Slashdot Mirror
Iran's Military Claims To Have Downed US Surveillance Drone
mrquagmire submits a link to the Jerusalem Post's report that an American reconnaissance UAV has been captured by the Iranian military. "'Iran's military has downed an intruding RQ-170 American drone in eastern Iran,' Iran's Arabic-language Al Alam state television network quoted the unnamed source as saying. 'The spy drone, which has been downed with little damage, was seized by the Iranian armed forces.' ... 'The Iranian military's response to the American spy drone's violation of our airspace will not be limited to Iran's borders any more,' Iran's Arabic language Al Alam television quoted the military source as saying, without giving details."
Pics or it didn't happen.
Why is it that USA thinks it can push other countrys around so much? They are in everybodys face, from Europe on copyrights to violating the sovereign territory of many countries with airstrikes that kill innocents to drones.
Iran will sell this drone to China, I'm sure. The world needs China as a counterbalance to the aggression of the USA. It's better to have 2 superpowers than just one which can do whatever it pleases. If China is there to push back against usa, usa won't be able to cause so many probs anymore.
I mean I thought the whole idea is you send in unmanned drones to do a dangerous mission because losing a drone is preferable to losing a pilot.(Then again you'd hope the technology on the drone wouldn't be too advanced so the enemy doesn't get much out of shooting one down.)
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
Maybe they were just trying to slip something in, to see if it could be done? Like, how good are their air defenses really?
A good mission for an "expendable" probe.
Who knows if this is the first one that has been sent in already . . . ?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
It was US that violated Iran's airspace. They have every right to shoot it down. It happens frequently with my country too and they never do anything about it - they just go "yes, we will demand answers from the this time, honestly we promise!". Kudos to Iran for taking a stance.
Not really. The US has been flying manned combat aircraft into Iran for several years probing air defences. My Persian cooworkers have a social app that tracks when people on the ground see the planes, I don't speak farsi (or understand the language) so I can't point you at it unfortunately. Searches for USAF probing iranian air defences gives some results along these lines.
The US is trying to fly as deep into Iran as they can before all the air defence sites 'light up', they're trying to locate all the air defence radars etc. It's illegal, but it's been going on for years, and everyone knows the game, the americans pretend 'this time is the time' they're going to attack natanz etc. and the Iranians call their bluff. Presumably one of these days the Israeli's or someone else will take this data and go after air defence sites along with the nuclear facilities but who knows.
This also isn't the first time that they've shot down a drone. I imagine that they make a big deal about this in part because they can't do much about U-2 overflights, and in part because it validates the government's rhetoric about how the whole world (except maybe Syria) is out to get Iran. Shooting down a drone is not terribly difficult.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
What problems are they causing?
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
"I wonder how much war rhetoric they would be spouting if the US didn't back them up."
I think they trust the old saying "It is better to have your people die for our cause, than to let our soldiers die for a lost cause". No, that was no old saying, i just made it up. Sorry.
Allegedly. Given the amount of evidence and the history of the regime (last time they made this claim they backed off it) I'm skeptical. It wouldn't really surprise me either way. Iran was putting their equivalent of a drone into Iraq while US forces were there. Maybe they're just returning the favor.
The US is trying to fly as deep into Iran as they can before all the air defense sites 'light up', they're trying to locate all the air defence radars etc.
There is 0 incentive to fly into a territory to find radar sites *before* a conflict has started. Anti-radar munitions have been around since at least the 70's. If a conflict were to break out, the US could then send in aircraft / drones with ARMs and take out any sites that light up.
This is at least the 3rd time Iran has claimed to have downed a US drone. They have provided no proof for any of the claims.
he doesn't know anyone in iran, he doesn't know any iranians, he just spent the weekend playing 'call of duty' and masturbating, but goddamnit, he knows foreign policy. and the number one thing we need to do is to violate the laws of war (which he calls 'faggot laws') and put weapons of mass destruction into a country without any formal declaration of war, congressional debate, etc.
because, after all, they shot down one of our robots.
WindBourne can be found during days at his job as a Wal Mart security guard, where he protects us from terrorists by body slamming grandfathers face-first into the concrete floor because they "resist arrest".
It seems like there has been some effort from the US to further increase tensions with Iran - including a string of three catastrophic, improbable but still officially accidental explosions at various Iranian industrial facilities. Add that to Stuxnet and targeted assassinations of Iran's brightest nerds, and it paints a pretty clear picture that we the West are trying to ratchet up tensions. On the other side, there are probably hardliners who are happy to play along. I don't like any of this escalation.
Additionally, the technical specs of the radar systems are already known, because Russia probably makes the systems and American intelligence has the instruction manual.
Knowing the frequencies and techniques of the enemy radar is enough to build an operational flight program for our countermeasures to jam it. I'm pretty sure that it's in our best interests to jam and/or deceive the radars rather than deliberately "light them up" before we strike. I know because I was an avionics troop in the USAF, specializing in electronic warfare (TISS).
Lastly, though, I want to say that all this rhetoric in favor of war with Iran being shoved up our asses is disgusting. With public approval of government at an all-time low and protests in every major city, it is clear that the government have completely lost touch with reality. We are not buying this bullshit again, from the bullshit "WMD" excuse used to go to war with Iraq to the conspicuously missing pictures of Bin Laden ( the U.S. had no problem with proudly displaying Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay as if they were a science fair exhibit! ).
This is fucking bullshit. This shit-talking has to stop.
For whatever reason, in USA - Iran battle I feel USA is somehow more evil and aggressive side... and given that Iran is theocracy, thats quite an achievement.
839*929
Someone just blew up (at least) one of their missile bases. There are reports of more attacks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/image-shows-than-an-iranian-missile-site-was-destroyed/2011/11/28/gIQA7KZW5N_blog.html
Iran claimed it was an accident...
Course then the UK embassy then gets invaded and a drone is shot down. Or claimed. All a coincidence of course.
Deleted
Probably it has a full bag of USB sticks loaded with the latest SCADA worms lol
Now this is an interesting Trojan strategy - fly RC Planes, er, drones, around annoying foreign country. Have specialized Stuxnet-type software embedded in the plane. Have annoying foreign country shoot down RC plane and try to disassemble it to gain secrets.
ZAP! You've been pawned.
Wouldn't be all that hard. If this actually happened there are going to be dozens of people just aching to open the thing up. First one to find the JTAG connector wins a prize!
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
A aerial reconnaissance is not an attack, much less a first strike by any definition.
Sure it's pisses off the target, and is subject to being shot down, but nobody considers it an act of war, that takes killing somebody or capturing/taking something/somewhere.
For that matter, until either the other side admits to losing the drone, or Iran coughs it up to a recognized 3rd party, like the UN for example, it's just propaganda on Irans part. I've seen the B.S. propaganda countries will say in an attempt to gain leverage. Remember the whole USA bombing Libya back in the 80s? I remember them showing an "unexploded bomb" that was actually only part of a high drag fin that wasn't even used in that operation. They also claimed bombing of civilian neighborhoods and showed photos of an area covered with potholes, but the bombs the USA used were larger than most of the potholes themselves and would have leveled the area instead of making potholes. Those holes, if they were caused during that incident, would have been from their own SAM falling down on the city due to stupidity in both the shooters (don't shoot into your own city), and the missile designers (on a miss, it should have self destructed).
I don't care what side you want to take (or not), but when it comes to countries and their propensity for propaganda, don't believe word of mouth, demand proof.
(Something which the article doesn't provide any of.)
There is 0 incentive to fly into a territory to find radar sites *before* a conflict has started.
Au contraire, mon frer. Only gamblers, gluttons and losers go into a fight without assessing their opponent's strengths and weaknesses first. There is a tangible variance between capability and practice; Mismanagement, ignorance, misinformation, unknowns...
Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
Iran has a history of expandable borders when they want something that's just slightly over the border. Very much like North Korea in that respect. It's definitely possible that the drone was in their airspace, but it's also possible that there was no drone or that it wasn't in their airspace. Given the credibility that Iran has, I wouldn't necessarily assume that they're being above the board without more information.
Iran coughs it up to a recognized 3rd party, like the UN for example
If I were them I'd sell it to China.
It was probably made in China.
Whoever modded this insightful, hit yourself, and excuse yourself from any military-related discussion. You are either utterly stupid, or utterly ignorant, and in both cases, you have no place in a discussion like this beyond asking "how does this work?".
Aerial surveillance, especially low altitude aerial surveillance is of CRUCIAL importance. You cannot see things like tunnel network entrances, weapon caches, small defence emplacements and so on with high altitude surveillance from U2 and satellites when they are properly concealed against it. And with that surveillance being in existence for decades, countries like Iran have long perfected such camouflaging. What looks like a natural hill to a satellite becomes a hidden pillbox full of anti-armor weaponry when photographed from an angle. What looks like a bunch of civilian trucks becomes a mobile radar site. What looks like a mobile radar site becomes a fake transmitters designed to attract HARMs. Etc. Fake "weapon systems" designed specifically to fool satellite surveillance are something of a Russian speciality.
If you don't believe it, look at end of cold war. USSR army size has been throught to be about 40% greater then it really was, because Red Army perfected techniques for faking weapon systems specifically for satellite and U2 surveillance. If there was a war, most of the first strike would end up hitting wooden models and balloons that look like weapons while real weapons would be hidden in bunkers and emplacements that look like natural hills to a satellite. That is what drones are for - exact mapping rather then general one you do with a satellite/U2 sweep.
Want to bet? I bet that majority people in USA believe that war against Iran is justifiable.
People are gullible by their very nature, and in large empires like USA, they are raised and taught to be more gullible then they would otherwise be, because the "needs of the motherland" require it.
why Iran has been taking the ones destroyed over iraq and afghanistan apart for years.
Indeed most of the technical hacks(like the discovery of taliban troops with tv's capable of receiving drone transmissions are done by iranians.
However Iran has several times in the past claimed to have shot down a drone in their airspace, and not once have they actually shown the crash site. just parts. Parts from drones shot down over other countries.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
I'm not the majority, but I have read about Operation Ajax. Yeah, I'm American, and I sorta think that we are special, and I like making money, yada yada yada. But, I can't justify what happened with Ajax. We destroyed a legitimate democracy, for the sake of a few cents per barrel of oil.
If I were Iranian, or Persian, or even Arabic, I'd be pretty pissed at the US too.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Military plans for ALL scenarios, and executes one that it's given an order to execute. Therefore preparation for all scenarios must be conducted when possible.
Yes, your memory has hazed over a little bit. It took weeks before all of Iraq's radar sites were eliminated. That, in spite of the fact that we had already painted them in the runup to the war. Month after month, we flew into Iraqi territory, recording everything we could, including the locations of radar installations. Still, when the war started, mobile radar units had been moved, and some of the stationary units hadn't ever been mapped.
Military intelligence changes daily, if not hourly. You've got to stay on top of things, or your intel is shit.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Maybe someone can explain the whole U2 thing to me, because i just don't get it. I mean here is a tech invented in...what? 1958? Why hasn't anyone figured out how to swat those thing down like gnats already? i mean i could at least understand the SR71 blackbird as literally by the time you knew the thing was headed your way it was already gone. But the U2 ain't that fast and if the Ruskies were able to shoot down Powers why hasn't everyone else been knocking those things down?
As for TFA I'm sure i'll get labeled a racist for not kissing the booty but i have a feeling this is the USA wasting yet more money to dance to Israel's tune. they same jump and we just hop like good little frogs. The sad part is living next to a wealthy conservative college I've actually got to talk to a few of the guys that actually roam the corridors of power and make policies and scarily enough our entire ME policy pretty much boils down to "Jesus won't come back! Come back Jesus come back!"
Sometimes i don't know which is scarier, the whole backward assed ME Sharia countries or that a supposedly highly advanced western nation WITH multiple nuclear weapons is basing its policy for a major part of the planet, which has so far cost an incredible number of lives, on an 1800 year old sheep's ass parchment that says a 2000 year dead guy has to have a certain race in a certain spot or he won't have a place to park his fluffy white cloud.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The US would do the same thing the USSR did 50 years ago to a U2: shoot it down and complain.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I guess it all depends. How "aerial reconnaissance", being a violation of a country's air space is not considered an attack, it probably depends on the attacked one.
If someone gets inside your house with a camera, without your permission checking your private stuff, perhaps you don't consider it an attack... I mean, at least if you never knew that it happened you don't consider harm was done.
Now ask that same thing to someone holding trade secrets if this is or not an attack, why is it different if it's a country?. Although, I agree that it would piss me off quite a lot.
According to some, the covert war has already started:
* $400 million funding for CIA Iran covert ops program
* Assassinations of Iranian scientists (the ones we know about: Majid Shahriari, Masoud Ali Mohammadi, Majid Shahriari, Fereidoun Abbasi-Davani (survived), Darioush Rezaeinejad)
* Cyber attacks (Stuxnet etc.)
* Sabotage of military/industrial sites (bombing of Isfahan uranium plant)
* Assassinations of military personnel (the head of the Revolutionary Guards missile program)
* And now: 12 CIA operatives arrested in Iran
It's almost as if someone is trying to provoke a full on war...
It was invented to go up against USSR, who eventually were able to down one. Against superpower military spending, the U2 is vulnerable. But it flys really high, so it takes some serious engineering skill just to design a weapon that can even reach it's height, let alone accurately kill one.
Those resources are not available to lesser militaries, at least not yet, and there will always be nations for whom high altitude overflight is still safe. Loiter time and distance (high altitude is still way, way, way closer than satellite) mean that the U2 is still an extremely cost effective surveillance platoform and is likely to remain so for some time against many targets. Further, unlike satellites, the U2 can be flown at arbitrary times, rather than on a regular and predictable schedule.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
It's mostly a cost thing, the U2 flew very very high, the wiki puts it at 70,000 feet, very few planes can even fly that high, so planes can't really do an intercept, also it's altitude is above the design range of most radars. Radar searching for planes puts most of it's power in areas where they will find planes, so they are pointed to not look too much into the 70k ft flight area, they could probably pick it up, but it probably wouldn't track it through the whole coarse over the coverage area. The same radar could just be pointed up and it would do a much better job at tracking it, but that would significantly reduce the range of the radar. The only real option to take it out is then a SAM that can hit things at 70k ft, when the U2 came out, things just didn't fly that high, SAMs simply couldn't fly that high either, now with modern planes many will hit it, but ultimatly it is a cost tradeoff, like a space ship adding a little bit of range means more fuel, and you need more fuel to carry that extra fuel, it all adds up, twice the distance on the missile means much more than twice the size (and cost) without increasing any speed/damage/maneuverability specs. Once the missiles came out that could hit those altitudes they came out with an SR-71, basically even if you did see it, your missile would need a range of something like 100 miles at mach 5 to get an intercept coarse, that in a huge amount of fuel when you consider even today, things like a sidewinder only goes 22mi at mach 2.5.
Iran "has a history of expandable borders", when?! Please provide some details.
As far as I know, Iran was attacked by Saddam Hussein and that is their latest war. The modern Iran has not been around for very long, you know, less than a century. Before the former shah's Iran it was a European protectorate of sorts. Around 1980, the mullah's took over ruined most of what was available at that time.
An "expandable border" theory sounds like century old history to me.
Yes, fortunately for us on our moral high-ground, Iran and North Korea are the only nations that have a history of territorial ambitions. The United States would never do something like that. Neither would Britain.
Allegedly. Given the amount of evidence and the history of the regime (last time they made this claim they backed off it) I'm skeptical. It wouldn't really surprise me either way. Iran was putting their equivalent of a drone into Iraq while US forces were there. Maybe they're just returning the favor.
Given this is a mid-altitude drone (50K feet) which has significant lack of stealth technology, about which Wikipedia says:
Aviation Week postulates that these design elements suggest the designers have avoided 'highly sensitive technologies' due to the near certainty of eventual operational loss inherent with a single engine design and a desire to avoid the risk of compromising leading edge technology
the shoot down is entirely plausible, and could easily be accomplished with what ever operational missiles or even manned fighter aircraft the Iranian's have in operation. An unmasked exhaust makes this drone vulnerable to heat seeker missiles.
At 6 million per copy, they are relatively cheap, and containing nothing particularly secret, it may even have been used as cover decoy for a much more expensive and more capable vehicle on a concurrent mission.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Citation? Iraq tried expanding their border by taking Iranian territory, I don't know any instance where Iran tried to expand their border, I also do not know of any case where Iran has claimed their border extended further than it does (this includes the British naval incident and the hikers - I do not believe they were spies but they were in Iranian territory and Iran got some propaganda for home consumption).
Nato has released a statement informing us that they "lost control" of a drone over the weekend. I agree, without evidence, take it with a grain of salt - I would not trust Iran or "our side" to be honest with us.
BM3
Which is why you keep having to send subsequent missions in and re-map them. There is such a thing as an ideal site for radar, and you can't just pack these things up and go at a moment's notice. You have to shut down, pack up, move, unpack, realign their systems, perform a baseline scan of the environment to compare with, and link back into the rest of the network. They do this in staggered pattern over several weeks, so as to not leave any gaps in the coverage. If you have everyone move the moment the drone leaves, they could send in a strike and you would be completely undefended.
No, they don't. Iran hasn't invaded anybody in like 2500 years.
So the CIA is not assassinating the religious fanatics who are making Iran shitty in the first place, but assassinating Iran's rational, secular thinkers?
RATIONAL secular thinkers would not be arming religious fanatics with nuclear weapons.
Scientists (engaged in nuclear research) are hard to grow.
Radical religious fanatics require no education, and can be recreated virtually overnight.
One would have thought that religious fanatics willing to blow them selves up would be just about exhausted and cleaned from the gene pool by now even in a depressing society with a horrible economy. Yet such is not the case. There is no point in taking out fanatics. You can't win that way. You need to turn them against each other, and remove any means of acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
Pre Iraq, the Muslim world was united, Muslims would never attach Muslims, and attacking a Mosque was unthinkable. Now they are at each others throats and bombing each other's Mosques. ”Such subtlety . . . ” said Slartibartfast, ”one has to admire it.”.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
There is 0 incentive to fly into a territory to find radar sites *before* a conflict has started.
Ah, no. False. 100% False.
Mapping radar ahead of time is very cost effective. There is no point is shooting a HARM at a remote radar towed behind a truck to some god forsaken mountain side with no coms to any air defense sites, and then losing aircraft approaching their targets to Radars that were there all along but turned on at the last possible instant. You want to know ahead of time which radars you need to kill and which are decoys.
What ever fools marked the parent as insightful, Thank You: for staying in your Mom's basement and not joining the Military.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Yes, pulling up stuff from the 19th century is extremely relevant to this conversation about an unmanned aerial drone.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
Pre Iraq, the Muslim world was united, Muslims would never attach Muslims, and attacking a Mosque was unthinkable.
Poppycock!
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
But if we're a net exporter of petroleum products, and coal, then what energy sources are we importing so much of that it changes the balance to make us into a net importer of energy overall?
The U.S. is a net importer of petroleum. The U.S. is a net exporter of refined petroleum products. Why is that? We have a huge refining industry - thus we don't need anyone's refined petroleum, whereas we can import oil, refine it, and reexport the products at a profit. The U.S. import about 4.5 barrels of crude oil for each barrel of refined petroleum exported.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Pre Iraq, the Muslim world was united, Muslims would never attach Muslims
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm, but just in case it isn't... Iran-Iraq war, Invasion of Kuwait, Afghan civil war (plus pt2), ...
I assumed the OP was alluding to the past, since he used that "history" word. But if you want to talk about now, please do so.... how exactly has Iran tried to "expand its borders" in the last couple of years? I really would like to know. As far as I can see (and contrary to the images portrayed by some Western media) the Iranian government hasn't invaded anyone, hasn't "settled" or captured any land, and has in fact been praised by the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq for being a good and helpful neighbor.
The government of Iran were also a major regional enemy of the Taliban - after declaring opium unlawful, the Iranian government eradicated the domestic trade in 18 months, and started fighting the Taliban smugglers who use Iran as a transit route to Europe. Three Iranian security agents are killed every day in this "war"; the total killed numbers in the thousands, and they almost went to war with the Taliban when they governed Afghanistan. This is something that our media forget to mention when they try to to convince us that Iran is the bad guy allied with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
I am no apologist for the Iranian government. From our liberal west point of view, we may not like the religious society that they want to create, but compared to ourselves their territorial ambitions seem to have been remarkably limited. Are they the ones that have invaded our neighbors? Are they the ones with soldiers deployed along our borders? Are they the ones constantly meddling in the politics of north America or Europe? Did they ever overthrow a western government and install a dictator? No. And yet, we have done all of these things to them. No wonder they dislike us.
Disagreeing with a government is not a reason to go to war:
"Old men declare war because they have failed to solve complex political and economic problems."
"War is the most striking instance of the failure of intelligence to master the problem of human relationships."
They sure shot a lot of SAMs at something they "didn't intend to down"... why would they do that?
(Incidentally, this book is a pretty interesting read if you're into this stuff...)
If they had an S-400, yes. Russia is hesitant about supplying them to most countries. Even its own backyard allies like Belarus aren't trusted with them. Russia recently canceled an order from Iran for an older S-300 system, and even China doesn't get full documentation on the system despite being one of the bigger customers.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Since when was the cost of munitions ever a factor in US military thinking?
Funnily enough, Christians have always been the majority of casualties in terror attacks by Christian fundamentalists too. The Catholic Church once ordered armies to wipe out the Cathars - another branch of Christianity - resulting in the massacre of over one million men, women and children. The Thirty Years War, the French Wars of Religion, the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre, hundreds of thousands dead, all carried out by feuding groups of Christians. Religion...
It's also as though someone wants to prevent a full-out shooting or nuclear war. Israel is taking a more and more hostile stance towards Iran. There are stories leaking about how the Israelis are going to attack Iran without US permission. If you were the US, you have to talk the Israelis off the ledge. So what do you do? You have to do what you did in the First Gulf War to stop the Israelis from coming into the war: hunt Scuds and do other shit to show them that you're providing an alternative. Israeli isn't going to let Iran get nukes. They will do anything to stop that, including a shooting war. Crippling Iran's nuclear capabilities in a backdoor way (I mean, Stuxnet was awesome, right?!) delays that war.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
America has been probing enemy air defenses since the Cold War. Operation Home Run was one in a series of operations that sent bombers stuffed with electronics into Russian territory to sniff where the defense radars were. At first, the bombers had to fly in international waters. But then the Russians would simply refuse to turn on all their radars to prevent their detection. Therefore, the US started to have their bombers suddenly divert into Russian airspace at a mad dash, which forced them to turn on their radars and shoot down US aircraft. Quite a few were lost in this manner. Both sides didn't make a big deal out of it because they didn't want a nuclear war. The families of the killed aircrews were told that their loved ones died in training accidents. Two hundred Americans and 40 aircraft were lost.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
This is bullshit. We have been patrolling enemy countries for their SAM and radar sites since the Cold War. Even stealth aircraft can be seen on radar, and their flight paths have to be routed around radar sites. When the First Gulf War was initiated, the first shots were fired by Apache helicopters that infiltrated Iraqi airspace by flying low altitude then blowing up a radar site. Perimeter air defenses are blown up by cruise missiles and the like to permit stealth aircraft to fly in and blow up other air defense systems. Only then do non-stealth aircraft with anti-radiation missiles come in to play.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
A aerial reconnaissance is not an attack, much less a first strike by any definition.
Try to imagine the roles reversed for a minute:
Iran has a large and powerful military with the latest high tech weapons, and could crush the US in a matter of weeks. Iranian politicians talk openly about the possibility of military strikes or invasion, and Iran is constantly spying on the US with satellites, drones and operatives on the ground. Iran invaded Canada on a lie and effected "regime change", and furthermore is widely seen in the west as being at war with Christianity and the American way of life. Mexico has nuclear weapons and is good friend of Iran, and is waging an active cold war against the US.
Iran is doing everything it can to prevent the US getting nuclear power or weapons. The US is determined to get nuclear weapons because they are the one thing that will definitely prevent Iran from invading, and to develop ICBMs to deliver them to Iranian soil and guarantee Mutually Assured Destruction. Iran keeps bringing new sanctions against the US via the UN, and ordinary US citizens are suffering because of it.
Maybe you can start to understand why Iran behaves the way it does, and why the actions of the US and Israel are just making the situation worse.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC