Too Funny - United States Asking Iran To Give The Captured Drone Back

SSSShhhhhh maybe he doesn't know that Iran hasn't invaded another country for over 150 years.

 

Interesting , so the US was dumb enough to let China steal their encryption algorithm (or maybe they just took them from the exposed labs like those at Carnegie Mellon) , the US was to dumb to see that the info was compromised (their counter-intelligence does suck , it's almost an abandoned department), since a semi-stealth UAV landing in China would be to obvious they landed it in US friendly Iran (thank you nVidia for providing the GPUs required to crack the encryption in real-time) . So China will get another quantum leap in tech bringing them closer and closer to the level that Russia is ATM .

Speaking of Russia , they did not do it . I'm 140% sure of it .

 

For over 250 years. The last time Iran attacked another country was Nader Shah attacking India in 1748.

 

Righto, now we are getting somewhere. Iran's computers aren't big and smart enough to bring down the clone and they couldn't create software to do it either. So Iran can't make the claim that they did it. Even if it were only a Styrofoam model it was good enough for the US to ask for it back, so they think Iran has got the drone. The US must think it is in one piece also, otherwise they wouldn't have asked for it back. Or maybe they know it is in pieces in the desert somewhere and are just joshing with Iran and Iran is just joshing too.

We all now know that this particular drone had a "Failsafe" backup system that would guide it back to its point of departure. SO I'm sticking to the theory that the US programmer put the wrong address in the HOME BASE field.

"Oh No, I put 1234 Revolutionary Guard Avenue, Iran in the address field instead of 45 Haqqani St, Afghanistan. I'm gonna get my balls busted over this."

Nima - what about the Russian - Persian war 1826 - 1828.

 

You would have to be a fool to think Iran actually took control and flew the plane to their desired destination.

It ain't all that complicated. That is what malfunctioned after we lost control. It did crash in Iran, and they picked it up. Hardly something that required more than the technology in a truck. (maybe a crane)

Did it dawn on you that you don't see the bottom because it crash landed in Iran and that is where the damage was sustained?

Anyway, Obama should have blown it up - that was a mistake. And because of that mistake the Chinese and Russians will now probably have access in exchange for their usual siding with Iran at the UN plus tons of cash or some other Chinese or Russian military goods.

So you just get to ignore all the Iranian proxies who are supplied weapons and cash to do the attacking? Don't be that lame.

 

Amazing. You've been in the country for 10 years and you talk like that. I'm guessing you applied for citizenship well after 9-11. Its time we seriously look at the immigration policies that allow people like Faisal Shahzad in the door. Seriously, we have enough losers and whiners from our own citizens washing around OWS as it is. Do we really need to import them?

Regarding the drone, I would love to see the "Hard proof" or even an admission by any US citizen with knowledge in the matter that the drone was indeed flying a spy mission over Iran(Sorry, Dick Cheney doesn't qualify, even if he did say what you claim he said). Were you planning on providing that? If not, the only thing we know for a fact is that Iran has a US drone in it's possession, by virtue of the fact the US has asked for it back. Any claims as to which country's airspace it was in when the US ceased to be in control of it are obviously conjecture. Just another provocation by Iran, giving another strong indication that open conflict is in it's near future.

 

Far from it (Mr. not-lame). I don't ignore them just as much as I dont ignore American troops and mercenaries doing the exact same thing as the those whom Iranian regime supports. They both intend to kill in order to gain more power.

 

I must have to agree that they did most likely not just "hack" the drone.
It would be near impossible with the used encryption algorithms and time limits.

No bank would be safe if computers were able to do those calculations and decryptions in such a short time.
If they somehow did hack it, they would probably not be able to make a controlled landing anyways.

The only way they would be able to make a controlled landing is if they somehow got their hands
on the system(s) used to control the drones in the first place. Which means there is a huge leak of information somewhere.

OR the ones responsible for creating the encryption/decryption algorithms were nutheads.

 

Iran hasn't invaded any country in modern times, good. That is, however, not relevant to the point I was making. Earlier I thought it was your lack of knowledge about cryptography, so I decided to explain it in simplest words I can. But after reading your this comment, I think you are just being a smartass.. Either that or you are a very dumb person. Feel free to take your pick.

Do you even read what you write? Bring down the clone? What clone?

It doesn't matter if it is in one piece or 10 million pieces, It still can be reverse engineered, for some parts, if not all.. They can easily break down the chemical formula of stealth paint coating. They can reverse engineer intact electronics, camera or stuffs like that, if the deciphering chip is intact, they can extract the whole decryption algorithm. Obviously US would want it back.

The fail safe only works if Flight system is still functioning, in the simple words, if the drone is still able to fly. If engine got damaged, if GPS has failed, if flight control failed the drone will crash, despite the fail safe.
But I understand that you have hard time getting your head around all this techno blabber so I don't expect you to understand it. Please excuse the harsh words but I don't think you appreciate gentle words.

 

Yeah Webby - correct - I couldn't give a shit about your techno blabber - you wasted your time, I was just shaking my head at your words. You know nothing more than anyone else here in this forum about what happened and it's all conjecture.

I find the whole episode hugely hilarious and have treated it as such. I was just being a smartarse and having some fun. But I'll still stick with the theory the the CIA programmer put the wrong address in - it's the only thing that works for me. Here's some more theories for you although I don't trust the source:

"a leading scenario is that the drone went into a default setting for an automatic landing pattern.

But the pressing question remains what triggered it.

"The forensics are ongoing," said an official.

One U.S. official said the landing was in line with an "internal or system failure" that would be consistent with the "default setting" theory.

Two intelligence sources, who work cyber issues, say the other scenarios include a catastrophic or navigational malfunction that caused the RQ170 to break contact with its base. But that scenario is problematic, the sources said, because it does not fully explain the "soft landing, one where it lands and lands well, not scratched up."

Once contact with the operators is broken, drones such as the RQ170 are programmed to circle an area until contact is re-established, sources said. If contact is not re-established during a pre-programmed period, it is designed to return to base or to self-destruct -- directed through a separate channel or program. A common outcome is that the drone crashes and is burned by its fuel.

Most concerning to investigators is that none of these steps occurred."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...eads-theories-on-drone-failure/#ixzz1gUTzmHIL

 

At least he did it through the legal channels unlike some other people whose parents cross the Rio Grande in the night from some shit hole in south America and then popped out a baby to stay in USA. It is sad to see such babies later on feel the need to be extra "American" just to hide their origin.

 

Faisal Shahzad did it through legal channels too. He and Nima share views on US foreign policy, and on the "evilness" of the USA on the whole. That was my point. Why are we granting such people citizenship? If they dislike the US so much, let them go elsewhere.

LoL. You've not been around a southern US border state much, have you. Legal, or illegal, the folks trying to fit in are far outnumbered by champions of La Raza.

Some humorous reading on the subject: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/26/sports/la-sp-0626-plaschke-gold-cup-20110626

 

Why are aren't people striped of their citizenship would be a better question If they don't like it they should just give it up and move to the Sub Saharan region or Antarctica . No citizenship required there .

I remember that the Romans and the Greeks had a punishment called exile which was usually permanent , why not reintroduce it ?

 

Where should they be sent? To Romania perhaps. This is what Austria did to you, deported (exiled) you back to your own country.

 

Oh you're in the UK , we might met

 

please, please, please give us our drone back.

 

I see a lot of Romanian beggars here in London but after awhile they all look alike, in which streets are you?

 

People like you makes the US bad. Its not dislike its whats the right thing to do.

By the way your choice for president has good family values. Newt Gingrich is it ? LOL !

 

Freedom of speech, speaking your mind, disagreeing with wrong government policies, standing up for what is right is what REAL USA is about but unfortunately people are forgetting the historical values and now instead we have bunch of wanna be "American" who are so ashame of their heritage that support anything that government does because in their heart they don´t feel accepted as Americans in the society.

 

So parking a car in times square filled with explosives was the "right thing to do"? Do you really think our immigration department would have granted him a visa, no less citizenship, if they could have seen that coming? You think Nima would have gotten his citizenship if the people who granted it were aware of his comments on this blog ahead of time?

I'm fairly certain the US government avoids making citizens out of people who think the US is evil. Apparently they just need to educate themselves a bit more on the backgrounds of these people.

Not that Gingrich, in particular, is my choice, but what gave you the impression I am a family values voter this election cycle? I'd be happy to settle for someone with a clue.