The main headline on bbc claims that Iran rebuffs the possibility it shot down the aircraft.
If the evidence is so compelling why would it do this and apparently bulldose evidence on site?
They’ve just lost their moral high ground.
The main headline on bbc claims that Iran rebuffs the possibility it shot down the aircraft.
If the evidence is so compelling why would it do this and apparently bulldose evidence on site?
Without going into detail, yes. It is qualified understanding.Is this a qualified understanding?
I’m not being an arse, I hate Trump as much as you, I’m just trying to get my head around the fuckers shooting down a fucking passenger airplane without knowing.
No, absolutely not. It was a f*ck up.You're making some real assumptions here mate and it just comes across as you wanting to find an excuse for the shooting down of the aircraft?
I know that isn't your intention btw.
Without going into detail, yes. It is qualified understanding.
Because it is a medieval dictatorship that tolerates no dissent.The main headline on bbc claims that Iran rebuffs the possibility it shot down the aircraft.
If the evidence is so compelling why would it do this and apparently bulldose evidence on site?
No one could blame you if you launched a missile attack on a US airbase in that case.I am about to go to the dentist due to a crown falling out of my gob this morning. Because I have spent to much time watching the news and eating sweets over the past couple of days no doubt.
Trumps fault.
Reminds me of the joke that went 'What's the difference between Saddam Hussein and Alex Ferguson? One is a ruthless dictator who rules by fear and doesn't tolerate any dissent. The other is President of Iraq.'Because it is a medieval dictatorship that tolerates no dissent.
Yes, and people may laugh, but that is exactly what he did.Reminds me of the joke that went 'What's the difference between Saddam Hussein and Alex Ferguson? One is a ruthless dictator who rules by fear and doesn't tolerate any dissent. The other is President of Iraq.'
No one could blame you if you launched a missile attack on a US airbase in that case.
The F4 Phantom was introduced into service in 1960. I know because I got an Airfix model Phantom from Father Christmas in 1966.Funny except this wouldn't be World War III. It would be a regional conflict.
US and Israeli cyber teams fighting Iranian cyber units in addition to air strikes. The Iranians have three large oil refineries. I feel fairly confident that American war planes would have those refineries destroyed within hours.
The Iranians fly fighters from the 1970's, the F-14 Tomcat, Mig 29 and the F-4 Phantoms. The Iranian pilots that actually take to the air to meet the US Air Force and Navy planes would meet their maker in short order.
Additionally, the US Navy would essentially destroy Iran's navy completely in a good days work, likely the missile batteries in the Straights of Hormuz as well, thus opening them up for shipping, completely.
As for Iranian army units that would intend to swarm into Iraq to battle American forces there, I present to you The Highway of Death from the first Gulf War.
That would leave us with the Iranians using terrorism as their main weapon. How's that different than the norm?