Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (143118)	8/14/2004 6:29:45 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<I have also heard reports that they were in International waters. I don't know the truth of it> I can't prove it, but I'd be surprised if they were in international waters. <//It's the same as the Korean pilot of the 747 provoked the USSR, which shot them down// Yes, they "provocatively" enter the wrong numbers into their flight path, so the Soviets "unprovocatively" shot down a civilian airliner without any warning. > You need to be gullible to believe that one Nadine. My brother was a 747 captain in the era that was done so knows what technology was used. He is adamant that 747s don't 'get lost' and ace captains don't make mistakes, which are picked up anyway by reporting way points and so on. The captain was el primo pilot who would fly the South Korean president around. They don't use amateurs for that job. No warning? There are transponders and communication channels. Of course the South Korean captain, as planned, refused to be forced down so ignored instructions, not believing the USSR would shoot it down. It was the same sort of provocation as the Americans flying down the coast of China, though in that instance, they were in international airspace and the dopey fighter pilot crashed into them. There could be some lawsuits on a grand scale if South Korean action was proved to be deliberate by USA military intelligence [there they go again] efforts of the day. 747s don't just aimlessly fly around the sky, putting the wrong flight paths in computers and forgetting to check course and so on. Just as the USA shoots down civilian airliners if they are in no-go areas, the USSR does the same. The USA did it to the Vincennes even though they were on course and doing the right thing, in error inasmuch as they didn't realize it was a commercial airliner. The USSR knew it was an airliner, but made a point. I don't think any more 747s went wandering off course after that. That's the same as Americans shoot vehicles full of civilians at check points in Iraq if they don't stop. That's the harsh reality of highly sensitive military action. They shoot first and ask questions later. Civilians had better not step over any lines. On Iranian self-defence in Iraq, you do remember that the USA invaded Iraq in the pre-emptive strike mode which they propounded. You can hardly be surprised when the Iranians, seeing conflict right in their back yard, adopt the same philosophy, especially when the USA has declared that they shall be dealt with as part of the Axis of Evil. The Iranians have seen what that means! They need to keep the USA mired in Iraq if possible and the USA public thinking it would be better to give up on PNAC pre-emptive war. <I guess you class the Iranian mullahs among those unnamed foreign leaders who want Kerry to win. Me too.> Maybe they think that. I'm not sure. If I was an Iranian, I suspect I'd rather deal with coward Bush than military award Kerry who was quite enthusiastic about attacking people who were a threat. He was a knife in teeth guy who was gung ho to cut some enemy throats. Leopards and spots. Liberal in voting maybe, but I wouldn't bet on him being too tame in the military stakes. I haven't seen any suggestion that Kerry would cut and run. Mqurice