we cannot reopen Hormuz through the air.

(3) We cannot win a ground war against it, which is what would be required to reopen Hormuz by military force.

If the status quo continues for another 6 months, they win.


Speaking of Fox News - the Boomer State News Propaganda Division of our Government - can any of the Boomer Neocons tell me if Fox News is reporting anything about what is going on in Northern Ireland, Belfast, and if they are, how are they framing it? Are they celebrating it as freedom fighters reclaiming their ancestral land from which they are being systematically ethnically replaced or Far Right, extremist rioters launching racist progroms aimed at immigrants and minorities?
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

FLBear5630 said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.


I read somewhere else today that said it was a drone


Short of a random midair collision, the odds of which are infinitesmal, a Shaheed drone cannot shoot down an Apache. It is a ground attack drone and the warhead alone weighs around 110 pounds. Compare this to something like a Stinger where the entire missile weighs around 20 pounds. In addition to that, the drone follows a pre programmed course to its target, and cannot be manuvered to engage in air to air combat. Finally, if such a drone did happen to collide with an Apache, the end result wouldn't be two uninjured pilots.


It had to be a MANPAD or SAM. Hell, in the environment i wouldn't be surprised at mechanical failure. Filters on Apaches in middle east were notorious for clogging, at least way back when.


I was thinking mechanical failure as well, with Netanyahu/Trump/Hegseth using it as a fig leaf to continue attacking. I'm guessing that the drone story was put out there because the location of the crash was far enough from shore for small arms fire or a MANPAD to be unbelievable.


Agree. Even in the infinitesimally small chance a drone collided with a helicopter there is absolutely no way the pilots would survive.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J.R. said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Has anyone thought to ask what brought that Apache down?

It was supposedly over water, so small arms fire is unlikely.

I thought assumed Capt. QuickStop had another tantrum and the pilots would rather crash than listen to his girlyboy fantasies while slinging Slurpees at the CEFCO.

perhaps Landman would be a better reflection on what I do. Same sandbox. Glad to see you are queer curious. Go ahead, let that Freak Flag Fly. The community loves them some Twinks! You got your quals handy? Let's start slow. Do you have a job?


You got in the wrong business J.R.

You could have just been a jew in Ukraine and stolen $100 million from the American tax payer. A lot faster and more efficient than buying up mineral rights in West Texas.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Iran has said that this call never happened.

Honestly, at this point, Trump is just running his mouth.

Incredible that Republicans just dont care that Trump lies to the nation, about war with Iran, regularly. I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife.

Tribalism ruining the country.

Does Derek Chauvin deserve the prison sentence he received and should he be in jail right now?
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Porteroso said:

Realitybites said:

boognish_bear said:




Iran has said that this call never happened.

Honestly, at this point, Trump is just running his mouth.

Incredible that Republicans just dont care that Trump lies to the nation, about war with Iran, regularly. I seem to remember them caring when it was a guy cheating on his wife.

Tribalism ruining the country.

Does Derek Chauvin deserve the prison sentence he received and should he be in jail right now?


Yes
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, at least manslaughter.
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No just remember Gulf War.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:




He read this in a book. He has no clue what it means or if any of it is outdated. He might be advocating for Plessy vs. Ferguson.
First Page
Page 153 of 154
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.