News   Apr 17, 2024
 722     0 
News   Apr 17, 2024
 310     0 
News   Apr 17, 2024
 1.9K     1 

Former President Donald Trump's United States of America

How do we know the US is telling the truth? I'd prefer to see a more neutral country do some investigating.
 
Given Iran's history, how do we know it was accidental?

We don't, but what's the gain of shooting down a passenger jet taking off from Tehran, of all places, filled with pretty much your own brethens? It's the definition of a self-own, and a PR disaster in so many ways (now the world is focused on what Iran did - and not one of their general gotten taken out). Intentionally shooting down passenger jets is unthinkable even for Iran - especially given the relatively measured responses even to their antagonist..

AoD
 
Last edited:
It just doesn’t make sense that the IRGC could confuse an commercial airliner with a fighter jet? Iran is refusing to give anyone the black box.
 
Tensions are high, someone gets trigger happy? There was a report that the plane tried turning back which couldn’t have happened if it were hit with a missile. We need an independent country to review.
 
I think it was irresponsible to even allow any flights to depart or land there. This just makes me so upset because it was so avoidable. Trump acting like a clown, the media doing what they do and irresponsible airline for letting that flight take off. Airport should have been locked down.
 
This is the unintended consequences of Trump’s escalation with Iran.

True, but only in circumstantial way.

Tensions are high, someone gets trigger happy? There was a report that the plane tried turning back which couldn’t have happened if it were hit with a missile. We need an independent country to review.

Not necessarily, depending on where it hit - the missiles often don't hit the target directly, but gets close enough and explodes - spraying out bits of metal that cuts through the target. That's also what happened with MH17. And if it is a missile hit of this sort, the physical evidence would be obvious (including the possibilty that those metal bits will be buried within corpses) - can't imagine the Iranians will be able to hide these physical evidence without destroying it en masse, which would be obvious as hell.

AoD
 
Last edited:
There was a report that the plane tried turning back which couldn’t have happened if it were hit with a missile.
It depends what size of missile.

In 2003 a DHL Airbus A300 was hit by an anti-air missile after taking off from Baghdad and managed to turn back to the airport and make a very perilous but ultimately successful landing. But that was a shoulder launched SAM, not the Russian beasts the Iranians reportedly have.
 
Well, it seems the Iranian's did not secure the site and/or have messed around with it - that's highly dubious (but by no means unique)


If so, I find that a far bigger matter than an accidential downing of a civilian aircraft.

AoD
 
Well, it seems the Iranian's did not secure the site and/or have messed around with it - that's highly dubious (but by no means unique)


If so, I find that a far bigger matter than an accidential downing of a civilian aircraft.

AoD

Scavengers Are Taking Evidence From the Iran Plane Crash Site, CBS Reports

From link.

Scavengers are being allowed access to the site of Wednesday’s plane crash in Iran to take away pieces of evidence, CBS News reports. The network’s foreign correspondent Elizabeth Palmer was able to enter the site before being told to leave by Iranian security officials. She reported that “apparent scavengers” were scouring through what debris is left from the crash and looking for pieces of the plane to take away. Palmer also reported that witnesses told her a truck arrived on Thursday to take the vast majority of the wreckage, but Iran has not said where it was taken. The jet’s fuselage and nose had been removed, and witnesses said the relocation of the wreckage started on the day of the crash. Ukrainian investigators have not visited the site, and will now find a largely empty area. Palmer wrote on Twitter: “No security. Not cordoned off. No sign of any investigators.”
 
WSJ: Trump said he ordered strike on Iranian general to help with impeachment

From link.

The Trump White House has maintained the strike on Iranian General Soleimani came as a result of intelligence showing he posed an “imminent” threat to the United States.

But so far the administration has been unable to show any intelligence or evidence to back up that claim. Even Republican senators have been left fuming over the lack of evidence, with one calling it “absolutely insane”.

One claim they furiously denied: it was an attempt to distract from the impeachment trial.

Except, the Wall Street Journal confirms that impeachment was at the top of his mind when Trump ordered the drone strike.

Its long story published Thursday on events surrounding the strike contains this line:

Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.

In other words, Trump ordered the strike to bolster support from wavering GOP allies.

Worth noting, the claim is being made in a pro-Trump newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch. It speaks for itself.
 

Back
Top